Urban/Regional Planning
United States Developments in 2025
In 2025, urban planning and land-use policy took center stage across the United States as policymakers sought to tackle housing shortages and growth challenges. State-Level Zoning Reforms: Many states enacted pro-housing zoning reforms to ease local restrictions. For example, Arkansas and Iowa legalized or expanded accessory dwelling units (ADUs) statewide, overriding local bans to spur “in-law” apartments and backyard cottages 1 . Multiple states – including Connecticut, Montana, Colorado, and Washington – eliminated or reduced minimum parking requirements, recognizing that parking mandates inflate housing costs and impede infill development 2 . California took bold steps by streamlining environmental review for qualifying urban housing projects under a modified CEQA process, shortening project timelines while upholding core environmental protections 3 4 . California lawmakers also passed a landmark transit-oriented zoning law (by Sen. Scott Wiener) requiring local governments to upzone areas around major transit stops for higher-density housing, linking land use with transportation access 5 6 . These measures reflect a broader national trend of tying housing growth to sustainable planning principles like walkability and public transit.
Modernizing Planning Frameworks: A notable development in 2025 was the push to modernize building codes and regional planning processes. Responding to calls to unlock “missing middle” housing, at least seven states advanced or adopted single-stair building codes – allowing mid-rise apartment buildings with a single staircase to reduce construction costs 7 8 . Bipartisan support for such code changes surged: states as politically diverse as Oregon, New Hampshire, Montana, Texas, and Colorado embraced single-stair designs in 4–6 story buildings, marking a shift in safety codes to enable more affordable multi-family construction 9 10 . Beyond individual zoning fixes, states also moved toward coordinated regional planning. Colorado created a Regional Planning Roundtable Commission to better align housing development with infrastructure investments, reflecting research-backed approaches to integrate land use and transportation planning 11 12 . Likewise, Utah’s new BUILD Council brought housing, transportation, and economic development agencies together to plan in concert 13 . These frameworks signal recognition that growth management requires cross-jurisdictional and interdisciplinary cooperation.
Preemption and Growth Management: Debates intensified over state preemption of local land-use authority. In Florida, lawmakers expanded the 2023 Live Local Act with a 2025 law (SB 1730) that broadly preempted local zoning for housing: it mandates that all counties and municipalities allow multifamily and mixed-use housing in commercially zoned areas and bans certain local development restrictions 14 . This aggressive approach aims to override exclusionary zoning to drive housing production. Even traditionally home-rule states are reconsidering local control – policymakers increasingly view outdated zoning codes as barriers to growth, and many 2025 reforms (from ADU legalization to density bonuses) effectively curb local veto power 14 15 . Notably, 124 pro-housing laws were enacted by states in 2025 (out of 412 bills introduced), underscoring a nationwide shift in seeing housing supply as a state priority rather than a hyper-local issue 16 . In tandem, federal discourse supported these moves: the Biden administration’s
1
Housing Supply Action Plan continued to encourage zoning reform, and bipartisan members of Congress promoted measures like the YIMBY Act to incentivize upzoning (though major federal zoning legislation remained pending). Overall, 2025 solidified housing and land-use policy as mainstream concerns, with states actively updating growth management strategies to be more inclusionary and responsive to demographic and economic needs.
Pennsylvania Developments in 2025
Pennsylvania in 2025 grappled with the legacy of restrictive land-use practices and took initial steps toward reform. Housing Underproduction Crisis: The state’s recent history of low housing growth became a rallying point. Between 2017 and 2023, Pennsylvania ranked 44th of 50 states in new housing built, contributing to a 46% rise in rents that far outpaced incomes 17 . Analysts pinned much of this affordability crisis on exclusionary local zoning – many municipalities permit only single-family homes on large lots, suppressing townhomes, duplexes, and apartments 18 . Minimum lot sizes, excessive parking requirements, and lengthy permitting processes have collectively choked housing supply and driven up prices statewide 19 20 . In 2025, bipartisan consensus began to form around addressing these barriers. Policymakers from both parties – from urban Democrats to suburban and rural Republicans – acknowledged that “Yes In My Backyard” (YIMBY) approaches are needed to spur development 21 . State Sen. Greg Rothman, a Republican with a real estate background, echoed a common sentiment that speeding up zoning approvals and cutting red tape is essential to attract private investment and bring housing costs down 22 23 . This marked shift indicates growing political will in Harrisburg to support pro-growth local planning, even if it means reining in some home-rule powers.
