Housing Policy | Ensure Zoning Policies Allow Housing Diversity

Ensure Zoning Policies Allow Housing Diversity

Goal: Increase the Availability of Affordable Homes
Role: Reduce Red Tape
Policy: Ensure Zoning Policies Allow Housing Diversity

How can zoning be used to support a diversity of housing types?

Most communities in the U.S. have some form of zoning policy (often expressed through a zoning ordinance or code) that dictates the types of land uses that are allowed in different parts (districts) of town. Originally adopted to ensure the separation of incompatible uses - to make sure residential areas were not built next to heavy manufacturing, for example - zoning is now used more broadly to shape neighborhoods and regulate an array of issues related to property use, such as density, parking requirements and building height. Zoning policies also specify the types of structures that are allowed within each district "as of right" - without the need for a special review process - and often restrict development in residential districts to detached single-family homes. Zoning policies that are written to allow a diverse range of housing types, including multifamily homes, manufactured homes and accessory dwelling units, make it possible to deliver housing that meets a broader range of needs and price levels.

What problems are solved by zoning policies that allow a diversity of housing types?

Many communities have zoning policies that make it difficult or impossible to develop multifamily or manufactured homes and other types of housing that tend to be more affordable to working families. Even when efforts to obtain a variance or conditional use permit to proceed with development that is not allowed "as of right" are successful, the process can lengthen the development schedule significantly, increasing unpredictability and total development costs. By introducing reasonable standards for manufactured homes and reducing regulatory constraints on the development of all of these housing types within appropriate areas, communities can help make sure that new homes are affordable to households at a range of income levels.

Restrictive zoning policies also limit the ability to accommodate the needs and preferences of a community's changing demographics. Married couples with children now represent less than one-quarter of U.S. households. Older adults, couples without children and people living alone have different housing and services needs. Through a comprehensive revision of zoning policies, communities can expand and diversify the local supply of homes to meet the needs of a changing population. (Learn more about revisiting zoning policies to meet the housing needs of older adults.)

Where are these policies most applicable?

Most large cities and many smaller communities have adopted zoning policies (Houston, TX is a notable exception). All jurisdictions with a zoning code may be able to broaden the diversity of allowable housing types by revisiting their policies, and giving special consideration to ameliorating restrictions and potential obstacles to the development of a diversity of housing types.

Solutions in Action

Photo courtesy of Potterhill Homes.

The Mills of Carthage in Cincinnati, Ohio demonstrates that factory-built homes can be effectively used as part of a community revitalization strategy in urban and suburban areas. The development is composed of 50 manufactured and modular homes, and sales prices started at $137,300 in 2002 when the units were first made available for purchase.

Visit the Gallery to learn more about the Mills of Carthage and other developments made possible through policies that support housing diversity.

Similarly, jurisdictions whose zoning appeals boards are inundated with requests for variances and conditional use permits may wish to consider reassessing current regulations to improve responsiveness to shifting demographics and reduce development times and costs. These communities may also want to consider rezoning some industrial or manufacturing areas as residential to better accommodate the demand for housing.

Learn more about zoning that allows a diversity of housing types

Go back to learn about other policies that help Reduce Red Tape

The Center for Housing Policy gratefully acknowledges the input and feedback provided for this policy section by the following reviewers: Thayer Long, Manufactured Housing Institute; Doug Moritz, DOMO Consulting. Please note, however, that the views and opinions expressed on HousingPolicy.org are those of the Center for Housing Policy alone.

Goal: Increase the Availability of Affordable Homes
Role: Reduce Red Tape
Policy: Ensure Zoning Policies Allow Housing Diversity

How can zoning policies be used to support a diversity of housing types?

Many communities directly prohibit development of multifamily homes and other housing types that can be built at lower costs than conventional detached single-family houses, such as manufactured homes and accessory dwelling units. Others have erected regulatory obstacles that have the effect of rendering these housing types uneconomical, such as unnecessarily-onerous parking or storm water management requirements. The rationale for these restrictive zoning policies is often based on concerns about preservation of neighborhood character and desirability. However, with appropriate zoning and design policies in place, a wide array of housing types can be incorporated into communities without compromising local design standards, property values or quality of life.

Click on the links below to learn about various ways that zoning policy revisions can be used to support a greater diversity of housing types:

Quality Hill

Revise zoning policies to allow development of a range of housing types "as of right"
Greater housing diversity and affordability may be achieved by revising zoning policies to eliminate both direct and "back door" prohibitions and explicitly allow a range of housing types, rather than requiring a special review process or disallowing certain types of structures entirely.

Providence Walk 2

Consider other innovative land use regulations that facilitate delivery of lower-cost homes
Local officials can implement an array of land use tools to create a regulatory environment that is hospitable to the development of homes affordable to working families.

Click here to view other resources on zoning policies that allow housing diversity.

