Resource

The ‘abundance’ movement is gaining momentum: it’s a big idea that calls for building more housing, more energy, and more infrastructure by getting rid of outdated and unnecessary red tape. Abundance is a great idea, and Smart Growth America is ready to offer our decades of experience and expertise, not only in seeking those same outcomes, but in demonstrating what it looks like when those big ideas are put into action.

Abundance is the idea this moment demands. For the first time in decades, bipartisan leaders are lining up behind the notion that we should allow growth and development that’s been stymied by over-regulation for generations. The momentum is real, and it’s long overdue. As experts in housing and the built environment, we share the abundance movement’s core belief: it’s time we tear down the outdated rules that make it nearly impossible to build in most neighborhoods— especially in the connected, opportunity-rich places where people actually want to live.

Addressing the urgent housing supply crisis is extremely important, but we also know that focusing on supply alone isn’t enough. If we only chase ‘more,’ without asking where, what, and for who, we risk repeating the same mistakes without addressing the root cause of the current crisis. This approach could lead us to build large, expensive houses on the fringe where regulation is looser, but opportunity is farther away. At best, this will slightly lower the cost of housing for people of more modest means, but it will do little to build housing to the walkable, transit-served places near jobs, retail, and services that people want to live. And it will do nothing to address the regulatory barriers that have stymied efforts for decades to build the housing people need.

Abundance done well means putting in the hard work of removing barriers in the highest-impact places: thriving, well-connected communities where high prices keep everyone out but the select few. It means variety—duplexes, triplexes, mixed-use—so people at every stage of life can find a home that makes sense for them. By building the housing people want in the places they want them, we will also align housing with transportation, energy, and economic development, meaning people can spend less money and time on transportation and pollute less while doing so. This is the smart growth approach we’ve championed for more than 20 years.

Here are three ways abundance + smart growth can meet the moment

Abundance doesn’t dictate a direction—but up is better than out.

The housing crisis is hitting hardest in established, high-demand places. And that’s exactly where we need to add the types of homes people can no longer find or afford. That will mean building inside existing communities, filling empty or underutilized parcels, and sometimes building taller. Those places tend to have more amenities (transit, walkability, retail) and more opportunities (from jobs to education); but they also are the places with the greatest regulatory barriers, which means building there will involve a fight.

Right now, less than three percent of the land area in our nation’s 35 largest cities is walkable, but those are the areas that generate the most GDP and have the highest prices for potential residents, indicating that the housing market is far from meeting demand for walkable, vibrant places. The market will direct developers to build in places where people want to live, only if decision-makers can focus on reducing the barriers that stop it from happening.

Building where land is cheapest on the fringe of metro areas might look affordable on paper, but when families are forced to own multiple cars just to get to work, school, and basic services, the actual costs skyrocket. The cost of gas, insurance, and maintenance can wipe out any savings from cheaper rent or mortgages. In contrast, building housing in well-connected communities lets families choose whether they even need a car, decreasing travel times, reducing costs, and bringing health benefits.

It is also more expensive to the government and the taxpayer. Building low-density requires the same investment in roads, water, sewer, trash, fire, schools, and police as denser development does. It just costs more per person. This leads to higher taxes or unmaintained infrastructure and services, usually the latter.
Development on the fringes is also more likely to be in areas that are vulnerable to extreme weather or necessitate high-cost infrastructure investments, and the added tax revenue often can’t cover the long-term costs of infrastructure maintenance and services. True affordability means looking at housing, transportation, and energy costs together—and dense, multifamily housing in connected areas almost always comes out ahead.

Abundance calls for changing the rules, but that matters most in the places where opportunity already exists.

Reforming zoning, construction, and environmental review processes is a goal we share. That means taking on the fight to ensure we can add housing where it is most needed, which is not in the places where it is already easy to develop. People hear “build more housing,” but in most existing communities, the current laws and regulations are too hard to overcome. Still, we need to build more housing, right? Well, that mindset leads to more housing being built on the fringes. We need to do the hard work now to dismantle zoning barriers in the communities where demand is the highest, and not simply leave it to each local jurisdiction to do the work itself. Moreover, when we do build in new places, we need to make sure they do not simply adopt the standard land use and zoning approaches that have gotten us here.

And beyond just cutting the red tape, policymakers should find ways to “regulate for what you want,” proactively creating policies that allow for and incentivize housing in well-connected existing communities. Beyond zoning reform, communities often also require support in identifying and incentivizing the development of underutilized sites and building up infrastructure to support small-scale developers ready to create more dense and innovative types of housing.
(Check out Jerusalem Demsas’s 2025 Smart Growth America Equity Summit Keynote, where she talks about this very goal.)

Abundance must actually build everything, not just single-family homes.

If all we do is churn out more single-family homes on big lots, we’re not solving the housing crisis—we’re cementing it. The real housing shortage is in “missing middle” housing: duplexes, triplexes, small apartments, and other modest-scale homes that outdated zoning has effectively banned in many communities across the country.

When these smaller options aren’t available, the math is simple: people who would live in them either get priced out of the housing market or get pushed into larger, more expensive homes, driving up prices for everyone else. One- and two-person households, low- and moderate-income families, young professionals, and older homeowners who want to downsize all lose out, and the small supply of smaller homes that does exist just gets more expensive due to scarcity. Meanwhile, some households, especially older Americans, remain stuck in larger homes that they may struggle to maintain.

This mismatch is stark: since 1960, the average household size in the U.S. has shrunk dramatically, while the houses we build have gotten bigger.

Last word

Housing abundance without housing variety isn’t abundance at all. It’s just supply growth on paper that leaves the core mismatch in place and keeps affordability out of reach.

If abundance does the hard work of dismantling regulations in ways that allow more housing of all types in denser, well-connected, existing communities, we can meet housing demand where that demand is highest, lower household costs, and build vibrant communities that last. Outward growth will only lock in decades of traffic and higher costs. Abundant smart growth would deliver what Americans want.