Build HUBS Act
- Sponsor
- Rep. Friedman, Laura [D-CA-30]
- Committees
- Transportation and Infrastructure Committee (primary)
- Last action
- Jan 15, 2026
Bottom line
The bill aims to accelerate housing production and economic development near transit hubs by making federal financing for transit-oriented development and attainable housing projects more accessible and efficient.
What it actually does
This bill extends and significantly modifies the Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (TIFIA) program and the Railroad Rehabilitation and Improvement Financing (RRIF) program to facilitate the financing of transit-oriented development (TOD) projects, especially those with attainable housing components. It introduces alternative creditworthiness assessments, streamlines environmental reviews through categorical exclusions for certain TOD activities, and establishes delegated origination and underwriting programs modeled after HUD's Multifamily Accelerated Processing system.
Proponents argue
Proponents argue that the bill directly addresses the national housing availability and affordability crisis by leveraging existing transportation financing programs for transit-oriented development. They contend that streamlining the application process, shortening underwriting timelines, and providing alternative credit assessments will unlock private investment, spur economic development, boost transit ridership, and create more affordable housing options, particularly in underserved communities.
Opponents contend
Opponents might argue that expanding the scope of transportation financing programs to include housing development could divert funds or focus from core transportation infrastructure needs. Concerns could also be raised about the potential for reduced environmental review through categorical exclusions, which might weaken protections, and the inherent risks associated with federal loans utilizing alternative creditworthiness assessments.
The bill is moderately complex, requiring careful reading to understand the statutory amendments, but its length is manageable for a focused review.
Section 3(b), 4(b)(2)
Definitions for Attainable Housing and TOD Projects
This provision defines 'attainable housing project' as a transit-oriented development (TOD) project serving households up to 120% of the area median income, with a majority of units affordable to those at 80% or less of the area median income. It also clarifies and expands the definition of 'transit-oriented development project' for both TIFIA and RRIF programs, emphasizing mixed-use development near transit facilities that generates new revenue for transit services.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue these definitions are crucial for directing federal financing towards projects that genuinely address housing affordability and leverage transit investments, ensuring that the programs serve their intended dual purpose of housing and transportation benefits.
Critics contend
No specific opposition is typically raised against definitional clarity, though critics of the overall bill might argue that the expanded definitions broaden the scope of transportation programs too far beyond core infrastructure.
Tradeoffs
The definitions balance the need for broad applicability to encourage TOD with specific requirements to ensure projects contribute to attainable housing goals and transit system viability.
Section 3(b)(4), 3(c)(1)(A), 3(d)(1), 3(e), 4(b)(1)(C)
Alternative Creditworthiness Assessments
This provision introduces an 'investment-creditworthiness assessment alternative' for TIFIA and RRIF projects, allowing projects to demonstrate fiscal soundness and low credit default risk without requiring a traditional investment-grade rating from a credit rating agency. Alternatives include joint liability agreements with creditworthy governments, alternative ratings for smaller federal credit instruments ($150M or less), or certification by an approved originator-servicer.
Section 3(c)(3)(B), 4(c)(p)
NEPA Streamlining for TOD Projects
The bill introduces specific National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) streamlining measures for transit-oriented development projects under both TIFIA and RRIF. It exempts land acquisition activities prior to a TIFIA/RRIF application from NEPA, except for publicly owned components. It also establishes categorical exclusions for certain TOD activities, specifically the rehabilitation or conversion of existing office buildings to residential/mixed use within the same footprint, and the reconstruction or construction of new commercial buildings primarily on land disturbed for transportation use.
Section 3(d)(2)(B), 4(b)(1)(B)
Reduced Interest Rates for Attainable Housing Projects
For both TIFIA and RRIF programs, the bill mandates that attainable housing projects receive a reduced interest rate of one-half of the Treasury Rate in effect on the date of loan agreement execution. This significantly lowers the cost of borrowing for projects that meet the 'attainable housing' definition.
Section 3(g), 4(o)
Delegated Origination and Underwriting Programs
The bill establishes delegated origination and underwriting programs for TOD projects under both TIFIA and RRIF. These programs, modeled after HUD's Multifamily Accelerated Processing (MAP) system, allow qualified originator-servicers to handle the origination, underwriting, and servicing of loans and lines of credit on behalf of the Secretary of Transportation. Crucially, projects under these delegated programs are not required to have an investment-grade rating.
Section 3(f)
Application of Labor Standards to TIFIA TOD Projects
This section mandates that transit-oriented development projects and attainable housing projects assisted under the TIFIA program shall be subject to the labor standards of section 5333(a) of title 49, U.S. Code. This typically includes requirements for fair wages and working conditions, often referencing prevailing wage standards.
Exempts land acquisition activities for transit-oriented development projects from NEPA review prior to a TIFIA/RRIF application, with an exception for publicly owned components.
Section 3(c)(3)(B)(i) and 4(c)(p)(1)
Why it matters:While common to place NEPA adjustments within program-specific sections, the pre-award acquisition exemption is a substantive change that could be overlooked by those not scrutinizing the environmental review process details. It streamlines the process by allowing early land acquisition.
Case for: Proponents argue this exemption accelerates project timelines by allowing developers to secure land without waiting for the lengthy federal environmental review process to conclude, thereby reducing costs and risks associated with land options.
Case against: Critics may argue that acquiring land before environmental review could lead to situations where land is purchased for projects that are later deemed environmentally unsound, or that it reduces public input on the initial stages of a project.
Estimated impact: Could significantly reduce the time and cost associated with the initial phases of TOD projects, potentially accelerating project delivery by several months to years.
Requires that for an 'attainable housing project' under the TIFIA program, not less than 75 percent of the total financial assistance must be used for residential components of the project.
Section 3(c)(1)(D)
Why it matters:This is a technical detail ensuring the housing focus of 'attainable housing projects' and is placed within eligibility criteria. It's not intentionally hidden but could be missed if a reader focuses only on the broader definitions or financial terms.
Case for: Proponents argue this ensures that federal funds specifically designated for 'attainable housing projects' are primarily used to create housing units, preventing funds from being diverted to other commercial or public infrastructure components within a mixed-use development.
Case against: Some developers might argue that a rigid 75% residential component requirement could limit flexibility in designing truly mixed-use TOD projects, potentially making some projects less financially viable if they require a higher proportion of commercial or retail space to succeed.
Estimated impact: Ensures a strong focus on housing production for projects receiving specific 'attainable housing' benefits under TIFIA, directing a substantial portion of federal assistance to residential units.