Housing Choice:
Most Promising Housing Strategies
2005 American Planning Association State
National Planning Conference
San Francisco, CA
March 20, 2005
Bill Klein, AICP
•Director of Research, American Planning Association
•bklein@planning.org
Stuart Meck, FAICP
•Senior Research Fellow, American Planning Association
•smeck@planning.org
Lynn M. Ross
•Research Associate, American Planning Association
•lross@planning.org
Housing Choice Scoping
Sessions
• Sponsored by Fannie Mae Foundation
• 6 half-day sessions held Fall 2004
• North Carolina, Southern New England,
Oregon-Washington, Midwest, Texas, and
California.
• Participants from various disciplines.
Key Discussion Components
Each Scoping Session Addressed:
1. Housing Need
2. Politics of Housing
3. Affordable Housing Production and
Retention
4. Most Promising Strategies
North Carolina
Housing Need
(North Carolina)
• Regional differences
– East
– Metropolitan areas
– Coastal areas and resort areas
• Impact of second home owners
• Section 8 waiting list
• Demand for one person units
Politics of Housing
(North Carolina)
• Lack of overarching housing policy
• Housing policy and production functions
spread out
• No dedicated source of funding
Affordable Housing
Production and Retention
(North Carolina)
•
•
•
•
•
Lack of capacity for rehabilitation
Limitations on investment tax credits
Shortage of land for multifamily housing
Difficulty in amending state building code
Lack of express authority of inclusionary
zoning
• Race-based opposition
North Carolina:
Most Promising Housing Strategies
•
•
•
•
Education on handling money and credit
Authorization for inclusionary zoning
Statewide minimum housing code
Development of rental housing production
capacity
• Incentivized housing trust fund for realtors and
bankers
• Education campaign on benefits of affordable
housing
Southern New England
Housing Need
(Southern New England)
•
•
•
•
•
•
Transition from industrial to service economy
Changes in household size and composition
Immigration, especially for key target areas
Loss of subsidy for very low income hshds
Stratification/segregation
Focus on workforce hsng impacts very low income
Politics of Housing
(Southern New England)
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Anti-tax feelings drive the discussion
Resources down to ¼ what they once were
Anti-development feelings generally
Fear of in-migration, impact on schools
Perception of excess profits by developers
Legitimate infrastructure needs
The Governor must lead
Affordable Housing
Production and Retention
(Southern New England)
•
•
•
•
•
•
Devolution of Federal responsibilities
More sophisticated ways to stop dev
Loss of by-right zoning for multi-family
Lack of certainty in process
Diminished profitability, fewer for-profits
Impact fees; pacing and phasing
mechanisms; off-site improvements
Southern New England: Most
Promising Housing Strategies
• Massachusetts Chapter 40R: Smart Growth
Zoning Districts
– 2 carrots for higher density
• Rhode Island Public Laws, Chapter 286
– R.I. Affordable Housing Act
• Inclusionary Housing Strategies
– Voluntary vs. mandatory inclusionary tools
Oregon-Washington
Housing Need
(Oregon-Washington)
• Most counties in Washington and Oregon
have affordable housing need
• Age and income cohorts affect housing
• Immigration impact—Hispanics represent 1
in 3 new households
• Portland, Corvallis becoming more
expensive
• Seattle—very expensive
Politics of Housing
(Oregon-Washington)
• Strong state growth management structure
• Limitation on use of inclusionary zoning in
Oregon
• No dedicated source of funds
• Voluntary housing goals from Portland
Metro
• Reliance on sales tax and commercial
activity
Affordable Housing
Production and Retention
(Oregon-Washington)
• Land inside Portland growth boundary “not
ready for development”
• Hard to find individual building lots for
under $100,000
• Hope VI working well in Seattle
• Investment tax credits—too many soft costs
Oregon-Washington:
Most Promising Housing Strategies
• Oregon LCDC needs to develop capacity to assist
local governments with affordable housing
