Dive Brief:
- New York and Philadelphia both saw increases in housing unit development activity in areas upzoned to allow for greater density compared with areas that are not, an April 15 Urban Institute study found.
- New York’s neighborhood-level upzoning resulted in 4,000 additional housing units within four years compared with its non-upzoned areas, while Philadelphia’s upzoned areas saw an estimated 4,000 more housing unit permits per year.
- Not all upzoned areas saw more housing, however. “While comprehensive upzoning may be necessary to accommodate regional housing needs, it is insufficient to ensure that development — including its benefits and burdens — is distributed everywhere across a city,” the study states.
Dive Insight:
The 2010s produced the lowest number of single-family housing units in the last 60 years, according to the National Association of Home Builders.
To combat a resulting housing shortage, many cities are turning to zoning reforms to encourage more density.
Philadelphia’s citywide zoning changes went into effect in 2012, but it wasn’t until 2018 that its upzoned areas began to see significant upticks in housing unit permitting. The looming expiration of a 10-year tax abatement program for new construction in the city also contributed to the increase, according to the report.
New York’s results came sooner. Within four years of neighborhood-specific upzoning efforts, housing development in upzoned areas outpaced parcels without the reform. The studied reforms in New York were also “routinely coupled” with other policy and investment tools, such as the city’s Mandatory Inclusionary Housing program, Urban Institute said.
Upzoned areas that did not see upticks in housing supply or permitting in both cities likely had preexisting, weaker housing markets, according to Urban Institute.
“Areas that did attract substantial development were likely already experiencing investment,” the study states. “As scholars have argued, zoning reform must be coupled with complementary policies that directly address affordability and displacement.”
