Tool Overview
Mapping State Land Use Reforms
The Land Use Reform Tracker is a resource designed to provide researchers, state lawmakers, city officials, the media and others with a database they can use to gain a deeper understanding of how the land use policy landscape is changing nationally.
The Tracker provides a database on enacted bills, including summaries of bill text, analysis of how the legislation compares to other states, and information on the different types of land use reforms. Additionally, it offers up-to-date collections of research and commentary about the legislation, information about how the reform is being implemented, and about litigation and other reactions to the reform.
Policy Analysis
The Intersection of Data and Insight
Across the country, state-level reforms to the land use and zoning process are being adopted in an effort to spur housing production. For researchers and key stakeholders, staying ahead of these changes requires more than just a list of bills—it requires context.
The Tracker combines a national database with rigorous research and policy analysis to help users understand not only what laws are changing, but how those changes affect what housing gets built.
Resource Library
We maintain a curated library of model legislation, empirical research about the effects of different land use reforms, and analysis of policy trends.
Our staff of policy experts analyze nationwide patterns, highlight differences in state approaches, evaluate the potential impact of new statutes, and provide a deeper look at individual pieces of legislation.
A Comprehensive Resource Library
Data alone doesn't tell the whole story. Our staff of policy experts produces regular Policy Briefs and Trend Reports that cut through the legal jargon. We analyze nationwide patterns, highlight differences in state approaches, evaluate the potential impact of new statutes, and provide the "so what" behind the legislation.
Research and Policy Analysis
We maintain a curated library of model legislation, empirical research about the effects of different land use reforms, and analysis of policy trends. Our staff of policy experts analyze nationwide patterns, highlight differences in state approaches, evaluate the potential impact of new statutes, and provide a deeper look at individual pieces of legislation.
A Taxonomy of State Accessory Dwelling Unit Laws 2025
Author: Emily Hamilton and Kol Peterson
Source: Mercatus Center George Mason University
Date: August 2025
Publication Type: Policy Insights
San Diego’s success in spurring missing middle housing: The accessory dwelling unit bonus program
Author: Muhammad Alameldin and Quinn Underriner
Source: Terner Center
Date: 2023
Publication Type: Policy Insights
Legalizing Accessory Dwelling Units at the State Level: A New Hampshire Case Study
Author: Emily Hamilton and Abigail Houseal
Source: Mercatus Center George Mason University
Date: March 2023
Publication Type: Policy Insights
Accessory Dwelling Units and the Preemption of Land Use Regulation
Author: Christopher Wielga
Source: Cityscape
Date: 2023
Publication Type: Article
Where Will Accessory Dwelling Units Sprout Up When a State Lets Them Grow? Evidence From California
Author: Nicholas J. Marantz, Christopher S. Elmendorf, and Youjin Kim.
Source: Cityscape
Date: 2023
Publication Type: Article
Public Act 21-29 Initial Findings (CT)
Author: Multiple
Source: Desegregate CT
Date: September 2023
Publication Type: Policy Insights
Accessory Dwelling Units Model State Act and Local Ordinance
Author: AARP Government Affairs
Source: AARP
Date: 2020
Publication Type: Model Legislation
Author: Metropolitan Abundance Project
Source: Metropolitan Abundance Project
Publication Type: Model Legislation
Regulating ADUs in California: Local Approaches & Outcomes
Author: Deirdre Pfeiffer
Source: Terner Center
Date: May 2019
Publication Type: Policy Insights
(Fact Sheet) Key Provisions: NJ’s New Affordable Housing Law
Author: Fair Share Housing Center
Source: Fair Share Housing Center
Date: July 2024
Publication Type: Policy Insights
Making housing affordable? The local effects of relaxing land-use regulation
Author: Simon Büchler and Elena Lutz.
Source: Journal of Urban Economics
Date: 2024
Publication Type: Journal Article
Author: Yonah Freemark
Source: Sage – Journal of Planning Literature
Date: 2023
Publication Type: Journal Article
Tennessee’s HPR Law and Its Transformation of Nashville’s Housing Market
Author: Charles Gardner and Alex Pemberton
Source: Mercatus Center George Mason University
Date: September 2024
Publication Type: Policy Insights
Overcoming Barriers to Manufactured Housing: Promising Approaches from Five Case Studies
Author: Chris Herbert, Chadwick Reed
Source: JCHS
Date: April 2024
Publication Type: Policy Insights
Author: Metropolitan Abundance Project
Source: Metropolitan Abundance Project
Publication Type: Model Legislation
Author: Metropolitan Abundance Project
Source: Metropolitan Abundance Project
Publication Type: Model Legislation
Increasing Residential Density Across Montana
Author: Emma Waters, Stephanie Espinoza
Source: Bipartisan Policy Center
Date: January 2024
Publication Type: Policy Insights
Eliminating Single-Family Zoning and Parking Minimums in Oregon
Author: Owen Minott, Julia Selby
Source: Bipartisan Policy Center
Date: September 2023
Publication Type: Policy Insights
Missing Middle Housing Legislation in Nebraska
Author: Owen Minott, Julia Selby
Source: Bipartisan Policy Center
Date: September 2023
Publication Type: Policy Insights
California’s HOME Act Turns One: Data and Insights from the First Year of Senate Bill 9
Author: David Garcia, Muhammad Alameldin
Source: Terner Center
Date: January 2023
Publication Type: Policy Insights
States Advance Single-Stairway Reforms to Expand Housing
Author: Chase Hatchett
Source: Pew Center
Date: November 2025
Publication Type: Policy Insights
Legalizing Mid-Rise Single-Stair Housing in Massachusetts
Author: Boston Indicators, Harvard Joint Center for Housing Studies, Utile
Source: JCHS
Date: October 2024
Publication Type: Policy Insights
California’s Building Code Appeals Process: A Quiet but Crucial Lever for Housing
Author: Ben Metcalf
Source: Terner Center
Date: November, 24, 2025
Publication Type: Policy Insights
Look at the Map: Bounding Environmental Review of Housing Development in California.
