
Building homes on federal land could lower costs — if cities are held in check
The Departments of the Interior and Housing and Urban Development are exploring making some federal land available for homebuilding to alleviate a stubborn housing shortage estimated at over 20 million homes. Their success will depend not only on how quickly and broadly the plan is implemented, but on making sure any newly opened land is not bogged down by the local land use regulations that make housing so scarce and expensive in the first place.
The current home shortage is primarily due to excessively restrictive local land-use rules that favor relatively expensive homes on large lots. But particularly in western states, land for homebuilding is limited by federal holdings near fast-growing metropolitan areas like Las Vegas, Phoenix and many others.
Western land was opened to large-scale settlement through 1862's Homestead Act, which resulted in the sale of more than 420,000 square miles — around 11 percent of the country — in blocks of up to 160 acres, typically to small farmers. As quality agricultural land grew scarce, claims plummeted and nearly dried up by the 1930s.
In 1946, the Bureau of Land Management was formed, reflecting a shift from sales toward maintaining land that had not attracted buyers. In 1976, the Federal Land Policy and Management Act repealed the Homestead Act, signaling an embrace of federal ownership and management, growing environmental concern and other changing currents in public opinion.
But in the following years, something else changed: The rapid growth of sunbelt cities made valuable land once thought worthless.
But selling federal land had become complex and politically fraught under the Federal Land Policy and Management Act, and western cities began to chafe against confinement. By the 1990s, the situation had become too pressing to ignore. The Southern Nevada Public Land Management Act authorized the Bureau of Land Management to transfer certain land to address a housing shortage in Las Vegas.
Its success has been mixed, with around 40 percent of the designated land still unsold. Land that has been sold has been subject to municipal zoning, which typically imposes restrictions such as minimum lot sizes, frontage requirements, setbacks and other mandates that hinder builders from constructing low-cost houses.
Today, western states such as Nevada, Arizona, Utah, Idaho, California and Oregon have some of the highest home price-to-income ratios in the nation. Hemmed in by federal land and burdened by their own expensive regulations, cities that should be centers of opportunity for a new generation are instead starter-home deserts. New houses are prohibitively expensive for too many buyers.
The new initiative promises to revisit the Federal Land Policy and Management Act's assumptions in a comprehensive way that encompasses all affected municipalities. Done right, it could cut through burdensome procedural barriers to selling federal land, relieve cost pressures on western urban markets, allow new cities to grow in appropriate locations and remain attentive to environmental and conservation concerns.
But the number of resulting homes that most Americans can comfortably afford will be closely tied to local land use regulations.
In Reno, Nevada, I found that new homes on lots smaller than 5,000 square feet appraised at an average of $343,000, while those on 5,000-to-7,000-foot lots were appraised at $461,000. Yet less than 10 percent of the single-family lots in Reno — and zero percent of the area of one major development district — allows homes on less than 5,000 square feet of land.
Frontage requirements also played a role in Reno. Each additional 10 mandated feet corresponded with an extra $60,000 in home costs.
So, unless the Bureau of Land Management and HUD push back against local policies like these by attaching robust, enforceable conditions to transfers or negotiating ironclad development standards that ensure that starter homes are legal to build, expect to see some nice, spacious — and expensive — homes built. Local politics almost inevitably lead to zoning that would blunt the affordability impact of land sales.
Beyond cost, there are environmental benefits to allowing smaller homes, including both single-family homes on small lots and multifamily housing. Higher-density housing makes more efficient use of urban land, reducing the rate of outward sprawl. Small lots in arid western climates also mean fewer large, irrigated yards sapping water supplies.
And while the benefits for American families could be immense, the amount of land required relative to total federal acreage is modest. The homesteading farmer sought 160 acres or more, but today's starter homes can sit on one-tenth of an acre or less.
