Build More Housing Near Transit Act of 2025
- Sponsor
- Rep. Peters, Scott H. [D-CA-50]
- Committees
- Transportation and Infrastructure Committee (primary)
- Last action
- Jul 22, 2025
Bottom line
The bill aims to incentivize local and state governments to adopt policies that reduce regulatory barriers to housing construction, especially affordable housing, near public transit projects by linking such policies to increased eligibility for federal transit grants.
What it actually does
This bill amends title 49, United States Code, specifically Section 5309 concerning capital investment grants for public transportation. It introduces a new definition for "pro-housing policy" and allows the Secretary of Transportation to increase a project's justification rating by one point if the applicant demonstrates such policies near transit facilities. It also mandates consultation with the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development for evaluating these policies and requires reporting on projects that receive this rating adjustment.
Proponents argue
Supporters argue that linking federal transit funding to pro-housing policies will encourage the development of more housing, including affordable housing, in transit-rich areas. This approach can reduce commutes, lower transportation costs for residents, decrease carbon emissions, and address housing shortages by leveraging federal infrastructure investments to achieve broader community development goals.
Opponents contend
Critics might argue that this bill oversteps the federal government's role by dictating local land-use policies, which are traditionally state and local prerogatives. They might also contend that adding housing requirements to transit grants could complicate the application process, delay critical infrastructure projects, or divert focus from core transportation objectives. Some may also argue that the "one point" increase might not be a strong enough incentive to overcome local political resistance to zoning changes.
The bill is very short and straightforward to read, allowing ample time for a thorough understanding of its provisions.
Section 2(1), amending 49 U.S.C. 5309(a)
Establishes "Pro-Housing Policy" Definition
This provision defines "pro-housing policy" as any state or local action that removes regulatory barriers to housing construction or preservation, including affordable housing. It specifically lists examples such as reducing or eliminating parking minimums, establishing by-right approval processes for multi-family housing, reducing minimum lot sizes, committing public land for affordable housing, and increasing residential height limits or dwelling units permitted by-right. The Secretary, in consultation with HUD, can determine other policies.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that a clear definition provides actionable guidance for local governments to implement policies known to increase housing supply and affordability. By specifying concrete actions like reducing parking minimums or enabling by-right approvals, the bill targets common regulatory hurdles that impede housing development.
Critics contend
Critics might argue that the specific examples listed could be seen as federal overreach into local zoning matters, potentially undermining local control and community input on development decisions. Some may also contend that a one-size-fits-all definition might not be appropriate for diverse local contexts.
Tradeoffs
Balances the desire for increased housing supply and affordability with concerns about local autonomy in land-use planning and potential impacts on existing community character.
Section 2(2), amending 49 U.S.C. 5309(g)(2)
Incentivizes Pro-Housing Policies in Grant Evaluation
This provision allows the Secretary of Transportation to increase a project's justification rating by one point (on a five-point scale) if the applicant provides documented evidence of pro-housing policies in areas within walking distance of and accessible to transit facilities along the project route. The Secretary must consult with the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development to develop a methodology for evaluating these policies and their expected impact on housing units, including affordable housing, appropriate to demand over the project's life.
Section 2(3), amending 49 U.S.C. 5309(o)
Mandates Reporting on Pro-Housing Policy Outcomes
This provision requires the Secretary of Transportation to include specific information in the annual report to Congress. This information must detail projects that received the adjusted rating due to pro-housing policies, including the specific policies submitted by the applicant and the expected amount of new and preserved housing units (including affordable housing) resulting from these policies, as measured by the DOT-HUD methodology.
The bill provides a highly specific definition for "by-right approval process for multi-family housing," requiring that land use development approval be limited to determining that the development meets objective zoning and design standards. These standards must involve no subjective judgment, be uniformly verifiable by external benchmarks, and be published and adopted by ordinance or resolution before application submission.
Section 2(1)(B)(ii), amending 49 U.S.C. 5309(a)(6)(B)(ii)
Why it matters:This level of detail is standard legislative practice for defining key terms to ensure consistent application and prevent loopholes. It's not necessarily evasive but requires careful reading.
Case for: Proponents argue that this precise definition is essential to ensure that "by-right" approvals genuinely streamline the development process by eliminating discretionary reviews that often lead to delays and increased costs. It aims to prevent localities from claiming "by-right" policies without truly removing subjective barriers.
Case against: Critics might argue that such a rigid definition could limit local flexibility in addressing unique community needs or unforeseen circumstances that might arise during development review. It could be seen as overly prescriptive, potentially stifling innovative local approaches to housing.
Estimated impact: This specificity could significantly influence how local governments design and implement their zoning reforms to qualify for the incentive, potentially leading to more genuinely streamlined approval processes for multi-family housing near transit.