Inclusionary zoning requires all developers to produce a percentage of affordable housing units along with the development of market rate units. The goals of the program are to create mixed income neighborhoods; produce affordable housing for a diverse labor force; seek equitable growth of new residents; and increase homeownership opportunities for low and moderate income levels. Montgomery County, Maryland used the concept of inclusionary zoning to expand the supply of affordable housing. The concept was to provide residential developers with certain incentives to reserve affordable to low and moderate income households. 15% of the housing have to be modern low income, 10% has to be sold but priced to be affordable and 5% sold to the county
In 1969, Massachusetts fashioned the law 40B, famously referred to as the “Anti-Snob Zoning Act”, which allows developers to bypass land use restrictions in towns where less than ten percent of the housing meets the state definition of affordable. There are multiple positions and solutions to friction in Massachusetts largely inspired by controversy surrounding the State's affordable housing law, Massachusetts General Laws chapter 40B between housing advocates and open space advocates. This thesis reviews and critiques the current law, and diagnoses various legislative proposals for the progressive feud.
The author explained how the government established policies and initiatives that created ghettos and suburbs. The Federal Housing Administration (FHA) is a program that helped citizens become homeowners by lending loans. However, only certain neighborhoods qualified for those loans. Research and data were used to prove that certain areas were considered a loss of investment. The
Many advocates and policymakers of housing for the poor believe that to achieve optimal human development of low-income households the location of the housing must be considered as well as the quality of the housing unit (Newman, 2008).
“Racial tension became paramount as city officials promoted and perpetuated racial division by supporting segregation and discrimination in housing, employment, and social services” (Massey & Denton 39). Various types of residential controls contributed to the problem of residential segregation. One such tool for segregation was the establishment of zoning. Zoning was introduced in New York City in 1916 and encouraged by the U.S. Department of Commerce through the publication of the Standard State Zoning Enabling Act in 1922. Zoning proponents argued:
Many of the housing uses zoning power delegated by government officials to assure that certain races such as blacks don’t move into their neighborhood. Zoning power is regulating the use of land by state governments and local governments to exercise authority over privately owned real
Wilson (2011) research proves that the Federal Housing Administration (FHA), contributed to the early decay of inner city neighborhoods by withholding mortgage capital and making it difficult for these areas to retain or attract families who were able to purchase their own homes. As the federal government created this program it excluded certain inner city neighborhoods. This exclusion created “redlining” which assessed primarily on racial composition. People who wanted to get out of public housing and purchase a home in a redlined neighborhood were denied proper mortgages, even if they had sufficient funds. Wilson (2011) says that such restrictions such redlining restricted many opportunities for building or even maintaining quality housing in the inner city, which in many ways set the stage for urban blight that many Americans now associate with black neighborhoods. Policies like this one were created to make blacks stay in the inner city
The problem is there is inevitably a lack of housing, due to homelessness and influx of people. Without enough housing, the prices of the homes will be very expensive; however, if there is not a balanced mix of luxury and affordable housing, those already living there will be forced to leave because they will not be able to maintain taxes and other increases that will be tacked on to housing expenses. In order to make this process a bit more feasible, New York created the “Inclusionary Zoning program.” This program required “that developers set aside a certain percentage of units in a new development as affordable units.” The issue with this zoning ordinance is that although it was stated as a “requirement” the city kept it as a voluntary process.” With the ordinance being voluntary and developers with a capitalist mentality, many developers opted out of adhering to the ordinance. Although the residents of New York may not be in the power broker or decision-making classification, many of its inhabitants have been there for many years. Unless there are efforts to make this ordinance mandatory, there will be much opposition to keep new development out.
Different areas of the private sector took control of the racial segregation. Areas such as real estate, banks, labor, and toxic waste locations have participated in some way to continue the segregation and inferiority of people of color. “African Americans and other communities of color are often victims of land-use decision making that mirrors the power arrangements of the dominant society” (Bullard [1994]2004:269). The land-use decisions are used by the real estate industry. The real estate industry along with the bank industry have worked together in order to make it almost impossible for people of color to acquire their own homes. When individuals of color do obtain their own homes the real estate industry corrals them all into one zone. Then the banks charge homeowners in these zones high interest rates on the mortgages needed to maintain their home ownership. “Zoning is probably the most widely applied mechanism to regulate urban land use in the United States” (Bullard [1994]2004:269). When people of color are corralled into a neighborhood the quality of the neighborhood is diminished. The
In “The Complexities and Processes of Racial Housing discrimination” by Vincent J. Roscigno, Diana L. Karafin, and Griff tester, the main concept of racial disparity and inequality among neighborhoods is discussed, and how those inequalities became to be. They first highlight the wide range of potentially exclusionary practices, through qualitative and quantitative data comprised of over 750 verified housing discrimination cases (Roscigno, p. 162). Citing the U.S. Census, it is found that Blacks, compared to Hispanics and Asians, continue to experience high levels of residential segregation. This is done through discriminatory practices, whether they be by exclusionary or non-exclusionary methods. Even after the passing of the Fair Housing Act in 1988, discrimination against Blacks and Hispanics decreased somewhat, though African Americans still appeared to take part in racial steering, and Hispanics continued to have limitations in regards to opportunities and access to rental units (Roscigno, p. 163).