Mountains of evidence show the exclusionary, cost-raising effect of overzealous local zoning. Federal authorities have an opportunity to do more than open land to Americans seeking a home to call their own. They can show our cities and counties what happens when inclusive policies allow for starter homes in addition to houses only the wealthy can afford.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
10 hours ago
- Yahoo
Strategists say President Trump is sending National Guard to Los Angeles to make a spectacle
Members of the California National Guard arrived in Los Angeles Sunday morning in response to Friday and Saturday's protest against federal immigration raids. President Donald Trump moved to deploy the 2,000 members over the opposition of California Gov. Gavin Newsom and L.A. Mayor Karen Bass, who called the move inflammatory and unnecessary. Julian Castro, former Secretary of Housing and Urban Development and now an MSNBC political analyst, along with Don Calloway, host of The Caucus Room P

Yahoo
2 days ago
- Yahoo
Chaco region ban on oil and gas drilling being reconsidered under Trump
Jun. 6—The Trump administration's focus on domestic energy production has pushed the Bureau of Land Management to reconsider a rule against oil drilling in a 10-mile area surrounding the Chaco Culture National Historical Park. As Department of Interior secretary, New Mexico gubernatorial candidate Deb Haaland issued an order in 2023 to prevent oil and natural gas drilling in the 10-mile radius surrounding Chaco Canyon for 20 years. The All Pueblo Council of Governors wants those protections to stay in place for the sake of protecting sacred sites in the Chaco region. But the Navajo Nation is suing to revoke the protections, arguing the withdrawal causes significant economic harm to its members. Increasing domestic energy production and mining is a Trump administration priority. On his first day in office, President Donald Trump signed an executive order telling agency heads to identify actions that impose an "undue burden" on the development of domestic energy resources, particularly oil, natural gas, coal, hydropower, biofuels, critical minerals and nuclear energy resources and to make plans to revise or rescind those actions. "This will restore American prosperity — including for those men and women who have been forgotten by our economy in recent years. It will also rebuild our nation's economic and military security, which will deliver peace through strength," the order reads. Subsequently, Interior Secretary Doug Burgum issued an order in February essentially telling his agency to take steps to follow Trump's order, including "actions to review and, as appropriate, revise all withdrawn public lands." When it comes to Chaco, the Bureau of Land Management is following that order to review withdrawn public lands. According to an agency spokesperson, no formal decision has been made yet related to the Chaco order, which prohibits oil and gas development and exploratory mining on federal lands within a 10-mile radius of the Chaco Culture National Historic Park. "It's deeply disappointing that Trump and his administration are working to undermine our communities rather than to address the struggles and concerns that New Mexicans face every day," Haaland said in a statement. The Bureau of Land Management held a tribal consultation in late May about considering revoking the Chaco order. Ahead of the meeting, Acoma Gov. Charles Riley called for a united tribal response to keep the protections in place. Recently, the All Pueblo Council of Governors also passed a resolution reaffirming its opposition to weakening Chaco protections. "Chaco is a place that's very sacred to us," Riley said. "It contains many of our beliefs and origins. ... Many times, people don't understand our connection with these sites, whether it be Chaco, Mesa Verde, Bears Ears, things like that, many of our religious tribal leaders still go back to these places and call upon our ancestors to guide and protect our people, and that's what people don't understand." Acoma also received notice of the consultation late, only 19 days ahead of time instead of the typical 30, Riley said, giving the pueblo leaders less time to prepare, and the consultation didn't seem like a "true consultation," he said. "It just doesn't seem like this administration is listening. They hear you, but they're not listening," Riley said. 'A domino effect' As the Biden administration came to a close in January, the Navajo Nation filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court against the United States, the Interior Department, the Bureau of Land Management and Haaland, arguing that she failed in her statutory obligations and fiduciary duties to the Navajo Nation when issuing the order. Navajo Nation members hold mineral rights for land in the area, and the lawsuit argues that profiting off of those mineral rights will be effectively impossible with the checkerboard of surrounding federal lands ineligible for lease. "This will result in sizable financial losses, especially relative to modest incomes that are prevalent in this isolated region, and will significantly reduce economic activity and employment in the region, further detrimentally affecting the Nation and its citizens," the lawsuit reads. The Navajo Nation repeatedly proposed a 5-mile withdrawal radius as a compromise approach to protecting Chaco. The lawsuit argues that the U.S. government never officially considered that suggestion, so it didn't encourage public consideration of it. The office of Navajo Nation President Buu Nygren did not respond to a request for comment by the Journal's print deadline. In April, the Acoma and Laguna pueblos asked to join the lawsuit as intervenors on the side of the defendants. New Mexico's all-Democratic congressional delegation have been vocal about trying to protect certain wild or culturally significant areas in the state, like the Gila and Pecos watersheds, from mining and oil and gas development. In April, Sen. Ben Ray Luján and Rep. Teresa Leger Fernández led the reintroduction of a bill to make the 10-mile protected area around Chaco permanent. All five members of the delegation are cosponsors. It seems unlikely to pass in a Republican dominated Congress. "With the atmosphere of today and the push for shorter environmental reviews, the fast track of mining of uranium and oil and gas production, it really does threaten a lot of our sacred places around the country," Riley said. "And if we — God forbid — fail on Chaco, then, in my opinion, it's just a domino effect. Then, who's next? What's next?" Journal Capitol Bureau Chief Dan Boyd contributed to this report.
