Copy
View this email in your browser
Late last year, we released data showing that housing production across the NYC metropolitan region was not significantly affected by the Covid-19 pandemic. The metro region, however, continues to suffer from housing production rates that lag those of many other large metros, a fact that contributes to housing affordability challenges in our region.

The data also showed strong imbalances within the metro region, particularly between those higher producing suburbs to the west of NYC—namely, Northern NJ—and those slower producing ones to the north and east of the city, the Hudson Valley and Long Island. 
Units Permitted per Capita by NYC Metro Subregion

Given the implications this has for the metro region’s ability to house a growing population, we’ve asked two regional housing experts—Noah Kazis, Legal Fellow at the NYU Furman Center, and Adam Gordon, Executive Director at the Fair Share Housing Center in NJ—to share their insights on the disparities and what might be done to address them.

Here's what they shared:  

Expert Spotlight:
Noah Kazis and Adam Gordon
on State Housing Policy, Affordability, and Exclusionary Zoning
Housing production in New York State’s suburbs is lower than in New Jersey’s suburbs. What do you think drive’s that disparity? 

NK - Let’s start with what’s not driving the disparity: demand.

New York City’s economy has been booming. New York’s in-state suburbs have great schools and best-in-the-country transit. Housing prices are—no surprise—high because people want to live on Long Island, and in Westchester and the Hudson Valley. 

Zillow Home Value Index - NYC Region

It’s just not legal for them to do so. Restrictive local zoning laws in New York State too often prohibit the development of multifamily housing, even small-scale duplexes. Minimum lot size regulations that routinely require one or two acres of land per house limit single-family construction. On top of that, arduous layers of discretionary review add cost and delay. All this means that, by law, there's essentially nowhere to put new housing. Of course production is low!

RPA Untapped Potential
As shown in the Regional Plan Association’s Untapped Potential report, many NYC Metro suburbs have commuter rail stations surrounded by zoning that do not permit multifamily development despite having infrastructure in place that would support additional housing capacity. 

The biggest difference between New York and New Jersey is that New Jersey limits restrictive and exclusionary zoning, and New York does not. Compared to other states in the northeast and on the west coast, New York stands out for its near total surrender to local exclusion. The results are predictable. 

What is the view from across the river? How does New Jersey’s housing regime differ from New York State’s? 

AG - New Jersey’s Mount Laurel Doctrine is a legal framework that prevents exclusionary zoning and provides for the development of affordable housing.

More than fifty years ago, residents in the historically Black community of Mount Laurel, began protesting town policies designed to displace and exclude low-income people and people of color. Their actions ultimately resulted in a series of decisions by the New Jersey Supreme Court that declared exclusionary zoning in the state unconstitutional. Those rulings affirmatively required all New Jersey towns to provide their fair share of the state’s affordable housing. In addition, towns had to change their zoning to allow for mixed-income developments that include 15-25% affordable homes.   

New York’s exclusionary zoning has deprived it of the housing investment that New Jersey is benefiting from—and, as well, the affordability, jobs, and community amenities that come with that housing. Those benefits, in fact, have helped shape local conversations so that in some New Jersey towns affordable housing is less about obligations and more about opportunity for all. 

What have other states done to address restrictive zoning and how effective are those policies at creating a more equitable housing environment?

NK - There’s so much happening right now! The thing about New York being so, so far behind is that at least we have a lot to learn from.

Massachusetts recently required every transit-accessible town in Greater Boston to allow some multifamily as-of-right. California is enacting process reforms to speed up approvals and base land use decisions on objective criteria, not ad hoc discretion. Both California and Oregon have also created a path for two to four homes to be built on most lots in urban and suburban areas. A half dozen states have legalized accessory dwelling units (ADUs). 

