Reason.com - Free Minds and Free Markets
Reason logo Reason logo
  • Latest
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Archives
    • Subscribe
    • Crossword
  • Video
    • Reason TV
    • The Reason Roundtable
    • Free Media
    • The Reason Interview
  • Podcasts
    • All Shows
    • The Reason Roundtable
    • The Reason Interview With Nick Gillespie
    • Freed Up
    • The Soho Forum Debates
  • Volokh
  • Newsletters
  • Donate
    • Donate Online
    • Ways To Give To Reason Foundation
    • Torchbearer Society
    • Planned Giving
  • Subscribe
    • Reason Plus Subscription
    • Print Subscription
    • Gift Subscriptions
    • Subscriber Support

Log In

Create new account

Housing Policy

Live Free or Ban Data Centers

Plus: D.C. considers single-stair reform, Idaho legalizes starter homes, and Florida bans discrimination against manufactured housing.

Christian Britschgi | 3.31.2026 1:00 PM

Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL Add Reason to Google
Media Contact & Reprint Requests
data center | Meta
(Meta)

Happy Tuesday, and welcome to another edition of Rent Free. This week's newsletter covers a number of new reforms that try to relegalize formerly ubiquitous forms of affordable housing.

  • In Washington, D.C., the city council will consider a bill to allow taller single-stair apartment buildings.
  • The Idaho Legislature has passed a bill allowing small starter homes to be built on smaller lots.
  • Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis has signed into law a bill that allows manufactured housing to be built in single-family areas.

Single-stair apartment buildings, starter homes, and manufactured housing are nothing new. All worked to make the American cities and towns of the past more affordable, accessible places to live.

Rent Free Newsletter by Christian Britschgi. Get more of Christian's urban regulation, development, and zoning coverage.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Over the decades, states and localities have imposed rules that restrict or even ban these forms of housing. As evidenced by the reforms advancing across the country, many policymakers consider those restrictions a mistake. Bit by bit, we're returning to the old, freer land use regime.

But first, the newsletter covers how the backlash to data centers in rural Ohio is leading some communities to consider adopting zoning for the first time.


Live Free or Ban Data Centers?

In rural Ohio, residents are balancing two uncomfortable propositions: live next to new data centers or adopt zoning codes to stop them.

WUOB, the state's public media outlet, reports that a mounting number of data center developments are springing up in the state's southeast, where many of the area's rural counties have no zoning codes.

The data centers are often unpopular, with local residents complaining about large, unsightly buildings consuming existing farmland and the lack of transparency from local governments and data center builders about their projects.

But without zoning codes, local officials have limited ability to block new data centers where they're proposed.

As I noted in a recent cover story for Reason, data centers are—all things considered—pretty low-impact land uses. They're not particularly noisy. They don't emit noxious fumes or smells. Their small permanent staffs mean that they also don't strain local roads and schools. Their water use is normal, and the impacts of their admittedly gargantuan power consumption are overblown.

For all those reasons, there are few environmental laws or nuisance regulations focused on actual neighborhood effects that one could use to stop new data centers from opening up. For that task, one needs zoning.

Zoning skips the whole business of regulating externalities and instead gives local officials the direct power to say what kinds of buildings are allowed where.

It's a perfect tool for stopping data centers. The problem is that zoning is a perfect tool for stopping almost everything.

"We don't have to ask permission for simple things like putting up a fence, so that's great.…At the same time, I think there should be some form of protection in place for this type of thing," WUOB quotes one woman who is concerned about new data center development while also wary of the regulations required to stop them.

The outlet notes that some towns are adopting straight moratoriums on data center development as an alternative to comprehensive zoning, but these can only be a temporary measure.

For people who don't want zoning, moratoriums can be risky business. Read Reason's coverage of land use battles in Caroline, New York, where a temporary moratorium designed to stop a Dollar General morphed into a wider effort to impose zoning on the then-unzoned town.

