Measuring Informal Housing Production in California Cities

Problem, research strategy, and ­findings: Planning scholars and practitioners once assumed informal housing was largely absent in the developed world; today they increasingly acknowledge its role in the United States. Recent evidence suggests that informal housing, or non-permitted construction, is a significant phenomenon inside incorporated cities, despite widespread regulations and code enforcement. Informal housing is a de facto source of otherwise scarce affordable housing in many locations, but also compromises health and safety and strains municipal infrastructure and fiscal health. Planners lack a means of measuring informal construction at the scale of individual cities. We propose such a method, and apply it to incorporated cities in California. Data limitations prevent us from precisely estimating the magnitude of non-permitted construction, but our findings suggest that informal channels are an important source of housing production, especially in the places where permitted construction is constrained.

Takeaway for practice: We urge planners to engage with informal housing issues, given the considerable importance of this hidden yet vital portion of the housing market as a means of providing living spaces amid tight housing market conditions. Our method for calculating the rate of informal housing addition is a useful tool for planners to gather basic facts about the informal housing market in their communities, a prerequisite for policy interventions.     

When Tourists Move In: How Should Urban Planners Respond to Airbnb?

Problem, research strategy, and findings: The online accommodation platform Airbnb has expanded globally, raising substantial planning and regulatory concerns. We ask whether Airbnb rentals generate significant neighborhood impacts like noise, congestion, and competition for parking; reduce the permanent rental housing supply and increase rental prices; or provide income opportunities that help “hosts” afford their own housing. We focus on Sydney, the largest region in Australia with 4.4 million people in 28 individual municipalities, which has experienced both rapidly rising housing costs and exponential growth in Airbnb listings since 2011. Airbnb’s growth has raised concerns serious enough to result in a formal Parliamentary Inquiry by the state of New South Wales. We analyze stakeholder submissions to this inquiry and review local planning regulations, Airbnb listings data, and housing market and census statistics. We find that online homesharing platforms for visitor accommodations blur traditional boundaries between residential and tourist areas so Airbnb listings may fall outside of existing land use regulations or evade detection until neighbors complain. Our findings are constrained by the difficulties of monitoring online operations and the rapid changes in the industry.

Takeaway for practice: Planners and policymakers in cities with increasing numbers of Airbnb rentals need to review how well local planning controls manage the neighborhood nuisances, traffic, and parking problems that may be associated with them while acting to protect the permanent rental housing supply. Local planners need to ensure that zoning and residential development controls distinguish between different forms of short-term Airbnb accommodation listings and their potential impacts on neighborhoods and housing markets.     

The Link Between Local Comprehensive Plans and Housing Affordability: A Comparative Study of the Atlanta and Detroit Metropolitan Areas

Problem, research strategy, and findings: I question whether the strength of affordable housing policies in local comprehensive plans is associated with better affordable housing outcomes, which I measure as a decrease in the share of low-income households who spend more than 30% of their income for housing, otherwise known as cost-burdened households. I first assess the strength of affordable housing policies in 58 local comprehensive plans, counting the number of—and degree of coercion in—those affordable housing policies. I then analyze the relationship between the strength of affordable housing policies and changes in the share of low-income households with cost burden. I find that the strength of affordable housing policies is higher in the Atlanta (GA) metropolitan area than in the Detroit (MI) metropolitan area. I also find that the strength of affordable housing policies is positively associated with a decrease in the share of low-income households paying more than 30% of their income for housing in the Atlanta metropolitan area. I do not find a comparable relationship between plan strength and housing outcomes in the Detroit metropolitan area. I also find that the state role matters: Georgia provides more support and guidance for local comprehensive planning, and for affordable housing policies in those plans, than does Michigan.

Takeaway for practice: Planners should continually promote local comprehensive plans that include more and stronger affordable housing policies and advocate for greater state support for comprehensive planning and affordable housing policies because these appear to lead to a greater likelihood of implementing stronger plans.     

Planning for Mixed Use: Affordable for Whom?

