[Fwd: Occasional Newsletter - Regulatory Barrier Awards]

[Guest guest]

--- Occasional Newsletter - Regulatory Barrier Awards

Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 16:34:55 -0700

From: Laurin <jeannemacl@...>

The following article is being sent to you as a client service.

Congratulations to the City of Oxnard and the Town of Corte Madera!

Lawrence

760-770-4212

If you do not wish to receive the Occasional Newsletter, please respond

to this email with the word " Unsubscribe " in the subject line.

Communities Receive Awards for Reducing Regulatory Barriers

On June 29, 2005, HUD Secretary Alphonso announced 14 winners

<http://www.huduser.org/rbc/newsletter/vol4iss3more.html#a> of the first

annual L. Woodson, Jr. Award. Named in honor of the former

Department Chief of Staff, HUD is making this award to recognize

communities that have taken on a leadership role in the effort to

increase access to affordable housing for American families through

regulatory reform. Each of the Woodson Award recipients has demonstrated

creativity and institutional foresight in arriving at reforms that are

bringing about an increased supply of affordable housing in their

respective jurisdictions. Strategies employed by the winning localities

most often involve multiple reforms that are part of a larger strategy

of regulatory barrier removal.

According to Secretary , " It's important to recognize and reward

communities that assume a leadership role in encouraging the production

of affordable housing. " He went on to say that, " Across this great

nation, local communities are removing barriers to affordable housing

and opening more doors to homeownership for hard working families. "

These awards are being granted through the America's Affordable

Communities Initiative (AACI), which was launched by HUD in June 2003.

Many of the winning reform strategies and cost containment practices can

be found right here on HUD's Regulatory Barriers Clearinghouse

(www.regbarriers.org <http://www.regbarriers.org/>).

Reform Gets Affordable Housing on the Ground

As a result of reducing unnecessary and inhibitive regulations, the

L. Woodson, Jr. Award communities have all seen dramatic

increases in affordable housing construction. Within the 14 winning

communities, nearly 14,000 affordably priced units have been completed

since the inception of their respective regulatory reform programs. Many

communities increased their development of affordable housing by as much

as 40 percent. Since its program's inception in 2001, Austin, Texas has

completed almost 4,000 affordably priced single- and multi-family units.

Through its regulatory reforms, Carolina, Puerto Rico increased its

affordable housing production from 400 units between 1992 and 2000 to

1,000 units between 2001 and 2004. In Santa Fe, New Mexico, nearly 16

percent of all new homes built in the last decade were affordable, while

in Grand Forks, North Dakota, 57 percent of the new developments since

2002 have met affordable housing target prices. Many of the new

affordable developments were built by the private sector with only local

regulatory and related incentives.

Diversity of Winners

The winners of this year's L. Woodson, Jr. Award are:

* Austin, Texas

* Carolina, Puerto Rico

* Chicago, Illinois

* Cincinnati, Ohio

* Town of Corte Madera, California

* Fitzgerald, Georgia

* Fort , Colorado

*

Grand Forks, North Dakota

*

King County, Washington

*

Orlando, Florida

*

Oxnard, California

*

San , Texas

*

Santa Fe, New Mexico

*

White Plains, New York

Representing eleven states and one U.S. territory, the 14 winners

reflect a broad spectrum of America's communities. The winning

communities vary in size from just 9,000 people to more than 3 million

people. Local median incomes vary from roughly $26,000 to $100,000 a

year, and median house values differ from approximately $52,000 to close

to one million dollars. Ranging from densely populated urban and

metropolitan areas to small towns in wealthy suburban counties to small

cities in rural areas, the communities honored by these awards reflect a

true cross-section of the American demographic.

Each community initiated a variety of regulatory reforms to address

different issues, but the award recipients all shared one common

problem: a lack of affordable housing for their growing populations.

Many communities, such as Austin, San , Chicago, Orlando, and

Oxnard (a fast-growing county outside of Los Angeles) have faced a sharp

increase in population, and were struggling to accommodate the

increasing demand for housing. Others, such as Fitzgerald, GA and

Cincinnati, OH were faced with decaying neighborhoods and older housing

stock that needed significant investment in order to be repaired. The

solutions implemented by these communities addressed their need to

consolidate the permitting process into a " one stop " development center

and revise outdated zoning standards. Recognizing that there was no

single solution to the variety of housing needs faced in each community,

many communities instituted a series of methods to address a wide range

of issues.

This diversity of communities and reforms demonstrates that regulatory

change is something that virtually any city can achieve. Regardless of

size and economic status, these cities and counties have all succeeded

in increasing affordable housing through regulatory reform.

