Urban housing shortages are often worsened by zoning and land-use laws that restrict new construction. While legal reforms like removing parking mandates or allowing more units per lot have been suggested, it's unclear which changes actually boost housing supply the most. Identifying the most effective reforms could help policymakers, planners, and advocates prioritize actions that truly alleviate housing crises.

How the Idea Works

One way to determine the best legal changes would be to systematically compare their impacts. This could involve:

• Reviewing existing research on how different zoning reforms affected housing construction
• Studying cities where specific changes were made (like Minneapolis eliminating parking requirements)
• Interviewing experts to understand real-world implementation challenges
• Comparing results across regions to spot consistent patterns

The goal would be to create a ranked list showing which reforms typically lead to the most new housing units, helping stakeholders focus on high-impact changes.

Who Could Benefit and Why

Different groups might find this analysis valuable:

• City governments: Could use evidence to pass reforms that actually work
• Housing advocates: Would gain stronger arguments for pushing certain policies
• Developers: Might better predict where construction will become easier

Since all these groups already want more housing (for different reasons), they'd likely support or use research that clarifies which legal changes deliver results.

Getting Started

A simpler version could begin by just analyzing a few well-documented cases where single reforms were implemented separately. For example, comparing housing growth before and after parking requirement changes in 3-4 cities could provide initial insights without needing a massive study. This scaled-down approach might quickly show whether certain reforms consistently outperform others.