Problem, research strategy, and findings: Mixed-use zoning is widely advocated to increase density; promote active transportation; encourage economic development; and create lively, diverse neighborhoods. We know little, however, about whether mixed-use developments affect housing affordability. We question the impact of mixed-use zoning on housing affordability in Toronto (Canada) between 1991 and 2006 in the face of waning government support for affordable housing and increasing income inequality due to the occupational restructuring accompanying a shift to a knowledge-based economy. We fi nd that housing in mixed-use zones remained less affordable than housing in the rest of the city and in the metropolitan region. High-income service occupations experienced improved affordability while lower wage service, trade, and manufacturing occupations experienced stagnant or worsening affordability. Housing in mixed-use zones is increasingly affordable only to workers already able to pay higher housing costs. Our findings are limited to Canada's largest city but have lessons for large North American cities with similar urban economies and housing markets.

Takeaway for practice: Mixed-use developments may reduce housing affordability in core areas and inadvertently reinforce the sociospatial inequality resulting from occupational polarization unless supported by appropriate affordable housing policies. Planners should consider a range of policy measures to offset the unintentional outcomes of mixed-use developments and ensure affordability within mixed-use zones: inclusionary zoning, density bonuses linked to affordable housing, affordable housing trusts, and other relevant methods.     

Lessons for LEED® for Neighborhood Development,Social Equity,and Affordable Housing

Problem, research strategy, and findings: Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design® for Neighborhood Development (LEED®ND) is a rating system designed to encourage sustainable development. I explore why and how most LEED®ND projects ultimately fail to meet the equity goals inherent in sustainability. I survey 114 LEED®ND accredited professionals (APs) and conduct 20 interviews with LEED®ND APs to illuminate the role of the rating system in developer decisions to include affordable housing in their projects. I also explore why nonprofit developers see value in seeking LEED®ND certification for their projects. Although a limited sample, it provides insights into how the certification process affects developer decisions. I find that the LEED®ND rating system does a poor job of encouraging developers to provide affordable housing: Only 40% of LEED®ND-certified projects include affordable housing. LEED®ND APs do not feel that the system offers sufficient incentives to overcome the risks and costs of providing affordable housing. Nonprofit developers might pursue LEED®ND to create savings for residents, but may be deterred by the cost of certification. Most respondents feel that the affordable housing credit should be increased and improved to provide adequate incentives to developers.

Takeaway for practice: Planners cannot count on LEED®ND certification to ensure the provision of affordable and mixed housing in sustainable neighborhoods. The LEED®ND system could be improved by weighting the affordable housing credit more heavily; developers could also be incentivized to build a greater mix of housing. The certification costs could be lowered or subsidized for projects with affordable housing and assessed on a per unit basis. Additional credits could be given to projects that significantly reduce utility costs for low-income residents.     

Using Photography to Assess Housing Damage and Rebuilding Progress for Disaster Recovery Planning

Problem, research strategy, and findings: U.S. communities rarely plan for recovery after a disaster, but planners have the skills to help communities redevelop, particularly in rebuilding housing, a key to community recovery. Planners, however, need appropriate and timely data on initial damage and rebuilding over time to apply for available funding, determine needs for temporary housing, address equity issues, develop appropriate policy interventions, track progress, and communicate transparently with all stakeholders. There is no accepted cost-effective and systematic method of providing those data. We developed a scalable method in which we photograph and assess the extent of home damage and rebuilding by reorienting existing damage assessment methods to provide data that can be linked to GIS and other local data to meet planning needs. We test the utility of our approach in West (TX), the site of a catastrophic fertilizer facility explosion in 2013. We compare our damage assessments to county property tax reappraisals after the disaster, finding that our approach is more accurate, generally identifying less damage and greater rebuilding than the county assumed. We conclude that our method improves on windshield surveys and other suggested methods of collecting damage and rebuilding data; it can provide efficient assessments of damage and rebuilding in technological disasters.

Takeaway for practice: We created a simple and cost-effective method of assessing initial damage to homes after a disaster and of measuring the extent of rebuilding. This method provides photos and easy-to-understand data that planners can use to meet multiple reporting requirements, to reassess redevelopment strategies, and to report progress to stakeholders.     