At the end of the day, freedom for me but not for thee is a hard thing to write into the law. The conflict over data centers in unzoned Ohio is evidence that being allowed to do what you want on your property usually requires tolerating what someone else does on their property—even if it's building a data center.


The D.C. City Council Considers Single-Stair Reform

Today, the Washington, D.C., City Council's Committee of the Whole will consider a bill introduced by Councilmember Brianne Nadeau that would allow apartment buildings of up to six stories to be built with just one staircase.

Like most U.S. cities, D.C. currently requires apartment buildings over three stories in height to have two staircases as a fire safety measure.

Reformers have argued that the requirement of a second staircase significantly increases costs to new construction and stymies the construction of smaller apartment buildings on smaller urban lots.

That's a loss for supply and affordability, advocates argue. And because new multifamily housing has the best fire safety record, single-stair requirements that prevent new multifamily construction could actually reduce fire safety.

New York City and Seattle have long allowed single-stair buildings to rise six stories. According to Pew, seven states passed single-stair reforms in 2025 that either require building code updates to allow taller single-stair buildings or otherwise require building code officials to consider such reforms.

Nadeau's "One Front Door Act" would require city building officials to update construction codes to allow six-story single-stair buildings within two years.

The reform will "increase the amount of space that can be built for residents, making it more economical and easier for builders to create more units or bigger units, which are good for families," said Nadeau in introducing the bill last year.

A public hearing on the bill was held in January. Written testimony shows a long list of housing policy groups, architects, and real estate advocates in favor of the reform. The main opposition comes from the city's Fire Fighter Association.


Idaho Passes Sweeping Starter Home Reforms  

Last week, the Idaho Legislature passed a bill allowing "starter home subdivisions" in municipalities across the state.

Senate Bill 1352, which was transmitted to the governor yesterday, would require cities of 10,000 people or more to update their land use laws to allow single-family homes on lots as small as 1,500 square feet within new subdivisions of at least four acres.

Similar "starter home" legislation is becoming an increasingly common form of housing supply reform. "Small homes on small lots" offers the potential for more modestly priced, owner-occupied housing. When restricted to new subdivisions, these bills can avoid some of the fights about allowing multifamily housing in existing residential areas.

According to the American Enterprise Institute's housing legislation tracker, over a dozen states have considered lot size reform bills this year.

Texas made headlines last year when it adopted a law allowing starter homes on 3,000-square-foot lots in five-acre subdivisions in larger cities and counties last year. Idaho's reforms go beyond Texas' policy by allowing even smaller lots in smaller subdivisions in smaller communities.

In addition to S.B. 1352, the Idaho Legislature is also considering reforms that would allow duplexes and accessory dwelling units in single-family areas. Bills that would enact those reforms passed the Idaho Senate earlier this month and are now being considered by the House.


Florida Passes Bill To Boost Manufactured Housing, Reduce Permit Fees

On Friday, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis signed into law House Bill (H.B.) 399, which would restrict local governments' ability to discriminate against manufactured housing.

The new law requires local governments to allow off-site constructed manufactured housing anywhere that detached single-family homes are also allowed. Localities are also forbidden from regulating manufactured housing more restrictively than single-family housing in the same zoning district.

Manufactured, a.k.a. mobile, homes used to be a significant portion of new homes built in America. These homes were also typically the most affordable form of new housing.

Brian Potter, author of the Construction Physics Substack, notes that in some years in the 1960s and 70s, as many as a fifth of new homes were factory-built manufactured housing.

In the 1970s, this type of housing went into steep decline, the reasons for which are debated. Some blame federal regulations of manufactured housing. Certainly not helping matters were the proliferation of zoning codes that explicitly banned manufactured housing in whole communities.

In more recent years, there's been a rising interest in attempting to revive the manufactured housing sector.

The housing bill currently being considered by Congress would peel back some federal regulations on manufactured homes. Florida's H.B. 399, meanwhile, tackles the zoning restrictions that keep these units out of town.

The new law also requires local governments to cap permitting fees at the cost of actually reviewing and processing building permits.