Author: Eric Biber, Christopher S. Elmendorf, Nicholas J. Marantz and Moira O’Neill.
Source: Environmental Law
Date: 2024
Publication Type: Law Review Article
Pairing Zoning and Environmental Review Reforms in Vermont
Author: Sophia Ayaz
Source: Bipartisan Policy Center
Date: May 2024
Publication Type: Policy Insights
Author: Christopher S. Elmendorf, and Timothy G. Duncheon
Source: Ecology Law Quarterly
Date: 2023
Publication Type: Law Review Article
State Housing Policy Changes Are More Random Than You Think
Author: Jenny Schuetz
Source: Mercatus Center
Date: September 2025
Publication Type: Policy Insights
Mandating Density Near Transit
Author: Yonah Freemark, Lydia Lo, and Yipeng Su
Source: Urban Institute
Date: December 15, 2025
Publication Type: Article
Effects of Transit-Oriented Incentive Programs: Evidence from LA
Author: Stephania Kestelman
Source: Harvard Joint Center for Housing Studies
Date: December 1, 2025
Publication Type: Article
Author: Metropolitan Abundance Project
Source: Metropolitan Abundance Project
Date: October 2024
Publication Type: Model Legislation
Author: Metropolitan Abundance Project
Source: Metropolitan Abundance Project
Publication Type: Model Legislation
The Effects of Impact Fees on the Price of Housing and Land: a Literature Review
Author: Jennifer S. Evans-Cowley and Larry L. Lawhon
Source: Journal of Planning Literature
Publication Type: Literature Review
It All Adds Up: The Cost of Housing Development Fees in Seven California Cities
Author: Sarah Mawhorter, David Garcia, Hayley Raetz
Source: Terner Center for Housing Innovation at UC Berkeley
Publication Type: Research Report
Tax Development, or What? Fiscal Foundations for the Next Era of Land Use Regulation in California
Author: Christopher S. Elmendorf and Darien Shanske
Source: Social Science Research Network (SSRN)
Publication Type: Journal Article
Impact Fees and Housing Affordability
Author: Vicki Been
Source: Cityscape: A Journal of Policy Development and Research
Publication Type: Journal Article
Portland has a wonky secret to building cheaper houses. Other cities are copying.
Author: Julie Z. Weil
Source: The Washington Post
Date: March 18th, 2026
Publication Type: News Article
Advancing Pro-Housing Policy at the State Level
Author: Lydia Lo, Annie Rosenow, Yonah Freemark
Source: Urban Institute
Date: July 2025
Publication Type: Article
Updates on the State of Statewide Housing Policy: New Insights into Implementation and Results
Author: Semida Munteanu, Jenny Schuetz, and Sydney Zelinka
Source: Lincoln Institute of Land Policy
Date: January 2025
Publication Type: Policy Insights
Author: Sightline Institute and Welcoming Neighbors Network
Source: Welcoming Neighbors Network
Publication Type: Toolkit
How Do Developers Respond to Land Use Regulations? An Analysis of New Housing in Los Angeles
Author: Gabbe, C.J
Source: Housing Policy Debate
Date: 2018
Publication Type: Journal Article
Author: Bente Birkeland
Source: CPR News
Date: October 7th, 2025
Publication Type: News Article
Cities Relying on Housing Overlays May Face “Builder’s Remedy” Under New Court Decision
Author: Daniel R. Golub, Will Sterling, Luca Trumbull
Source: Holland & Knight
Date: November 14th, 2025
Publication Type: News Article
Pennsylvania Fair Share Doctrine
Author: Jack Farrell and Cooper Andrews
Source: YIMBY Law
Date: September 2025
Publication Type: Research Report
Pro-Housing Designation Programs: How States are Incentivizing Pro-Housing Reform
Author: Shazia Manji, Rachel Ozer-Bearson
Source: Terner Center
Date: November 2024
Publication Type: Policy Insights
Portland’s IZ Program is Finally Performing, New Data Suggests
Author: Michael Anderson
Source: Sightline Institute
Date: November 2025
Publication Type: Article
U.S. Supreme Court rejects challenge to New Jersey affordable housing law
Author: Krystal Knapp
Source: The Jersey Vindicator
Date: February 24, 2026
Publication Type: News Article
The Housing Strategy That Has California NIMBYs in a Corner
Author: Conor Dougherty
Source: New York Times
Date: November 20th, 2025
Publication Type: News Article
Author: Katherine Kallergis
Source: The Real Deal
Date: October 30th, 2025
Publication Type: News Article
Author: Bente Birkeland
Source: CPR News
Date: October 7th, 2025
Publication Type: News Article
State Housing Policy Changes Are More Random Than You Think
Author: Jenny Schuetz
Source: Mecatus Center
Date: September 2025
Publication Type: Policy Insights
Author: Metropolitan Abundance Project
Source: Metropolitan Abundance Project
Publication Type: Model Legislation
Eliminating Single-Family Zoning and Parking Minimums in Oregon
Author: Owen Minott, Julia Selby
Source: Bipartisan Policy Center
Date: September 2023
Publication Type: Policy Insights
The Effect of Minimum Parking Requirements on the Housing Stock