California Senate Bill 9

Plus, there are older policies. Besides New Jersey, Massachusetts, Connecticut, and Rhode Island each have their own "fair share" models that override some local zoning restrictions in places not meeting a minimum percentage of housing that is affordable. Pennsylvania has a simple-but-elegant rule: every jurisdiction must allow a mix of housing types. The West Coast has a planning-based model that’s historically so struggled to show results, but might be about to prove transformative. Then there's grants, incentives, and technical assistance programs, which we’ve learned don’t move the needle on their own (especially in wealthy areas), but can help support other policies.

All of these can be tools in the toolkit. Indeed, they each push back on different aspects of exclusionary zoning; they're complements, not substitutes.

How do you see rules in New Jersey working well to create an equitable housing market? 

AG - Historically, when Mount Laurel has been enforced, rents and home prices in New Jersey have not risen faster than income. That said, today we are still digging out from a period of non-enforcement from 2000 to 2015; a time during which rents rose twice as fast as incomes, and home prices at three times the rate. So even though development is now moving ahead more rapidly—and includes an increasing number of deed-restricted affordable homes—we still have a substantial shortage of affordable homes to meet actual needs.

Signing the NJ Fair Chance in Housing Act

More than that, we know that the physical construction of these units is only the first step to ensuring equal access. Just last year, New Jersey passed the Fair Chance in Housing Act—the first statewide law of its kind that protects individuals with prior criminal legal system involvement from housing discrimination in the rental market. We need to address these kinds of structural barriers, especially those that disparately impact communities of color, while also creating more homes with affordability restrictions. Increasing the supply of housing alone is necessary but not sufficient.

New York’s legislature is contemplating a variety of housing reforms. What lessons can you share on housing reform implementations? 

NK - The politics of zoning reform scramble ordinary political coalitions and it’s important to see which message and which coalition meets the moment.

Another lesson: there’s no one-and-done. Success comes from improving policies over time. California passed its first ADU reforms in the 1980s, but it took many rounds of legislative tinkering to close loopholes being exploited by exclusionary governments. Production only took off in the last few years. Investments in state oversight capacity are crucial.

Finally, no one policy does everything, and that’s okay. Maybe one year there’s energy around transit-oriented development; maybe another year the focus turns to addressing racial and economic segregation. In time, these policies can build on each other. But success has come from taking on exclusionary zoning one step at a time. 

New Jersey has a more transparent regime for tracking housing production than New York State. How has data tracking been relevant to overall reforms? 

AG - New Jersey, through the DCA Construction Reporter, tracks monthly housing production in great detail. This analysis helps New Jersey policymakers understand the impact of different policies and shifting development patterns. Absent other reforms, it is not something that prevents exclusionary zoning, but it does help New Jersey policymakers better understand the impact of different policies and shifting development patterns.

Those data have shown, for example, that development in New Jersey has largely shifted away from environmentally sensitive rural areas and towards urban and suburban areas, often in the form of transit-oriented development and the redevelopment of older office parks and shopping centers. That recognition has helped drive more of a focus—again via the Mount Laurel process—on ensuring supposedly “built-out” towns are making housing opportunities more realistic, and in turn creating more redevelopment-focused housing opportunities.

New Jersey also requires that the race and ethnicity of applicants and occupants be tracked in buildings with 25 or more units. This is just one of several ways—anti-discrimination testing regimes being another—that can help identify whether affordable homes are being affirmatively marketed and whether excessive screening barriers stand in the way of fair housing.  

Have questions or want to connect? Email us.

About Us

The Regional Planning Division was borne out of OneNYC, which highlighted the need for the city to work with neighbors across borders to promote a sustainable and equitable future for our shared region. You can read more about our team and our work here.

Copyright © 2022 NYC DCP, All rights reserved. 

Want to contact us or learn more?
Send us an email, or visit our website nyc.gov/region.
NYC DCP | 120 Broadway, 31st Floor
New York, NY 10271

Want to change how you receive these emails?
You can update your preferences or unsubscribe from this list.






This email was sent to <<Email Address>>
why did I get this?    unsubscribe from this list    update subscription preferences
The City of New York - Department of City Planning · 120 Broadway, Suite 31 · New York, NY 10271-3100 · USA