Zoning Rules Designed for Skyscrapers Are Hindering Small-Scale Housing Development

Zoning Rules Designed for Skyscrapers Are Hindering Small-Scale Housing Development
SLUG: rules-designed-skyscrapers-blocking-duplexes
EXCERPT: US Housing Secretary Scott Turner highlights how complex regulations, intended for large projects, disproportionately burden smaller housing developments, increasing costs and limiting supply.
CATEGORY: housing
TAGS: housing affordability, zoning, regulations, urban planning, housing development, incremental development, ADUs, starter homes
SEO_TITLE: Zoning Rules for Skyscrapers Block Duplexes and Small Housing
SEO_DESCRIPTION: US Housing Secretary Scott Turner argues that regulations designed for massive developments are a major barrier to building smaller, more affordable housing units like duplexes and starter homes.
MEDIA_QUERY: housing development in a US city, showing a mix of large apartment buildings and smaller residential homes
IMAGE_ALT: A street scene showing a mix of large apartment buildings and smaller residential homes.

The current regulatory landscape for housing development, largely designed with large-scale projects in mind, is inadvertently stifling the creation of smaller, more affordable housing units, according to US Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Secretary Scott Turner. Speaking at the Milken Institute Global Conference, Turner argued that the procedural hurdles, overlapping reviews, and financing conditions applied to massive multifamily projects are unfairly burdening incremental developers attempting to build duplexes, backyard cottages, or starter homes.

This approach, he contends, drives up costs and makes it more difficult to provide housing that meets a wider range of needs and budgets.

Procedural Hurdles and Escalating Costs

Over time, housing development has become encumbered by a complex web of procedural requirements. These include extensive reviews, specific financing conditions, stringent engineering standards, environmental assessments, and numerous legal hurdles. While some of these processes are necessary for significant developments, their application to smaller projects creates disproportionate challenges.

These barriers do more than just cause delays; they significantly increase the cost of building. Ultimately, these increased costs are passed on to residents, exacerbating housing affordability issues.

The Scale Discrepancy

A key issue identified by Turner is the mismatch in scale between the regulations and the development projects they govern. Many of the barriers HUD is focused on were conceived for “giant leaps” in development – massive multifamily projects with hundreds of apartments, large regional developments backed by federal subsidies, and projects supported by extensive teams of consultants, attorneys, and engineers. Such large-scale ventures often do warrant substantial scrutiny.

However, the problem arises when cities apply the same mindset and complex procedural systems to incremental developers. These are individuals or small teams trying to renovate a duplex, add a backyard cottage, or construct a starter home on an empty lot. The result is that those most capable of making small, productive investments in neighborhoods are often least equipped to navigate the bureaucratic maze designed for much larger endeavors.

Local Governments’ Role in Affordability

Cities often discuss housing affordability as primarily a state or federal issue. However, Turner emphasizes that many local governments hold the power to enact reforms that directly influence costs and housing production. While some barriers are indeed embedded in federal law, financing structures, and environmental review requirements that may take years to change, local governments should not use this complexity as an excuse for inaction.

Most local jurisdictions already possess the authority to implement practical reforms that facilitate incremental housing growth.

Strong Towns’ Housing-Ready City Toolkit offers several such reforms, including:

• Allowing duplexes and triplexes by right.
• Permitting accessory dwelling units (ADUs) in residential neighborhoods.
• Legalizing starter homes.
• Eliminating excessive lot size requirements.
• Repealing parking mandates.
• Streamlining approval processes.

These are not radical proposals but rather incremental reforms designed to legalize development patterns that were instrumental in building many beloved neighborhoods historically.

Examples of Successful Reforms

Cities across North America are already demonstrating the effectiveness of these types of reforms:

• Fayetteville, Arkansas, legalized ADUs and reduced lot size barriers to encourage incremental neighborhood growth.
• South Bend, Indiana, streamlined approvals and developed preapproved housing plans that can now be permitted in minutes rather than months.
• Atlanta reduced parking requirements, making small cottage developments financially viable.
• Kalamazoo, Michigan, reformed ADU rules, lowered lot size requirements, reduced parking minimums, and empowered local builders to reinvest in vacant lots.

While these cities have not solved the housing crisis overnight, they have demonstrably shifted the trajectory of housing development. More importantly, they have fostered a change in mindset. Instead of treating every housing project as a massive undertaking, these communities have created systems that allow for small investments, gradual adaptation, and local reinvestment.

Building Strong Towns Through Small Investments

The shift towards enabling small-scale development is crucial because strong towns are rarely built through a single, transformative megaproject. They are the product of thousands of small acts of investment made by local people over time. A city that efficiently processes small infill projects builds institutional capacity. Planning staff that can differentiate between a regional megaproject and a corner lot reinvestment project begin to make more proportional decisions. A council that witnesses incremental success becomes more willing to tackle larger structural reforms.

Housing abundance does not emerge from one grand solution. It arises from communities that make it easier for many small investments to occur simultaneously. The most effective housing reform conversations should not start with “How do we eliminate regulation?” but rather with a more fundamental question: “Are we regulating a giant leap, or are we unintentionally stopping a small step?”

Edward Erfurt, the author of the article and Chief Technical Advisor at Strong Towns, is a trained architect and urban designer with extensive experience in development and placemaking projects. He advocates for community-focused processes that embrace diverse viewpoints, equity, and time-tested town-planning principles to achieve sustainable growth and preserve community character. Strong Towns is a non-profit organization dedicated to helping cities, towns, and neighborhoods grow in safe, livable, and financially resilient ways.

Key facts
| Subject | Detail |
|—|—|
| Core Issue | Regulations designed for large-scale developments hinder small-scale housing projects. |
| Impact | Increased costs, reduced housing supply, and difficulty for incremental developers. |
| Proposed Solutions | By-right duplexes, ADUs, reduced lot sizes, repealed parking mandates, streamlined approvals. |
| Examples | Fayetteville, South Bend, Atlanta, Kalamazoo. |

Fuente: Strong Towns https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2026-5-27-the-rules-designed-for-skyscrapers-are-blocking-duplexes

Key facts