Special Ethical Considerations for Planners in Private Practice

Problem, research strategy, and ­findings: Planners must constantly consider the ethics of their professional behavior, yet few studies have specifically investigated the ethical landscape for those planners working in private practice, assuming that all members of the profession are subject to similar ethical considerations. We investigate the particular ethical considerations faced by planners in private practice by interviewing owners of 10 planning consulting firms. Our sample size is very small and limited to three states, which limits the generalizability of the study. We find that private practice planners routinely experience ethical conflicts related to disclosure of information, balancing uneven benefits among stakeholders, interests of the client, and ethics of firm competition. Alhough planners mostly navigate everyday ethical concerns with confidence, they face ethical challenges in managing client relationships when values conflict, and in competing with other firms.

Takeaway for practice: We find that challenging ethical situations arise for private sector planners on a routine basis. The planners we interview feel that they are able to identify ethical pitfalls and choose the correct course of action, but more research is needed to understand the scope and nature of private practice ethical challenges, and to determine whether more education or enforcement would be effective solutions to between-firm conflicts.     

City Managers Have Ethics Too? Comparing Planning and City Management Codes of Ethics

Problem, research strategy, and ­findings: Planners and city and county managers regularly work together but often face ethical conundrums. We compare the codes of ethics from their two U.S. professional organizations—the American Institute of Certified Planners (AICP) and the International City/County Management Association (ICMA)—and then apply the AICP Code of Ethics to five published ICMA ethics scenarios to determine how the two professions might respond differently in each. We find common professional values in the codes: equality, creativity, and diligence. The AICP Code, however, emphasizes direct democracy and engaging citizens, while the ICMA Code emphasizes representative democracy and engaging elected officials. Code values and actual behaviors are not always related, but we believe our work shows the source of ethical challenges and power struggles between managers and planners.

Takeaway for practice: Planners can learn from ICMA’s Code to focus on elected officials. Managers can learn from AICP’s Code to focus on citizens. Planners and managers can overcome their professional biases and blind spots by understanding the ethical codes under which the other profession operates. Planners work from the outside in, managers from the inside out; working together, they can improve the communities they serve.     

09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0: Four Reasons Why AICP Needs an Open Data Ethic

Problem, research strategy, and ­findings: Computing and digital technologies have changed how data are created, analyzed, and communicated. The American Institute of Certified Planners (AICP) Code of Ethics has no guidelines for planners working with emerging urban informatics. Here we make a theoretical argument based on the premise of epistemic justice: The idea that how planners collect, manage, disseminate, and use data all bear on justice in democratic decision making about cities.

Four reasons exist for planners to prioritize open data in our formal code of ethics. First, emerging Big Data from urban informatics have a steep learning curve that potentially exacerbates the gaps in power and political voice between experts and nonexperts. Second, algorithms have come to govern an increasing portion of human life and cities, and planners should ideally be enabling residents in their ability to scrutinize, understand, and challenge managerial algorithms that have become prevalent in e-government. Third, urban informatics potentially alter the economic and community development of cities and the urban experience. Fourth and finally, ubiquitous data sensing, new consumer tracking capabilities, obscure and readily skipped terms of use agreements, and rapidly changing technologies make cities into potentially coercive data collection environments.

Takeaway for practice: Substantial barriers exist to open data ethics in an information economy where exclusive access to data can drive profits. Emerging data systems can consolidate power in the hands of experts and large private firms to the exclusion of citizens and small, independent firms. Open data and code vitiates those problems to a limited degree, and AICP could benefit practitioners by adopting an open data ethic.     

Metropolitan Transportation Planning: Lessons From the Past,Institutions for the Future

Problem, research strategy, and findings: There are more than 400 U.S. metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) overseeing multiple transportation projects totaling billions of dollars, yet these crucial organizations and their history and current role are generally unknown or confusing to many planning practitioners and scholars. MPOs face major challenges in developing meaningful long-range regional transportation plans, challenges rooted in their history that planners should understand as they grapple with metropolitan planning efforts. MPOs may approve projects and their funding, but disparate agencies and often competitive local governments control budgets and actually build projects. MPOs, moreover, do not fully represent all regional interests and have no control over the local land use decisions that would support less autocentric communities and human-powered modes. I provide a metareview of the history of regional transportation planning and the MPOs responsible for it, describing U.S. metropolitan transportation planning from the early 20th century. Federal legislation in the 1960s first suggested a regional forum for conversations about metropolitan transportation. Federal legislation in subsequent decades made incremental if incomplete progress toward creating a meaningful regional forum, adapting institutions and practices to increase stakeholder involvement as well as the scope of transport planning, yet MPOs have multiple limitations that planners can address.