Author: Matts Andersson, Svante Mandell, Helena Braun Thörn, and Ylva Gomér Source: Transport Policy
Date: April 19, 2016
Publication Type: Policy Insights
Upzoning and redevelopment: The details matter. Journal of Housing Economics
Author: Jens von Bergmann, Thomas Davidoff, Nathan Lauster, and Tsur Somerville
Source: Journal of Housing Economics
Date: 2025
Publication Type: Journal Article
Third-Party Review Legislation
Author: Metropolitan Abundance Project
Source: Metropolitan Abundance Project
Publication Type: Model Legislation
State Housing Policy Changes Are More Random Than You Think
Author: Jenny Schuetz
Source: Mercatus Center
Date: September 2025
Publication Type: Policy Insights
Author: Moira O’Neill and Ivy Wang
Source: Cityscape
Date: 2023
Publication Type: Article
California’s Streamlining Laws: Lessons from the Field
Source: YIMBY Law
Date: February 2025
Publication Type: Law Review Article
Public Comment and Public Policy
Author: Alexander Sahn
Source: American Journal of Political Science
Date: August 31, 2024
Publication Type: August 31, 2024
Overparticipation: Designing Effective Land Use Public Processes
Author: Anika Singh Lemar
Source: Fordham Law Review
Date: 2021
Publication Type: Law Review Article
Rethinking Local Regulations Governing Housing Production
Author: Ingrid Gould Ellen, Yonah Freemark, and Jenny Schuetz
Source: A Research Agenda for US Land Use and Planning Law
Date: December 12, 2023
Publication Type: Law Review Article
Does Discretion Delay Development?
Author: Michael Manville, Paavo Monkkonen, Nolan Gray, and Shane Phillips
Source: Journal of the American Planning Association
Date: November 15, 2022
Publication Type: Research Study
Author: Rachel Gallagher, Thomas Sigler, Stephanie Wyeth, and Yan Liu
Source: Cities
Date: October 2025
Publication Type: Research Study
Author: Moira O’Neill, Giulia Gualco-Nelson, and Eric Biber
Source: Hastings Environmental Law Journal
Date: 2019
Publication Type: Law Review Article
Planning as Bargaining: The Causal Impacts of Plans in Seattle and San Francisco
Author: Adam Millard-Ball
Source: Journal of the American Planning Association
Date: 2021
Publication Type: Research Study
Author: Chris Elmendorf, Eric Biber, Paavo Monkkonen, and Moira O’Neill Source: Arizona Law Review
Date: 2021 Publication Type: Law Review Article
Evaluating the impact of New York City’s racial equity reports on land use changes
Author: Moses Gates, Matthew Flower, and Marcel Negret
Source: Brookings Institute
Date: October 31, 2025
Publication Type: Article
Upzoning and gentrification: Heterogeneous impacts of neighbourhood-level upzoning in New York City.
Author: Minjee Kim and Hyojung Lee
Source: Urban Studies
Date: 2024
Publication Type: Journal Article
Author: Yonah Freemark
Source: Sage – Journal of Planning Literature
Date: 2023
Publication Type: Journal Article
Dismantling Exclusionary Zoning: New Jersey’s Blueprint for Overcoming Segregation
Author: Fair Share Housing Center
Source: Fair Share Housing Center
Date: April 2023
Publication Type: Policy Insights
The Impact of Land Use Regulation on Racial Segregation: Evidence from Massachusetts Zoning Borders
Author: Matthew Resseger
Source: SSRN
Date: 2022
Publication Type: Article
Addressing Housing Supply Challenges through Target Setting
Author: Christina Plerhoples Stacy, Aniket Mehrotra and Leah Hendey
Source: Urban Institute
Date: September 18, 2025
Publication Type: Article
The Complexity of State-Led Housing Planning: Lessons from Implementation in Southern California
Author: Huixin Zheng
Source: Sage – Journal of Planning Education and Research
Date: 2024
Publication Type: Journal Article
(Fact Sheet) Key Provisions: NJ’s New Affordable Housing Law
Author: Fair Share Housing Center
Source: Fair Share Housing Center
Date: July 2024
Publication Type: Policy Insights
How Do Developers Respond to Land Use Regulations? An Analysis of New Housing in Los Angeles
Author: C.J. Gabbe
Source: Housing Policy Debate
Date: 2018
Publication Type: Journal Article
Author: Angela Tiangco
Source: YIMBY Law
Date: November 2025
Publication Type: Research Report
Upzoning and redevelopment: The details matter. Journal of Housing Economics,
Author: Jens von Bergmann, Thomas Davidoff, Nathan Lauster, and Tsur Somerville
Source: Journal of Housing Economics
Date: 2025
Publication Type: Journal Article
Part 2, “Legalizing Missing Middle Housing—Recommended Reforms for Massachusetts”
Author: Amy Love Tomasso
Source: JCHS
Date: August 2025
Publication Type: Policy Insights
Author: Sara C. Bronin, Scott Markley, Matthew Harris, and Diana Drogaris
Source: National Zoning Atlas
Date: June 2025
Publication Type: Article
Zoning and the Dynamics of Urban Redevelopment
Author: Vincent Rollet
Source: SSRN
Date: April 29, 2025
Publication Type: Working Paper
Upzoning and gentrification: Heterogeneous impacts of neighbourhood-level upzoning in New York City.
