For most of America’s history, there was no zoning. Homes, churches, stores, and small businesses developed naturally as communities grew. That changed during the Industrial Revolution, when factories, rail yards, and other heavy industrial uses began locating next to residential neighborhoods. To protect public health and property values, cities sought a way to separate incompatible land uses. The movement culminated in 1926 when the United States Supreme Court upheld municipal zoning authority in Village of Euclid v. Ambler Realty Co., giving local governments broad authority to regulate how land could be developed.

The original purpose of zoning was both practical and widely supported. Few people would argue that a steel mill, chemical plant, or landfill belongs beside a neighborhood. For decades, zoning successfully protected families from incompatible land uses while providing communities with an orderly framework for growth. It was never intended to determine how large a home must be, what materials it must be built from, or how many families could afford to live in a community.

Over time, however, zoning evolved far beyond separating residential, commercial, and industrial uses. Many local ordinances now regulate minimum lot sizes, minimum house sizes, architectural standards, setbacks, landscaping, parking requirements, tree preservation, and countless other design elements. Individually, these requirements often appear reasonable. Collectively, they increase the cost of every new home. When construction costs surged and mortgage rates climbed in recent years, builders could no longer respond by simply building smaller, more affordable homes because, in many communities, local regulations no longer allow them to.

America’s housing affordability crisis did not develop overnight, nor is it the result of a single policy. It is the cumulative effect of decades of well-intentioned regulations that have steadily reduced flexibility while increasing development costs. Communities should absolutely protect public health, safety, infrastructure, and the environment, but they should also ask whether every regulation still serves its original purpose. If a rule no longer protects the public but instead prevents working families from buying a home, it deserves thoughtful reconsideration.

As I wrote in Zoned Out, “Housing affordability did not disappear overnight. It was regulated away gradually.” That single sentence captures the challenge facing America today. The goal is not to eliminate zoning, but to restore its original purpose—protecting communities while allowing builders to provide homes that teachers, firefighters, nurses, police officers, and young families can once again afford.