Inclusionary Housing Policy - Term Paper Example

Inclusionary Housing Policy Introduction As with several other cities in the United States of America, for the cities of Denver and Boulder in the state of Colorado, inclusive and affordable housing policies are being formulated and implemented to meet the requirement for low income housing. Denver is confronted with challenges in fulfilling the housing needs of its economically diverse population, for sustainability, diversity and inclusiveness. “The scarcity of affordable housing prevents lower income households from participating in the benefits of economic growth or establishing a stable home environment” (DCP 109). Concurrently, in Boulder, the comprehensive plan that establishes land use decisions takes into account the need to protect the natural environment of the Boulder Valley “while fostering a livable, vibrant and sustainable community” (BCP 1). Thesis Statement: The purpose of this paper is to compare the inclusionary housing policies of Denver and Colorado, in providing affordable housing. Discussion a. The Need for Affordable Housing in Denver and Colorado The number of households in Denver was 2,39,235 in the year 2000, a higher population level as compared to Boulder with only 39,596 households in the same year. The area average or median income per person recorded in 2009 was less for Denver, in relation to Boulder. Similarly, the average monthly rent for both one-bedroom as well as two-bedroom accommodations were found to be slightly less in the case of Denver, though the rental rates in both cities are high, with the minimum being $725 for one-bedroom accommodations in Denver as compared to $ 825 in Boulder, and Denver’s two-bedroom accommodation rated at $ 995, as compared to Boulder’s $ 1, 295 (Zilpy, 2009). Similarly, Denver’s average home value is placed at $ 213, 300, while Boulder’s is comparatively higher at $ 3, 17, 900 (Zillow, 2008). Thus, it is evident Boulder with its much smaller population, has higher house rental and purchase values, as well as greater per capita income as compared to Denver. Both cities in Colorado, though less expensive than those in some other states such as California, need to develop more affordable housing with lower housing purchase rates, and reduced house rental rates for both lower income citizens and college students. Denver’s comprehensive plan goal strives to ensure that the limited supply of land with the potential for development should include housing opportunities for all incomes, with a specific focus on increased availability of low and moderate income housing. (Denvergov.org, 2009). Similarly, Boulder also has limited land for residential development, but promotes inclusive housing to reduce social conflict by decreasing segregation and inequality. Further, the growing student population from the University, as well as the environmentally sensitive urban service boundaries also increase the need for decent housing options for very low, low- and moderate-income families. b. The Affordable Housing Plans of the Two Cities Each City’s Perspective on the Affordable Housing Issue The underlying key element of the Denver Comprehensive Plan 2000 is to ensure that the city should be livable for all its people, providing quality of life to the diverse range of its citizens (DCP 2). Similarly, the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan reflects “the community’s desires for future development and preservation of the Boulder Valley” (BCP 1). The entire framework of the comprehensive plan emphasizes the importance of sustainability, and the need for affordable housing forms an important component towards achieving long-term goals for a sustainable community. The Main Elements of the Housing Plans of Denver and Colorado. Denver’s Comprehensive Plan includes the Affordable Housing Program which provides a number of housing purchase options. The housing units are affordable, deed restricted and have to comply with the terms of a Covenant. The Affordable Housing Covenant includes an upper limit on the permissible income of prospecive buyers. It also defines the maximum allowable purchase price for any future sale of the property, may impose a transfer fee, and does not permit renting out of the unit at any point of time. Affordable housing may require a final resale requirement (Denvergov.org, 2009). Similarly, the Boulder Division of Housing in the city of Boulder offers incentives such as down payment assistance on a range of homes from those priced at market rate to homes sold at affordable prices. The assistance is offered to a diverse range of people including low and moderate income groups “who would otherwise not purchase a home in today’s housing market” (City of Boulder, 2009). The Inclusionary Zoning Ordinance requires that developers should build affordable homes governed by the Affordability Covenant, for income-eligible buyers. However, the method used for structuring inclusionary zoning (IZ) policies is based on development patterns in the community, “the affordable housing needs of residents, and political feasibility” (PolicyLink, 2009). The Inclusionary Zoning policy has different components that can be tailored appropriately in order to effectively meet the local needs. The Range of Strategies for Affordable Housing Found in the Plans of Both Cities In Denver, to use the limited amount of developable land to provide a full range of housing choices to meet the needs for all