Author: Minjee Kim and Hyojung Lee
Source: Urban Studies
Date: 2024
Publication Type: Journal Article
Author: Hongwei Dong
Source: Journal of Planning Education and Research
Date: 2024
Publication Type: Journal Article
Built out cities? A new approach to measuring land use regulation
Author: Paavo Monkkonen, Michael Manville, and Michael Lens
Source: Journal of Housing Economics
Date: 2024
Publication Type: Journal Article
The Costs of Housing Regulation: Evidence from Generative Regulatory Measurement
Author: Alexander W. Bartik, Arpit Gupta, and Daniel Milo
Source: SSRN
Date: September 2024
Publication Type: Working Paper
The impact of upzoning on housing construction in Auckland
Author: Ryan Greenaway-McGrevy, and Peter C.B Phillips
Source: Journal of Urban Economics
Date: 2023
Publication Type: Journal Article
The Impact of Land Use Regulation on Racial Segregation: Evidence from Massachusetts Zoning Borders
Author: Matthew Resseger
Source: SSRN
Date: 2022
Publication Type: Article
Author: Joseph Gyourko, Jonathan S. Hartley, and Jacob Krimmel
Source: Journal of Urban Economics
Date: July 2021
Publication Type: Journal Article
Housing and Homelessness Toolkit (Includes Land Use, Zoning and Supply)
Author: National Conference of State Legislatures
Source: National Conference of State Legislatures
Date: April 2024
Publication Type: Toolkit
Author: Metropolitan Abundance Project
Source: Metropolitan Abundance Project
Publication Type: Model Legislation
Author: Metropolitan Abundance Project
Source: Metropolitan Abundance Project
Publication Type: Model Legislation
Author: Yonah Freemark
Source: Sage – Journal of Planning Literature
Date: 2023
Publication Type: Journal Article
Eliminating Single-Family Zoning and Parking Minimums in Oregon
Author: Owen Minott and Julia Selby
Source: Bipartisan Policy Center
Date: September 2023
Publication Type: Policy Insights
Under the (Neighbor)Hood: Understanding Interactions Among Zoning Regulations
Author: Amrita Kulka, Aradhya Sood, and Nicholas Chiumenti
Source: The Review of Economics and Statistics
Date: 2026
Publication Type: Article
The effects of an “urban village” planning and zoning strategy in San Jose, California
Author: C. J. Gabbe, Michael Kevane, and William A. Sundstrom
Source: Regional Science and Urban Economics
Date: 2021
Publication Type: Journal Article
How Big Upzonings Affect Housing Supply
Author: Yipeng Su, Will Curran-Groome, and Yonah Freemark
Source: Urban Institute
Date: April 15, 2026
Publication Type: Research Report
State Preemption of Local Zoning Laws as Intersectional Climate Policy
Source: Harvard Law Review
Date: April 2022
Publication Type: Law Review Article
Does Housing Growth in Washington, D.C., Reflect Land Use Policy Changes?
Author: Leah Brooks and Jenny Schuetz Source: Cityscape
Date: 2023
Publication Type: Journal Article
Upzoning Chicago: Impacts of a Zoning Reform on Property Values and Housing Construction
Author: Yonah Freemark
Source: Urban Affairs Review
Date: January 29, 2019
Publication Type: Journal article
The Effects of Minimum-Lot-Size Reform on Houston Land Values
Author: Emily Hamilton
Source: Cityscape
Date: 2024
Publication Type: Journal Article
Download Data
Access and download raw datasets, including the full database of state bills as enacted, as well as a codebook to explain each policy feature and classification in the data set produced by the NYU Furman Center.
- Download Bills Data Set Download Here
- Codebook Download Here
Data & Methods
Find additional information on the methods the NYU Furman Center used for collecting, analyzing, and presenting the data.
Disclaimer
Please note, we are continually improving the appearance and content of this website and the underlying database. This includes adding newly passed legislation to the database and correcting potential inaccuracies. If you notice information that is incomplete, incorrect, or out of date, please contact the NYU Furman Center via our website’s contact page
How to Use
There are a number of ways to search for information in our Land Use Reforms database:
- Use the Search function to conduct a text search on the top-left corner of the map
- Search the map and table by year the law was passed, the state, the majority political party of the bill sponsors, or the policy topic.
