How Additive Language Transforms the Zoning Reform Debate
- Jonathan Berk
- Jul 23
- 4 min read
The terms "eliminating parking minimums" and "eliminating single-family zoning" frequently appear in newspaper headlines as housing policy reforms gain momentum to facilitate new housing development. Although these phrases may be factually accurate in certain instances (as parking minimums are indeed being removed in many cases), they set a negative tone for the public debates to follow and can enhance public opposition from folks already skeptical of these reforms.
When discussing zoning reform—especially the elimination of single-family zoning and minimum parking requirements—it's essential to use additive rather than subtractive language. Subtractive framing, such as saying we’re “eliminating single-family zoning” or “removing parking mandates,” can unintentionally trigger fear, loss aversion, and opposition from residents who worry their neighborhoods will change for the worse or become unrecognizable and are susceptible to missinformation. These phrases suggest something is being taken away from people, like their existing parking spaces, or their single family homes, even when the policies in question are about increasing flexibility and expanding choices.
Dr. Jenny Schuetz highlighted in a 2024 article for Brookings that the term "eliminate single family zoning" is not only negative but also inaccurate. Dr. Schuetz explains that this phrase "fundamentally misunderstands how zoning laws work." Single family zoning is typically still permitted in areas undergoing zoning reforms. Rather than 'eliminating single family housing,' these reforms simply introduce more flexibility for homeowners regarding what they can build on their properties.
Focus On The Benefits
Additive language emphasizes what these reforms enable rather than what they restrict. Instead of stating that we're "eliminating single-family zoning," as a recent headline in a Boston Globe article described Cambridge's zoning reforms, expressing it as “we’re allowing more housing types” or “providing property owners the freedom to construct various housing types alongside single-family homes” conveys expansion, opportunity, and flexibility. It underscores that these reforms aim to accommodate more neighbors, diverse lifestyles, and more affordable options. This perspective shift helps people understand that zoning reform is not about taking away but about creating more possibilities and offering property owners, tenants, and communities more choices, which are urgently needed in many areas.
This framing is particularly important in local politics and public discourse, where misinformation and fear can quickly derail efforts to create more equitable and sustainable land use. By emphasizing the positive outcomes—more homes for families, more walkable neighborhoods, more affordability, and greater climate resilience—additive language brings people into the conversation rather than pushing them away. It’s not about banning the familiar, but about welcoming the future. Language shapes public perception, and the way we talk about zoning can make the difference between stalled reform and meaningful progress.
"Using clear, precise language will help good-faith participants better understand the public debate about zoning reforms. And the negative framing of “end single-family zoning” provides easy opportunities for committed NIMBYs (“Not In My Backyard”)—or more politely, “neighborhood defenders”—to claim that zoning changes will cause wholesale demolitions of existing homes or even “abolish the suburbs.” - Dr. Jenny Schuetz
Portland's Residential Infill Project
Like Cambridge, Portland, Oregon, implemented a citywide change to 'eliminate single-family exclusive zoning' not by removing single-family zoning, but by permitting a broader range of middle housing types, such as townhomes and duplexes, alongside single-family homes. Five years after the reform, the city has witnessed the construction of nearly 1,400 homes through their Residential Infill Project, resulting in more naturally occurring affordable housing than seen in recent memory. This has provided affordable homeownership opportunities for those wishing to establish themselves in this Pacific Northwest city.
In Portland, the project wasn't pitched as "eliminating single family zoning." It was branded as the "Residential Infill Project" or RIP, a better monicker for what the program hoped to spur, more housing types in more neighborhoods across the City that were seeing rapidly rising costs of the only housing stock that existed there... larger single family homes. A lesson as other cities look to their own zoning reforms, messaging matters, positive wording matters and branding is key to your pro housing reforms.
"Eliminating Minimum Parking Requirements"
As numerous communities across North America consider revising their parking requirements, acknowledging the significant impact on housing costs, traffic, climate, and land use, it's crucial to address public concerns about potential parking losses. Additionally, we should employ more positive language to explain what these reforms truly mean for a city.
Instead of 'eliminating parking minimums' consider adopting phrases like;
"Giving property owners the flexibility to build the right amount of parking for their needs"
"Protecting the historic fabric of our community"
"Allowing homes and businesses to decide how much parking they need"
"Freeing up space for housing, trees, and people—not just cars"
"Removing one-size-fits-all parking mandates"
"Enabling smarter, more efficient land use"
"Letting the market and individual property owner needs guide parking decisions"
"Supporting more housing and walkability by modernizing parking rules"
"Lowering the cost of housing by reducing unnecessary parking requirements"
Effective messaging, branding, and terminology are crucial for implementing necessary policy reforms to address housing challenges, and it's important to stay ahead. If you're working on zoning reform in your community and want to discuss the framing, messaging, and branding of your initiatives, feel free to contact us to see how the re:Main team and our partners can assist to ensure successful policy reform discussions in your community!
Interested in receiving similar posts along with updates and innovations in housing policy from across the globe in your inbox twice a month? The re:Main re:Think Newsletter offers insights into housing policy reforms and innovations locally and worldwide, delivered biweekly, with the goal of inspiring the changes needed to ensure a future with plentiful housing options in thriving, dynamic communities.
Jonathan Berk is an urbanist, placemaker, housing advocate, and the founder of reMAIN, a platform dedicated to advancing the development of missing middle housing in pedestrian-friendly neighborhoods. This platform supports the creation of infill housing by collaborating directly with municipalities, connecting strategic development sites with local developers and new funding sources, and helping communities achieve their stated housing objectives.