Housing Choice: Most Promising Housing Strategies

1. Housing Choice: Most Promising Housing Strategies 2005 American Planning Association State National Planning Conference San Francisco, CA March 20, 2005

2. 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

3. 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.

4. Key Discussion Components Each Scoping Session Addressed: • Housing Need • Politics of Housing • Affordable Housing Production and Retention • Most Promising Strategies

5. North Carolina

6. 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

7. Politics of Housing(North Carolina) • Lack of overarching housing policy • Housing policy and production functions spread out • No dedicated source of funding

8. 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

9. 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

10. Southern New England

11. 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

12. 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

13. 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

14. 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

15. Oregon-Washington

16. 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

17. 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

18. 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

19. 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

20. Midwest

21. 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

22. 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

23. 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

24. 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

25. Texas

26. Housing Need (Texas) • Immigrant Influx • Household Composition • Spatial Component- Rural v. Urban • Jobs- Housing Balance • Change in Poverty Dynamics • Boom/Bust Economy

27. 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

28. Affordable Housing Production and Retention(Texas) • Low Income Housing Tax Credit • Regulatory Barrier Removal • State Programs • Role of the Non-profit Sector • Manufactured Housing

29. 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

30. California

31. 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

32. 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

33. 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

34. 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

35. 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

36. 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

37. 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.

38. Thank you for attending! 2005 American Planning Association National Planning Conference San Francisco, CA