Goal: Increase the Availability of Affordable Homes
Role: Reduce Red Tape
Policy: Ensure Zoning Policies Allow Housing Diversity

As-of-Right Development

Communities interested in expanding the availability of affordable homes should carefully examine current zoning policies to determine the effect they have on housing affordability. Are there adequate opportunities to build multifamily homes? Can residents build accessory dwelling units for a relative or for additional rental income? Does the system rely heavily on zoning variances that make it more expensive to develop homes and therefore may escalate home prices?

In their review, communities should seek to:

Expand the range of allowable housing options and areas in which they may be built
Revise policies that make these housing types impractical
Consider ways to reduce the reliance on variances and expand "as of right" development opportunities

Building proposals that fit within the specifications of local zoning policies may proceed
"as of right." Developers still need to secure a building permit and fulfill customary regulatory requirements, but the approvals process is generally less contentious and/or

Photo courtesy of McCormack Baron Salazar

time-consuming than the process for proposals that require an exception from current zoning regulations. Through the revision of zoning policies, jurisdictions can significantly broaden the types of housing that are allowed as of right, thus simplifying and reducing the cost of the delivering homes that are more likely to be affordable to working families.

There is no one-size-fits-all policy that will work to expand housing options in all communities, but through consultation with builders and other key stakeholders, officials can develop a zoning code that facilitates development of lower-cost homes without compromising other core community concerns.

Photo courtesy of Philadelphia Housing Authority

Click on the links below to learn more about specific types of housing that can help communities meet the needs of households with a range of preferences and budgets:

Multifamily/attached homes, which may include apartment buildings, condominiums, town homes, row houses and duplexes.

"Factory-built" homes, from manufactured homes built entirely in production facilities to modular housing that is assembled on-site.

Accessory dwelling units within or attached to a larger single-family home, or on the same lot.

Mixed-use housing, where residential units co-exist with commercial and retail enterprises.

Single-room occupancies, also called efficiency apartments and residential studio units.

You are currently reading:

Revise zoning policies to allow development of a range of housing types "as of right"
Greater housing diversity and affordability may be achieved by revising zoning policies to eliminate both direct and "back door" prohibitions and explicitly allow a range of housing types, rather than requiring a special review process or disallowing certain types of structures entirely.

Other pages in this section:

Consider other innovative land use regulations that facilitate delivery of lower-cost homes
Local officials can implement an array of land use tools to create a regulatory environment that is hospitable to the development of homes affordable to working families

Click here to view other resources on zoning policies that allow housing diversity.

Goal: Increase the Availability of Affordable Homes
Role: Reduce Red Tape
Policy: Ensure Zoning Policies Allow Housing Diversity

Multifamily/Attached Homes

Capitol Heights Cityhomes, St. Paul MN -- Photo courtesy of LHB, Inc.

Multifamily and attached homes include apartment buildings, condominiums, town homes, row houses, duplexes, quads, and other housing configurations that provide more than one unit under the roof. This style of housing can often be rented or sold for less than low-density, detached single-family housing, primarily because the cost of land - one of the largest cost components of any new development - is distributed among a greater number of households. Building at a relatively higher density also facilitates more efficient delivery of public services and infrastructure, such as trash removal and sewer systems, which can then be supplied at a lower per-unit cost.

Neighborhoods with higher housing density also can more effectively address traffic congestion and transportation needs. Unlike low-density development, higher-density housing is able to support public transportation, helping to reduce individual transportation costs and the community's traffic congestion. Higher-density development can also cut down travel time for working individuals, reducing the time they spend in the car and providing more convenient access to services and amenities that can particularly be a benefit to certain populations, such as older adults (Learn more about zoning for higher-density residential development to meet the needs of older adults).

Solutions in Action

The State of New Hampshire recently passed a Workforce Housing Law intended to expedite the appeals process for developers of workforce housing whose proposals have been denied. The bill, SB 342, helps to codify a 1991 state Supreme Court Decision (Britton v. Town of Chester), in which the court ruled that municipalities must allow for "reasonable and realistic opportunities for the development of [their fair share of] workforce housing," including rental homes. The law directs local jurisdictions to assess their land use ordinances and, to the greatest extent possible, amend lot size and density requirements to provide opportunities for the development of workforce housing (defined here as for-sale housing affordable to a 4-person household earning up to 100 percent of area median income, or rental housing affordable to a 3-person household earning up to 60 percent of area median income).

This law finally gives "teeth" to the court ruling. In cases where a proposed workforce development is denied or receives approval subject to conditions that threaten the project's economic viability, the developer may appeal the denial or conditional approval in court. What's new is that the court is now required to hold a hearing on the merits of the case within 6 months from when the appeal is filed, or to appoint an impartial party to do so. Successful appellants may be awarded a "builder's remedy," in which the court's ruling supersedes local regulations. The developer and municipality must then work together to establish an appropriate solution. See a side-by-side explanation of the statute [PDF], or click here to leave this site and read an article about the statute.

