From a blog discussion...

Work at home seems to be consistent with your recommendations for housing. Basically, I believe, they call for sharing existing space to a much greater degree. While cities would not write better sharing of existing space into their housing plans, they probably should, as that would work better with their real economic situation.

An anecdote: Thirty years ago, I got an opinion piece published in a newspaper noting how Mexican immigrants shared space. They treated housing as a community issue, and a large group would share one apartment. Since some worked the night shift, beds could be shared between day and night workers, and daycare duties could also be shared. Sharing cars might also have been common.

But on the subject of transportation. living in groups and sharing cars (and mechanics) seems like a transportation strategy some immigrants use. But why couldn't a modified approach to this model work for the many workers in the tech economy? Work at home, live in groups, share cars. (Well, true, they'll need some non tech Mexican immigrants to show them how to do it.)

So just to take the Facebook headquarters example: They want to build a new town (presumably) for their workers. But there are two large, underserved communities adjacent to all this. So they're going to exhaust the bank to build this new town, whereas they could  lean on neighboring cities (which they are already bribing with housing-assistance money) to develop a housing plan that involves sharing existing space. And that involve a work plan for working at home. Doubtless, setting all this up would produce a lot of jobs, just of a newer and more specialized sort.