Feds seek to ease housing shortage caused by exclusionary zoning
Biden seeks to ease housing shortage with $5 billion 'carrot, no stick' approach
By Andy Sullivan, Jarrett Renshaw Quote:
Full article here: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-u...-idUSKBN2BV1CX |
Thank God. Someone's finally fighting the NIMBYs!
|
I'm a little surprised this news article didn't generate any discussions. This is a big move into what has been previously seen as a local responsibility, but perhaps a necessary one to address a national housing shortage. I personally like the carrot approach. So it's not a heavy mandate, but an opportunity for a city to revamp their zoning codes in exchange for more infrastructure funding.
Some communities will pass, but it will help out communities that may be struggling all by unlocking their land values. |
A carrot approach certainly makes sense. A stick wouldn't be supported, as it would be seen as overreach even by many in his own party.
|
I just hope there's a developer ready to build midrise "affordable" housing next to Joe's single family home.
The elite too often doesn't expect to be affected by the policies they want to foist on the rest of us. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
You love to see this but is a $5 billion fund of incentives even close to enough? Is whatever piece of $5 billion that would be parceled out to each locale really going to be enough to convince Lower Merion Township (rich suburban municipality right next to Philadelphia border) to change their zoning code to allow more small apartment buildings?
What you'd like to see is zoning reform tied to the real federal pot of gold - funding for roads. I really think something could be done if the Congressional Black Caucus and social justice aligned democrats really pushed for it. Some republicans would naturally be in favor of this kind of action if targeted at the right areas - expensive cities and suburbs that are trending blue anyway. Encouraging more development within city cores would discourage sprawl into redder exurb areas. |
$5 billion is nothing, really. And the problem is almost entirely in wealthy, suburban communities, probably none who would be willing to sacrifice their town's zoning in exchange for a few more federal dollars. So I don't see this initiative as having much impact.
I mean, you see this in practice, right now. A lot of suburban, wealthy communities have very high property taxes, because they actively refuse to zone for commercial entities and multifamily. The residents are saying they'll gladly pay more to restrict access. |
I think some of you miss the entire point of both incentives and bully pulpits / marketing. This is true regardless of the topic.
The targets aren't the people/places who are diametrically opposed to something. It's about the people/places that are in the gray areas, where a moderate incentive and shift in the discussion can tilt the result. Will a program like this shift everything, or even a huge percentage? Probably not. But it can move the needle in many places. Of course we don't know the details yet. So keep being surprised every time something like this comes up. But maybe ask yourself why they come up so often. |
Quote:
|
Yes
|
If any state that could benefit hugely from this is Califor-Nimby-a!
Minneapolis outlawed single family home zoning last year. |
All times are GMT. The time now is 12:59 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.