Problems Addressed

In creating a regulatory environment that's conducive to affordable

housing, each community faced its own underlying set of problems. For

example, after devastating floods in 1997 in Grand Forks, ND city

officials created a " tool box " of incentives to stimulate re-growth and

the construction of affordable homes, using measures that included an

infill program. The Town of Corte Madera, CA faced surging demand for

new housing and soaring prices. Carolina, PR and King County, WA were

dealing with slow permitting and review processes that hindered

development and proved too restrictive. In Fort , CO and Santa

Fe, officials had already been working for over a decade to address

regulatory barriers and affordable housing shortages. Following on the

successes achieved through favorable changes in zoning policies and the

creation of an affordable housing task force, both cities were looking

for additional solutions to rising population and housing costs arising

out of tourism and the increasing popularity of these areas as

relocation destinations.

Administrative Reforms

One of the most popular reforms undertaken by those submitting

applications to the inaugural AACI Woodson Award competition in 2005 is

administrative streamlining. Austin conducts fast-track reviews of

proposed developments that feature affordable housing, and has a

facilitation and resolution process to address any problems identified

along the way. Carolina, PR restructured its planning and permitting

process and established specific timetables for each approval.

Cincinnati has a One-Stop Development Center to coordinate all

permitting and processing, and to provide builders with a single point

of contact. The city also has a cooperative pre-development meeting

process that involves all agencies in the resolution of all development

issues at one time.

Another multi-tiered approach can be found in The Town of Corte Madera,

CA, where officials have streamlined the environmental review process,

reduced permitting time for mixed-use projects, and decreased the amount

of time needed to secure approval of accessory units.

Affordable housing rehabilitation over commercial property in Chicago,

Illinois

And in Fitzgerald, GA, there are flexible land development standards

with streamlined approvals provided at the staff level. Fitzgerald has

also implemented batch processing of building permits. Fort , CO

has priority processing for affordable housing developments, and has

instituted a 120-day target date for final review. To further expedite

the process, additional staff has been assigned to conduct conflict

resolution in the development review process. Fort now only

requires " sketch plans " to make land use decisions.

Heading north, Grand Forks, ND has instituted flexible, easy to obtain

zoning variances. King County, WA permits accessory units on all lots

over 10,000 square feet, streamlined environmental requirements for

small developments, and offers pre-approvals of commonly used house

plans. Orlando implemented a public/private cooperative planning process

for fast-track approval through the development review process. Oxnard,

CA provides for development approvals at the administrative staff level

if projects are consistent with the city's plans. Meanwhile, Santa Fe

accelerates the processing of housing developments that include at least

25 percent affordably priced housing. And just north of New York City,

White Plains has a coordinated review process chaired by the Mayor's

Office in which all city departments conduct expedited reviews of

proposed developments as a team.

Fee Waiver and Reduction Reforms

Another common thread shared by most of the communities winning awards

this year has been reforms aimed at reducing the impact that local

government fees have on the cost of developing affordable housing.

Austin provides for fee waivers based on the amount of affordably priced

housing in a given development proposal. Carolina, Chicago, and

Fitzgerald waive permitting fees for affordable housing developments,

while Corte Madera waives most fees for affordable housing created in

their Affordable Housing Mixed Use District. Fort delays the

payment of impact fees until occupancy, and provides impact fee rebates

- especially for affordable rental housing. It also provides inspection,

right of way, and street cut fee exemptions for affordable development.

Grand Forks waives the usual 50 percent developer contribution for

infrastructure and defers special assessments imposed on buyers of

affordable housing.

Single-family housing development in Oxnard, California

Orlando offers relief from a number of fees that the city normally

requires, and provides for reimbursement of sewer and transportation

fees to developers of affordable homes. It also provides major discounts

on school impact fees and reduced transportation capacity fees for

affordable homes. Orlando also reduces and, in some cases, waives land

development fees.

Back on the West Coast, Oxnard waives or reduces most development fees

for infill housing - regardless of income - and defers or waives

development fees if a developer will agree to sell or lease 10 percent

of the units to very low-income or 20 percent to low-income households.

San waives impact fees on all the new affordable housing

developments in specific neighborhoods and exempts these communities

from building permit and platting fees. Santa Fe waives or reduces

various impact, processing, and permitting fees for affordable housing

developments. The city also exempts these developments from water

utility expansion charges and related water utility building requirements.

Zoning and Land Use Reforms

Most of the winning communities have also adjusted local zoning code

provisions to encourage the development of affordable housing, and have

revised their development requirements to reduce costs. Austin reviews

all proposed code amendments, rule changes, neighborhood plans, and

development fees for their impact on housing affordability. Chicago

offers density bonuses for affordable housing in Chicago's booming

central area, and provides an array of incentives, including density

bonuses for market rate condominium and townhouse developments that

include affordably priced units for moderate-income families. Cincinnati

has developed a new zoning code that allows 2,000 and 4,000 square foot

lots in older neighborhoods, permits clustered housing, and provides for

reduced requirements for side yards and setbacks.