Takeaway for practice: History suggests that MPOs can be a force for regional change. Planners and policymakers could anchor future reforms to MPOs’ existing legal and administrative frameworks. Planners should revisit the membership and voting structures of MPO boards to ensure better stakeholder representation and permit some MPOs to generate and direct transportation funds at the local level.     

Achieving Regional Housing Planning Objectives: Directing Affordable Housing to Jobs-Rich Neighborhoods in the San Francisco Bay Area

Problem, research strategy, and findings: Low-income households face affordability issues and are often forced to live in areas with limited job access and inadequate transportation. Local communities exacerbate these problems through exclusionary zoning. We study the impact of the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) change in allocation formula under California’s affordable housing mandate. The old policy followed a fair share strategy, whereas the new policy requires local jurisdictions to locate mandated affordable housing units in jobs-rich areas. We compare affordable housing produced in the region before and after ABAG adopted the jobs-housing policy; we also compare the new patterns to the location of market-rate housing and to the experiences of San Diego (CA) and Los Angeles (CA), both of which retain fair share allocation. We do not control for variables that may have affected affordable housing location. ABAG’s policy shift is associated with a 104% improvement in the balance of housing and jobs at the local level; affordable housing units are more likely than market-rate housing to locate in jobs-rich areas, which may indicate that localities prioritize affordable housing. We also find that more affordable housing locates in such areas in the San Francisco Bay Area (CA) than in San Diego or Los Angeles.

Takeaway for practice: A voluntary regional government in a state with mandatory affordable housing requirements can affect the production and distribution of affordable housing. A total of 25 U.S. states require localities to include affordable housing elements in their comprehensive plans; we suggest that regional and local planners use these opportunities to meet multiple policy goals by directing affordable housing to jobs-rich neighborhoods.     

Planning for Happy Neighborhoods

Problem, research strategy, and findings: There is increasing interest in planning for healthy communities, but little is known about how planners can affect mental health and wellbeing in neighborhoods, although much is known about how planners can affect physical health through neighborhood design. In this review essay, we draw lessons from a cross-disciplinary set of studies to reveal how the neighborhood built environment may affect one aspect of residents' wellbeing: happiness. Providing residents access to open, natural, and green space may directly increase their happiness. Incorporating design features that allow for social interaction and safety also may promote residents' happiness.

Takeaway for practice: Planners have the capacity to contribute to greater opportunities for happiness in neighborhoods. Strategies include integrating happiness-related indicators into health impact assessments and employing a new, participatory neighborhood planning process, the Sustainability Through Happiness Framework.     

Do Strict Land Use Regulations Make Metropolitan Areas More Segregated by Income?

Problem, research strategy, and findings: Income segregation has risen in each of the last four decades in U.S. metropolitan areas, which can have lifelong impacts on the health, economic productivity, and behaviors of residents. Although it is widely assumed that local land use regulations—such as minimum lot sizes and growth controls—exclude low-income households from wealthier neighborhoods, the empirical research is surprisingly limited. We examine the relationship between land use regulation and segregation by income using new measures for the 95 biggest cities in the United States. We find that density restrictions are associated with the segregation of the wealthy and middle income, but not the poor. We also find that more local pressure to regulate land use is linked to higher rates of income segregation, but that more state control is connected to lower-income segregation.

Takeaway for practice: Density restrictions do drive urban income segregation of the rich, not the poor, but should be addressed because rich enclaves create significant metropolitan problems. Planners at the local level need assistance from regional and state efforts to ameliorate income segregation. Inclusionary housing requirements have a greater potential to reduce income segregation than bringing higher-income households into lower-income parts of the city. Finally, comprehensive and consistent data on the impacts of local land use regulations should be collected to inform future research and planning practice.     