incomes, the following strategies are being implemented. The focus will be on increasing the availability of additional low and moderate income housing, offering incentives to encourage the construction of moderately priced housing, make it necessary for all developers of thirty or more dwelling units to include a minimum number of moderately priced units, ensure that developers contribute to a special revenue fund and comply with the policies, ensure that the new moderately priced dwelling units (MPDU) would not take the place of the remaining low income housing, and use the special revenue fund to provide affordable housing (Denvergov, 2009). Further, reduction of utility costs through energy efficiency is carried out to make housing more affordable (DCP 35). Boulder’s strategies include implementing the housing goals of the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan by promoting the construction of housing that is affordable to the community and its workforce; providing accommodation in the city for people that work in the city; maintaining a balanced community with housing for people of all incomes; ensuring that housing options continue to be available for very low income, low income, and moderate income residents, and for people with special needs (BCP 48). How Inclusionary Housing Fits into Each City’s Overall Housing Plan In both the cities’ overall housing plans, the concept of inclusionary housing to accommodate all income levels, has been given a central position, since both Denver and Boulder give significant importance to sustainability and long-term community development (DCP 9; BCP 47). Whether there is an Explicit Mention of Affordable Housing, and Related Strategies In the housing plans of both Denver and Boulder, affordable housing is clearly mentioned, and treated as a key element in housing development. For Denver, the need for affordable housing is stressed by DCP (p.109) due to the rising rents and low vacancy rates. For Boulder, BCP (p.5) states its “commitment to a diversity of housing types and price ranges to meet the needs of the Boulder Valley population”. c. Comparison of the Merits and Challenges of the Inclusionary Housing Policies The Merits and Challenges of Each Inclusive Housing Policy Among the merits of Denver’s inclusionary housing policies are that the city’s housing plan is consistent with the comprehensive plan, there is empowerment from the citizens’ commitment and skills, community collaboration and supportive local government environment. Further, the government provides “a range of services for low- and moderate-income renters, owners, new home buyers and special needs housing” (DCP 111). Also, the concept of mixed-use communities is being establshed in new housing developments, providing opportunities to include a complete range of housing types, sizes, and prices in residential units. Among the challenges faced by Denver in implementing inclusionary housing policies are: for further economic development to take place Denver should provide a wide variety of housing types for people of all incomes; affordable housing to eliminate substandard, overcrowded accommodations; further research is needed to evaluate the extent of the impending problem with expiry of HUD project based subsidy within the next one year, and preservation of Denver’s available stock of affordable housing, is needed. Families with children are increasingly being placed at risk of homelessness due to lack of affordable units; and higher-density and rental housing are sometimes regarded as unacceptable, because new development is perceived as changing a neighborhood’s character (DCP 110-111). In Boulder, the Housing and Human Services Master Plan of 2005 provides a wide variety of policies and strategies for meeting the diverse needs of Boulder’s citizens. Particularly, these methods apply for achieving the Comprehensive Plan goal to have 10% of the total housing stock permanently affordable within 15 years or less (BCP 47). The strengths of Boulder’s inclusive housing policy includes local support for community housing needs through various methods. For example, local solutions are formulated towards affordable housing, evaluation of policies for supply of affordable housing, provision of permanently affordable housing, serving populations with special needs, and strengthening community housing partnerships. Secondly, provision of housing choices and a mixture of housing types, preserving existing housing stock, and preservation and development of manufactured housing. Further, adance and sustain economic diversity by balancing housing supply with employment base, and keeping low and moderate income workers in Boulder. Finally, integration of growth goals with community goals through supporting a mix of housing in future developments, maintaining housing affordability, conversion of residential units in the community, integration of permanently affordable housing, and minimizing displacement (BCP 50). Some of the limitations of the affordable housing policy are that: Boulder cannot provide affordable housing for everyone who would like to live in this city. However, individuals and families need to be retained towards the well being of the community. A variety of policies, programs and regulations need to be formulated so that a definite difference can be made, in adequately providing affordable housing units, to people with limited resources or special needs (BCP 47). Similarities and