Map View and Table View: The map and table work together automatically. When you select a topic from the drop-down menu of topic filters, the states which have passed legislation on that topic will be highlighted on the map and and appear on the table:
- Select one or multiple “Topic” filters at once to view state laws from the database classified under each topic.
- Select one or more States in the dropdown. This selection will be reflected both in the map and table results.
- Select one year or a range to view and filter results by the year the bill was passed into law.
- Click on a state to show table results only for that state and any other selected filters.
- Hover over a selected state to view the number of laws in our database from that state. Click “View Detailed” to view table results for that state.
- Users are able to view all the bills passed on a given topic, state-by-state, across the selected time period.
- Click the Bill in the “Bill Number” column to view a summary of the legislation’s key provisions in a separate window. This page also includes a hyperlink to the full bill text on the state legislature’s website.
Map/Table View Output: The data from your filtered selection can be exported in a table or list that can be downloaded as a CSV file.
About this dataset
The NYU Furman Center’s National Database of State Land Use Reforms includes a comprehensive list of state laws passed between January 2017 and December 2024. Please note the database may not yet include all relevant bills passed in 2025 and 2026 thus far, but we have included several of the major proposals passed across states in 2025, and our team is continuing to regularly update the database.
Our current dataset includes the following:
- Bills aimed at removing land use barriers in order to increase housing development (e.g., legalizing duplexes or accessory dwelling units)
- This includes legislation that affects zoning ordinances and housing development in different and sometimes opposing ways, in order to capture a holistic view of state policymaking in this area.
- State mandates regarding local land use planning, zoning, and subdivision ordinances, as well as impact fees and local development charges.
- Reforms related to building codes (both requiring the study of potential reforms or mandating actual changes to building codes and their implementation).
- Reforms to streamline the local planning approval and building permit processes for new housing, including changes to environmental review.
- Legislation regarding tax incentives or state funding opportunities to encourage developers to build housing, or to encourage localities to adopt zoning reforms, or other ‘pro-housing’ regulation and policies.
To ensure we focused on the legislation that is specific to the land use policies that most impact new housing development, we excluded state legislation that is narrowly focused on the preservation of existing affordable housing.
Other areas of housing policy not included in this database:
- Rent regulations, just cause requirements and other tenant protections; housing discrimination laws or source of income protections (when not tied to a broader land use or supply-side policy), tenant opportunity to purchase property or right of first refusal laws.
- State budget appropriations for housing programs, including but not limited to; direct assistance to renters and homeowners, housing trust funds, capital funding for rehabilitating housing, services for homelessness and shelters, rebuilding housing after natural disasters, regular budget appropriations to these programs, and certain COVID-era initiatives
- Minor amendments to existing tax incentives for affordable housing, the creation or authorization for localities to use new revenue sources for housing programs (e.g. enabling localities to use certain tax revenue for a housing trust fund) or increasing bond capacity.
The data downloads linked above provide the full raw dataset of the bills in our database. The accompanying codebook defines each of the nearly 100 columns that classify whether or not the bill includes a specific policy feature (See “Codebook” file above for all the definitions).
This section includes definitions for the topic filters featured in the Map/Table format of this web-based tool. Each bill in our dataset has been categorized according to a detailed list of topics and policy dimensions. This was done based on what each bill added to, removed from or changed about the state law.
Topic Filter Definitions
Bill Number: Bill number, including the chamber of the house it was introduced in, according to that state’s naming convention.
Year: Year the bill was signed into law by the governor.
Party: The party of the majority of bill sponsors. Where there were sponsors from multiple parties, if 60% or more of the sponsors are from one party, we used that party. If neither party represented more than 60% of the total sponsors, the bill was categorized as bi-partisan. We excluded independents in this calculation. If the bill was sponsored by a committee, we list the majority party in the state legislature at that time
Allowing More and Different Types of Housing
- Allow Lot Splits: Bills that authorize or require localities to allow residential lots to be split into multiple smaller, individual lots.
- “Co-Living” and Single-Room Occupancy: Bills that authorize or require changes to local zoning or building codes to allow “co-living” options (e.g. rooming houses, single-room occupancy – defined as residential units with private rooms and shared bathroom or kitchen facilities)
- Density Increases: Bills that require local governments to approve multifamily housing by-right, encourage “missing middle” housing, reform minimum lot size requirements, or mandate higher density zoning for housing on specific lands. This includes mechanisms such as increasing allowed floor-area ratios and dwelling units per acre.
- Encouraging Duplexes, Triplexes, Fourplexes, and Townhomes: Bills containing provisions that specifically require or permit zoning to allow these housing types.
- Tiny and Micro Units: Bills permitting ‘’tiny homes’ or micro residential units built on a lot (not to be confused with accessory dwelling units built on lots with an existing home, or manufactured homes that require a permanent chassis)
- Manufactured Housing: Bills regarding the siting or permitting of manufactured housing.
- Workforce Housing: Bills for the construction or funding of workforce housing (e.g., rental housing for public sector workers, local industry workforces, or employer-provided housing).
Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) Regulation
Bills that explicitly include provisions governing accessory dwelling units.