Quick Links

  • The Argument's Jerusalem Demsas on Congress' bipartisan bias against renters
  • The FBI is warning homeowners about a new scam in which fraudsters send them fake letters demanding payment for building permits. The bureau says the scam is so successful because the fraudulent fee demands sound so much like the real, random fees homeowners have to pay.
  • A Rhode Island House committee will consider a bill that repeals regulations on single-room occupancy and co-living housing today.
  • America's first developer president wants his presidential library to be a gleaming glass tower.
  • No lies detected:

(Georgist meeting) we recognize that we are holding this meeting on untaxed land,

— Harlo Pippenger ???????????? (@PippengerHarlo) March 30, 2026

Rent Free is a weekly newsletter from Christian Britschgi on urbanism and the fight for less regulation, more housing, more property rights, and more freedom in America's cities.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

NEXT: 10 Years Ago Today, Trump Promised To Eliminate the National Debt. Instead, It Has Doubled.

Christian Britschgi is a reporter at Reason.

Housing PolicyFloridaD.C.ZoningAffordable HousingIdaho
Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL Add Reason to Google
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

Hide Comments (20)

Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.

  1. Longtobefree   2 months ago

    Libertarians for state control of local zoning?

    1. charliehall   2 months ago

      Local zoning is the single most un-libertarian act by governments in the US.

      1. TJJ2000   2 months ago

        You do know Idaho is a [R]epublican state right.
        Last week you were telling me [D]s were De-Regulating and [R]s were fussing about it.
        Apparently untrue.

        1. charliehall   2 months ago

          Yes, and would that those Republicans live in New York. I tell you again that it is the Ds who are de-regulating here and every R is going scorched earth to stop it. With the approval of Trump himself.

          1. CE   2 months ago

            In California it's the wealthy Democrat enclaves that are trying to keep the riff-raff out.

      2. CE   2 months ago

        Except you are free not to buy a home in those communities, or to buy one if you choose. The state is trying to remove that choice.

      3. Agammamon   2 months ago

        But federal zoning isn't?

    2. CE   2 months ago

      Exactly. All of these reforms enable the state to overrule the wishes of local communities, who set up different rules and chose to live in those communities in part because of the housing rules that were already set up there.

  2. mad.casual   2 months ago

    As I noted in a recent cover story for Reason, data centers are—all things considered—pretty low-impact land uses. They're not particularly noisy. They don't emit noxious fumes or smells. Their small permanent staffs mean that they also don't strain local roads and schools. Their water use is normal, and the impacts of their admittedly gargantuan power consumption are overblown.

    Once again, not opposing datacenters (my livelihood depends on them), but this is a misinformed, if not dishonest, representation. It feels like the same old coastal elite mentality.

    It's rural farmland. Noise isn't an issue now. Smells and fumes go along with the territory like dust and pollen. Their small, permanent staff is larger than the families who farm there and compared to the wells, homes, and farmland that was there, their power and water use is considerable. Most of these people don't like environmentalism, so they aren't explicitly opposed to the land being used, but pretending these aren't massive shifts in the region and that the actual costs and constraints don't vary widely between data centers and regions doesn't make you look pro-innovation or pro-humanitarian or whatever, it makes you look stupid and uniformed.

    This is on top of the fact that the people living in these areas aren't directly going to benefit from these data centers. Much like the crops they already grow to support urban "food deserts" and whiz-bang corpse-rape subways and useless street cars, they are, at best, getting "better" TikTok recommendations out of the deal.

    Most people, even in major cities, don't interact with this size and scope of development. These projects are typically well larger (like 2-3 fold or more) than most urbanite's notion of a "15 min. walkable city". Imagine Central Park, 3X it's current size and someone turns it into a data center. The vast majority of suburbs or "Villages" in Chicagoland are smaller than a modest/average datacenter campus. Many of the buildings on these campuses are the largest man made structures for literally a hundred miles in any direction. We did this for cars and steel previously. So it's not unreasonable or anything like immoral, but the "How could anyone be opposed? What's not to love?" take is retardedly optimistic.

