Access to housing constitutes one of the main urban challenges in cities such as Lima Metropolitana, where population growth and urban expansion have outpaced the capacity of formal planning systems. In this context, zoning regulations and urban planning parameters, such as building height, density, and open space requirements, become key instruments in shaping the city. The so-called Urban Planning Parameters Case before the Constitutional Court represents a milestone in defining the allocation of powers between the Ministry of Housing, Construction and Sanitation (MVCS) and local governments.

This research adopts a qualitative approach based on the interpretative analysis of the Constitutional Court rulings in the Urban Planning Parameters Cases I, II, and III (Exp. 00017-2021-PI/TC; Exp. 00001-2021-CC/TC and 00004-2021-CC/TC; and Exp. 00003-2020-CC/TC), focusing on municipal authority over zoning, urban planning, and planning parameters in relation to national housing regulations and special regulatory frameworks. The analysis is developed from an urban planning perspective, assessing the implications of these decisions for urban planning processes and access to housing.

The findings indicate that constitutional jurisprudence consolidates a model of urban governance in which the MVCS establishes general regulatory guidelines, while municipalities retain autonomy in managing urban planning parameters and determining maximum building heights. This study contributes to the broader discussion on access to housing and the development of Social Interest Housing (VIS) projects. Furthermore, it highlights the existing fragmentation across different levels of urban planning and offers a critical reflection aimed at improving coordination and the formulation of future urban policies.