Inclusionary Zoning: What's Lost and What's Gained?
The Furman Center released a big report yesterday about how inclusionary zoning affects prices and development. In other words, the report looked into whether incentivizing the creation of affordable housing puts an undue strain on developers, forcing them to raise prices for market-rate units or scrap would-be projects. The study focused on how inclusionary zoning…
The Furman Center released a big report yesterday about how inclusionary zoning affects prices and development. In other words, the report looked into whether incentivizing the creation of affordable housing puts an undue strain on developers, forcing them to raise prices for market-rate units or scrap would-be projects. The study focused on how inclusionary zoning has worked in San Francisco, D.C., and suburban Boston areas, and it more or less concluded that it does not sink development or cause unnatural price hikes. “Our analysis refutes the ‘sky-is-falling’ cries from IZ opponents; we find no evidence that IZ programs have reduced housing production in the San Francisco area, and find evidence of only slight effects on production in the Boston area,” said Vicki Been, Director of the Furman Center, in a statement. “However, we found that IZ policies have produced only a modest number of affordable housing units, suggesting that IZ by itself is not a panacea for a community’s affordable housing challenges.” Indeed, the current practice of simply requiring a small percentage of affordable housing in an otherwise market-rate development—which is one of the main ways New York City is addressing its affordability crisis—is something, but it’s hardly everything.
Report on the Impact of Inclusionary Zoning Programs [Furman Center]
Photo by Housing Here and Now.
Let’s not forget the most important fact regarding real estate regulation in NYC.
The NIMBY types are a small minority that provides the veneer of popular support for oppressive laws. The politicians however are bankrolled by the rich development families. They want to keep the barrier to entry high and the vacancy rates forever low so that demand will always be astronomical and THEY will reap the rewards of THE lowest risk and highest reward investment game in town.
11:17 Amen. Why I was down in Bear Stearns the other day and there was one of those corporate welfare brokerage kings driving a brand new Beamer he bought with his check from the government bailout. I say make these lazy corporate bucks get a real job. Maybe bookmaking. That’s honest work–at least with bookies if their bets don’t pan out, they lose money.
bloody socialism. gov’t should not be messing around with the market.
bloody socialism. gov’t should not be messing around with the market.
As always, there is no free lunch. The discount given to the occupant of one “affordable home” is a premium added to the price of another.
The free market handles real estate better than any other mechanism. Government intrusion is almost always disastrous.
Meanwhile, the best way to ease real estate expenses for people with less is to increase the number of people in NY City with more.
Waterfront property should sell as waterfront property always does when government gets out of the way. For a big premium.
When residents pay market prices for the best real estate, more property tax revenue flows to the city, which is then able to open the door to development and upgrading of less desirable areas.
One big question is how these developments are displacing existing affordable housing in the area. (i.e. rent control). I don’t see this study addressing that.
whaddya mean – many of the new luxury condos in 11211 are blighted by “affordable housing” components
eg northside towers, the edge
10:04 Grover? Grover Norquist? Is that you?
Governments shouldn’t support programs that provide affordable housing for a small percentage of a populous while the rest of the populous is forced to pay market prices. Why favor one citizen over another. A person making $40,000 must pay full price while anther making $60,000 gets an apartment below market price. WHY!!! These programs are just like corporate welfare but on a smaller scale. Instead of giving some a cheaper rent the government should spend less money and LOWER EVERYONE’S TAXES!!! That’s how you make it easier on EVERYONE!!! Our taxes are way out of control!!! We pay more in city and state taxes than anyone else. We have all of these brilliant minds in NYC and we can’t figure out how to run a government on fewer dollars per capita than any of the other states – not one!! Scrap these government programs that only help a select few and help everyone else by LOWERING OUR TAXES!! Make NY affordable by putting more money in our pockets.