    It is notable that when a planned Foxconn plant (about 3/4 the size of one of these datacenters) in Kenosha, WI got (conditional!) tax breaks, you motherfuckers pitched a fit.

    1. charliehall   2 months ago

      "the people living in these areas aren't directly going to benefit from these data centers"

      They will get a big benefit from the property taxes the data centers pay.

      1. Rick James   2 months ago

        They will get a big benefit from the property taxes the data centers pay.

        Not of the locale gives them "tax-incentives" which means they pay no property or local taxes for eleventy years... and by 'benefit' that depends. If 'benefit' means they DO pay property taxes, which means the burden of taxes drops for the normies who already lived there then:

        If big corporate footprints in glass and steel edifices full of high-tech workers benefitted me on property taxes by taking some of the pressure off, I'd live in the lowest property tax state in the nation.

        1. charliehall   2 months ago

          One of the best things Jerry Brown did was to take away the power of local development authorities to give such "incentives". He realized that they were competing against each other! Would that there were a way to ban them nationwide.

          Those glass and steel edifices are the reason New York City's property tax rates are low. The rest of the state prefers to be "exclusive". The high property taxes keep the "wrong" people out.

        2. mad.casual   2 months ago

          They will get a big benefit from the property taxes the data centers pay.

          This is the same retarded urban/concrete--jungle-dwelling hick mentality.

          The article goes through how there are no zoning codes. So the land simply goes from being unzoned agricultural land to unzoned commercial land. Even without subsidies, any property taxes go to the state at the same rate and get redistributed the same way. There are certainly datacenters going in on re-zoned commercial property but, the ignorance of "tax-incentives" *and* zoning is either near-inbred levels of sheltered ignorance or dishonest.

          Income tax and imaginary social constructs: growing up, we had to pay to use the public library in town. You could walk in and use most(?) services for free, but to check out books or media you had to have a library card. When you put down your address, if you weren't in the township where the city collected fees to pay for and build it, you had to pay to obtain a library card. This was the case well into the days of high speed internet.

          1. mad.casual   2 months ago

            And, again, I'm not anti-data center. Just that once again "borders are imaginary constructs" until the rubber meets the road and then, suddenly, the backwards, luddite rubes aren't too local for Reason to stroll down from their tower in DC to inform them how wrong they are.

      2. Agammamon   2 months ago

        No they won't.

        Next you'll be telling us about all the taxes and revenue sports stadiums bring into the local government.

        1. mad.casual   2 months ago

          Of note: Trickle down currency or economics is a thing. Trickle down information churning isn't.

          If a billionaire gets a 1% tax break and reinvests 50% in the business, which reinvests 20% in the community, the community gets $1M. $1M is $1M. If he asks them to store 500 yottaBytes of data, it may be $10B worth of data, it may be 50% of a larger, encrypted data store that is, itself, essentially garbage. It may contain none of "their" data, it may be entirely composed of "their" data. Jack may be trading his cow for some magic beans that may or may not have a golden goose at the top and that he may or may not have to chop down to avoid capture at some later date.

  3. Idaho-Bob   2 months ago

    Senate Bill 1352, which was transmitted to the governor yesterday, would require cities of 10,000 people or more to update their land use laws to allow single-family homes on lots as small as 1,500 square feet within new subdivisions of at least four acres.

    There are 25 towns that qualify in all of Idaho.

    The towns may be forced to allow this, but how many developers are going to do it when they have all that sweet California transplant money staring at them?

  4. Rick James   2 months ago

    In Washington, D.C., the city council will consider a bill to allow taller single-stair apartment buildings.

    This is symbolic of just how 'chipping-around-the-edges' modern 'mainline' libertarianism has become. Really, it's the final endpoint from years of saying, "Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good" while the statists were drinking your beer, sleeping with your wife, selling your daughter into slavery and you celebrated the victory of entering into a public-private partnership that allowed you to use your own cell phone charger after midnight once you purchased credits on a carbon market.

