Key facts
- State laws preempting local zoning control are increasingly influencing housing project approvals through a 'shadow effect'.
- Developers can leverage the existence of these laws to expedite projects, even when local officials are cooperative.
- Florida's Live Local Act and California's Senate Bill 79 are examples of such preemptive zoning laws.
- In Fort Lauderdale, eight projects have used the Live Local Act since 2025, with three receiving administrative approval without public hearings.
- In Palo Alto, developers have filed applications under California's SB 79, which offers less room for local negotiation compared to standard zoning processes.
- A Sares Regis Group project in Palo Alto was approved by the planning commission, with commissioners noting the developers did not bypass the commission by using SB 79.
State laws that preempt local zoning control are increasingly influencing housing project approvals, a phenomenon developers and officials are calling the 'shadow effect.' This occurs when the mere existence of state legislation, designed to increase housing supply and affordability, shapes municipal decisions and speeds up approvals without developers needing to formally invoke the law.
Developers often present local officials with two paths: a cooperative process under local codes, or a route leveraging state preemptive laws. Knowing the potential cost of rejecting a project under state law, officials may be more inclined to approve it, even if the state law is not explicitly cited. This dynamic has been observed in states like Florida, with its Live Local Act, and California, with Senate Bill 79.
In Fort Lauderdale, Florida, the Live Local Act has been utilized in eight projects since 2025, with three receiving administrative approval without public hearings. However, some developers opt for local discretionary processes. For instance, a 440-unit apartment project saw its developer choose a more comprehensive review over direct use of the Live Local Act, a decision welcomed by Mayor Dean Trantalis, who expressed concerns about density and the law's restrictive nature.
Palo Alto, California, has also experienced the 'shadow effect,' particularly with SB 79. Developers have filed dual applications for sites, one under local zoning and another under SB 79, which offers less room for negotiation on design and density. This leverage was highlighted during a planning commission hearing where a commissioner noted that opposing neighbors would have less say if a project shifted to the SB 79 process. The city saw nine projects filed under SB 79 in a two-week window before local ordinances capping its reach took effect.