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

Figures & data

Table 1. Potential housing policies linked to affordable housing in comprehensive plans.

Cost reductions	Use of public money
Reduction of impact fees for affordable housing One-stop permitting Excess city-owned land or vacant lots given to affordable housing organizations Preferential tax treatment for building affordable housing	HOME Investment Partnership Program Community development block grant Cooperation with housing authority State program (identified) to provide affordable housing Interlocal agreement to provide affordable housing
Zoning	Household assistance
Allow higher-density development Allow accessory dwellings Allow a variety of housing types (or multifamily) Inclusionary zoning	Homebuyer assistance Homeowner rehabilitation assistance Homeowner assistance (e.g., foreclosure prevention program) Information and education for low-income households about affordable housing opportunities
Location or land use map	Alternatives
Identified criteria/locations for low-income housing Identified criteria/locations for mobile homes and manufactured housing	Community land trust Support of fair-share housing Job training or job creation as an affordable housing solution (income strategy) Information and education for developers and nonprofits on providing affordable housing

Note: All items but those italicized are from Aurand (2014).

Table 2. Strength of affordable housing policies.

Variable	Atlanta (GA) metropolitan area	Detroit (MI) metropolitan area
Mean strength of affordable housing policies	4.90	1.82
Median strength of affordable housing policies	4.00	1.00
Highest strength of affordable housing policies	18.00	7.00
% Comprehensive plans with no specific affordable housing policies	3.3%	25.0%
Note: The highest strength possible of affordable housing policies is 46 (23 × 2).

Aurand, A. (2014). Florida’s planning requirements and affordability for low-income households. Housing Studies, 29(5), 677–700. doi:10.1080/02673037.2014.882497

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar