State Mandates, Housing Elements, and Low-income Housing Production

2020

Self Cite

California is known for home values that eclipse U.S. housing prices. To increase housing inventory, California has implemented a regional housing needs allocation (RHNA) to transmit shares of housing growth to cities. However, no study has established RHNA’s efficacy. After examining the 4th RHNA cycle (i.e., 2006–2014) for 185 Los Angeles region cities, this study determined that RHNA directed housing growth to the city of Los Angeles and the region’s outlying cities as opposed to increasing density in the central and coastal cities. Second, RHNA directed 62% of housing growth to the region’s unaffordable cities. Third, the sample suffered a 34% shortfall in housing growth due to the Great Recession but garnered an average achievement of approximately 93% due to RHNA’s transmission of minimal housing growth shares. Lastly, RHNA maintained statistically significant associations with increased housing inventory, housing affordability, and housing growth rates, indicating that RHNA may influence housing development.

Section: The Origins Of Allocating Housing Needsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Efficacy of Allocating Housing Growth in the Los Angeles Region (2006–2014)

2020

Self Cite

“…In the immediate years after 1926, many states adopted SZEA and many cities subsequently implemented zoning ([27], Figure 1). However, Euclidean zoning begat an enduring tension between states and cities regarding autonomy and development [27][28][29][30][31]. Under home rule, can city residents and elected officials pursue a neighborhood idyll that excludes low-income households?…”

Section: The Role Of Zoningmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The authors then examined the zoning from 87 suburban cities in Los Angeles County to survey ADU zoning restrictions and reported that 61 suburbs (or 70%) required on-site parking, 42 (or 48%) stipulated a minimum lot-size, and 27 (or 31%) required covered parking [4]. In order to overcome ADU zoning restrictions nationally, the AARP and the American Planning Association (APA) created model ADU ordinances (partly based on California's ADU mandate) to influence planners in the same manner that the 1920s SZEA models influenced states [27,75]. The models provided three levels of development standards for fine-tuning a city's zoning: optimal (has the fewest restrictions), favorable (has modest restrictions), or minimal (may hinder production; [75]).…”

Section: Adus As Innovative Housingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Accessory Dwelling Units as Low-Income Housing: California’s Faustian Bargain

2018

Self Cite

In 2003, California allowed cities to count accessory dwelling units (ADU) towards low-income housing needs. Unless a city’s zoning code regulates the ADU’s maximum rent, occupancy income, and/or effective period, then the city may be unable to enforce low-income occupancy. After examining a stratified random sample of 57 low-, moderate-, and high-income cities, the high-income cities must proportionately accommodate more low-income needs than low-income cities. By contrast, low-income cities must quantitatively accommodate three times the low-income needs of high-income cities. The sample counted 750 potential ADUs as low-income housing. Even though 759 were constructed, no units were identified as available low-income housing. In addition, none of the cities’ zoning codes enforced low-income occupancy. Inferential tests determined that cities with colleges and high incomes were more probable to count ADUs towards overall and low-income housing needs. Furthermore, a city’s count of potential ADUs and cities with high proportions of renters maintained positive associations with ADU production, whereas a city’s density and prior compliance with state housing laws maintained negative associations. In summary, ADUs did increase local housing inventory and potential ADUs were positively associated with ADU production, but ADUs as low-income housing remained a paper calculation.

“…Early 20th century housing plans were calls to reform slum conditions [55]. During the 1950s and 1960s, HUD's Section 701 funds supported comprehensive and housing plans that employed technical analyses to quantify needs and demand [31,33]. In the late 1970s, HUD allowed planners to implement regional allocation systems after recognizing that uncoordinated municipal responses could not reduce housing inequity [56].…”

Section: California's Housing Element Lawmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…After WW II, Congress passed the Housing Act of 1949 to advance slum clearance with urban renewal; however, a city could not receive slum clearance funds unless its urban renewal plan conformed to its general plan [31,32], Title I, Section 105. Soon after, federal officials found that small localities (25,000 persons or less) lacked housing and building codes that would guide federal investments [33] (p. 179).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

According to the Plan: Testing the Influence of Housing Plan Quality on Low-Income Housing Production

2017

Self Cite

For more than 20 years, scholars have assessed a plan's content to determine the plan's quality, with quality serving as a proxy for planning efficacy. However, scholars rarely examine the relationship between a plan's quality and the plan's intended outcome. Thus, it is unclear whether quality influences planning outcomes or even advances equity. To close this gap, this study assessed a non-random sample of housing plans from 43 cities in California's Los Angeles and Sacramento regions to observe how cities accommodated low-income housing needs and to observe whether each plan's quality influenced low-income housing production. The analysis indicates that the plans identified 42 different planning tools to accommodate low-income housing needs, and nearly 60% of the implementing objectives proposed construction programs. Quality is influential after the city's location, land-use, population, and the plan's compliance with state housing law are taken into account. In summary, quality illuminated how these cities accommodated low-income housing needs and, in conjunction with other city conditions, quality influences low-income housing production. Due to this non-random sample, this study calls on planning scholars to subject quality to more empirical tests on planning outcomes in other areas to increase quality's importance in scholarship.