Yahoo
2 days ago
- Yahoo
Resignation of Crater Lake head leaves Oregon congressional delegation concerned
Crater Lake on a hazy afternoon Aug 4, 2021, caused by wildfires in southern Oregon. (Photo by Alex Baumhardt / Oregon Capital Chronicle) While Democratic members of Oregon's congressional delegation expressed alarm at the sudden resignation of the leader of the state's only national park, the Republican who has the park in his district declined to take a position Friday. Kevin Heatley, the new superintendent of Crater Lake National Park, resigned from his post May 30 over staffing concerns after just five months on the job. Heatley, who had previously worked at the Bureau of Land Management, told Oregon Public Broadcasting, KGW, The Washington Post and several other news organizations that staffing was already lean at Crater Lake, and layoffs of probationary employees President Donald Trump ordered, followed by hiring freezes, mandates to leave vacant positions unfilled and new federal incentives from the Office of Personnel Management and the office known as the Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE, to resign or retire were making it worse. Oregon's congressional delegation met the news with differing levels of concern. U.S. Rep. Maxine Dexter, representing Oregon's 3rd Congressional District, wrote Wednesday to Doug Burgum, secretary of the Department of the Interior, demanding to know if he or the agency had undertaken any analysis of what staffing levels were like there or how bad it had gotten. Dexter is also a member of the House Natural Resources Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations. On X, formerly known as Twitter, Oregon's U.S. Sen. Ron Wyden, a Democrat, said it is clear to him that Trump is 'hellbent on destroying natural treasures like Crater Lake.' U.S. Rep. Cliff Bentz, who represents Oregon's 2nd District —his district includes southern Oregon's Crater Lake — said on the phone Friday he'd 'look into it.' 'The person's (Heatley) concern may be well founded. It may not. Until I know the facts better, I'm not going to take a position on it, but now that you've raised an issue, we'll look into it,' he said. The national park in southern Oregon, famous for its vibrant and translucent volcanic lake that is among the deepest in the world, typically sees about half-a-million visitors each year. But this summer, 60 to 65 seasonal positions will need to be filled, Heatley told journalists in several reports, and just eight ranger positions have so far been filled to keep visitors in the 286-square-mile park safe. 'I mean, the train is still running on the tracks, but it's not heading in the right direction,' Heatley told OPB on June 2. 'I cannot, in good conscience, manage an operation that I know is moving in the wrong direction.' Spokespeople for Crater Lake did not respond to Capital Chronicle requests for staffing and hiring data. The federal jobs portal USA Jobs does not list any current vacancies at Crater Lake. The Kansas-based company running Crater Lake's lodging, concessions, retail and boating operations had 18 vacant positions listed on its site as of June 5. The National Parks Conservation Association, a Washington D.C.-based nonprofit conservation group, called the staffing issues at the 63 National Parks a 'full-blown staffing crisis.' They report that the Department of the Interior's own workforce database shows that as of May 13, the Park Service had just over 18,000 employees across all parks, a more than 16% drop from 2023, the previous fiscal year — a decrease equal to that of the previous ten years combined. The association said the recent sharp drop was driven by Trump-incentivized buyouts, early retirements, deferred resignations and leaving vacancies unfilled. Interior Department data also shows 39% of seasonal and temporary staff at the national parks have been hired so far — about 3,300 employees. That's less than half the number of seasonal employees Park Service officials said they'd hire in a February memo. In her letter to Burgum, Dexter called Heatley's resignation a 'flashing red warning sign that something is very wrong,' in a news release Wednesday. This article was first published by the Oregon Capital Chronicle, part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Oregon Capital Chronicle maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Julia Shumway for questions: info@