Inclusionary housing policies—those
which either require or encourage developers to provide low-priced housing
within market-rate developments—have largely survived the recent housing
downturn. However, several obstacles now stand in their way, preventing them
from reaching their full effectiveness, according to a recent report from the Center for Housing Policy.
Major hindrances to these policies
include shifts in development pattern, new restrictions regarding rental
housing, and rising homeowner association fees, among others.
Inclusionary housing policies are
often enforced through zoning codes, although some are voluntary and offer
incentives for participating developers.
Proponents of these policies favor
their “ability to harness the energy of the private market to create affordable
homes while enabling economic integration and social inclusion” as well as their
“ability to produce affordable homes without the need for public subsidies,”
according to the Center for Housing Policy.
About 400 mandatory inclusionary
housing policies currently exist in 17 states and the District of Columbia.
California claims almost half of these policies, according to the Center, which
found only about eight policies eliminated during the housing crisis.
However, “while most policies
survived the housing downturn nationwide, few saw much inclusionary housing
production over the past five years,” the Center for Housing Policy stated in
its report.
Shifting development patterns
account for part of the lull. “While suburbs remain the predominant location
for new housing construction, development patterns are shifting toward compact,
transit-served neighborhoods closer to the regional core,” according to the
report.
This shift poses a challenge because
land in these densely-populated areas tends to be much more costly, and there
are several stipulations for buildings in these areas that can also increase
the cost of construction.
Additionally, a California appellate
court determined in Palmer/Sixth Street Properties, L.P. vs. the City of Los
Angeles in 2009 that inclusionary rental policies, when applied to rental
housing, violate state laws against rent control.
Much of California’s new development
is taking place in the multifamily market; thus this decision is having a large
impact on inclusionary policies.
California has also eradicated its
redevelopment agencies. Many inclusionary policies were connected to
redevelopment, meaning inclusionary policies have been further stagnated in the
state.

Rising homeowner and condo
association fees also present challenges for inclusionary housing policies.
While initial costs might be affordable to lower-income families, when
associations raise their fees in later years, some homeowners find themselves
with “substantial fees that can sometimes rival mortgage payments,” the Center
stated.
The Center sees some hope for
inclusionary policies in the future as HUD has begun to draw increased
attention to the issue of affordable housing across the nation.
No comments:
Post a Comment