• Needs to be a mechanism to pledge affordable
housing as a condition of UGB expansions
• Real estate transfer tax for affordable housing, lift
ban on exclusionary zoning in Oregon
• Banking land for affordable housing
• Citizen education
• More short term activity to produce affordable
units
Midwest
Housing Need
(Midwest)
• Participants were from Indiana
• Loss of jobs—no longer strong industrial base
• Central Indiana housing affordable, northern part
of state more need
• Lack of high-end housing in Indianapolis
• Imbalance of housing choices in Indy region
• Lack of very low income housing
• Homelessness
Politics of Housing
(Midwest)
• State has 66 public housing authorities
• But state oversees public housing
• No dedicated revenue source for affordable
housing
• No housing planning requirement in
Indiana, but now in Illinois
Affordable Housing
Production and Retention
(Midwest)
• Manufactured housing filling needs in rural
areas of state
• Special exception requirements for
manufactured housing
• Fort Wayne citywide housing strategy
• Affordable housing trust fund in
Indianapolis
• Owner-occupied downtown housing in Indy
Midwest:
Most Promising Housing Strategies
• Illinois Comprehensive Housing Plan
• Illinois Affordable Housing Planning and
Appeal Act
• Cooperative efforts outside government
• Training local planning commissions
concerning affordable housing
• UniGov approach to housing to share
burdens and benefits
Texas
Housing Need
(Texas)
•
•
•
•
•
•
Immigrant Influx
Household Composition
Spatial Component- Rural v. Urban
Jobs- Housing Balance
Change in Poverty Dynamics
Boom/Bust Economy
Politics of Housing
(Texas)
• State Level
– Not typically a Governors Office issue
– A Regional Issue for the Legislature
• Local Level
– NIMBY
– Race and Income Segregation
– Property Values
Affordable Housing
Production and Retention
(Texas)
•
•
•
•
•
Low Income Housing Tax Credit
Regulatory Barrier Removal
State Programs
Role of the Non-profit Sector
Manufactured Housing
Texas:
Most Promising Housing Strategies
• S.M.A.R.T. HousingTM program
– Austin
• Land Assemblage Redevelopment Authority
(LARA)
– Houston
• Volunteer Income Tax Assistance (VITA)
– San Antonio
California
Housing Need
(California)
•
•
•
•
Sharp population growth
Immigration
Inadequate production of housing overall
Two markets
– Those who bought early
– Those who are trying to get in
• Speculative housing in Sacramento region
Politics of Housing
(California)
• Proposition 13 and impact
• Housing policy not a priority for any
governor
• Lack of comprehensive approach
• Local government barriers—larger houses,
larger lots
Affordable Housing
Production and Retention
(California)
• Builders wary of affordable housing market
• Regulatory barriers
• Private, but not public, enforcement of state
housing element law
• Lack of certainty
• San Diego SRO
California:
Most Promising Strategies
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
More housing generally
Accessory dwelling units
Higher densities
Statewide inclusionary zoning
Maintaining Section 8
The “Urban Williamson Act”
Linking affordable housing to job development
Building affordable housing in smaller clusters
Top 10 Most Common Themes
10. Impact of Local/Regional Tax Structure
9. Inadequate State Funding for Housing
8. Lack of Support at State Legislative
Level
7. Use of Tax Credits
6. Wages vs. Cost of Living
Top 10 Most Common Themes
5. Service Gap for the Very Low Income
4. Change in Household Composition
3. Impact of Federal Programs
2. Need for More Education, Training, and
Capacity-Building Programs
1. Not In My Backyard
Learn More
APA Website, www.planning.org
• Affordable Housing Reader
– Free online reader features 100 APA published articles.
• Housing and Community Development Division
– Learn about the division activities, join, read the
newsletter.
• Housing Choice online (coming soon)
– Complete session summaries, theme analysis, strategy
descriptions.
Thank you for attending!
2005 American Planning Association
National Planning Conference
San Francisco, CA