Physical Environment Air & Water Quality Housing & Transit Search Policies & Programs

hints
Display All Policies & Programs

Inclusionary zoning & housing policies

Health Factors: Housing & Transit
Decision Makers: Community Development Professionals Local Government State Government
Evidence Rating: Some Evidence
Population Reach: 100% of WI's population
Impact on Disparities: Likely to decrease disparities

Is this program or policy in use in your community? Tell us about it.

Description

Inclusionary zoning (IZ) & housing policies require developers to reserve a portion of housing units for low income residents, often with restrictions on resales that specify purchase by low or moderate income households. Inclusionary zoning & housing policies may be based on mandatory requirements or development incentives, such as density bonuses, expedited permits and approvals, relaxed design standards, or fee waivers or reductions. Units created via IZ are available to homeowners and renters and are typically part of multifamily developments (Dawkins 2017, Kontokosta 2014, Gibbons 2015, Mukhija 2015).

Expected Beneficial Outcomes

Increased access to affordable housing
Increased access to quality housing
Increased neighborhood socio-economic diversity
Increased asset accumulation

Evidence of Effectiveness

There is some evidence that inclusionary zoning (IZ) & housing policies increase access to and production of quality, affordable housing for low and moderate income households, especially in urban areas with strong housing demand (Mukhija 2015, Urban-Levy 2012, Mukhija 2010, Read 2009). Available evidence from case studies and IZ policy analysis suggests such policies may increase the supply of quality, affordable housing available to rent and to purchase for low and moderate income households (Dawkins 2017, Thaden 2017, Schuetz 2009, Brookings-Brown 2001), and ensure long-term affordability of housing stock (Dawkins 2017, Thaden 2017, RAND-Schwartz 2012). Additional evidence is needed to confirm effects (Urban-Ramakrishnan 2019, Sturtevant 2016, Mukhija 2015).

IZ policies appear most effective with incentives for developer participation (Mukhija 2010, Read 2009, Schuetz 2009) and when implemented as part of a multi-component affordable housing strategy (Mukhija 2015). Mandatory IZ policies are more effective than voluntary policies (Mukhija 2015, von Hoffman 2006); however, most states with mandatory policies do not currently have tools to support policy enforcement (Karki 2015).

The amount of affordable housing produced by IZ policies varies with how long the policy has been in place (Schuetz 2011), whether it offers density bonuses or other incentives, and the types of projects eligible for consideration (Mukhija 2015). IZ policy design features such as long-term affordability requirements influence the magnitude of the effect IZ policies can have on the supply of affordable housing and the reduction of concentrated poverty (RAND-Schwartz 2012). Some IZ policies may include homes for purchase, offering families with low incomes the opportunity to build wealth through homeownership (Urban-Ramakrishnan 2019, Dawkins 2017). In larger cities with high cost housing markets such as Boston, San Francisco, and New York City, IZ policies may be associated with increased housing costs and lower production (Urban-Ramakrishnan 2019, Furman Center-Madar 2015).

Cities with IZ policies appear to have a larger proportion of multifamily housing units, higher prices for single family units, and smaller single family houses than cities without IZ policies (Mukhija 2015, Bento 2009). IZ policies may also minimize adverse effects of gentrification (Urban-Levy 2012, CDC-Gentrification, SCANPH 2005), such as displacement of families with low incomes (Damewood 2011). Neighborhoods with IZ units appear to be more racially and socio-economically diverse than neighborhoods without IZ homes (Urban-Ramakrishnan 2019). IZ policies that provide incentives for developers to include public spaces in their plans (e.g., plazas or walkways) may increase access to privately owned public space and increase mixed-use development (Yoon 2015). IZ policies do not appear to change the number of housing projects started (Bento 2009, SCANPH 2005).

