{"id":900143,"date":"2022-07-14T15:15:27","date_gmt":"2022-07-14T21:15:27","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/?p=900143"},"modified":"2022-07-14T15:15:43","modified_gmt":"2022-07-14T21:15:43","slug":"zoning-reform-isnt-simple-as-it-seems","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/zoning-reform-isnt-simple-as-it-seems\/","title":{"rendered":"Effective Zoning Reform Isn\u2019t as Simple as It Seems"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Yonah Freemark and Lydia Lo | Bloomberg<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Biden Administration\u2019s\u00a0Housing Supply Action Plan, unveiled last week, aims to help close America\u2019s\u00a0shortfall of almost 4 million housing units\u00a0and subdue the nation\u2019s\u00a0skyrocketing home prices. At the top of\u00a0its list of action items\u00a0is a promise to\u00a0provide federal grants as a reward to communities that alter land-use policies to promote density, an approach the administration is\u00a0already piloting.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But identifying the land-use policies that most effectively add housing is harder than it seems. Mounting\u00a0evidence indicates\u00a0that one-off reforms such as eliminating single-family-only zoning aren\u2019t adequate. To make meaningful progress in building homes, municipalities have to do more.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Biden plan doesn\u2019t detail how it will determine which types of policies will make a community eligible for these federal grants. But to meet the administration\u2019s housing goals, we recommend it require that local governments seeking grants both show that their zoning changes are actually producing additional housing units, and also that their reforms include the full array of land-use policies that affect housing affordability.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The requirements for these zoning reforms<\/a> must be tailored to different jurisdictions\u2019\u00a0unique circumstances, because a one-size-fits-all strategy won\u2019t be effective or equitable.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Limits of Zoning Reform<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

The most popular land-use reform strategy now discussed is changing zoning rules to allow for the construction of small-scale apartments. That\u2019s a good step forward \u2014 but it will not increase access to housing unless those units get built.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Consider the example of Minneapolis, which voted to effectively\u00a0eliminate single-family zoning\u00a0citywide in 2019, allowing landowners to build two- and three-unit apartment buildings on land previously off limits to anything other than individual homes. This change to base zoning \u2014 the use and form restrictions that determine what can be built as of right \u2014 expanded the permitted variety of buildings and density of units.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The policy was\u00a0lauded by scholars, policymakers\u00a0and the press, who pointed to the rule change as a key mechanism to\u00a0increase housing construction,\u00a0reduce costs of living\u00a0and ease residential segregation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Unfortunately, evidence thus far points to little progress in achieving any of those goals \u2014 at least as a result of this policy. Between 2018 and 2021, according\u00a0to city data, permits for small apartment buildings doubled, but only to 81 total housing units in those types of structures \u2014 a tiny figure in the context of the city\u2019s\u00a0180,000 households. At the same time,\u00a0prices for single-family homes\u00a0on lots affected by the zoning change increased, though outcomes varied by neighborhood.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

There are several explanations for these results. In much of the city, these small apartment buildings, even if technically allowed,\u00a0were required to be\u00a0less than three stories tall and have small overall square footage, limiting the desirability of potential new apartments. And assembling financing for these types of structures is\u00a0notoriously difficult.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Eliminating single-family zoning isn\u2019t enough if disgruntled neighbors can hold up construction on three-unit apartment buildings through months of public review.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Drawing attention to these middling effects does not invalidate Minneapolis\u2019s reform. Zoning rules limiting construction to just single-family homes are inherently restrictive because they make many neighborhoods \u2014 often those with the best-funded schools and best access to jobs \u2014 unaffordable for people who can only cover the cost of an apartment. They arbitrarily limit new construction to small areas, even when demand for housing has risen and the supply has not kept up. In too many communities, this has led to\u00a0increased segregation and inequitable opportunity for people of color. Thus, reforms that eliminate single-family zoning should be replicated.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But other, less-prominent changes Minneapolis made in the previous years were much more effective in increasing the city\u2019s housing stock. The city legalized\u00a0accessory dwelling units in 2015,\u00a0eliminated\u00a0parking requirements near frequent transit service in 2015, and dropped parking requirements\u00a0citywide in 2021, making it cheaper to add apartments outside of downtown. As a result, the number of housing units permitted in Minneapolis\u00a0doubled from 2015 to 2020. More than 90% of new units were in large buildings with at least 10 units.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Minneapolis shows that eliminating single-family zoning alone \u2014 or altering other forms of base zoning \u2014 is not a silver bullet to increasing housing supply. Such changes are a small part of a wider transformation needed to improve communities\u2019 land-use regulations to support housing production.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Thinking Bigger and Broader <\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Rather than solely predicating federal grants on a potentially ineffectual checklist of potential zoning reforms, Washington should consider requiring that jurisdictions demonstrate how land-use policies have actually increased housing production.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Towns, cities\u00a0and counties trying to win federal grants should also show that they have a framework for developing reform strategies that go beyond base zoning and address\u00a0all elements of land-use policy that affect housing affordability and equity, including:<\/p>\n\n\n\n