- Limit Local Requirements on ADU Occupants: Prevents localities from requiring specific relationships between ADU occupants and primary homeowners and ensures owners can rent ADUs separately.
- Allow ADUs Where Single-Family Homes are Permitted: Requires local governments to permit ADUs on lots or in areas currently zoned for single-family dwellings.
Affordable Housing Incentives and Financing
Legislation to encourage developing affordable housing at various income levels. This includes finance and tax incentives to create affordable housing as part of the new supply (e.g. granting density bonuses to developers, funding to build multifamily housing on public lands, tax incentives for workforce housing).
Building Code Reform
Mandates to study or implement building code reforms, mandates to change building codes, fire safety, energy codes, or restrictions on a locality’s ability to diverge from statewide standards.
By-Right Zoning
Bills related to ministerial approval (no discretionary review) or declaring certain housing permitted by-right. This includes legislation that authorizes or incentivizes localities to permit certain housing by-right without explicitly mandating it.
Declare HOA Rules Void
Bills that prohibit or void deed restrictions in common-interest communities (HOAs) that require properties to be used exclusively as single-family residences or otherwise block the construction of diverse housing types.
Enforcement
Legislation that creates or reforms enforcement mechanisms for state land use or housing laws. This includes builder’s remedies, court orders, fines, penalties, the withholding of state funds, the awarding of attorney fees, or defining who has standing to sue a jurisdiction for non-compliance.
Environmental Review
Implementation of or changes to environmental review requirements specifically related to housing.
Development Fees
Regulations governing how localities determine and charge impact fees, exactions, connection fees, or other fees associated with residential development.
Housing on Specific Lands
Legislation regarding the development of housing on one or more of the following types of land (including but not limited to local zoning and land use regulation):
- Commercial land
- Land owned by educational institutions
- Land owned by faith-based organizations
- Land owned by non-profits
- Publicly-owned land
- Land near transit
- Vacant or blighted lands
Incentives for Development
Laws regarding how local governments provide developer incentives, including:
- Direct Funding
- Density Bonuses
- Historic Preservation Tax Credits
- Tax Incentives and Tax Increment Financing (TIF)
- Fee Waivers
Incentives and Technical Assistance to Jurisdictions
- Pro-Housing Designation: Incentives for localities to adopt “pro-housing” policies or update zoning.
- Funding: Financial support for local jurisdictions.
- Technical Assistance: Practical guidance for local governments implementing new laws.
Inclusionary Zoning
Bills regarding policies to require a set percentage of affordable units or a fee-in-lieu for affordable housing funding as part of zoning regulations.
Lot Size Requirements
Legislation regarding local minimum lot sizes
.Minimum Parking Requirements
Bills to reduce, limit, or prohibit minimum parking standards for residential developments.
Planning Requirements
State mandates that localities plan for local housing production and growth, covering both general supply and affordable housing.
- Fair Distribution of Housing: Bills regarding housing need allocations or quantitative production targets, including the methodology for these calculations.
Procedural Requirements and Deadlines for Land Use Decisions
- Streamlining Hearings: Limits on public public engagement in hearings regarding new housing, including capping the number of hearings, requiring transcripts, or exempting specific developments from public meetings.
- Deadlines: Time limits for local governments to review or approve planning and building applications.
- Third-Party Review: Allows an independent party (other than the local government or the applicant) to review or approve permit applications.
- Voting Requirements: Changes to the number of votes required to approve a proposed residential development (e.g., shifting to a simple majority).
- Appeals: Establishes specific appeal processes, designates bodies for appeals, or defines who has the standing to appeal a decision.
- Written Findings, Burden, and Standard of Proof: Requires decision-makers to provide written justifications for permit denials, specifies the standard of proof (e.g., preponderance of evidence, rational basis) or limits the criteria used in local determinations.
Planning for Climate Adaptation and Hazards
Legislation that aligns housing supply goals with state climate objectives or limits residential development in areas prone to natural disasters.
How we identified subject-matter scope
The NYU Furman Center’s national database of Land Use Reforms tracks state legislation that reforms how local governments’ zoning ordinances, subdivision regulations, exactions, other land use requirements, building codes, tax incentives, and permitting procedures may affect housing supply. For more information on our scope please see “About this Dataset” under the Getting Started section above.
How we identified state laws
Our database tracks all state legislation enacted between 2017 and 2025 (inclusive) and categorizes each bill by the reform it makes.
We systematically searched for bills between October 2024 and January 2026 using legal databases like LexisNexis, and filtered results based on all bills that passed into law after December 31st, 2017. Based on the policy topics in our scope, we created a search string of key words to employ a consistent approach state by state. Our team of law student research assistants catalogued and downloaded (in a form that preserved statutory additions and deletions where available) every bill that had been “enacted” and which fell within our scope of policies. We later checked for any vetoes by governors to ensure that we used the version of the bill signed into law. We also recorded the bill sponsor and their political parties, but not the voting record of who supported or opposed the bill. Finally, we recorded the year the bill was signed into law, and when it came into effect.