Massachusetts has a similar law, the Comprehensive Permit and Zoning Appeals Act � also known as Chapter 40B � which passed in 1969. Click here to learn more about Chapter 40B.

Addressing community concerns: Objections to multifamily housing are usually related to concerns about the effect of new development on property values, traffic congestion and crime levels. It is important to note, however, that a growing body of evidence indicates that these concerns may generally be unfounded. Studies have shown that single-family homes close to multifamily buildings appreciate in value at rates equivalent to, or higher than, those that are not near multifamily homes. Moreover, researchers have found no link between higher-density multifamily housing and increases in crime rates or traffic congestion. [1] Opposition to higher density multifamily housing also may be based on aesthetic grounds and fears that buildings will be unattractive or out of place in the community. Of course, "higher density" is a relative characterization, and new development should be designed to fit with the existing neighborhood. Higher density development in cities may mean mid- or high-rise apartment buildings, whereas higher density development in suburban areas and small towns may be characterized by town homes and two-story garden apartments. Any step in the direction of allowing greater density can help to increase housing options for working families. Click here to view a PowerPoint presentation by Doug Bibby, President of the National Multi Housing Council, on the importance of rental housing. Among other things, the presentation points to rental housing as a means to address the affordable housing shortage in the US, and advocates for the need to make changes in the regulatory climate to promote higher-density, transit-oriented development.		Obstacles to development: Some communities prohibit multifamily and attached housing altogether through zoning policies that limit development in all residential districts to single-family homes. Other jurisdictions do not adopt outright bans, but rather erect regulatory barriers that severely limit opportunities for development. This may be accomplished through zoning policies that: -- Mandate residential density that is too low to support multifamily or attached housing -- Restrict the land area zoned for multifamily or attached housing to an insignificant share of total land area -- Limit the number of multifamily or attached units that may be built in a year -- Limit the number of multifamily or attached units allowed in the jurisdiction by setting a cap or a required ratio of single-family homes to multifamily or attached units -- Prohibit the development of multifamily or attached developments within a specified proximity to one another -- Limit the number of primary residence structures allowed per lot -- Prohibit or constrain the conversion of single-family homes to multifamily residences -- Impose overly restrictive parking requirements that make multifamily development uneconomical

Click on the links below to learn more about other types of housing that can help communities meet the needs of households with a range of preferences and budgets:

Multifamily/attached homes, which may include apartment buildings, condominiums, town homes, row houses and duplexes.

"Factory-built" homes, from manufactured homes built entirely in production facilities to modular housing that is assembled on-site.

Accessory dwelling units within or attached to a larger single-family home, or on the same lot.

Mixed-use housing, where residential units co-exist with commercial and retail enterprises.

Single-room occupancies, also called efficiency apartments and residential studio units.

[1] See Overcoming Opposition to Multifamily Rental Housing, a white paper by Mark Obrinsky and Debra Stein issued by the National Multi Housing Council, for an overview of the evidence refuting these arguments.

Goal: Increase the Availability of Affordable Homes
Role: Reduce Red Tape
Policy: Ensure Zoning Policies Allow Housing Diversity

Factory-built Homes

"Factory-built" homes is an umbrella term that encompasses a wide range of housing types - from manufactured homes that are built entirely in production facilities, to modular housing that is transported in pieces and assembled on-site. Some types of factory-built homes, including modular homes, must be modified to comply with local building codes and, for regulatory purposes, are treated as site-built homes. In contrast, manufactured homes are designed to comply with a building code created by HUD (more on this below), rather than the prevailing state and local codes, and are more likely to receive separate treatment in local zoning policies.

Photo courtesy of ULI Development Case Studies.

Manufacturers of all types of factory-built homes use standardized designs and components to lower the cost of the production process and achieve economies of scale by purchasing building materials in bulk quantities. Because production is done primarily in a factory, rather than on-site, the construction and delivery of homes is also unlikely to be subject to costly delays caused by adverse weather and other environmental conditions.

The cost savings that can be achieved through these techniques are substantial: in 2008, the average sales price of a new, average-sized manufactured home was $64,900, or $41.34 per square foot, while a new single-family site-built home of average size (excluding land) cost $217,744, or $88.55 per square foot - more than twice as much on a per square foot basis. [1]

Addressing community concerns: Objections to factory-built homes are often related to their appearance and safety, particularly in areas prone to tornados, hurricanes, and other severe weather. In general, these concerns are based on outmoded images and stereotypes of single-wide mobile homes, "trailer parks" and their occupants, and the effects they have on nearby property values and quality of life.

Since the mid-1970s, however, all manufactured homes have been built in compliance with a HUD code (The Federal Manufactured Home Construction and Safety Standards) that ensures basic standards of safety and soundness in construction. Prior to installation, homes must be checked by a certified inspector, who verifies that they meet national requirements for durability, fire resistance and quality. The HUD code does not apply to modular homes, which must meet state and local building codes in the communities where they are installed.

Design-related concerns are also outdated; modern manufactured homes can easily blend into most urban and suburban neighborhoods, and modular homes are almost always two or more stories tall and incorporate design features that make them virtually indistinguishable from conventional single-family homes. In most cases the quality of construction is superior to on-site construction due to more precise construction standards at the factories.

An additional benefit of this building type is that it can be built "on grade," meaning it does not require deep footings or basements, minimizing the remediation that a Brownfield site requires.

Obstacles to development: A number of states have passed legislation that prohibits local jurisdictions from discriminating against manufactured homes when developing and implementing zoning policies

(Click here to visit the Manufactured Housing Institute to learn more about statutes in your state).

Even so, one report notes that "when a manufactured home buyer seeks a lot to buy or a new land lease community to move into, they often find difficult, expensive and time consuming land use regulations barring their way." [2]

These regulations include:

Disallowing manufactured homes in all residential districts

Limiting manufactured housing to "manufactured-home only" districts, which are typically sited on the least-desirable lots (i.e., those adjacent to highways, landfills, wastewater treatment plants, and similar facilities)

Requiring large minimum lot sizes, which diminishes the affordability of manufactured homes and housing in general

Although not an obstacle to development, manufactured homeowners that rent the land their home sits on may face obstacles to sustainable homeownership. The lack of secure land tenure limits homeowners' stability in a manufactured home park -- there are few protections against rapid rent increases or land fees, park closures that might lead to displacement, or non-renewed leases.

Manufactured homeowners can create a more stable living situation through cooperatively taking ownership of the underlying land with other homeowners in their community. This mechanism is known as a Resident-Owned Community (ROC). Click here to learn more about the ROC.

[1] Cost and Size Comparison. In Understanding Today's Manufactured Housing. Arlington, VA: Manufactured Housing Institute.

[2] Suggested Policy on Zoning and Land Use Regulations for Manufactured Housing. [PDF] 2003. Frankfort, KY: Kentucky Manufactured Housing Institute, p. 3.

Goal: Increase the Availability of Affordable Homes
Role: Reduce Red Tape
Policy: Ensure Zoning Policies Allow Housing Diversity

Accessory Dwelling Units

Accessory dwelling units are self-contained residential units that are either:

Set aside within a larger single-family home, such as a separate basement or attic apartment;

Attached to a primary residence, such as an apartment above an attached garage; or

Smaller separate units built on the same lot as single-family homes.

Accessory dwelling units (ADUs) - also called secondary units, granny flats, carriage houses and in-law apartments - can be an important source of low-cost rental housing for small households in many communities. They can provide an opportunity for renters to enjoy the advantages of living in established homeownership communities, including good schools and safe and quiet neighborhoods. In addition, they can provide affordable options for older adults to live in certain communities in which they have better access to amenities and transit. They can also allow people who have lost their homes to foreclosure to stay in their community as an ADU renter.

ADUs may also be a boon to owners of the primary home, who collect extra income from the rental unit that can be used to help cover mortgage payments, property taxes and other costs. This extra income could prove especially helpful during economic downturns, and could help some families avoid foreclosure.

Capitol Heights Cityhomes, St. Paul MN -- Photo courtesy of LHB, Inc.

In some cases, the lease may include an agreement that renters help with household chores and basic maintenance, an arrangement that can help aging homeowners remain in their homes when they are no longer able to perform these tasks. Older adults and empty nesters may eventually choose to move into the ADU and rent out the main house, an adaptation that further helps them age in place. ADUs are generally built and financed entirely by the homeowner, so no public subsidy is required to make them available. Communities interested in using ADUs as an affordable housing option should comprehensively review their zoning policies to ensure they facilitate, rather than hinder, development of ADUs.

Solutions in Action

Addressing community concerns: Objections to ADUs are most often based on concerns about overcrowding, traffic congestion and parking shortages, and a loss of neighborhood character. However, the experience of many communities has been that when ADUs are approved, units tend to "trickle in" rather than overwhelm entire neighborhoods overnight. [1] Because they are often incorporated into or next to existing homes, ADUs have minimal impact on neighborhood density and can blend in seamlessly with the community.

Obstacles to development: Some communities prohibit ADUs entirely, while others have regulatory requirements (often unintentional) that severely limit opportunities for this development or make the development process so long and costly that private homeowners opt out. These include zoning policies that:

Allow only one residential unit per lot

Increase the minimum lot size for units with ADUs to twice the minimum lot size specified in the underlying zoning code

Limit the proximity of ADUs to property lines, making it difficult to develop above-garage units adjacent to back alleys

Require an excessive number of parking spaces per unit

Impose excessive permit fees or impact fees that make development of ADUs too costly

In 1982 the state of California passed the Second Unit Law - legislation intended to promote the development of accessory dwelling units by codifying a state standard for ADU approval. Under the law, communities that had not already adopted a local ADU ordinance were given considerable discretion in setting the terms of their own approvals procedure and development standards. However, those that chose not to adopt an ADU ordinance were required to approve all proposals that met state standards.