Crowdsourcing Bike Share Station Locations

Problem, research strategy, and findings: Planners increasingly involve stakeholders in co-producing vital planning information by crowdsourcing data using online map-based commenting platforms. Few studies, however, investigate the role and impact of such online platforms on planning outcomes. We evaluate the impact of participant input via a public participation geographic information system (PPGIS), a platform to suggest the placement of new bike share stations in New York City (NY) and Chicago (IL). We conducted 2 analyses to evaluate how close planners built new bike share stations to those suggested on PPGIS platforms. According to our proximity analysis, only a small percentage of built stations were within 100 feet (30?m) of suggested stations, but our geospatial analysis showed a substantial clustering of suggested and built stations in both cities that was not likely due to random distribution. We found that the PPGIS platforms have great promise for creating genuine co-production of planning knowledge and insights and that system planners did take account of the suggestions offered online. We did not, however, interview planners in either system, and both cities may be atypical, as is bike share planning; moreover, multiple factors influence where bike stations can be located, so not all suggested stations could be built.

Takeaway for practice: Planners can use PPGIS and similar platforms to help stakeholders learn by doing and to increase their own local knowledge to improve planning outcomes. Planners should work to develop better online participatory systems and to allow stakeholders to provide more and better data, continuing to evaluate PPGIS efforts to improve the transparency and legitimacy of online public involvement processes.     

Do Practicing Planners Value Plan Quality? Insights From a Survey of Planning Professionals in Ontario,Canada

Problem, research strategy, and findings: Researchers have developed conceptualconsensus on core plan characteristics that contribute to plan quality, but rarely assess how practitioners view plan quality. I explore how Canadian planners view the characteristics thought to create quality plans. I asked planners in 290 municipalities across southern Ontario (Canada) their view of the importance of plan quality and asked that they identify additional plan quality characteristics, rate the infl uence of various plan characteristics, and explain why they omitted certain characteristics in their offi cial plans. I find that practitioners valued quality plans because they facilitate implementation and help inspire the community while adding credibility and legitimacy to planning processes and the planning profession. Planners did not value all plan elements equally; they felt that clear and enforceable polices were crucial, but that it was less important to report participation in plan preparation or discuss monitoring or interorganizational cooperation in the offi cial plan. Planners did not always include important plan quality elements in their offi cial plans because they lacked suffi cient resources to prepare comprehensive plans and rarely signifi – cantly updated older plans. These case study findings may not be generalizable to other jurisdictions in Canada or internationally, but still offer useful insights.

Takeaway for practice: Scholars should ensure that planning practitioners have a key role in shaping understanding of plan quality. Academics and practitioners should work together to create refl ective practitioners who use plan quality characteristics to guide them as they create or update plans. The profession needs to better train current and future planners on how to prepare and evaluate quality plans through improvements in planning curricula and professional development courses offered by the American Planning Association and the Canadian Institute of Planners.     

The Effects of Revitalization on Public Housing Residents: A Case Study of the Atlanta Housing Authority

This research uses administrative data to examine the long-term socioeconomic status of households that relocated from public housing projects in Atlanta as a result of mixed-income revitalization. The research spans 7 years, covering the period before relocation and demolition had begun and ending after mixed-income redevelopment was completed. Residents who lived in three public housing projects that were revitalized are compared to a control group of residents who lived in three projects that were not revitalized, showing that mixed-income revitalization greatly accelerated the residential mobility of public housing residents and that households displaced by revitalization did not experience a statistically significant loss of housing assistance. Households that relocated by using vouchers or by moving to mixed-income revitalized communities experienced significant improvements in their socioeconomic status, and they moved to higher quality neighborhoods. Additionally, their long-run socioeconomic status was similar to the status of households who moved from housing projects voluntarily, i.e., not in response to a planned demolition. This is one of few empirical studies of the effects of HOPE VI revitalization on public housing residents, and its conclusions argue against the elimination of funding for HOPE VI as called for in the president's budget for 2006.     

Beyond HOPE VI: Demolition/Disposition and the uncertain future of public housing in the U.S.