Disparities of the Policies of Denver and Colorado The main similarity in the policies of Denver and Colorado is that both work towards sustainability in the community, in families and in individuals’ quality of life. Other similarities are that, in both cities the government and local communities are actively involved in promoting inclusionary housing policies, and there is emphasis on economic progress through supporting the disadvantaged people among diversely different groups, and ensuring that the housing needs of all sections of society are met. The concept of mixed communities living closely together in the same unit is supported by both cities as essential for developing integration among diverse communities. The main disparity is that higher density and rental housing are slow to be accepted as appropriate accommodation in Denver, whereas in Boulder these forms of low income housing are considered useful. Moreover, there is an emphasis on the preservation of available stock of affordable and mixed community housing in Denver, though Boulder’s affordable housing policies do not focus on the same. Whether Each City is Adequately Addressing its Affordable Housing Needs It is clear from the Affordable Housing plans of the Denver Comprehensive Plan and the Boulder Comprehensive Plan, that both cities are adequately addressing its requirement for affordable housing, by formulating policies, developing strategies and implementing them for achieving affordable housing needs for the low and middle income groups. Whether the Policy of One of the Cities is Better than that of the Other The policies of Denver take into account its limitations besides its strengths, and work towards eliminating the challenges faced in dealing with their implementation. The policies of Boulder appear to be more comprehensive,. dealing minutely with different components of the policies and plans. Inclusion and Exclusion of Demographic Groups by the Policies No demographic groups are excluded in the policies of both Denver and Boulder. On the other hand, there is an intensive effort to include diverse people from different income levels and other groups commonly segregated on the basis of discrimination. The Incentive Approaches for Developers The incentive approach for developers is being implemented in Denver as an essential method by which inclusionary housing policies can be implemented. This practice is further strengthened by particular governmental rules which developers need to comply with. Thus, the incentive approach is a crucial one for achieving inclusionary housing complexes to suit every individual’s requirement. Evidence Whether these Policies are Working Through the Hope VI Project, the Denver governement extends its support to fund the transformation of an older public housing development project into “a mixed-use, mixed income neighborhood, to be used as a model community for future rehabilitation efforts” (DCP 111). Similarly, it is seen that various projects are being implemented by Boulder based on its changing role in the region, changing demographics and emphasis on growth through redevelopment, with sustainability as it long-term goal (BCP 4). Conclusion This paper has highlighted and compared the merits and limitations of the inclusionary housing policy of Denver and Colorado, in providing affordable housing. The reasons why affordable housing was required in each city; the main issues involved in the plans and the concrete strategies related to inclusionary and affordable housing in both Denver and Colorado; the merits and challenges posed by the inclusionary housing policy of each city, and a comparison of the beneficial and adverse aspects of the policies of both cities, were investigated and critiqued. The evidence indicates that the policies are highly relevant, and their implementation establishes inclusionary housing as vital to promote economic progress, community diversity and integration. ---------------------------------------------- Works Cited BCP (Boulder Comprehensive Plan). Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan. Boulder, Colorado. (2005). Retrieved on 21st November, 2009 from: http://www.bouldercolorado.gov/files/PDS/BVCP/bvcp.pdf Boulder PBA (Planning Board Agenda). City of Boulder Planning Board Agenda Item. (July 16, 2009). Retrieved on 22nd November, 2009 from: http://www.bouldercolorado.gov/files/HSHHS/Planning/7_16_09_iz_code_chgs_memo.pdf City of Boulder. Division of housing: Summary of programs. City of Boulder, Colorado. (2009). Retrieved on 22nd November, 2009 from: http://www.bouldercolorado.gov/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=3465&Itemid=840 DCP (Denver Comprehensive Plan). Plan 2000. CompPlan 2000. Denver, Colorado. (2000). Retrieved on 21st November, 2009 from: http://www.denvergov.org/Portals/650/documents/CompPlan2000.pdf Denvergov.org. Affordable housing details. The Denver Office of Economic Development. (2009). Retrieved on 21st November, 2009 from: http://www.milehigh.com/displayPage/545 PolicyLink. Inclusionary zoning. Equity Development Toolkit. (2009). Retrieved on 22nd November, 2009 from: http://policylink.info/EDTK/IZ/How.html Zillow. Real estate market reports. Zillow Home Value Index. (2008). Retrieved on 21st November, 2009 from: http://www.zillow.com/local-info/ Zilpy. Boulder apartments and houses rent comparison, neighborhood rent maps. (2009). Retrieved on 21st November, 2009 from: http://www.zilpy.com/US/Boulder_Metro/ Read More