Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

GRCentro

Inclusionary Zoning

4 posts in this topic

Grand Rapids is getting a lot of new housing stock downtown; most of it, however, is priced for the upper-income brackets. Considering that and the recent UP conversations on gentrification, I was reminded of an interesting planning tool: inclusionary zoning

Wikipedia - Inclusionary Zoning

More interesting reads

Basically, the local government requires new developments to include a minimum number of low-income housing units (typically 10-30%). In exchange, developers may be awarded certain zoning variances, grants, tax breaks, etc.

It seems like a great planning tool. It achieves two things. First, it ensures that the city retains affordable housing units. Second, it steers away from a "monoculture of poverty" by requiring low-income housing to be built alongside market-rate units.

It appears to be successful in other communities. Would it work here?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


It seems like a great planning tool. It achieves two things. First, it ensures that the city retains affordable housing units. Second, it steers away from a "monoculture of poverty" by requiring low-income housing to be built alongside market-rate units.

It appears to be successful in other communities. Would it work here?

I was involved with some housing in Ontario a number of years ago. The affordable housing mandate (25%) in Canada came from the provincial government. The developers, however, still created plans that segregated the affordable units from the others. True economic diversity would integrate all unit types into a planned neighborhood.

The quote-of-the-day on Google is, "If we were to wake up some morning and find that everyone was the same race, creed and color, we would find some other cause for prejudice by noon." George Aiken

I would assume that economic status would be the next big target for discrimination.

It seems that it would take a state or federal mandate to require a percentage of affordable housing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

True economic diversity would integrate all unit types into a planned neighborhood.

Of course. Couldn't inclusionary zoning be used to achieve that as well?

There will always be discrimination. But, it seems like our urban housing stock could be better regulated. I see inclusionary zoning, potentially, as a means of doing gentrification "right".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guy that I had a few classes with did his Masters Thesis on the creation of a mixed use district in the Jefferson-Wealthy district. While I think it is a great idea and could be very successful, the city also needs to be careful to not push developers out into the countryside and add to the existing sprawl.

Often times a carrot/stick combination of incentives and regulation to encourage the creation of a housing development for a wide range of economic levels. The one that was created in Denver Co was looked at as a complete failure for a year or two, but once the project started to gain momentum the mixed income neighborhoods spread beyond the boundaries of the original project.

An additional benefit of having a diverse mixed income neighborhood is the reduction of crime and property maintenance concerns.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.