Terner Center for Housing Innovation’s Post

Addressing our nation’s housing affordability crisis calls for bold and innovative solutions. In a new report, the Terner Center for Housing Innovation profiles six state-led pro-housing designation programs from California, Massachusetts, Montana, New Hampshire, New York and Utah, designed to tackle unique housing challenges and priorities while enhancing compliance with existing laws. Learn more about how states are incentivizing pro-housing reform here: https://lnkd.in/eSNCbckT #policy #affordablehousing #housingreform

Yesterday, Terner Center published a comparison of six states that have recently enacted "pro-housing designation programs" aimed at getting localities to allow more housing. Short story is that states are mostly designing and running these programs really poorly - accepting cities' representation that particular policies will work or asking for proof of permitting progress that can't possibly be attributed to the current elected leadership. Both approaches are probably needed, but have to be done more thoughtfully: ie, demonstrating enacted policies only makes sense if somebody is actually modelling whether the policies will work in the local context and showing permitting growth only make sense as a back-end true up and evaluatory tool.

As identified at the VP debate, housing affordability is a major concern for American working and middle class families—the unaffordability of housing is particularly difficult for younger Americans who hope to form stable families. Unfortunately several of the proposals coming out of the campaigns would be expensive and ineffective. The Harris-Walz proposals for large subsidies both to individuals and local governments will increase housing costs and distort the housing markets. On the other hand, the Trump-Vance proposals to build on public land not currently being used or set aside as national parks could substantially increase housing supply. Finally focusing on reducing zoning, land use and other regulatory burdens to building housing maybe most promising approach.

I recently participated in a discussion around “The Current State of Housing in Massachusetts” with the Pioneer Institute, a lively conversation on one of the region’s greatest challenges.   Guiding our conversation was the Pioneer Institute’s recent Supply Stagnation report, which outlined four main factors contributing to supply constraints in the Massachusetts market: restrictive zoning laws, local opposition to development, rising construction costs, and rising financing costs. The challenges outlined in the report are well understood, but zoning and NIMBYism have been the most pressing. While well-capitalized developers can work around the financial factors, we cannot move forward with development without the support of our communities and key political figures. Looking at our projects in the region, our development and investment in Everett’s Commercial Triangle is producing nearly 2,000 units within just a few years. The City of Everett was receptive to development and offered a permitting process that was transparent and efficient. The scale at which we were able to build in this municipality shows what developers can achieve when communities begin to welcome new projects and collaboration. Many community members express apprehension over the creation of new housing citing concerns like strains on local schools, which may lead them to oppose new projects. These concerns should absolutely be addressed, ideally proactively, but the conversation isn’t truly productive if it’s not also considering the benefits offered by a project. For instance, new property and real estate taxes from these projects would increase a town’s resources, which provides funding for schools to accommodate additional students. It’s paramount to have these conversations to dispel misconceptions that hinder new development and hold the region back. Hear more about my perspective and listen to the full conversation here: https://lnkd.in/eah7Vjij  

This is from the Atlantic Magazine on What created the housing crisis. Consider how a home is built in America. Long before the foundation is poured, the first step is to check the rule books. For the uninitiated, the laws that govern the land appear hopelessly technical and boring, prescribing dozens upon dozens of requirements for what can be built and where. Zoning ordinances and other land-use regulations or zoning ordinances reach far beyond the surface-level goal of preserving health and safety. Instead, they reveal a legal regime stealthily enforcing an archaic set of aesthetic and moral preferences. Preferences that flourished out of a desire to separate Americans by race have evolved into a labyrinthine, exclusionary, and localized system that is at the core of the housing crisis—and very few people know about it. In America, we’ve delegated the power over how our land is used to the local level, and seeded the process with various veto points. We’ve done this under the misguided assumption that decentralization will make the process more democratic. In reality, this system has resulted in stasis and sclerosis, empowering small numbers of unrepresentative people and organizations to determine what our towns and cities look like and preventing our democratically elected representatives from planning for the future.

This study highlights how inclusionary zoning negatively impacts housing. If we want to make housing more affordable, we need to focus on increasing supply by removing barriers to building market-rate housing, and use public money to subsidize rent for those that need it. #affordablehousing https://lnkd.in/gHkveGrb

An interesting report put out recently by the Terner Center for Housing Innovation about how some states are trying to address housing affordability and production issues! #affordablehousing

Good summary of the opportunities and challenges of how zoning reform can help provide more housing in Texas and, hopefully, bring the cost of housing down. It's complicated and more than one approach is necessary, but we have to start. It does seem to be one of the few areas where there is some bipartisan agreement and actual momentum. https://lnkd.in/gWyvvnxY

Reward Cities That Produce Housing—Creating a Fairer, More Affordable California For too long, many California cities have resisted the pressing need to build housing, exacerbating our state’s crisis of affordability and opportunity. Despite exploding demand, local governments have been stymied by a web of bureaucracy, fiscal concerns, and outdated policies. The result? California’s housing crisis continues, deepening inequality, driving up costs, and limiting access to opportunity for millions. At the NCC, we’re advocating for a solution that rewards cities for building all types of housing while addressing the fiscal concerns that often slow or halt development. We believe that by aligning incentives with the needs of residents, we can create sustainable growth that benefits everyone. We propose a “cap-and-trade” system for housing production. Under this system: 🔹 Cities failing to meet their Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) goals will contribute to a fund. 🔹 Cities that meet or exceed their housing goals will receive financial support and greater priority for essential resources like transportation, infrastructure, and school construction. The goal is simple: incentivize housing development in the areas that need it most and ensure that each and every Californian can afford an affordable place to live. 📊 By the Numbers 68%: The percentage ofCalifornians that say housing affordability is a major issue in their community. 11x: Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) production grew elevenfold from 2016 to 2022, showing that cities can build when barriers are removed.  2.5 Million: California has set a goal to build 2.5 million new housing units over the next eight years, with at least 1 million affordable homes for low-income residents. NCC’s Call to Action: The NCC is committed to making California affordable for ALL of its residents by: ✅ Cutting red tape that delays housing projects and drives up costs Modernizing CEQA to ensure environmental protection without stalling necessary housing development ✅ Streamlining and funding the infrastructure that supports housing growth Supporting bold reforms led by policymakers, like Assemblymember Wicks, to drive both infill development and new single-family construction California’s housing crisis won’t be solved overnight, but with transformative policies like these, we can take real steps toward an affordable future. Join us in demanding action—let’s ensure every Californian has a place to call home! #HousingForAll #AffordableHousing #BuildCalifornia #NCC #CaliforniaDream

This recent research is so important—for the 25 years I’ve been designing affordable housing, it has almost always been relegated to the lower income areas, with poor transit, poor air quality and low resources. I have done SO many housing projects next to train tracks and freeways. That’s where cities zoned it. BUT NOW, it has been shown overwhelmingly that this is not ok, this is not equitable, and that affordable housing deserves to be in high resourced neighborhoods. And yes, it takes a LOT more community education, outreach and collaboration to make this happen, but this is not only essential for fair housing, but its also the hard work we just love to do. And so many folks in high resourced neighborhoods that I know actually want the opportunity to house new neighbors in their hood, not over somewhere else along the tracks. (Shoutout: North Berkeley NOW!, South Berkeley NOW! East Bay 4 Everyone and CAYIMBY!) We have a long way to go to Affirmatively Further Fair Housing—-and we are here to climb that mountain as architects and activists that know the value of diversity, housing choice, and social justice in our neighborhoods.