  5. richardwashby   2 months ago

    Please differentiate "manufactured homes" mine is a modular which looks no different to a regular house. Mobile homes, on the other hand are constructed differently and look different. They are also more liable to suffer from weather events.

    1. mad.casual   2 months ago

      Yeah, "off-site constructed manufactured housing" is not "a.k.a. mobile, homes".

Please log in to post comments

Mute this user?

  • Mute User
  • Cancel

Ban this user?

  • Ban User
  • Cancel

Un-ban this user?

  • Un-ban User
  • Cancel

Nuke this user?

  • Nuke User
  • Cancel

Un-nuke this user?

  • Un-nuke User
  • Cancel

Flag this comment?

  • Flag Comment
  • Cancel

Un-flag this comment?

  • Un-flag Comment
  • Cancel

Latest

Trump Loves Accusing Critics of Treason. U.S. Law Makes That Charge Hard To Prove—for Good Reason.

Jacob Sullum | 5.30.2026 8:00 AM

Trump's Proposed $250 Bill Is Everything the Founders Despised

Billy Binion | 5.29.2026 4:47 PM

Is Private Equity Really 'Buying Up the Rituals of American Childhood'?

Nick Gillespie | 5.29.2026 4:26 PM

Trump Cut Nuclear Red Tape. Now His Administration Is Picking Winners.

Tosin Akintola | 5.29.2026 3:25 PM

Markwayne Mullin's Less 'Flashy' DHS Is Using the Same Thuggish Tactics

C.J. Ciaramella | 5.29.2026 3:08 PM

Recommended

  • About
  • Browse Topics
  • Events
  • Staff
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Advertise
  • Subscribe
  • Contact
  • Media
  • Shop
  • Amazon
Reason Facebook@reason on XReason InstagramReason TikTokReason YoutubeApple PodcastsReason on FlipboardReason RSS Add Reason to Google

© 2026 Reason Foundation | Accessibility | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

r

I WANT FREE MINDS AND FREE MARKETS!

Help Reason push back with more of the fact-based reporting we do best. Your support means more reporters, more investigations, and more coverage.

Make a donation today! No thanks
r

I WANT TO FUND FREE MINDS AND FREE MARKETS

Every dollar I give helps to fund more journalists, more videos, and more amazing stories that celebrate liberty.

Yes! I want to put my money where your mouth is! Not interested
r

SUPPORT HONEST JOURNALISM

So much of the media tries telling you what to think. Support journalism that helps you to think for yourself.

I’ll donate to Reason right now! No thanks
r

PUSH BACK

Push back against misleading media lies and bad ideas. Support Reason’s journalism today.

My donation today will help Reason push back! Not today
r

HELP KEEP MEDIA FREE & FEARLESS

Back journalism committed to transparency, independence, and intellectual honesty.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

STAND FOR FREE MINDS

Support journalism that challenges central planning, big government overreach, and creeping socialism.

Yes, I’ll support Reason today! No thanks
r

PUSH BACK AGAINST SOCIALIST IDEAS

Support journalism that exposes bad economics, failed policies, and threats to open markets.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

FIGHT BAD IDEAS WITH FACTS

Back independent media that examines the real-world consequences of socialist policies.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

BAD ECONOMIC IDEAS ARE EVERYWHERE. LET’S FIGHT BACK.

Support journalism that challenges government overreach with rational analysis and clear reasoning.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

JOIN THE FIGHT FOR FREEDOM

Support journalism that challenges centralized power and defends individual liberty.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

BACK JOURNALISM THAT PUSHES BACK AGAINST SOCIALISM

Your support helps expose the real-world costs of socialist policy proposals—and highlight better alternatives.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

FIGHT BACK AGAINST BAD ECONOMICS.

Donate today to fuel reporting that exposes the real costs of heavy-handed government.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks