Comment on Paul G. Lewis's "Can state review of local planning increase housing production?"

Research output: Contribution to journalComment/debatepeer-review

1 Scopus citations


Paul G. Lewis finds that California's mandatory housing element does not predict new housing starts. This is unfortunate but not surprising for California. Lewis offers important lessons for all states - lessons that must be heeded before the housing crunch gets worse. This comment highlights the pending housing crunch, embellishes on Lewis's California findings through the lens of hazard mitigation, offers some anecdotal evidence of what appears to be a successful mandatory housing element (Portland, OR), elaborates on lessons we have learned about effective institutional arrangements, and calls on state legislatures to provide more than lip service in meeting the nation's housing needs.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)201-209
Number of pages9
JournalHousing Policy Debate
Issue number2
StatePublished - 2005


  • Affordability
  • Housing policy
  • State and local governments

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Development
  • Urban Studies
  • Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law


Dive into the research topics of 'Comment on Paul G. Lewis's "Can state review of local planning increase housing production?"'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this