State Planning and Zoning Initiatives: Governor Josh Shapiro’s administration used the 2025 budget to bolster planning capacity and encourage local reforms. Shapiro proposed dedicated funding of $1 million for the State Planning Board to assist municipalities in adopting growth-friendly policies and to hire staff helping towns modernize their zoning, permitting, and code enforcement processes 24 . This investment aimed to provide small communities with technical support to update comprehensive plans and streamline development approvals. In the same vein, Governor Shapiro championed a boost to the state’s housing programs: he secured an increase of $10 million for the Pennsylvania Housing Affordability and Rehabilitation Enhancement (PHARE) fund (bringing it to $110 million by 2028) to finance home repairs and new affordable housing construction 25 . He also proposed $10 million for a first-time homebuyer assistance program 25 . These measures, while modest in dollars, signaled that the state government recognizes its role in facilitating local development and incentivizing updated land-use practices. Lawmakers like Sen. Rothman praised the focus on reducing regulatory burdens, though he cautioned that mandates like strict affordability set-asides should be balanced so as not to deter developers 26 . The overall approach in 2025 was to pair carrots (funding, technical aid) with an implicit stick (the threat of state intervention) to nudge Pennsylvania’s patchwork of boroughs and townships toward more accommodating zoning for housing.
Local and Regional Planning Efforts: On the local level, 2025 saw Pennsylvania’s cities innovating within existing frameworks. Philadelphia, facing a severe housing crunch, explored adaptive reuse as urban planning strategy – the city began promoting conversion of underused ofice buildings into residential units, a plan backed by City Council members to address post-pandemic downtown vacancies and expand housing supply without consuming new land 27 28 . Pittsburgh, meanwhile, engaged in a high-profile debate over inclusionary zoning (IZ). In October 2025, after a year of deliberation, Pittsburgh’s City Council rejected the mayor’s proposed mandatory IZ (which would have required all new developments citywide to include affordable units) and instead rewrote it into a voluntary incentive program, offering tax breaks for projects that opt to include affordable housing 29 30 . This controversy – with narrow council votes, extensive public comment, and eventual referral of the revised plan to the Planning Commission – underscored the tensions in planning for equitable growth. Proponents argued mandatory IZ was needed to avoid economic segregation, while opponents feared it would “discourage building new homes” by cutting into project finances 31 . The debate remained unresolved by year’s end, but it highlighted growing awareness in Pennsylvania cities of planning tools to produce affordable housing, as well as the need for regional solutions. Indeed, outside the big cities, regional planning agencies like the Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission continued to emphasize multi-municipal coordination on issues like transit-oriented development and open space preservation (building on prior frameworks, though without new statutory mandates in 2025).
In summary, Pennsylvania’s place-based planning in 2025 was characterized by acknowledging past constraints and laying groundwork for change. The state’s political leadership openly tied the Commonwealth’s economic future to modernizing land-use policy, backing efforts to streamline local development approvals. While no sweeping overhaul of the 1968 Municipalities Planning Code occurred in 2025, the momentum shifted toward proactive planning: finding land for infill development, rehabilitating blighted structures, and fostering growth in both fast-growing townships and land-constrained older cities 32 33 . Pennsylvania’s planners and oficials began to look to national models – from Minneapolis’s upzoning to New Jersey’s fair-share housing laws – with an eye to adapting those lessons in coming years. The stage is set for more significant planning and zoning reforms in Pennsylvania as it strives to balance local control with the urgent need for housing and sustainable growth management.