Research assistants built off existing research at the Furman Center on ‘pro-housing’ state laws. They checked to ensure we were not including duplicates of a bill, and cross-referenced against datasets from other researchers to ensure that we were identifying all relevant legislation. Research assistants and staff also cross-checked for completeness against secondary sources such as policy analysis by peer organizations, subject matter experts, or academics; empirical research by academic, governmental, or other empirical researchers; and media coverage to ensure complete coverage of relevant laws passed.
Our Codebook
In devising our codebook, we employed both a top-down and bottom-up approach. Top-down, the research team worked with our faculty director and advisory committee of subject matter experts to determine the key questions we wanted to ask about each bill. Bottom-up, our team reviewed a sample of especially salient bills on each topic to surface important distinctions between the bills. Then, as we examined each bill, we identified additional questions to include in our coding. We translated our expert-identified and inductively-identified questions into a coding scheme that is available for download in our codebook. This scheme relies primarily on binary “yes” or “no” classifications—e.g., ‘does this bill pertain to parking requirements?’
Coding each bill
We ultimately used three separate processes to code the bills identified as relevant: a traditional process with a trained research assistant alone coding each bill, one with a trained research assistant and secondary validation, and one integrating Large Language Model (LLM) technology. Our transition to the latter was motivated by a desire to reduce misclassifications, speed bill coding, and reduce the number of hours involved in updating the tracker in future years.
At the onset of the project, we employed a traditional coding process. Research assistants were trained on the codebook, then used a simple web-based survey form to ‘code’ and categorize bills assigned to them. As the research assistants were first starting out, the NYU Furman Center’s Policy Fellow reviewed their classifications making corrections where the research assistants had misclassified something, refining the codebook where misclassifications indicated that there was ambiguity, and adding new questions to the codebook that hadn’t been identified in the earlier stages. Ultimately, 17% of the bills were coded using the standard process by a research assistant and validated by a second coder (the Policy Fellow), 24% of the bills were coded using the standard process only by a research assistant.
This process had a number of drawbacks. Research assistants have limited time and tenure, and varied in their interpretations of the codebook. The Policy Fellow’s validation step was also a significant bottleneck. Motivated in part by these drawbacks, we explored integrating Large Language Models (LLMs) into our classification pipeline. Led by the NYU Furman Center’s Legal Fellow, in collaboration with the data team, we conducted a series of tests to evaluate the tradeoffs of this integration.
These tests occurred in two primary stages: non-representative and representative testing. Initially, we tested the performance of various LLMs (OpenAI’s gpt-5-mini model and MLX’s Qwen3 Next Thinking 80B A3B 4-bit open source model) on a subset of our ‘bigger picture’ questions (whether the bill pertained to multifamily housing, ‘middle housing’, ADUs, affordability, planning, etc.) and a set of harder technical questions (e.g., whether an ADU bill includes a limit on parking requirements for ADUs). We then compared these LLM-based classifications to those produced by research assistants with secondary review on the (non-representative) bills already coded under that process.
Compared to this coding process, the best LLMs produced moderately fewer false negatives (e.g., a bill coded as NOT pertaining to ADUs when it in fact DID) but significantly more false positives (e.g., a bill coded as pertaining to ADUs when it in fact did NOT). This was because the LLMs were more likely—too likely—to indicate a bill DID fall into a given class than to indicate that it did NOT. In general, the LLMs appeared to miss fewer positive identifications where the statutory text supporting that identification was buried or far from the most otherwise relevant text in the bill. By contrast, they appeared especially prone to mistakenly make false identifications where a given question was more sensitive to context, whether conceptual (e.g., the concept of “middle” housing can be conceptually ambiguous without strong context) or statutory (e.g., additions and deletions to existing statutes can be difficult to classify without a clear understanding of what the prior statutory text was).
We confirmed these patterns with additional testing, which evaluated classifications produced on a random, representative sample of bills by i) research assistants alone; ii) an LLM alone; and iii) an LLM with research assistant validation. The research assistants produced the fewest false positives but the most false negatives, whereas the LLM alone produced the most false positives and fewest false negatives. The combination of using an LLM with research assistant validation preserved the research assistants’ infrequent false positives while producing only slightly more false negatives than the LLM alone.
Because of these suggestive benefits of integrating an LLM, we coded the remaining uncoded bills using the third process: an LLM coded each bill first, then a research assistant validated its coding. 415 bills, or 59% of the dataset as of publication, were coded using this process. In total, we expended approximately 700 research assistant hours and 125 policy fellow hours on coding the 287 bills under the standard process, then another 450 research assistant hours on coding the remaining 414 bills under the LLM-integrated process. We have created a flag in the raw data to indicate which process was used for each bill.
We chose to use Qwen’s (open source) model to perform this pre-coding because of its comparable performance with other models, lower cost-per-code, customizability, and guaranteed future availability. In addition to producing fewer false negatives than research assistants alone without producing more false positives, the LLM facilitated significantly faster review by the research assistants. Note that, because the following columns in our raw data were added at later stages in the coding process, they were coded under a more ad hoc process, but always with final review by either the Policy or Legal Fellows:
- Lot Split, Climate, Disaster Mitigation, Density (Other), Lot Size, Bans Protections, Plan Exemption (Population Minimum), Plan (Goal Affordability), Streamline Approval (Application, Third Party, Vote, and Other), Lose Funds, Right of Action General, Fine, Appeal (General).
