Changing Zoning from Exclusionary to Inclusionary to Fundamentally Redress Century-long Wrongs
BLUF: Bottom Line Up Front
The Role of Zoning in Segregation and Inequity: Outdated and discriminatory zoning policies have perpetuated racial segregation and restricted affordable housing development, disproportionately harming African American communities.
The Case for Inclusionary Zoning: Inclusionary zoning policies mandate or incentivize affordable housing in new developments, fostering mixed-income neighborhoods and providing greater access to high-opportunity areas.
Leveraging Federal Incentives: Federal agencies could tie funding for housing, transportation, infrastructure, and environmental programs—totaling nearly $20 billion annually—to land use reforms that encourage inclusionary zoning and increased housing density.
State Leadership in Zoning Reform: States like Oregon and New Jersey have enacted groundbreaking legislation mandating inclusionary zoning and prioritizing affordable housing in historically exclusionary communities, demonstrating replicable models for other states.
Local Progress in Housing Policy: Cities and counties nationwide are adopting measures to increase affordable housing stock by allowing greater housing density, such as upzoning single-family neighborhoods for duplexes, triplexes, and small apartment buildings.
Anti-Displacement Protections: To ensure new development benefits existing residents, states and localities must implement anti-displacement policies, such as housing trust funds, tenant protections, and community land trusts. These policies prevent gentrification that prices out vulnerable populations.
See Specific Recommendations for federal incentives and state leadership to create more affordable housing, especially for African Americans, other people of color, and households with lower incomes.
I will spend the first few months of 2025 exploring transformative solutions to level the playing field and repair and redress historical wrongs against African Americans.
In January, I’m examining what we must do to create genuinely racially equitable neighborhoods. My proposals in this policy area are intentionally far-reaching, knowing that success in the short and medium term will require a slow three-step forward-two-step-back process.
Providing Far More Affordable Housing-A Comprehensive Shift from Exclusionary to Inclusionary Zoning Nationwide
There are scant few cities and suburban counties across the U.S. that are not wrestling with the profound lack of housing and, therefore, lack of affordable housing in their jurisdictions. The building of new housing in America has fallen short of building single-family homes or apartments by the hundreds of thousands every year for over a decade.
For the first time in at least a half-century, housing became a national front-burner election issue in the 2024 presidential election. Where I live in the metro D.C. area, it was a critical election-year issue in the District of Columbia and every single suburban district in Maryland and Virginia.
As we saw in my last post, the lack of affordable housing impacts African Americans disproportionately. Many factors contribute to the lack of new housing being built, but the most significant contributor is outdated and historically discriminatory local zoning policy.
Thus, in this post, I’ll focus on ways to change zoning policy to allow not only more housing to be built (aka, housing “production”) but, as importantly, where it can be built. Unlike in my last post, I will not propose solutions aimed only at benefiting African Americans. Instead, I recommend proposals that will have the most significant positive benefits to Black residents, locally and nationally, while benefiting Americans across race.
If you’re not a housing policy analyst, you probably don’t know that zoning policy has been used as a tool by cities and counties for a century to segregate Black residents (and other communities of color); for much of that time, these tools were used explicitly. Once Congress passed the Fair Housing Act in 1968, the practices to preserve segregation—and sustain home values primarily in White-majority neighborhoods—have been more subtle but in many places with equivalent success at maintaining racial segregation.
It's critical to know that
“75% of residential land in major cities in America is zoned exclusively for single-family housing … Areas with single-family zoning are significantly more White, home values are greater and income levels are higher. These neighborhoods, in turn, have better-performing schools, significantly higher underlying graduation rates, access to greater upper mobility, and significantly better health outcomes, all of which lead to better life outcomes for children.[1]
These realities—around higher home values and better schools, economic mobility, and health outcomes —are why we must look at building far more housing, especially in neighborhoods that have excluded anything except single-family detached homes.