To retain affordable housing units over time, IZ policies restrict resale amounts which, in turn, limits tax revenue potential (Karki 2015) and sale proceeds for those units (Gibbons 2015, Dulchin 2013). Additional evidence is needed to determine the effect of IZ policies on the cost of residential development overall (Read 2009).

Implementation

United States

As of late 2016, there are 866 jurisdictions with inclusionary zoning (IZ) & housing policies across 25 states and Washington DC; most policies are in New Jersey, Massachusetts, and California (AIC-IZ, Thaden 2017) and the majority of policies are mandatory (Stromberg 2016). New Jersey, Maryland, and Oregon have state mandated policies and Massachusetts has both a mandatory and a voluntary, incentive-based policy (Karki 2015).

Many cities have local IZ policies. As of 2019, Boston, MA; San Diego and San Francisco, CA; and Washington DC have mandatory inclusionary zoning policies (Boston-IZ, San Diego-IZ, San Francisco-IZ, DC-IZ). IZ is used throughout all five boroughs of NYC; the number of affordable units varies by targeted income, location, and if the affordable units must be in the same building as the market-rate units or located off-site (Furman Center-NYC housing). Burlington, VT has a mandatory policy, which is administered by the Champlain Housing Trust, a community land trust (Burlington-IZ, CHT-VT). Chicago’s IZ policy allows developers to pay fees rather than build affordable housing; revenue is then added to the City of Chicago Affordable Housing Opportunity Fund to build or rehabilitate affordable housing, or to the city supported rental assistance program (US HUD-Evidence matters IZ 2013).

Wisconsin

Wisconsin does not have a statewide inclusionary zoning statute (Hollister 2007). Madison, Wisconsin had an IZ program until a sunset clause took effect on January 5, 2009 (Madison-IZ). 

Implementation Resources

AIC-IZ - All-In Cities, an Initiative of PolicyLink. Inclusionary zoning. Accessed on August 10, 2019
ChangeLab-Housing toolkit - ChangeLab Solutions. Preserving, protecting, and expanding affordable housing: A policy toolkit for public health. 2015. Accessed on August 5, 2019
Furman Center-Affordable housing - Furman Center for Real Estate and Urban Policy. Research area: Affordable & subsidized housing. New York University, Furman Center. Accessed on August 15, 2019
Furman Center-Land use - Furman Center for Real Estate and Urban Policy. Research area: Land use. New York University, Furman Center. Accessed on July 31, 2019
IHI - Innovative Housing Institute (IHI). Inclusionary housing. Accessed on July 29, 2019
LHS - Local Housing Solutions (LHS). To enhance local affordability and foster inclusive communities. New York University, Furman Center and Abt Associates, Inc. Accessed on August 15, 2019
LISC-Affordable housing - Local Initiatives Support Corporation (LISC). Helping neighbors build communities: Affordable housing. Accessed on August 5, 2019
MA EEA-IZ - Massachusetts Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs (MA EEA). Smart growth/smart energy toolkit: Inclusionary zoning. Accessed on July 29, 2019
ULI Building healthy places - Urban Land Institute (ULI) Building Healthy Places Initiative. Building healthy places toolkit: Strategies for enhancing health in the built environment. Accessed on July 29, 2019

Citations - Description

Dawkins 2017* - Dawkins C, Jeon JS, Knaap GJ. Creating and preserving affordable homeownership opportunities: Does inclusionary zoning make sense? Journal of Planning Education and Research. 2017;37(4):444-456. Accessed on August 10, 2019
Gibbons 2015 - Gibbons LK. Considering the cost of inclusionary zoning and resale restrictions in the District of Columbia. Policy Perspectives. 2015;22:1-8. Accessed on July 29, 2019
Kontokosta 2014* - Kontokosta CE. Mixed-income housing and neighborhood integration: Evidence from inclusionary zoning programs. Journal of Urban Affairs. 2014;36(4):716-741. Accessed on July 29, 2019
Mukhija 2015* - Mukhija V, Das A, Regus L, Tsay SS. The tradeoffs of inclusionary zoning: What do we know and what do we need to know? Planning Practice & Research. 2015;30(2):222-235. Accessed on July 29, 2019

