In June of this year, Councilwoman Maria Quinones-Sanchez of Philadelphia’s City Council introduced Ordinance No. 170678 to require all new and renovated residential development projects in the City of over 10 units to include at least 10% of the project units as “affordable”. Under the terms of the ordinance, at least 25% of the affordable units have to exists on the project site, while the other 75% can either be built elsewhere or be addressed via a payment into the City’s Housing Trust Fund. Since the ordinance’s introduction in June, Councilwoman Quinones-Sanchez has been in dialogue with a number of stakeholders, with a hope to have the ordinance brought to a vote in City Council prior to the end of 2017. The proposed ordinance addresses both new projects and renovations which will be defined to cover alterations costing in excess of $7,000 per housing unit and requiring a zoning permit. The ordinance also provides for limited increases in density, as implied compensation to developers which provide affordable housing.
Supporters of the ordinance argue that it is required to address significant gaps within the City for affordable housing for the many poor residing in Philadelphia, and that the proposed ordinance fairly balances the interests of developers with broader public policy requirements. Those who object, which includes the local chapter of the Building Industry Association, argue that the requirements are erroneous and inappropriately place upon residential real estate developers the obligation to address a policy concern better met by the broader body politic.
Among the potential variables, and areas that may be subject to amendment in the ordinance, are how many units of affordable housing should be required, whether they should be required on or off site, the extent to which such requirement should apply to renovations, and what corresponding inducements or benefits should be made available to developers in the character of increased density or other types of cost offsets.
In the City of Philadelphia, developers must come to terms with several issues which can increase development costs, including a variety of zoning requirements to provide parking, requirements in certain circumstances to provide economic opportunity plans in connection with projects, and a local norm in Center City development of utilizing union labor. Some are concerned that the additional imposition of required affordable housing would tip the balance and end or significantly curtail residential development.
In a city with an active housing authority and other public or quasi-public organizations promoting housing opportunities for the poor, a question is presented regarding the appropriateness of achieving a laudatory public policy goal through the imposition of requirements upon a small sector of private business owners. If the objective of providing housing to the poor is one adopted by local government, should it not be addressed directly via explicit taxing and spending policies, instead of indirectly through the zoning code? This is the question which will be addressed in hearings and debates soon to occur in Philadelphia City Council.