And why we must fundamentally change zoning so that more households, especially African American households, have access to higher-opportunity neighborhoods and better quality-of-life outcomes.
One key way is inclusionary zoning.
In contrast to exclusionary zoning, inclusionary zoning includes “policies and practices that mandate or provide incentives for the inclusion of affordable housing units in new developments to encourage mixed-income neighborhoods and increase the supply of affordable housing.”[2]
Similarly, upzoning more broadly supports building more townhouses, multiplexes, and multi-family apartments—with other complementary policies—that increase the supply of housing and housing affordability over time.[3]
Although almost all zoning is conducted locally, the federal government can play a critical role because billions of federal funds flow to jurisdictions annually.
My Federal-Level Proposal
In my book, I propose that federal agencies require local jurisdictions and states that receive federal housing, transportation, environment, and infrastructure dollars to eliminate regulations that reduce the availability of affordable housing, particularly where exclusionary zoning is baked into local ordinances.
HUD and the Treasury Department shell out billions of dollars in grants and tax credits for housing every year. Specifically:
· Community Development Block Grants (HUD - $3.4 billion annually)
· HOME Investment Partnership Program (HUD - $1.35 billion annually)
· Low Income Housing Tax Credit (Treasury - $9.5 billion annually)[4]
Each of these programs should require funding to become contingent upon land use reform and more inclusionary zoning.
Why does this proposal focus beyond just funds for federal housing but also funding for transportation, environment, and infrastructure?
Because not all districts, especially wealthier districts, receive federal housing funds, and thus would not be incentivized at all. However, far more districts, including more affluent districts, receive transportation (and other types of federal) funding.
Thus, to receive federal transportation funding, the Department of Transportation (DOT) could require jurisdictions to demonstrate “a higher percentage of residential land zoned for multifamily housing and reasonable density limits”[5] (which allow for construction higher than two or three floors)
This requirement could be applied to Surface Transportation Block Grants ($11.6 billion annually),
Federal departments could make comparable provisions for infrastructure and environmental funding:
Infrastructure for Rebuilding America grants ($906 million annually)
Transportation Infrastructure Financing and Innovation Act grants ($300 million annually)
Better Utilizing Investment to Leverage Development grants ($1 billion)
Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program ($2.4 billion annually)
Brownfields and Land Revitalization Program (tens of millions annually)
Partnership for Sustainable Communities ($571 million annually)[6]
These federal funding programs, combined, total nearly $20 billion annually and would require more equitable zoning and land use locally.
NOTE: The non-profit Up for Growth published an excellent report in 2021, Leveraging Federal Funds to Incentivize Land Use and Zoning Reform, that examines these possibilities more deeply. You can access it HERE.
How possible would this be federally? Well, paler versions can and are getting pursued.
In July 2023, the Biden Administration announced initial funding of a very scaled-back version of what I propose through a series of actions to address land use and zoning barriers that limit housing.[7] The Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Department issues the grants for this new initiative. The grants are incentive-based, so the program doesn’t prevent jurisdictions from persisting with exclusionary zoning but instead hopes to shift to more inclusionary zoning. You can read more about HUD’s Pro Housing: Pathways to Removing Obstacles program HERE.
Then in May 2024, his administration announced additional HUD funds and programs to continue to boost affordable housing. This included:
1.3 billion to build affordable housing through its HOME federal block grant program to help produce affordable owner-occupied and rental housing for low-income households
$214 million to every state to increase affordable housing supply through the Housing Trust Fund to increase and preserve the supply of decent, safe, and sanitary affordable housing.
$3.3 billion through Community Development Block Grants to provide decent housing/suitable living environment and expand economic opportunities for low-and moderate-income people.[8]
The transition to a Trump Administration may result in overturning this policy, yet even Republicans acknowledge significant change will be required to build far more housing for the millions of Americans of every income level (especially low to moderate income) who need it.
Local Rezoning Efforts Can Make a Significant Difference
That’s why I’m heartened by the action happening on the ground in recent years.
