Resources – United States

Richard Drdla Associates: NATIONAL HOUSING STRATEGY: Inclusionary Zoning – Domestic and International Practices; CMHC; December 2016.

This paper examines inclusionary zoning and related inclusionary housing policies as practised in the four countries: the US, England, Canada and Australia. In addition to a detailed review of those practices, it provides an overview highlighting their main similarities and differences, and also summarizes some of the key lessons for Canada that can be drawn from this experience.  Read the Report

Stockton Williams, et al.: The Economics of Inclusionary Development; Urban Land Institute and Terwillinger Center for Housing, 2016.

The purpose of the study is to help policy makers to understand better how IZ affects real estate development and how to use development incentives most effectively. To set a context for that, it also provides a brief overview of the economics of real estate development, and the key determinants of feasibility for real estate development from a developer’s perspective.  Read the Report

Read a Critique

 

Lisa A Sturtevant:  Separating Fact from Fiction to Design Effective Inclusionary Housing Programs; Center for Housing Policy; May 2016.

This paper reviews the current thinking and research on the effectiveness and impact of IZ programs. Included is an examination of five factors thought to be associated with successful programs.  Read the Report

Rick Jacobus: Inclusionary Housing – Creating and Maintaining Equitable Communities; National Community Land Trust Network, Cornerstone Partnership and Lincoln Institute of Land Policy; 2015.

This report provides an overall review of the current thinking about inclusionary zoning practices in the US.  Drawing extensively upon recent research and studies,  it includes chapters on designing a program, understanding the economics, preparing for administration and other key topics.  Read the report

Innovative Housing Institute: Inclusionary Housing Survey: Measures of Effectiveness; Nov 2010.

This paper reviews the results of a survey of roughly 50 programs across the US looking at their production, duration, and provisions – including setaside requirements, compliance alternatives, regulatory concessions, affordability limits and others.  Read the paper.

Heather L. Schwartz, et al:  Is Inclusionary Zoning Inclusionary?  A Guide for Practitioners;  The RAND Corporation; 2012.

This study, through an analysis of the impact of 11 representative inclusionary programs across the US, examines who these programs have benefitted, and how well they have fostered social inclusiveness.  Read the report

Nico Calavita and Alan Mallach: Inclusionary Housing, Incentives, and Land Value Recapture; Land Lines, Lincoln Institute of Land Policy; January 2009.

This paper puts forward and explores using inclusionary housing programs as a way of explicitly recapturing for the public benefit some part the gain in land  value resulting from public decisions to re-zone land, and now going unearned to the land owners.   Read the paper.

Gerrit-Jan Knaap, et al:  Housing Market Impacts of Inclusionary Zoning; National Center for Smart Growth Research and Education; February 2008.

This major study, funded by the National Association of Home Builders in the US, used advanced  statistical techniques to examine the  impact of inclusionary zoning programs across California on the price, production, and size of housing over the period 1988-2005.    Read this report.  Read a precis.

Vicki Been, et al.:  The Effects of Inclusionary Zoning on Local Housing Markets: Lessons from the San Francisco, Washington DC and Suburban Boston Areas; Furman Center for Real Estate & Urban Policy, Working Paper 07-05,  November 2007.

This major study examined the impact of inclusionary zoning programs on the  price and production of market-rate housing in three major metropolitan areas where they are widely used — Boston, San Francisco, and Washington DC.   The findings are based upon a rigourous statistical  analysis of the building data and house prices  for single-family homes in these areas for the 1980-2005 period.   Read the report.    Read a precis.

Affordable by Choice: Trends in California Inclusionary Housing Programs; Non-Profit Housing Association of Northern California & California Coalition for Rural Housing; 2007.

This report presents the key findings of the 2006 comprehensive survey of inclusionary housing practices in California.  Read the report

Rick Jacobus:  Delivering on the Promise of Inclusionary Housing:  Best Practices in Administration and Monitoring; Policy Link; 2007.

This paper examines the administrative measures used in the US to protect the affordability of the affordable units produced through inclusionary zoning programs.   Read the paper.

The Non-Profit Housing Association of Northern California & the Home Builders Association of Northern California: On Common Ground: Joint Principles on Inclusionary Housing Policies; July 2005.

This paper sets out a set of recommended principles, jointly agreed both by these non-profit and builders organizations, that should be incorporated in inclusionary zoning programs in order to enhance their effectiveness in producing affordable units.   Read the report.

David Rusk:  Nine Lessons for Inclusionary Zoning: Keynote Remarks to the National Inclusionary Housing Conference, Washington DC; 5 October 2005.

This speech highlights the key lessons that should be considered in order to create and implement an effective inclusionary zoning program.   Read the speech.

Nicholas Brunick:  Inclusionary Housing: Proven Success in Large Cities; Zoning Practice, American Planning Association; October 2004.

This paper describes and examines the inclusionary zoning programs in the five large cities of Boston, San Francisco, San Diego, Sacramento and Denver.  Read the paper.

Nicholas Brunick: The Inclusionary Housing Debate: The Effectiveness of Mandatory Programs over Voluntary Programs;  Zoning Practice, American Planning Association; September 2004.

This paper sets out the evidence and examines why mandatory inclusionary programs are more productive than voluntary ones.   Read the paper.

David Rosen:   Inclusionary Housing and its Impact on Housing and Land Markets;  NHC Affordable Housing Policy Review; 2004.

This report examines new construction permit data from 1981 to 2001 in 28 Californian cities to determine impact of inclusionary zoning programs on the production of market housing.   Read the paper

Inclusionary Housing in California: 30 Years of Innovation; Non-Profit Housing Association of Northern California & California Coalition for Rural Housing; July 2003.

This report draws upon the findings of a comprehensive state-wide survey of inclusionary housing practices to examine how inclusionary housing has evolved in California.  Read the report.

Nicholas Brunick, et al:  Large Cities and Inclusionary Zoning; Business and Professional People for the Public Interest; November 2003.

This paper explores the benefits of inclusionary zoning in large cities, and provides brief case studies  of the five programs in Boston, San Francisco, San Diego, Denver and Sacramento.   Read the paper.

Mixed-Income Housing:  Myth and Fact; Urban Land Institute; 2003.

This report examines and debunks eight common criticisms of mixed-income housing.   Read the paper.

Nicholas Brunick, et al:  Voluntary or Mandatory Inclusionary Housing? Production, Predictability, and Enforcement;  Business and Professional People for the Public Interest; November 2003.

This paper compares mandatory and voluntary programs, and examines why mandatory programs are more productive.   Read the paper.

Nicholas Brunick: The Impact of Inclusionary Zoning on Development; Business and Professional People for the Public Interest; 2003.

This paper identifies the benefits of inclusionary zoning, and examines its impact on the production of market housing.  Read the report

David Rusk: Evaluating Inclusionary Zoning Policies; 2002.

This paper draws a distinction between affordable housing policies and inclusionary zoning policies, and sets out the key components of an effective inclusionary zoning policy. Read the paper.

Richard Drdla Associates:  Affordable Housing Mandates: Regulatory Measures used by States, Provinces and Metropolitan Areas to Support Affordable Housing; CMHC, August 2001.

This report examines the affordable housing mandates that have been used in the US and Canada to provide for affordable housing.  It focuses principally on the demanding mandates in New Jersey, California, and Massachusetts, but also looks at others in British Columbia, Ontario, and elsewhere.  Under the best of these mandates, municipalities are obliged to use  the planning regulations and development approval process to provide for affordable housing in affirmative and effective ways that go well beyond the  “good planning” practices seen in Canada.  Read the report.

Print Friendly