While the purpose of this legislation was to facilitate creation of additional units, implementation hit a snag when all of the jurisdictions that adopted an ordinance approved ADUs as a conditional use only. Rather than allowing development as of right, applicants had to undergo a lengthy and potentially contentious review and public hearing process that made creation of new units difficult at best. With development falling far short of expectations, in 2003 the state legislature passed Assembly Bill 1866, which amends the original law by requiring local communities to allow ADUs as of right (provided they are otherwise in compliance with the zoning code) by prohibiting local ordinances that mandate discretionary review of ADU applications.

Some critics of the law point out that it only facilitates the administrative approvals process, and does not address structural conditions that localities may choose to apply, such as size and design requirements, parking regulations and other restrictive standards that can constrain development of ADUs or make them cost-prohibitive.

More at Accessory Dwelling Units. 2004. Instant Advocate. Oakland, CA: Transportation and Land Use Coalition, Section 2: Is this the Right Tool for You?

[1] Accessory Units: An Increasing Source of Affordable Housing. 1991. By Patrick H. Hare and John Danbury. Public Management 73, pp. 5-8, cited in Accessory Dwelling Units. 1995. Report No. 33. Seattle, WA: Municipal Research and Services Center of Washington; and Accessory Dwelling Units. 2004. Instant Advocate. Oakland, CA: Transportation and Land Use Coalition, Section 2: Is this the Right Tool for You?

Goal: Increase the Availability of Affordable Homes
Role: Reduce Red Tape
Policy: Ensure Zoning Policies Allow Housing Diversity

Mixed-Use Development

Most zoning policies were initially designed to separate incompatible land uses, like slaughterhouses and apartments. Changes to the American economy have led to commercial uses that are more compatible with housing. Most business and retail enterprises today can easily co-exist with residential units without causing any discomfort or hardship. In fact, the inclusion of residential uses in commercial districts (or vice versa) may be an appealing development strategy, both in high-end neighborhoods where residents want the convenience of amenities at their doorstep, and in revitalizing areas, where mixed-use development can improve vitality, enhance safety by increasing "eyes on the street" around the clock and create a desirable walkable neighborhood that can attract new residents.

Mixed-use development can be structured on an individual building scale (traditionally as ground floor commercial or office space with residential units above), on a neighborhood scale through a mix of residential, retail and/or commercial buildings in proximity to one another and/or through development of live-work spaces that combine studio or office space and living space in a single unit. All offer opportunities to increase the supply of homes available to working families, particularly when implemented in tandem with an inclusionary zoning strategy or density bonus that encourages or requires a share of newly developed units to be affordable to working families.

Mixed-use development also gives residents the opportunity to use their automobiles less frequently by making it possible to walk to shops and other services. This independence may be particularly attractive to older adults who wish to maintain an independent lifestyle when they are no longer able or interested in driving. When mixed-use districts are established near public transit centers - a strategy known as transit-oriented development - pedestrian access to these amenities is further improved. (Learn more about how mixed-use and transit-oriented development can help to reduce transportation costs and energy consumption.)

Addressing community concerns: Objections to mixed-use development are generally related to concerns about increases in traffic and parking congestion, reduced property values and undesirable changes in the

Solutions in Action

Photo credit: Fred Wilson

The Bookmark Apartments, in the Hollywood District of Portland Oregon, combines in one building a public library, café and 47 apartments, 19 of which are affordable to low-income households earning up to 60 percent of the area median income.

Visit the Gallery to learn more about Bookmark Apartments and other mixed-use housing developments.

character of the community. With careful planning, attractive design and
proper traffic calming measures, however, these outcomes can be avoided. Traffic congestion may actually be lessened with mixed-use development, as fewer households need to get in the car to reach local shops and recreation destinations.

Obstacles to development: Communities do not typically prohibit residential or commercial development, but many jurisdictions have zoning policies that rigidly segregate these uses into separate districts, a type of land use regulation known as Euclidean zoning. By establishing an overlay district, planned unit development or other "form-based" approach to zoning that permits and encourages a combination of uses (i.e., allowing residential uses in a commercial district), or changing the underlying zoning altogether, communities can reduce or avoid overly strict limitations on development.

Goal: Increase the Availability of Affordable Homes
Role: Reduce Red Tape
Policy: Ensure Zoning Policies Allow Housing Diversity

Single Room Occupancies

Photo courtesy of DePaul

Single Room Occupancies (SROs), also called efficiency apartments and residential studio units, provide a low-cost housing option for single-person households. Traditionally residents share kitchen, bathroom and laundry facilities, but have a private room for living and sleeping. Modern single room occupancies, however, may offer full-service efficiency apartments that include a kitchenette, private bathroom and some storage space. These small rental homes provide an affordable housing option for individuals who want to be located near their work and urban amenities but may not be able to afford a larger unit.