Housing allocation determinations and planning review powers were also passed down from the state to Councils of Government (COG), which served as regional planning commissions that were thought to be closer to municipal governments and less likely to be perceived as encroaching on local land use decision-making (Ramsey-Musolf para. 7). The need for regional, as opposed to decentralized housing policies, is significant: shortages of housing in one area simply push housing burdens to adjacent cities, exacerbating statewide levels of inequality. Unfortunately, a study cited in the Journal of Planning Literature found that this well-intentioned legislation has only created a production imbalance between LIH and MRH: though collective housing element compliance may have increased between 1990 and 1997, a sample of 53 California municipalities only produced 32% of its
“Not in my back yard” (NIMBY) has reached a point in some communities where it’s difficult to put community facilities anywhere. Some cities are responding by encouraging nursing home construction in specific residential areas based upon density bonuses. Density bonuses are granted for projects in which the developer agrees to include a certain number of affordable housing units. For every one unit of affordable housing a developer agrees to build, there’s a greater number of market rate units. Density bonuses vary from project to project.
This program as its part of New York City's zoning since 1987 was created to encourage economically integrated communities in areas experiencing new housing development. There are two programs to achieve Inclusionary Housing Program bonus; first program is original R10 Program that provides a floor area bonus of up to 20%, and second program is in Inclusionary Housing designated areas give a bonus of 33 %of floor area can be achieved for providing 20 percent as affordable housing.
The two projects I chose were UAlbany Campus Building Historical Tour and Mapping Segregation. The audience of the first project UAlbany Campus Tour are former, current or potential students, parents seeking for historical information about the school and possible employees interested in becoming part of the UAlbany community. I came to the conclusion on who the targeted audience were based on the type of information provided by the project. The UAlbany Campus Building Historical Tour provides the viewer with information about the different campuses within UAlbany, such as: the location of each campus, what year they opened, and what historical personnel is associated with the campus. For the second project, Mapping Segregation the targeted
The lack of affordable housing in the United States is a problem that doesn 't receive nearly the attention that it necessitates. This absence of affordable housing became especially prevalent following World War II when suburbanization spread across the country like wildfire. Although the sheer number of homes increased, Jim Crow segregation influenced housing policy, meaning that white institutions prevented blacks from obtaining the mortgages needed to afford such homes. Therefore, rather than accept subprime loans, which often result in foreclosure, many black people have been pigeonholed into paying exorbitant rates for dilapidated rental properties located in inner-cities, thereby creating the affordable housing problem. Although the situation seems bleak, with careful planning and execution, we can solve the affordable housing problem. Specifically, my proposal involves the following two components: the government must first revise and draft three forms of legislation that create strict yet concise standards that landlords must follow, and then allocate federal funding to health and wellness programs within poor communities. By examining the contributing societal factors to the lack of affordable housing in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, and then implementing the proposal mentioned above, one could potentially solve the affordable housing problem there and transpose the plan to other impoverished cities across the country.
When new development or renovations on empty lots begin the citizens of the communities start asking amount them who will be the beneficiary of the gentrification. Even the displaced of mom and pop businesses are disappear. And the neighborhood no longer can afford to leave on such communities. The question is how does gentrification impact the government? Well, government plays a big role in serving low income to citizens. It create apartment that an affordable to them. It doesn’t impact the government on a negative way because they generate new policies and programs that help the people from the community. So, many types of local and states polices are design to accommodate affordable houses, even though the cost are increasing. One of the several program that the government had is one called “inclusionary zoning” (IZ). The characteristics for this program are: “(1) whether they are mandatory or voluntary, (2) what size or type of development projects are affected, (3) the required share of affordable units, (4) the