Citations - Evidence

Bento 2009 - Bento A, Lowe S, Knapp GJ, Chakraborty A. Housing market effects of inclusionary zoning. Cityscape: A Journal of Policy Development and Research. 2009;11(2):7–26. Accessed on July 29, 2019
Brookings-Brown 2001 - Brown, KD. Expanding affordable housing through inclusionary zoning: Lessons from the Washington metropolitan area. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution; 2001: Discussion Paper. Accessed on July 29, 2019
CDC-Gentrification - Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Health effects of gentrification. Accessed on July 29, 2019
Damewood 2011 - Damewood R, Young-Laing B. Strategies to prevent displacement of residents and businesses in Pittsburgh's Hill District. September 2011. Accessed on July 29, 2019
Dawkins 2017* - Dawkins C, Jeon JS, Knaap GJ. Creating and preserving affordable homeownership opportunities: Does inclusionary zoning make sense? Journal of Planning Education and Research. 2017;37(4):444-456. Accessed on August 10, 2019
Dulchin 2013 - Dulchin B, Gates M, Williams B. Housing policy for a strong and equitable city. Toward a 21st Century City for All. Center for Urban Research, The Graduate Center at City University of New York; 2013. Accessed on July 29, 2019
Furman Center-Madar 2015 - Madar J. Creating affordable housing out of thin air: The economics of mandatory inclusionary zoning in New York City. Housing for an inclusive New York: Affordable housing strategies for a high-cost city. New York University, Furman Center; 2015. Accessed on July 31, 2019
Gibbons 2015 - Gibbons LK. Considering the cost of inclusionary zoning and resale restrictions in the District of Columbia. Policy Perspectives. 2015;22:1-8. Accessed on July 29, 2019
Karki 2015* - Karki TK. Mandatory versus incentive-based state zoning reform policies for affordable housing in the United States: A comparative assessment. Housing Policy Debate. 2015;25(2):234-262. Accessed on July 29, 2019
Mukhija 2010* - Mukhija V, Regus L, Slovin S, Das A. Can inclusionary zoning be an effective and efficient housing policy? Evidence from Los Angeles and Orange counties. Journal of Urban Affairs. 2010;32(2):229–52. Accessed on July 29, 2019
Mukhija 2015* - Mukhija V, Das A, Regus L, Tsay SS. The tradeoffs of inclusionary zoning: What do we know and what do we need to know? Planning Practice & Research. 2015;30(2):222-235. Accessed on July 29, 2019
RAND-Schwartz 2012 - Schwartz HL, Ecola L, Leuschner KJ, Kofner A. Is inclusionary zoning inclusionary? A guide for practitioners. Santa Monica: RAND Corporation; 2012: Technical Report 1231. Accessed on July 29, 2019
Read 2009* - Read DC. The structure and potential economic effects of inclusionary zoning ordinances. Real Estate Issues. 2009;34(2):1–9. Accessed on July 29, 2019
SCANPH 2005 - Southern California Association of Non-Profit Housing (SCANPH). How does inclusionary housing work? A profile of seven southern California cities. Los Angeles: Southern California Association of Non-Profit Housing (SCANPH); 2005. Accessed on July 29, 2019
Schuetz 2009* - Schuetz J, Meltzer R, Been V. 31 Flavors of inclusionary zoning: Comparing policies from San Francisco, Washington, DC, and suburban Boston. Journal of the American Planning Association. 2009;75(4):441–56. Accessed on July 29, 2019
Schuetz 2011 - Schuetz J, Meltzer R, Been V. Silver bullet or trojan horse? The effects of inclusionary zoning on local housing markets in the United States. Urban Studies. 2010;48(2):297–329. Accessed on July 29, 2019
Sturtevant 2016 - Sturtevant L. Separating fact from fiction to design effective inclusionary housing programs. Inclusionary housing: A series of research & policy briefs. Washington, DC: National Housing Conference and Center for Housing Policy; 2016. Accessed on August 10, 2019
Thaden 2017 - Thaden E, Wang R. Inclusionary housing in the United States: Prevalence, impact, and practices. Cambridge, MA: Lincoln Institute of Land Policy; 2017. Accessed on August 10, 2019
Urban-Levy 2012 - Levy DK, Franks K, Bertumen K, et al. Expanding housing opportunities through inclusionary zoning: Lessons from two counties. Washington, DC: US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of Policy Development and Research (PD&R); 2012. Accessed on July 29, 2019
Urban-Ramakrishnan 2019 - Ramakrishnan K, Treskon M, Greene S. Inclusionary zoning: Wwhat does the research tell us about the effectiveness of local action?. Washington, DC: Urban Institute; 2019. Accessed on August 10, 2019
von Hoffman 2006 - von Hoffman A, Belsky ES, Lee K. The impact of housing on community: A review of scholarly theories and empirical research. Cambridge: Joint Center for Housing Studies (JCHS), Harvard University; 2006:W06–1 Accessed on July 29, 2019
Yoon 2015* - Yoon H, Srinivasan S. Are they well situated? Spatial analysis of privately owned public space, Manhattan, New York City. Urban Affairs Review. 2015;51(3):358-380. Accessed on July 29, 2019

