Land-use regulation and the spatial mismatch between housing and employment opportunities

Abstract

Spatial mismatches between housing and employment contribute to higher commute burdens and limited access to high-opportunity employment areas, particularly for racial or ethnic minorities and low-income residents. To date, however, there is little evidence regarding the relationship between spatial mismatches and residential land-use regulation. This study uses data from the Terner California Residential Land Use Survey, the American Community Survey, and the Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics Origin-Destination Employment Statistics to examine whether cities that have adopted differing land-use regulations also have differences in the spatial mismatch between housing and employment opportunities. The analysis suggests that cities that prohibit high-density development tend to have residents whose earnings are markedly higher than those of their workforce and that cities that offer more affordable housing incentives and those that do not impose minimum lot-size restrictions on accessory dwelling units tend to have a better balance between the number of residents and the number of workers and have a better fit between the number of affordably priced housing units and the number of low-income workers. These policies, along with the use of urban growth boundaries and more lenient parking restrictions, also appear to reduce the commute burden experienced by workers.