Near me, the City of Alexandria, VA (pop. 154,000), overhauled its zoning ordinances in late 2023 to expand affordable housing, made changes to single-family zoning, and reduced parking requirements, among other modifications to update zoning laws that dated back to legal residential segregation. City leaders hope it will create far more affordable housing for lower-income and working-class residents and expand the overall housing pool.[9]
Adjacent to Alexandria, Arlington County recently altered its zoning code to allow for apartment buildings, townhomes, and duplexes in traditionally single-family neighborhoods.
One hundred miles to the southeast, Charlottesville, Virginia, approved a new zoning ordinance that allows for greater residential density in a city dominated by single-family, detached dwellings.[10]
Montgomery County, Maryland's largest county with more than one million residents, is considering an Attainable Housing Strategies plan in early 2025 to allow duplexes, triplexes, and small apartment buildings in many suburban neighborhoods that have only allowed single-family, detached housing. See more HERE for details of the plan.
Hundreds of districts (cities and counties) in dozens of states are taking action to implement inclusionary zoning.
States Step in to Take Substantive Action
Some states have not waited for cities and counties to lead on upzoning and inclusionary zoning.
In 2019, the Oregon Legislature passed a bipartisan bill to provide state residents with more housing choices. Now, cities with more than 10,000 residents must allow duplexes; cities with more than 25,000 must allow duplexes, triplexes, fourplexes, and townhomes.[11]
In Spring 2024, New Jersey, which has a deficit of more than 200,000 affordable homes, enacted what some analysts have called the strongest framework in the country. It obligates communities to change their zoning ordinances and allow affordable housing to be built, especially in communities that have historically excluded them. The legislation built upon the state’s Supreme Court Mount Laurel Doctrine from 1975, which the court reinforced in 2015 to ensure jurisdictions finally and more vigorously implement its decision for each community to provide its fair share of affordable housing.[12]
As a result, since 2015, “New Jersey has nearly doubled the rate of affordable housing production. The state is producing more new multifamily housing than ever before — over 70,000 affordable homes since 2015, including 20,000 with long-term affordability guarantees — and neighborhoods where new homes have been built have become more integrated. Much of this new housing is close to public transportation and redevelops older office parks or shopping centers that are no longer viable.[13]
This is remarkable progress in a decade, yet the state still has an enormous deficit in affordable homes. The successes are not solely the result of court or legislative action. In New Jersey, housing activists across the state organized and built coalitions to take many types of legal and policy action, as many jurisdictions have been resistant (and often opposed) to changing how business has always been done.
As a result, the state method to calculate obligations prioritized “creating affordable homes in historically exclusionary communities, along transportation corridors, and near employment opportunities,” primarily to ensure that towns and cities that had sustained exclusionary policies were obligated to build more homes.[14]
New Jersey has also appointed advocacy institutions to help ensure enforcement and that jurisdictions comply with their legal obligations. From the State Supreme Court decision in the 1970s until recent years, no such enforcement mechanism existed; thus, municipalities and entrenched local residential opposition have won out. Only with vigorous enforcement in place has so much new affordable housing been built in the state in the past decade.
The Trump Administration is highly unlikely to do anything to encourage inclusionary zoning at the federal level—remember his comments in the 2020 presidential campaign where he promised that suburbanites would “no longer be bothered or financially hurt by having low-income housing built in your neighborhood.”[15]
Thus, at the STATE-level I recommend that
far more states follow the lead of Oregon and New Jersey to mandate inclusionary zoning, especially in communities that have historically excluded Blacks (and other people of color) and affordable housing.Over the next three to four years, I believe a dozen and a half Blue-leaning states could conceivably join these two states in passing comparable years.