Citations - Implementation

AIC-IZ - All-In Cities, an Initiative of PolicyLink. Inclusionary zoning. Accessed on August 10, 2019
Boston-IZ - City of Boston. Inclusionary development policy: 2019 update. Accessed on August 10, 2019
Burlington-IZ - City of Burlington, VT. Inclusionary Zoning (IZ) program. Accessed on July 29, 2019
CHT-VT - Champlain Housing Trust (CHT). Northwestern Vermont-based community land trust (CLT). Accessed on July 29, 2019
DC-IZ - Washington DC Department of Housing and Community Development. Inclusionary Zoning (IZ) Affordable Housing Program. Accessed on July 29, 2019
Furman Center-NYC housing - Furman Center for Real Estate and Urban Policy. State of New York City’s subsidized housing in 2017. New York University, Furman Center; 2018. Accessed on August 10, 2019
Hollister 2007 - Hollister TS, McKeen AM, McGrath DG. National survey of statutory authority and practical considerations for the implementation of inclusionary zoning ordinances. Washington, DC: Shipman & Goodwin LLP, National Association of Home Builders (NAHB); 2007. Accessed on July 29, 2019
Karki 2015* - Karki TK. Mandatory versus incentive-based state zoning reform policies for affordable housing in the United States: A comparative assessment. Housing Policy Debate. 2015;25(2):234-262. Accessed on July 29, 2019
Madison-IZ - City of Madison. Inclusionary zoning (IZ) program. Accessed on July 29, 2019
San Diego-IZ - City of San Diego. Inclusionary housing. Accessed on August 10, 2019
San Francisco-IZ - San Francisco Planning. Inclusionary affordable housing program. Accessed on August 10, 2019
Stromberg 2016 - Stromberg B, Sturtevant L. What makes inclusionary zoning happen? Inclusionary housing: A series of research & policy briefs. Washington, DC: National Housing Conference; 2016. Accessed on August 10, 2019
Thaden 2017 - Thaden E, Wang R. Inclusionary housing in the United States: Prevalence, impact, and practices. Cambridge, MA: Lincoln Institute of Land Policy; 2017. Accessed on August 10, 2019
US HUD-Evidence matters IZ 2013 - US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). Evidence Matters: Inclusionary zoning (IZ) and mixed-income communities. 2013. Accessed on July 29, 2019

Page Last Updated

August 14, 2019

* Journal subscription may be required for access.