Housing remains the cornerstone of the American Dream and over the last two decades that dream has faced truly tumultuous highs and lows.  From the free money days of yore to the lack of inventory days of now, Americans around the country yearn for more homes. According to a recent Pew Research study, it is estimated that the U.S. is facing a shortage of 4 to 7 million homes, and that shortage can be felt coast to coast.  As they say in Real Estate, Location, Location, Location.  America could easily frame up and build millions of homes out in the great wide open, however that’s not where people necessarily want to live.  New housing really needs to be placed around available jobs and reasonably established centers of commerce.  Injecting 4 to 7 million new homes and millions of people in need of housing into already existing communities is where some challenges can arise.  There are a myriad of potential issues when it comes to the U.S. housing market, but the one we will be focusing on today is the somewhat complicated issue of ZONING.

 

Sightlines, and Lot size, and Density, oh my!  There are environmental issues like migratory birds and historical districts to consider as well.  Each and every zoning restriction may very well have made sense when it was created, however, over the years, those requirements can accumulate until the list of local zoning ordinances is the size of a NYC phone book….remember those?  For individuals and businesses alike, the process required to ensure that any new building project does NOT run afoul with regard zoning requirement can take great time and effort to research and confirm.  Once it’s confirmed that a project may violate zoning requirements, variances do exist.  However, obtaining a variance can be burdensome whether by design or not.  The filing of forms and awaiting rulings, public hearings and petitions, all of which could still result in a firm “no”, can cost time and money.

 

“Housing experts say there just aren’t enough homes in the U.S.” per a recent article by NPR.  Many American metros desperately need more housing but often cannot get out of their own way to facilitate growth.  The first modern zoning ordinance in the U.S. was passed in New York City in 1916 and communities around the country soon followed suit. Some did not. Below, we summarize tales from two of these cities, huge metropolis Houston, TX and the tiny Caroline, NY hamlet.  Their pains and solutions around how to deal with what goes where helps to illustrate why zoning exists and perhaps why so many disagree on whether that is a good thing or not.

 

Houston, the most populous city in Texas and the Southern United States. With over 2.3 million residents in 2023, it ranks as the fourth-largest city in the nation—behind only New York, Los Angeles, and Chicago—and forms the principal hub of the fifth-most populous U.S. metropolitan area. Established in 1836 and named for General Sam Houston, this expansive city of approximately 640 square miles boasts a diversified economy driven by energy, aerospace, manufacturing and healthcare.  Houston also does not currently and never has had zoning laws.  According to a recent article by Houston Landing Org, Houston’s status as the largest U.S. city without zoning provides developers and city planners with an unusual level of flexibility, helping to spur innovation and expedite projects that would otherwise get delayed by formal zoning procedures. Projects are typically built “by right,” meaning they move forward without lengthy city council hearings or rezoning requirements. In theory, this can lead to more diverse developments, mixing commercial and residential concepts in ways that are often restricted elsewhere. It can also lower barriers to constructing new housing, which can be critical for a fast-growing city like Houston to meet consumer demand. However, the reliance on private deed restrictions to shape land use in the absence of formal zoning can create inequities; affluent neighborhoods are often more adept at organizing and enforcing restrictions via the legal system, while low-income communities may lack the resources to do so. 

 

As a result, critics argue that Houston’s no-zoning approach reproduces many of the same N.I.M.B.Y. (Not in My Backyard) problems as are caused by zoning policies in other cities.  Deed restrictions continue to limit affordable housing and reinforce exclusivity in some parts of town. Moreover, the city’s relatively low housing costs do not necessarily translate into sufficient affordable housing for its lower-income residents, who often bear the brunt of industrial expansion and environmental hazards. Experts warn that while Houston’s approach allows for creative developments and fewer bureaucratic delays, it calls for more public intervention, targeted incentives, and robust planning efforts to ensure equitable growth and protections.