Addressing community concerns: Popular perceptions of SROs are closely associated with "skid row" and flophouses catering to

homeless men. While many SRO developments serve individuals at risk of homelessness, particularly those linked with supportive services, small efficiency apartments also provide an affordable housing option for students, recent graduates and single professionals. In high-cost urban areas single-room occupancy and efficiency units may be very common; however, community acceptance of SROs in lower-density and suburban areas can be more difficult to achieve. An early outreach and public education campaign can help developers respond to and overcome "not in my back yard" (NIMBY) resistance from neighbors.

Obstacles to Development A Fairfax County, Virginia task force charged with studying single-room occupancies found that the County's zoning code variously characterizes SROs as (1) multifamily buildings that may be built in certain residential districts if they are efficiency units with private bathrooms and kitchens, or (2) hotels that may be built in certain commercial districts if units do not have kitchens or bathrooms. [1] Developments that offer both types of units may be difficult to classify and site. In addition, some zoning ordinances establish the number of residential units allowed on a site on the basis of the size of the parcel. Because SROs are smaller than typical apartments, this methodology may not allow an adequate number of units to be developed, and an alternative system based on floor area ratio may be more appropriate. A recommendation to amend the current zoning policy to identify SROs as a single use allowed in specified districts is currently being considered by Fairfax County's Department of Planning and Zoning so that SROs can potentially be incorporated into areas designated for other residential or non-residential areas.		Solutions in Action
		Coan Pond residences in the high-cost community of Fairfax County, VA provide an affordable home to low- and moderate-income individuals earning between $14,500 and $43,500 a year -- between 20 and 60 percent of area median income. (Income limits as of May 2010.) The 20-unit development is located in a mixed-use office park and shares a building with County Redevelopment Housing and Authority offices. Each unit comes furnished and includes a private kitchenette and bathroom. [2]

[1] See An Affordable Housing Solution for Low Income Single Residents: Single Resident Occupancy (SRO) Housing in Fairfax County, Virginia. [PDF] 2005. Fairfax County SRO Task Force Final Report, p. 16.
[2] Fairfax County Rental Program website

Goal: Increase the Availability of Affordable Homes
Role: Reduce Red Tape
Policy: Ensure Zoning Policies Allow Housing Diversity

Other Regulations

In addition to revising their zoning policies to allow certain types of housing, communities can use other land use tools to enhance the local capacity to deliver affordable homes. Even seemingly small revisions, such as reducing the number of parking spaces required per residential unit, can make a big difference - especially where land costs are high and space is at a premium.

Photo credit: The Olson Company, courtesy of City of Fairfield, CA

Click on the links below to learn more about ways that local jurisdictions can adapt their regulations to increase the availability of affordable homes.

Reduce parking requirements
Local zoning policies may result in an overgenerous supply of parking at the expense of additional affordable homes.

Encourage use of innovative zoning techniques
Communities can use several regulatory tools to encourage innovation and allow flexibility in local design and land use.

You are currently reading:

Consider other innovative land use regulations that facilitate delivery of lower-cost homes
Local officials can implement an array of land use tools to create a regulatory environment that is hospitable to the development of homes affordable to working families

Other pages in this section:

Reduce parking requirements

Many communities have zoning policies that specify a minimum number of off-street parking spaces that must be provided with each residential unit. The intent of these policies is generally to calm traffic congestion and guard against overfull street parking. However, because parking spaces take up additional land and can be costly to create, these requirements may also have the effect of increasing development costs (and thus home prices and rents) and/or reducing the overall number of units built.

In many communities, off-street parking requirements for new development range from one space per unit to one space per bedroom. Particularly for homes located near public transit and other amenities or targeted on small households, the elderly and working families, local zoning policies may result in an overgenerous supply of parking at the expense of additional affordable homes.

To help ensure that parking requirements do not stand in the way of housing for working families, communities can revise parking standards for all new development or reduce or waive standards for certain types of housing (i.e. affordable or housing for older adults, or units located near public transit) on a discretionary basis.

Solutions in Action

In 2006, San Francisco California eliminated minimum parking requirements for downtown residential development, instead establishing a parking maximum that caps the number of parking spaces allowed at one per four dwelling units (or 0.25 spaces per unit). Developers who wish to include additional parking spaces above this cap may submit an application for a conditional use permit, which would allow creation of additional parking of up to 0.75 spaces for each one-bedroom or studio unit and up to one space for each unit with two or more bedrooms. Applications are subject to case-by-case review by the Planning Commission.

San Francisco has also prohibited downtown residential developers from requiring buyers to purchase a parking space. Spaces must instead be leased or sold separately from the housing unit, helping to reduce costs for homebuyers without cars.

Several other cities, including Coral Gables and Fort Myers, Florida; Milwaukee, Wisconsin; Portland, Oregon; and Seattle and Spokane, Washington have also abolished residential parking requirements for certain downtown neighborhoods.

This example is taken, with permission, from Our Communities, Our Homes, a book by former HUD Secretaries Henry Cisneros and Jack Kemp, and Kent Colton and Nick Retsinas.

