100 likes | 266 Views
Inclusionary Housing In North Carolina – An Exploratory Case Study Analysis. Joella Schiepan, MCRP, MPH Recent Graduate UNC – Chapel Hill. Outline. Thesis Background North Carolina Inclusionary Housing (IH) Snapshot Initial Conceptual Model Revised Conceptual Model Key Findings
E N D
Inclusionary Housing In North Carolina – An Exploratory Case Study Analysis Joella Schiepan, MCRP, MPH Recent Graduate UNC – Chapel Hill
Outline • Thesis Background • North Carolina Inclusionary Housing (IH) Snapshot • Initial Conceptual Model • Revised Conceptual Model • Key Findings • Recommendations
Project Background • Literature Review – Health/Housing Connection • Quality • Location • Affordability • Overall Project Goal • To understand why some municipalities in North Carolina have created an inclusionary housing policy, while others have not • Data Collection • Exploratory Case Study • 4 Municipalities, 29 interviews
North Carolina IH Snapshot Source: US Census *2006 American Community Survey Data **Data from Chapel Hill-Carrboro Chamber of Commerce (2003)
Inclusionary Housing Policy Policy-Development Context Local Government Identifies Need for Affordable Housing (AH) Policy Decision Economic Factors • Social Factors Other AH Policy Solutions Political Factors Initial Conceptual Model
Policy-Development Context • Political Factors • Public Recognition of the need for AH • Political Advocacy • Enabling Legislation Not Needed • Political Will • Enabling Legislation Needed • Political Power (Opposed) Inclusionary Housing Policy • Economic Factors • Financing/Funding • Increasing Property Values • Displacement of Residents/ Gentrification • Market Forces • Physical Quality of Housing • Living Wage • Social Factors • NIMBYism • Economic Diversity • Access to AH by Workforce • Racial Diversity • Homelessness Local Gov’t Identifies Need for Affordable Housing Policy Decision Other AH Policy Solutions Key: High Level of Importance in both Municipality types High Level of Importance in IH Municipalities High Level of Importance in non-IH Municipalities Revised Conceptual Model
Key Findings: Economic Factors • Financing/Funding • Increasing Property Values • Displacement of Residents/Gentrification • Market Forces • Physical Quality of Housing • Living Wage
Key Findings: Social Factors • Not in My Back Yard (NIMBYism) • Economic Diversity • Access to AH by Workforce • Racial Diversity • Homelessness
Key Findings: Political Factors • Enabling Legislation • Political Power (Opposed) • Political Advocacy • Political Will • Public Recognition of the need for AH
Recommendations • Clarify the IH legality issue • Advocate for IH through electing political advocates • Build Political Support by Bringing ALL Voices to the Table • Media advocacy to decrease the negative views and beliefs about affordable housing