← All notes
PolicyMarch 14, 2026 · 11 min read

Zoning Reform and Supply Elasticity: A Three-State Comparison

RE
RE-Invest Research
Research Team
Abstract

We compare the supply responses from three recent state- and city-level zoning reforms: Minneapolis (2018, eliminated single-family-only zoning), Oregon HB 2001 (2019, legalized duplexes statewide in cities >10k), and the Texas HB 2439 (2022, preempted municipal building-material restrictions). Using a difference-in-differences design with matched comparison metros, the estimated permit elasticity is +18% to +27% over five years above counterfactual. Our projection: these reforms collectively dampen HPI growth by 60–140bp annually in affected MSAs through 2030, relative to a no-reform counterfactual.

1. The three reforms

ReformYearScopeHeadline change
Minneapolis 2040 Plan2018CityEliminated single-family-only zoning citywide
Oregon HB 20012019StatewideDuplex-by-right in cities >10k; triplex+ in cities >25k
Texas HB 24392022StatewidePreempted most municipal building-material restrictions

2. Methodology — diff-in-diff with matched controls

For each reform metro (Minneapolis, Portland, Austin), we built a synthetic-control counterfactual using a weighted combination of matched metros (similar population, income, pre-reform permit trajectory, labor market). Outcome: log-permits per 1k population, by quarter. The estimator is:

  log(permits/pop)_{it} = β × Treated_i × Post_t
                        + γ × Quarter_t + δ × Metro_i + ε_{it}

  where β identifies the reform effect on the treated metro
  post-reform, after absorbing quarter and metro fixed effects.

3. Results

Figure 1Permit elasticity by reform, 5-year post-reform
0.06.813.520.327.0Minneapolis+22.0Portland+18.0Austin+27.0PERMIT LIFT VS COUNTERFACTUAL (%)
Percent increase in log-permits per capita vs matched counterfactual, measured at 60 months post-reform. 95% confidence intervals from panel-bootstrapped standard errors.

3.1 Minneapolis — duplex-by-right effect

The estimated +22% permit lift came primarily from 2–4 unit builds. Single-family permits actually fell slightly (-3% vs counterfactual), consistent with substitution toward denser product rather than overall market growth. Multifamily permits (5+ units) were essentially unchanged — the binding constraint for mid-rise construction was elsewhere (parking requirements, not zoning).

3.2 Portland and Oregon HB 2001 — slow burn

Oregon's state-level reform showed the slowest uptake: +5% lift at 24 months, +12% at 36, +18% at 60. The lag reflects the time required for municipalities to update local codes to comply. The rollout is informative for investors pricing in 2024 reforms (Vermont, Minnesota, Washington state) that are following a similar statutory path.

3.3 Austin HB 2439 — material cost channel

The Texas preemption is interesting because it operated through a different channel — build cost — rather than zoning-permitted density. The estimated +27% permit effect reflects lower per-unit cost enabling previously marginal projects. The mechanism is distinct enough that it should not be extrapolated to other "zoning reform" conversations.

4. Price impact

Applying our v0.2 forecast model with reform-informed supply inputs versus the counterfactual, we estimate price impacts:

Figure 2HPI path: reform vs counterfactual, Minneapolis
95.0106.3117.5128.8140.0048121620HPI (REFORM Q = 100)QUARTERS SINCE REFORMObserved (Minneapolis)Counterfactual (synth)
Observed Minneapolis HPI rebased to 100 at reform date (Q4 2018). Counterfactual (dashed) is the weighted synthetic control of 12 matched metros. 5-year cumulative gap: -9.8pp (i.e., Minneapolis HPI grew ~10pp less than it would have absent the reform).

5. Forward-looking — who's next?

Monitoring state-level legislation, seven additional states have passed or are close to passing material zoning reforms in 2025: Vermont, Washington, Minnesota, Connecticut, Colorado, Maine, and Massachusetts. Our framework forecasts supply elasticities in the +10% to +20% range five years out, with price impacts of -50 to -110bp annualized. For investors, this is a cross-cutting signal: markets in these seven states face materially higher forward-supply risk than our pure-momentum forecasts capture.

References

  1. [1]Building permits from Census BPS monthly filings, aggregated to MSA-quarter.
  2. [2]Synthetic control weights computed using the standard Abadie-Gardeazabal method on 8 pre-reform characteristics.
  3. [3]Minneapolis 2040 Plan: full text at minneapolis2040.com. Oregon HB 2001: Oregon Legislative Information System. Texas HB 2439: capitol.texas.gov.
  4. [4]Price impact estimated by re-running the v0.2 forecast with permit-series replaced by counterfactual values; difference attributed to reform.