 

On the smaller side of American municipalities is the town of Caroline, NY. Nestled just southeast of Ithaca, NY, Caroline is a charming town with a rich history, founded around 1794. Covering approximately 55 square miles, the town is predominantly rural, offering scenic views of rolling hills and easy access to the picturesque Finger Lakes region. With a population of 3,318 as of the 2020 census, Caroline maintains a close-knit yet vibrant community. The town’s population density is about 53 people per square mile, contributing to its peaceful atmosphere. The median household income stands at $43,315, with many residents commuting to nearby Ithaca for employment.

 

As told in an article from Reason.com, Caroline found itself in a heated battle over whether to adopt its first-ever zoning code.  Things first went awry when a local farmer wished to cash out and retire by selling a portion of his land to a firm that wanted to build a Dollar General store.  Longtime residents and Cornell-affiliated professionals who eventually favored zoning, argued that the practice was needed to preserve Caroline’s agrarian character and keep chain stores, unsightly developments, and urban sprawl at bay. Opponents, however, saw zoning as a threat to their livelihoods and the freedoms they’ve always enjoyed. John Morse, who owned a local wedding venue, feared proposed restrictions would quash his plan to build rental cabins on his property; similarly, farmer Hannah Wylie notes that new requirements for special use permits would make it costly and risky to start a small campground or R.V. park. For these locals, land is their biggest economic asset, and they worried that zoning’s layers of safeguards and hearings may limit their ability to experiment and adapt as necessary.

 

Tensions quickly turned personal. Pro-zoning residents pointed at the town’s updated comprehensive plan, which emphasized controlled growth to protect open spaces and farmland. They saw zoning as a logical extension of that vision, echoing a nationwide trend in cities and states that want more deliberate development. But Carolyn’s “anti-zoners” felt blindsided by dense, 137-page drafts dictating what businesses can and cannot open, along with rules on how land may be used or built upon. Large public meetings devolved into confrontations, and some pro-zoning yard signs were vandalized. Anti-zoning activists rallied outside the town hall and circulated petitions, spotlighting examples of how zoning might make longtime businesses illegal or how simple plans—like Morse’s cabins or a tight-knit cottage cluster—would suddenly become prohibitively complex or outright banned.

 

Behind this battle is a collision of values and needs. Advocates for zoning see it as preserving the pastoral qualities that drew people to Caroline in the first place, even if it means limiting what property owners can do. Opponents argue that without zoning, the town has thrived by allowing new ideas, businesses, and developments to flourish organically—a flexibility they believe is critical to surviving economic shifts and preserving longstanding family farms. The fight has become about more than signage or setbacks; for many, it represents an existential question of control: Who gets to decide how a small town grows, and at what cost to the dreams and livelihoods of the people who call it home?

 

As highlighted in the examples of Houston and Caroline, whether big or small, the zoning debate plays a critical role in shaping the housing landscape across America. While zoning (or lack thereof) can offer much needed structure and predictability, it can also have a negative impact on growth and equity. While Houston does not share common national zoning laws, it handles traditional zoning issues via expensive legal challenges that can result in similar obstructions hindering new housing progress being faced around the country.  Caroline, while significantly smaller than Houston, found its citizenry deadlocked over ideals of freedom and control over how they are allowed to manage their own property.  Whether it’s high-rise apartments, discount retailers, or a mom-and-pop small businesses, it’s still location, location, location.

 

In closing, the U.S. housing market continues to demand additional inventory within metropolitan areas.  That much needed, higher density housing within neighborhoods that have traditionally been restricted via zoning regulations to single family homes, can bring progress that not everyone is always happy to see.  Beyond simpler things like character and sightlines, opponents argue that high density housing can lower property values, burden public services, and increase crime.  So, while most will admit we do need additional housing, the actual location of said progress really  remains the classic debate.  Ultimately, the challenge probably lies in finding a balance—ensuring that housing development is both sustainable and inclusive while protecting vulnerable communities and fostering the growth needed to meet America’s increasing demand for housing.  A demand which may require the vast majority of U.S. cities to rethink and/or revise their potentially voluminous zoning requirements to help meet the challenges of today rather than the preserve nit-picks of yesteryear.