A final note on zoning:
States and localities must pair inclusionary zoning changes with anti-displacement policies that protect residents from being priced out once the housing construction in a neighborhood is complete.Anti-displacement policies might include housing trust funds, legal counsel to tenants in eviction proceedings, just-cause eviction protections, tenant right of first refusal laws (to allow tenants groups to purchase an apartment building up for sale), local government-backed financing of affordable housing preservation funds, and community land trusts.[16]
All the above zoning-change examples, especially if paired with intentional and thoughtful tools for anti-displacement, would have a disproportionately positive impact on African Americans (and other historically marginalized populations) in those locations.
Footnotes
[1] Dismantling Exclusionary Zoning: New Jersey’s Blueprint for Overcoming Segregation,” Fair Share Housing, April 2023, p.3, https://www.fairsharehousing.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/Dismantling-Exclusionary-Zoning_New-Jerseys-Blueprint-for-Overcoming-Segregation.pdf.
[2] “What is inclusionary zoning?” Planetizen, https://www.planetizen.com/definition/inclusionary-zoning.
[3] Todd Litman, “Upzoning Affordability Impacts: The Latest Research,” Planetizen, December 26, 2023, https://www.planetizen.com/news/2023/12/126834-upzoning-affordability-impacts-latest-research.
[4] Melissa Winkler, “Leveraging Federal Funds to Incentivize Land Use and Zoning Reform,” Up for Growth, 2021, p. 3, https://upforgrowth.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/policy-brief-january-2021.pdf.
[5] “Unaffordable Housing: Why Housing is so Expensive and What We Can Do About It?” The New Center, August 2020, p. 18, https://newcenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/Unaffordable-Housing.pdf.
[6] Ibid.
[7] Biden-Harris Administration Announces Actions to Lower Housing Costs and Boost Supply,” The White House, July 27, 2023, https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2023/07/27/biden-harris-administration-announces-actions-to-lower-housing-costs-and-boost-supply/.
[8] “FACT SHEET: Vice President Harris Announces $5.5 Billion to Boost Affordable Housing, Invest in Economic Growth, Build Wealth, and Address Homelessness in Comnmunities Throughout America,” The White House, May 7, 2024, https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2024/05/07/fact-sheet-vice-president-harris-announces-5-5-billion-to-boost-affordable-housing-invest-in-economic-growth-build-wealth-and-address-homelessness-in-communities-throughout-america/.
[9] James Cullum, “Alexandria’s polarizing Zoning for Housing plan unanimously endorsed by Planning Commission, ALXnow, November 2, 2023, https://www.alxnow.com/2023/11/02/alexandrias-polarizing-zoning-for-housing-plan-unanimously-endorsed-by-planning-commission/.
[10] Erin O’Hare, “City Council approved a new zoning ordinance that re-envisions Charlottesville as a denser and more economically diverse city,” Charlottesville Tomorrow¸ December 19, 2023, https://www.cvilletomorrow.org/city-council-approved-a-new-zoning-ordinance-that-re-envisions-charlottesville-as-a-denser-and-more-economically-diverse-city/.
[11] From Urban Institute webinar, “Zoning Reforms that Improve Access to Housing for All,” February 05, 2024.
[12] Adam Gordon, “New Jersey Just Took Bold Action on Exclusionary Zoning. Will Other States Follow Its Model?” Next City, May 9, 2024, https://nextcity.org/urbanist-news/new-jersey-just-took-bold-action-on-exclusionary-zoning-model.
[13] Ibid.
[14] “Dismantling Exclusionary Zoning,” (New Jersey), p. 11.
[15] Karni, et al, “Trump Plays on Racist Fears of Terrorized Suburbs to Court White Voters,” The New York Times, July 29, 2020, https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/29/us/politics/trump-suburbs-housing-white-voters.html.
[16] Jorge Gonzalez-Hermoso, Mark Treskon, and Noah McDaniel, “How to Embed Racial Equity into Zoning Code Reform, Urban Institute, March 4, 2024, https://www.urban.org/urban-wire/how-embed-racial-equity-zoning-code-reform.