logo
Opinion - Building homes on federal land could lower costs — if cities are held in check

Opinion - Building homes on federal land could lower costs — if cities are held in check

Yahoo21-03-2025

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 In 1976, the Federal Land Policy and Management Act repealed the Homestead Act, signaling an embrace of federal ownership and management, growing environmental concern and other changing currents in public opinion.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.
Charles Gardner is a research fellow with the Mercatus Center at George Mason University.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Senate Proposes Selling Up to 3 Million Acres of Public Land
Senate Proposes Selling Up to 3 Million Acres of Public Land

Yahoo

timean hour ago

  • Yahoo

Senate Proposes Selling Up to 3 Million Acres of Public Land

The Republican majority on the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee is calling for the U.S. government to sell up to three million acres of public land in order to hit revenue goals in the federal budget. That's the astonishing high end of acreage of BLM and U.S. Forest Service land that would be required to be sold or transferred, the revenues from which would go to the U.S. Treasury. The low end of the spectrum is just over 2 million acres of federal land. Language requiring the government to 'dispose' of millions of acres of land was inserted in the committee's draft bill, which was released this evening by committee chair Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT). The bill would require consultation with the governor of each state affected, and would require consideration of 'the extent to which the development of the tract of Bureau of Land Management land or National Forest System land would address local housing needs (including housing supply and affordability).' The bill lists BLM and Forest Service land in most Western states as 'eligible for disposal.' Conspicuously absent from the list is Montana, whose Congressional delegation has been vocal in their opposition to land sales or transfers. When the House Natural Resources Committee considered a version of the budget that included for sale some 500,000 acres of BLM land in Nevada and Utah, Montana congressmen Ryan Zinke and Troy Downing were among the few Republicans to oppose the measure. Given the slim Republican majority in the House, Republican leadership stripped the land-sale provision from the bill before passing it and passing it to the Senate. Montana Senator Steve Daines (R) has said he opposes sales of federal land, and in an emailed statement today his office reiterated that 'Senator Daines is against the sale of public lands and is making his strong concerns clear to his colleagues.' Federal land protected from sale, according to the committee bill draft, includes national parks, national monuments, national wildlife refuges, and a number of other land-management agencies. But the number of acres at play is significant, and is by far the biggest proposed federal land sale in modern U.S. history. The bill draft requires the BLM to divest itself of between 1.18 million and 1.77 million acres, and the Forest Service to sell or transfer between 686,000 and 1.03 million acres. That's about 2.8 million. 'The Secretary shall select for disposal not less than 0.50 percent and not more than 0.75 percent of Bureau of Land Management land, and shall dispose of all right, title, and interest of the United States in and to those tracts selected for disposal,' the bill draft reads. The Secretary of Agriculture (acting through the Chief of the Forest Service) is required to sell a similar percentage of Forest Service lands. Without Montana's contribution, the amount of BLM land in the West totals a little over 251 million acres. Forest Service holdings total about 146 million acres. In a video accompanying the committee's bill draft, Sen. Lee noted that about a third of American real estate is owned by the federal government, and about 70 percent of his state is in federal landownership. 'That's not sustainable,' he says in the recording. 'It's not fair. It's not serving the Americans who actually live here. 'We're opening underused federal land to expand housing, support local development, and get Washington, D.C. out of the way of communities that are just trying to grow.' In the video, Lee assuages the conservation community, which has been almost unanimously opposed to smaller land sales proposed in earlier budget drafts. 'To our hunters, anglers, and sportsmen, you will not lose access to the lands you love. Washington has proven it can't manage this land. This bill puts it in better hands.'

Cortez Masto grills Burgum on public land sales proposal for Senate's funding bill
Cortez Masto grills Burgum on public land sales proposal for Senate's funding bill

Yahoo

time2 hours ago

  • Yahoo

Cortez Masto grills Burgum on public land sales proposal for Senate's funding bill