Public housing redevelopment in the United States is virtually synonymous with the HOPE VI program, through which the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development has transformed over 250 housing projects into mixed-income communities. However, the overall the extent of public housing redevelopment has far exceeded the original mandate of HOPE VI due to the expansion of Demolition/Disposition activities facilitated by the program. The permissiveness of such activities has resulted in the replacement of housing projects with luxury condominiums, shopping and convention centers, and other land uses unrelated to affordable housing. In the process, over 210,000 housing units guaranteed to be affordable to low-income households have been removed from the country??s public housing inventory. This article investigates the foundations, the overall scope, and the characteristics of Demolition/Disposition activities beyond the purview of HOPE VI, and discusses their implications for the uncertain future of public housing in the U.S.     

Racial and Class Bias in Zoning: Rezonings Involving Heavy Commercial and Industrial Land Use in Durham (NC), 1945–2014

Problem, research strategy, and findings: In this study I investigate whether zoning has traditionally protected communities of color from the dangers of heavy commercial and industrial use to the extent that it has protected White communities. I evaluate whether upzonings—changes from less intensive uses to more intensive heavy commercial and industrial uses—disproportionately occurred in African-American and low-income neighborhoods in Durham (NC) from 1945 to 2014, and I evaluate the comparative impact of downzonings. I use the contemporary demographics of the census tracts where these rezonings occurred and qualitative evidence from public hearings, plans, and other relevant primary materials. I find that before 1985, the pattern of rezonings in Durham had negative implications for African-American areas in particular. Environmental justice efforts in the 1980s, followed by gentrification, caused the city’s planners and local elected officials to change course.

Takeaway for practice: Planners have an ethical obligation to promote equity, and their ability to do so depends on understanding sources of social injustice. In Durham, race historically played a role in upzonings and downzonings involving heavy commercial and industrial uses. The city also demonstrates that planners and local elected officials can successfully intervene to end disparities in zoning practice across communities of different racial characteristics. Assessing past zoning practices in other cities may reveal similar records of bias and help planners to present cases for corrective action.     

Streamlining the Development Approval Process in a Post–Level of Service Los Angeles

Problem, research strategy, and findings: Local governments across the United States have for decades relied on the autocentric level of service (LOS) metric to analyze and impose exactions for the transportation impacts of land use developments. In California, LOS has dominated transportation impact analysis under the state’s project-level environmental review law. In that role, LOS has exacerbated the state’s notoriously tortuous development approval processes, particularly in urban areas. But LOS is on its way out. The state recently replaced LOS with vehicle miles traveled (VMT) as the primary measure—and basis for mitigation—of transportation impacts under the California Environmental Quality Act. Local governments must make the switch by July 1, 2020. We use a historical counterfactual approach to assess how replacing LOS with VMT could have affected the approval process for 153 land development projects over 16?years in the city of Los Angeles. We find that most projects could have benefited from at least some environmental review streamlining under the VMT-based framework recommended by the state, including more than 75% of residential-containing projects.

Takeaway for practice: Our results suggest that swapping LOS for VMT could reduce the environmental review burden for development in low-VMT urban areas and provide at least some of the approval process streamlining necessary to increase housing production in California. Similar impacts from an LOS-to-VMT switch could also potentially accrue outside of California under the right conditions, but more research is needed.     

Navigating Statistical Uncertainty: How Urban and Regional Planners Understand and Work With American Community Survey (ACS) Data for Guiding Policy

Problem, research strategy, and findings: The American Community Survey (ACS) is a crucial source of socio­demographic data for planners. Since ACS data are estimates rather than actual counts, they contain a degree of statistical uncertainty—referred to as margin of error (MOE)—that planners must navigate when using these data. The statistical uncertainty is magnified when one is working with data for small areas or subgroups of the population or cross-tabulating demographic characteristics. We interviewed (n = 7) and surveyed (n = 200) planners and find that many do not understand the statistical uncertainty in ACS data, find it difficult to communicate statistical uncertainty to stakeholders, and avoid reporting MOEs altogether. These practices may conflict with planners’ ethical obligations under the AICP Code of Ethics to disclose information in a clear and direct way.

Takeaway for practice: We argue that the planning academy should change its curriculum requirements and that the profession should improve professional development training to ensure planners understand data uncertainty and convey it to users. We suggest planners follow 5 guidelines when using ACS data: Report MOEs, indicate when they are not reporting MOEs, provide context for the level of statistical reliability, consider alternatives for reducing statistical uncertainty, and always conduct statistical tests when comparing ACS estimates.