Encourage use of innovative zoning techniques

In addition to revising zoning policies to allow development of a greater range of housing types, communities can use several regulatory tools to encourage innovation and allow flexibility in local design and land use. These tools are generally applied to small subdivisions, and allow developers to override local zoning policies to accomplish higher densities, preservation of open space and mixed-use development.

Click on the links below to learn more about each policy tool:

Not all of these policies have housing affordability as their core objective, but by facilitating development that might not otherwise be able to occur (cluster zoning) or facilitating economies of scale, higher densities, and more predictable approval processes (planned unit developments), these techniques can help to expand the supply of housing and reduce upward price pressures.

Photo courtesy of Seattle Office of Housing.

Cluster zoning, also called open space zoning, is a land use tool most commonly used by rural and exurban communities to preserve natural areas as development encroaches. Under traditional Euclidean zoning policies a parcel of land in an undeveloped residential district would be entirely carved up into individual lots, each reserved for development of a new home.

Cluster zoning groups the same number of homes onto a smaller portion of the parcel, with the rest of the land remaining protected as open space through a covenant, conservation easement or other temporary or permanent preservation program. This zoning technique is often used to help maintain rural character and preserve open space; however, by allaying community concerns about the preservation of open space,

cluster zoning may also help facilitate the approval of new development, thereby helping the market keep pace with housing demand. The cost of infrastructure to serve this more compact development is also lower than it would be under traditional zoning, helping to further lower costs.

To learn more about cluster zoning view the article "Open Space" Zoning: What It Is & Why It Works. 1992. By Randall Arendt. Planning Commissioners Journal, Issue 5.

Back to top

A planned unit development (PUD) is a land use tool that allows communities to set aside large swaths of land (typically 100 to 2,500 contiguous acres) within which traditional zoning rules may be waived in order to promote innovation and coordinated development. Rather than approaching development on a lot-by-lot basis, as typically occurs under traditional zoning, the entire parcel is planned in a comprehensive and integrated fashion.

This flexibility does not mean PUDs are unregulated - applications to create a PUD are likely to be subject to a rigorous review and public hearing process to ensure the proposal is in compliance with the overall vision of the community. However, once the PUD is approved, developers enjoy a predictable approvals process that helps to reduce development time and costs.

After designating an area as a PUD, local officials adopt a unique set of zoning laws for that area which may be less rigid or encourage a greater mix of land uses than traditional zoning policies allow. Generally, these laws are targeted to achieve specific goals within the PUD, including higher-density development or creation of mixed-income residential subdivisions in a district previously designated for large-lot development. Communities may also choose to include housing affordability incentives or requirements, where appropriate, to ensure that homes for low- and moderate-income families are included in the new development.

Back to top

Transfer of development rights (TDR) is a market-based tool used to simultaneously promote protection of open space and sensitive natural areas and encourage development in areas that are underutilized or can accommodate higher densities.

TDR works by designating "sending areas," where future development will be limited, and "receiving areas," on which more intense land use will be targeted. For a negotiated price, landowners in sending areas shift the right to develop their land to owners in receiving areas, who are then entitled to build at greater densities.

While the mechanics of TDRs can be complicated, a clear and detailed TDR policy can help communities achieve local goals while allowing land use flexibility that would not otherwise be permissible under traditional zoning policies. TDRs do not increase overall density; rather they use the economic value of increased density to make funds available for the development or rehabilitation of affordable homes.

To learn more, view the TDR page in the state of Massachusetts' Smart Growth/Smart Energy Toolkit.

Solutions in Action

Under Seattle's Transferable Development Rights (TDR) program, commercial developers who want more density than allowed under zoning rules can purchase unused density from owners of downtown properties with affordable housing, landmark buildings, or major open space. To enhance efficiency, nonprofits that need funds to repair and preserve their properties can sell the development rights to the city, which deposits them in a "TDR Bank" for later sale to office and hotel developers on an as-needed basis.

The program is a critical tool for preserving low-income housing in the downtown area. Between 1986 and 2005, developers paid owners of over 900 units of low-income rental housing about $7.8 million.

Click here to learn more about Seattle's Transferable Development Rights (TDR) Program.

This example is taken, with permission, from Our Communities, Our Homes, a book by former HUD Secretaries Henry Cisneros and Jack Kemp, and Kent Colton and Nick Retsinas.

Goal: Increase the Availability of Affordable Homes
Role: Reduce Red Tape
Policy: Ensure Zoning Policies Allow Housing Diversity

Key Resources

The following is a list of key resources on topics related to ensuring zoning policies allow a variety of housing types. If you're aware of other resources that should be added, please contact us.

Multifamily/Attached Housing [go to policy page]

Websites

The National Multi Housing Council is a membership organization that represents the interests of larger apartment firms. Visitors to the website can access statistics about rental housing and other research reports.