LAS VEGAS (KLAS) — Democratic Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto asked for details about a federal plan to sell 2 million acres of public lands, but U.S. Interior Secretary Doug Burgum didn't have answers on Wednesday. At a Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee hearing, Cortez Masto wanted to know more about Utah Republican Sen. Mike Lee's reported plan to revive attempts to sell off public lands. Lee is the chairman of the committee. Burgum confirmed it was under consideration, but had no other information. A similar plan that Nevada Republican Rep. Mark Amodei attached to the 'one big, beautiful bill' in a late-night U.S. House committee vote eventually failed because it wasn't supported by Montana Rep. Ryan Zinke, who served as Interior secretary during Trump's first term. Now the battle has moved to the U.S. Senate. Despite follow-up questions from Cortez Masto, Burgum couldn't provide details or identify anyone in Nevada who the administration is working with to ensure land sales actually meet the needs of the local communities. Burgum said he was 'not actively engaged' in negotiations, according to a news release from Cortez Masto's office. 'I'm asking you because we have not seen anything,' Cortez Masto said. 'The chairman has (the proposal), it is behind closed doors. I would assume you would be talking … because you're going to be taking the lead as the lead agency. So if you don't know, I'm really concerned and we should all be concerned across the West.' Last week, speculation grew around what Lee would propose in the Senate. Public lands in Nevada and Utah appear to be likely targets. Cortez Masto pressed Burgum on how these public lands might figure into helping to solve Nevada's affordable housing crisis, but Democrats have widely described the land sale as an attempt to fund renewal of President Donald Trump's 2017 tax breaks that are about to expire. She also criticized Burgum over his statements regarding the Southern Nevada Public Land Management Act (SNPLMA). Burgum talked about the importance of a comprehensive process like SNPLMA as a model for federal land sales earlier in the hearing, Cortez Masto's office said. BLM auction brings $16 million for 8 parcels across Las Vegas valley 'You talk about the benefits (of this model), but in action you're not doing it,' she said. 'In fact, on the House side — and I'm assuming they worked with the administration — their reconciliation package included federal land sales … that weren't even near areas where you could actually do affordable housing.' She said Amodei's amendment would have sold land in the middle of the desert. 'There's no infrastructure. I don't know any builder who is going to build housing in the middle of the desert, it makes no sense,' Cortez Masto said. SNPLMA has provided funds for parks, recreation and water infrastructure in Nevada, but the federal government has been criticized as too slow to free up lands needed to build more housing. A compromise struck by the Bureau of Land Management under Joe Biden allowed the sale of land for $100 an acre, which would have paved the way for affordable housing construction. But that price also drastically reduced the amount of money flowing to parks through BLM land auctions. Later Wednesday, U.S. Senate Majority Leader John Thune said he would cancel the July 4 recess week to complete work on the 'one big, beautiful bill.' It's unclear if Republicans have the support to pass the reconciliation spending package. And even if it passes with public land sales included, the changes would be subject to approval in the House, where Zinke has said he will be a firm 'no.' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Dozens of environmental groups sign letter opposing return of public lands sale
Dozens of environmental groups sign letter opposing return of public lands sale

Yahoo

timea day ago

  • Yahoo

Dozens of environmental groups sign letter opposing return of public lands sale

People rally in opposition of Utah's lawsuit attempting to take control of federal lands at the Capitol in Salt Lake City on Saturday, Jan. 11, 2025. (Photo by Spenser Heaps for Utah News Dispatch) Organizations from around the country signed a letter on Monday urging U.S. senators not to include a controversial proposal to sell thousands of acres of federal land in Congress' budget bill. The letter comes in the wake of reports that Utah Sen. Mike Lee is considering reviving an amendment to the bill originally proposed by Rep. Celeste Maloy that would dispose of nearly 11,500 acres of Bureau of Land Management land in southwestern Utah, and about 450,000 acres in Nevada. Lee, when asked by a Politico reporter last week if he intended to reintroduce the disposal, responded, 'I gotta go vote, but yes.' Lee's office did not respond to a request for comment on Monday, and it's unclear whether Utah's senior GOP senator is considering bringing back an exact copy of Maloy's amendment, or something different. But more than 100 organizations and nonprofits around the country are sounding the alarm, telling Senate leaders to 'heed how dramatically unpopular this idea is and reject any misguided attempt to get public lands sales back in this bill.' 'Decisions about the future of public lands should remain in public hands. Leaders in the House and Senate, extractive industry, and private developers are using the reconciliation process to sell off federal lands to pay for billionaire tax cuts. But such moves are deeply unpopular. Polling has repeatedly shown that the public — especially westerners — strongly believes in keeping public lands in public hands and, across partisan lines, rejects any efforts that would lead to the sale of these shared and cherished lands,' reads the letter, signed by Utah groups like the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance, Conserve Southwest Utah, Save Our Canyons, Great Basin Water Network and Back Country Horsemen of Utah. The letter is addressed to Lee, who chairs the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, New Mexico Democrat Martin Heinrich, the committee's ranking member, Senate Majority Leader John Thune, a South Dakota Republican, and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, a New York Democrat. Maloy's amendment was dropped from the budget bill after it received pushback from all sides of the aisle. That includes Montana Republican Rep. Ryan Zinke, who previously said selling public lands is a line he would not cross and rallied support from a bipartisan group of lawmakers to strip the proposal from the bill. 'The public had no opportunity to participate in the process of identifying these parcels, let alone time to understand the long-term effect of selling off these public lands,' the letter reads. Maloy's proposal identified parcels owned by the Bureau of Land Management to sell to Washington and Beaver counties, the Washington County Water Conservancy District and the city of St. George. The land would have been used for water infrastructure (like reservoirs and wells), an airport expansion in St. George, new and widened roads, recreation and housing. This story was originally published by the Utah News Dispatch which is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network, including the Daily Montanan, supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store