The United States faces a housing affordability crisis, and local governments share a significant part of the blame. For too long, local governments have constrained housing supply by limiting where and how much developers can build. The time has come for cities and counties to reduce barriers to housing construction of all types.
According to recent census data, nearly half of the 45 million households who rent in America are considered cost-burdened, meaning they spend more than 30% of their income on housing. Within the cost-burdened group, 11.2 million households spend more than half of their income on rent. This is not sustainable.
The monthly construction rate for homes has fallen by 37% from its peak before the 2008 housing crash. The result? Renters compete against each other, chasing after a limited pool of units and giving landlords pricing power. The search for safe and affordable housing often leads renters to live far from work, where public transportation is limited and the economic stress of maintaining a vehicle creates additional burdens.
This raises two questions. Why isn’t the United States producing enough housing in economically dynamic, opportunity-rich areas? With so much demand, shouldn’t the market respond with more supply?
Housing production is connected to the number of construction companies, labor availability, materials costs and interest rates. But there’s one primary input missing from the list: land.
Housing requires land, and local governments control what can be built via land-use and zoning regulations. The limitations imposed by these ordinances — which control the location, height and bulk of buildings — have prevented developers from meeting housing needs. Addressing the affordable housing crisis will require more local governments to encourage construction by allowing more housing of all types by right.
The origins of land-use and zoning regulations can be traced to when American cities underwent rapid urbanization and industrialization in the late 19th century. This urban boom occurred in an era of largely unregulated economic activity. It was common for a factory belching smoke or discharging polluted water to be built near houses and retail businesses, damaging public health and property values. Land-use and zoning regulations were a late Progressive Era reform intended to bring order.
However, conditions in cities have changed dramatically over the past century. Today, local government wields this power to micromanage every aspect of land development — including setting dramatic limits on new housing. In many modern communities, land-use and zoning regulations cause more harm than good.
Reform could take many forms, including eliminating minimum parking requirements, allowing accessory dwelling units and allowing larger apartment buildings to be built along high-frequency transit corridors. Local governments also need to cut down the timeline for construction approvals significantly.
Thankfully, the zoning reform movement is picking up steam. For instance, Minneapolis reformed its zoning in 2019 to allow more multifamily housing and density along transit corridors, reduced parking requirements and eliminated single-family-only areas citywide. Cincinnati adopted an ordinance in 2023 legalizing accessory dwelling units in single-family areas. Also in 2023, Arlington County, Virginia, voted to allow multifamily buildings to be built across the county.
Modifying regulations to support abundant housing would bring benefits to communities. Many local elected officials would like to encourage more housing, but the politics of reform are challenging. The most significant barrier to change comes from entrenched local interests — especially longtime homeowners — seeking to maintain the status quo. The acronym NIMBY exists for a reason.
The federal government can help end this political stalemate by rewarding communities that choose to replace outdated zoning regulations with rules that allow for more housing of all types. To this end, Congress should authorize a new, competitive grant program administered by the Department of Housing and Urban Development. Implementing real land use reform will require a strong political commitment by local elected officials to push through the opponents’ objections.
Resources from Washington could provide the incentive needed to spur success.
Updating local land-use and zoning regulations to allow for all types of new housing is an essential and often overlooked path to easing the burden of housing costs over time. The federal government could serve as a vital partner to those local officials willing to commit to the hard work of reform.
Kevin DeGood is the director of infrastructure policy at the Center for American Progress.