Reports

Higher-Density Development Myth and Fact. [PDF] 2005. By Richard Haughey. Washington, DC: Urban Land Institute.
This report addresses eight popular misconceptions about higher-density development, which are often the basis for opposition to multifamily projects. Project profiles help illustrate the benefits of higher-density housing.

Overcoming Opposition to Multifamily Rental Housing. 2007. By Mark Obrinsky and Debra Stein. Washington, DC: National Multi Housing Council.
This report examines four common arguments against multifamily rental housing, including concerns about area home values, anti-social behavior, the increased burden on public infrastructure, and traffic/parking congestion. The authors present research evidence refuting each of these arguments, then offer tips for generating support for specific projects, including how to run an outreach campaign and constructively engage neighbors.

Zoning as a Barrier to Multifamily Housing Development. 2008. By Gerrit Knaap, Stuart Meck, Terry Moore, Stuart Meck, and Robert Parker. Chicago, IL: American Planning Association.
This report, commissioned by the U.S.Department of Housing and Urban Development documents how communities use restrictive zoning policies to prevent the construction of multifamily housing, and how to use Geographic Information Systems (GIS) data to observe the impact of zoning practices on housing affordability in select metropolitan areas.

Back to top

Factory-built Homes [go to policy page]

Websites

CFED, a national not-for-profit organization, has launched an initiative called I'M HOME - Innovations in Manufactured Homes. I'M HOME supports programs across the country that are helping families who choose manufactured homes receive fair treatment and build durable assets. To be good investments for these families, I'M HOME argues that manufactured homes should be well-built and installed on a proper foundation once they reach their destination. Their financing should be fair and affordable. Homeowners should own, or have longterm control over, the land underneath the homes. And, finally, when it's time to move, the homeowners should be able to sell the homes at a fair value.

The Manufactured Housing Institute is a national trade organization that makes available research reports, state and local policy information and industry statistics about factory-built housing.

The National Modular Housing Council promotes the advancement of sensible legislation and regulation of modular homes, and provides industry and consumer education. The website includes quarterly news updates, industry statistics, and resources for builders, manufacturers and buyers of modular homes.

Articles & Reports

An Examination of Manufactured Housing as a Community- and Asset-Building Strategy. [PDF] 2002. By William Apgar, Allegra Calder and Mark Duda (Joint Center for Housing Studies of Harvard University) and Michael Collins (Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation). Report to the Ford Foundation. Washington, DC: NeighborWorks.
This report provides a comprehensive examination of all aspects of manufactured housing, and includes a lengthy literature review for further information.

"Mobile" Homes No More: Policy Innovations in Manufactured Housing. [PDF] 2005. By David Buchholz. Housing Facts and Findings 7(4). Washington, DC: Fannie Mae Foundation.
This article provides an overview of recent policy changes related to manufactured homes, particularly with regard to financing, land ownership and zoning. A list of web sites and articles provides links to further information.

Back to top

Accessory Dwelling Units [go to policy page]

The Transportation and Land Use Coalition's online guide to Accessory Dwelling Units walks users through an overview of ADUs, a series of case studies and more information about how to implement the tool in a local community. The guide includes links for more information as well as a series of contacts.

Back to top

Mixed-use Housing [go to policy page]

Mixed-Use Development. [DOC] 2005. By Edward A. Tombari. Smart Growth, Smart Choices series. Washington, DC: National Association of Home Builders.
This report explains the components that characterize a mixed-use development, including walkability, connectivity and increased density. The author draws links between mixed-use building and transit-oriented development and the smart growth movement, and provides an overview of recent trends.

Back to top

Single Room Occupancy [go to policy page]

An Affordable Housing Solution for Low Income Single Residents: Single Resident Occupancy (SRO) Housing in Fairfax County, Virginia. [PDF] 2005. Fairfax County SRO Task Force Final Report.
Although focused on Fairfax County, this report provides a useful overview of different types of SROs, obstacles to development and recommendations for building community support. The report features a lengthy appendix with multiple examples of SRO developments in other communities.

Back to top

Parking and Other Innovative Zoning Techniques [go to policy page]

Cutting Costs with Cottage Housing. 2008. Breakthroughs 7(1). Washington, DC: US Department of Housing and Urban Development, Regulatory Barriers Clearinghouse.

This article describes "cottage housing developments," which provide relatively small homes clustered together to preserve open space and promote a sense of community. As noted in the article, cottage housing development codes have been adopted primarily by communities in the Pacific Northwest, although with shifting demographics leading to smaller households, the author suggests that other cities may soon choose to follow suit.

Rethinking Residential Parking: Myths and Facts. [PDF] 2001. San Francisco, CA: Non-Profit Housing Association of Northern California.
This report debunks eight popular misconceptions about residential parking, including: "People are unwilling to live in housing without a parking space" and "Affordable housing in particular needs more parking." Case studies highlight developments in California that have successfully reduced parking.

Back to top

Return to the Zoning Policies main page.