Finally, the Legal and Policy fellow performed a joint audit of all three coding processes: RA alone, RA plus secondary validation, and LLM plus RA validation. To do so, we sampled 10 random bills from each set (30 bills in total) and subjected them to consensus review. We took the results of this consensus review to be the ‘ground truth’ against which we evaluated the three coding processes. Reassuringly, these audits suggest that our overall accuracy for each of the three coding processes was over 98%. In the audit of the LLM with research assistant review, accuracy reached 99%. More broadly, these audits confirmed our earlier experiments. With one exception, the LLM with research assistant review exhibited the highest performance across all standard measures used to evaluate classification processes (accuracy, precision, recall, specificity, and F1-Score). The one exception—recall performance— fell squarely in the middle of research assistants alone (which exhibited the lowest performance on all measures) and research assistants with secondary review (which exhibited intermediate performance on all measures except recall). The results of these audits are given below.
Accuracy, Precision, Recall, Specificity, F1-Score
- Research assistants alone: 98.5%, 74.1%, 75.5%, 99.2%, 75.8%
- Research assistants with validation by a secondary coder: 98.8%, 75.9%, 85.4%, 99.2%, 80.4%
- LLM with research assistant validation: 99.0%, 83.0%, 79.6%, 99.6%, 81.3%
Our team will expand this audit to a larger sample size after publishing the tracker and update this section to provide a more representative picture of the accuracy of our bill coding and categorization. We also strive to correct inaccuracies in bills through ongoing updates to the database.
Limitations:
Due to the breadth of legislation from across the country included here, and the diversity in state statutory frameworks, we have not captured the full context for each policy area when a given law comes into effect. Rather, this is a survey of reforms to the law over time.
Our team was not able to summarize the state of a policy in each state at the onset of our tracking, nor did we perfectly capture how these reforms interact and build upon each other; each entry in the database and how it it is categorized is a point-in-time analysis of how that specific legislation impacts state law.
The database also does not include case law that may be relevant to the interpretation of some statutes. Our resource library will be updated with news on relevant legal challenges to the reforms, and will include the courts’ decisions. This is an evolving dataset and we will continue to update and resolve errors in the categorization.
Citing Us
The Land Use Reform Tracker, and its maps, tables, and other resources may be incorporated into your work and research, and may be cited as: NYU Furman Center’s Land Use Reform Tracker.
Please preserve all trademarks and logos on any exported maps or tables.
For academic and research presentations, please follow the citation formats below:
APA Style
Data Source. Table Title [format]. Data date. NYU Furman Center’s Land Use Reform Tracker. permalink URL. (date accessed)
Chicago Style
Title of map, dates. NYU Furman Center’s Land Use Reform Tracker, permalink URL (based on data from <identify data source>; date accessed).
MLA Style
Title of map, dates. Map. NYU Furman Center’s Land Use Reform Tracker, permalink URL (based on data from <identify data source>; date accessed).
Bluebook Citation Format
N.Y.U. Furman Ctr., Table Title [format], Land Use Reform Tracker (Data date), permalink URL (last visited date).
For questions about citing the Tracker for use in a media outlet, please contact our communications office at furmancenter@nyu.edu.
Independent research and analysis are the cornerstones of the Land Use Reform Tracker. We are grateful to Arnold Ventures for their foundational support in helping us build the nation’s premier repository for state land use legislation.
While we are grateful for the support of our sponsors, the Tracker maintains full editorial independence. The findings, analysis, and views expressed in our policy briefs are those of the NYU Furman Center staff alone.
Team & Acknowledgements
Vicki Been
Brad Greenburg
Helen Ketema
Jacob Waggoner
Rohun Iyer
Donna Borak
Isabel Kirsch
Hayley Raetz
Masaaki Kato
Harrison Boyer
Max Gordy
Daria Guzzo
Sophia Hughes
Ava Klein
Sharon Li
Finlay Scanlon
Benjamin Auerbach
Shantelle Brown
Maddie Chiu
Michelle Lu
Jeremy Faust
Grace Getman
Flora He
Aditya Kannoth
Rachel Klein
Suad Mumin
John Overstreet
Sam Ozer-Staton
Kaushik Resu
Nina Russell
Hannah Tager
Alex Veitch
Vincie Wang
Zoe Yao
Cameron Ederle
Alicia Lee
Henry Rodgers
Samar Jha, Government Affairs, AARP’s National Government Affairs
Henry Honorof, Director, Coordinating Team, Welcoming Neighbors Network
David Garcia, Deputy Director of Policy, Terner Center for Housing Innovation at UC Berkeley
Shazia Manji, Senior Research Associate, Terner Center for Housing Innovation at UC Berkeley
Yonah Freemark, PhD, Principal Research Associate, Urban Institute
Greg David, Director, Business and Economics Reporting Program, Craig Newmark Graduate School of Journalism
Professor Christopher S. Elmendorf, Martin Luther King Jr. Professor of Law, UC Davis and Non-Resident Senior Fellow, Institute for Progress
Go To Tool
Track recent state statutes that reform land use, zoning and related housing policies across all 50 states.