Looked at 2024-H-7948 on changing the inclusionary zoning state law.....
Main change is decreasing the % of inclusionary zoning affordable units (IZAU) from 25% to 15% and reducing the added density bonus of market rate units (DBMRU) from 2 to 1 for each additional IZAU...
So, as example, if there is a 20 unit development proposed of market rate units, with proposed changed statute.....there would be a minimum of 3 affordable IZAUs ( given 15% requirement) and 3 additional market rate added density bonus DBMRU units ( given 1:1 ratio )....so total # of units is the 20 original + 3 +3 = 26....and thus the real % of affordable IZAUs is 3/26 or 11.5%....
Under the current law, the math would be: 20 unit development proposed of market rate units.....there would be a minimum of 5 affordable IZAUs ( given 25% requirement) and 10 additional market rate added density DBMRU units ( given 2:1 ratio ) ....so total # of units is the 20 original + 5 +10 = 35....and thus the real % of affordable IZAUs is 5/35 or 14.3%....
So in a community that has available land and very few affordable units.....this mechanism would only add 3 affordable units in developments of 26 homes/condos, with the change....under current law, it is 5 affordable units in a total 35 unit development.....
Please check my math.....still early and may need more caffeine.....
This does little to address the need at lower incomes... the added inclusionary zoning units may and probably will serve people up to 120% of area median income (AMI), for homeownership and rentals, and thus not meeting the needs of so many at less than 80% or less than 60% or 50% AMI, that have been excluded from finding housing outside of the urban core by housing costs and other factors like racism....see RIGL,a portion below, that defines affordable units.....
According to RIGL 42-128-8.1(d)(1) ...(d)
(1) “Affordable housing” means residential housing that has a sales price or rental amount that is within the means of a household that is moderate income or less. In the case of dwelling units for sale, housing that is affordable means housing in which principal, interest, taxes, which may be adjusted by state and local programs for property tax relief, and insurance constitute no more than thirty percent (30%) of the gross household income for a household with less than one hundred and twenty percent (120%) of area median income, adjusted for family size.
If we were to keep the 25% requirement and reduce the density bonus to 1:1 ratio for added market rate units ...then the 20 original development # adds 5 inclusionary units and 5 market rate units....so total is 30 units...and real affordable % is 5/30= 16.7% ...a bit better....
I believe in inclusionary zoning and mixed -income development but currently the housing crisis is worst for very and extremely low-income households....and needing to breakdown the de-facto segregation of housing in our state....and we need to focus on those people of less than 80% AMI and at 60% and 50% and 30% AMI and less and those hundreds living outside and so many in poor quality units and so many facing evictions.
One of the problems we have not grappled with is the excessive cost of building anything. One reason for that is we are running out of forests so the price of wood keeps going up. I read a very cool article in Yankee magazine about how the University of Maine which threw me out of forestry school more than 50 years ago has figured out how to turn sawdust and a corn product into something to 3d print houses and are prototyping 3d printed modules to create houses. Not yet scalable, but this is something we might really want as an way to get more housing faster while shrinking our footprint on the planet.
Greetings,
Looked at 2024-H-7948 on changing the inclusionary zoning state law.....
Main change is decreasing the % of inclusionary zoning affordable units (IZAU) from 25% to 15% and reducing the added density bonus of market rate units (DBMRU) from 2 to 1 for each additional IZAU...
So, as example, if there is a 20 unit development proposed of market rate units, with proposed changed statute.....there would be a minimum of 3 affordable IZAUs ( given 15% requirement) and 3 additional market rate added density bonus DBMRU units ( given 1:1 ratio )....so total # of units is the 20 original + 3 +3 = 26....and thus the real % of affordable IZAUs is 3/26 or 11.5%....
Under the current law, the math would be: 20 unit development proposed of market rate units.....there would be a minimum of 5 affordable IZAUs ( given 25% requirement) and 10 additional market rate added density DBMRU units ( given 2:1 ratio ) ....so total # of units is the 20 original + 5 +10 = 35....and thus the real % of affordable IZAUs is 5/35 or 14.3%....
So in a community that has available land and very few affordable units.....this mechanism would only add 3 affordable units in developments of 26 homes/condos, with the change....under current law, it is 5 affordable units in a total 35 unit development.....
Please check my math.....still early and may need more caffeine.....
This does little to address the need at lower incomes... the added inclusionary zoning units may and probably will serve people up to 120% of area median income (AMI), for homeownership and rentals, and thus not meeting the needs of so many at less than 80% or less than 60% or 50% AMI, that have been excluded from finding housing outside of the urban core by housing costs and other factors like racism....see RIGL,a portion below, that defines affordable units.....
According to RIGL 42-128-8.1(d)(1) ...(d)
(1) “Affordable housing” means residential housing that has a sales price or rental amount that is within the means of a household that is moderate income or less. In the case of dwelling units for sale, housing that is affordable means housing in which principal, interest, taxes, which may be adjusted by state and local programs for property tax relief, and insurance constitute no more than thirty percent (30%) of the gross household income for a household with less than one hundred and twenty percent (120%) of area median income, adjusted for family size.
If we were to keep the 25% requirement and reduce the density bonus to 1:1 ratio for added market rate units ...then the 20 original development # adds 5 inclusionary units and 5 market rate units....so total is 30 units...and real affordable % is 5/30= 16.7% ...a bit better....
I believe in inclusionary zoning and mixed -income development but currently the housing crisis is worst for very and extremely low-income households....and needing to breakdown the de-facto segregation of housing in our state....and we need to focus on those people of less than 80% AMI and at 60% and 50% and 30% AMI and less and those hundreds living outside and so many in poor quality units and so many facing evictions.
One of the problems we have not grappled with is the excessive cost of building anything. One reason for that is we are running out of forests so the price of wood keeps going up. I read a very cool article in Yankee magazine about how the University of Maine which threw me out of forestry school more than 50 years ago has figured out how to turn sawdust and a corn product into something to 3d print houses and are prototyping 3d printed modules to create houses. Not yet scalable, but this is something we might really want as an way to get more housing faster while shrinking our footprint on the planet.