Corte Madera created an Affordable Housing Mixed Use District where the

city can triple maximum densities, reduce parking requirements, and

increase commercial space in buildings with affordable housing. Other

reforms incorporated in the Corte Madera code include a high density

land designation that permits 25 dwelling units per acre, three high

density zones requiring that 50 percent of units be affordable, and

reduced parking standards for all affordable housing. Fitzgerald allows

manufactured housing (as of right) in most residential districts,

subject to site and design standards, and waives or adjusts setback,

side, and other development standards. Fitzgerald allows manufactured

housing, as of right, in most residential districts, subject to site and

design standards, and waives or adjusts, as needed, setback, side and

other development standards. Fort provides density bonuses and

reduces builder bonding and landscaping requirements for affordable

housing. It also allows reductions of street widths, right-of-way, and

sidewalk widths. Grand Forks offers relaxed land development

requirements by requiring narrower road widths and road right of way

dedications. The city has also reduced minimum lots sizes.

In Washington State, King County has instituted a number of land use

reforms. The county has eliminated most minimum lot sizes and has

established a unique requirement for minimum densities. It also now

allows multifamily housing in many formerly single-family residential

areas and mixed uses in many residential areas. The county also revised

the county's zoning ordinance to provide for townhomes, zero-lot-line

development, and small cottage housing.

Orlando provides density bonuses for affordable housing and now has

flexible, less costly land development standards. Oxnard provides

density bonuses in exchange for the provision of affordable housing, and

waives or adjusts development standards if a significant number of lower

income housing units are part of the development. San and Santa

Fe grant density bonuses for the development of affordably priced

housing. Santa Fe has also reduced lot sizes, increased lot coverage,

and provided greater opportunities for appropriately designed HUD-Code

housing. The city also eased code requirements to allow accessory units.

On a similar tack, White Plains has enacted a comprehensive reform of

its zoning ordinance with height and density incentives available

throughout the city for both " workforce " and " below middle-income "

housing and doubled allowable densities for low-income housing in

targeted neighborhoods. To further encourage affordable home production,

White Plains has also modified its building codes to reduce costs.

Tax Reform Policies

Two of the communities that won awards during the first AACI process

used local tax policies to promote the development of affordable

housing. Fort provides sales and use tax rebates on materials to

affordable housing builders. Grand Forks has a two-year property tax

exemption for the first $75,000 of value and a three-year property tax

exemption for increased values from rehabilitation.

Land Utilization

In addition to reforming regulations to promote the development of

affordable housing, several of the winning communities have provided

public property to developers who would create affordable housing.

Austin makes surplus, city-owned land available to a non-profit housing

organization at below-market rates for the development of affordably

priced housing. Carolina has an inventory of all available Commonwealth

and city-owned land, and releases some of this land to lower development

costs. Fitzgerald uses redevelopment authority to clear and assemble

infill sites for redevelopment, and San uses surplus land for

affordable home construction.

Supplemental Programs

Several cities augmented their regulatory reform actions with other city

activities. Austin facilitates dialogue between neighborhood groups and

affordable housing developers for proposals requiring zoning changes,

thereby promoting early identification and resolution of concerns and

issues. Carolina now uses " design-build " bids for city-built housing,

resulting in significant savings for this type of affordable

construction. Fort has a major affordable housing marketing

effort, and has empanelled an Affordable Housing Board to recommend new

reform efforts.

Conclusion

Recognized by HUD's Secretary Alphonso , the 14 communities that

have received the L. Woodson, Jr. Award are leading the nation by

adopting creative and effective methods of reducing the impact that

state and local regulatory barriers have on the cost of providing

affordable housing.

These model communities have eliminated regulatory barriers by

eradicating repetitive and time-consuming review and approval processes;

they have redrawn out-of-date building codes and zoning ordinances;

enacted codes that encourage (rather than hinder) rehabilitation; and

have waived some of the fees that can drive housing costs skyward. By

their good examples, these communities have made great strides in

discouraging NIMBYism and exclusionary thinking in neighborhoods of

widely divergent social and economic configurations. Their successes can

be measured in terms of the new and rehabilitated affordable housing

that their efforts have yielded, and in the extraordinary examples they

have set for other communities to follow.

Sharing Your Experiences

If you have similar experiences or successful barrier reduction

strategies, we'd love to hear from you. Please call 1-800-245-2691,

option 4, or send us an email at rbcsubmit@...

<mailto:rbcsubmit@...>