On February 1, 2017, an inclusionary zoning ordinance came into effect in Portland, mandating that all new residential projects with 20 or more units dedicate a portion of the building to affordable housing. For the first year, the requirement was 8% of all units for households earning 60% of the Area Median Income or 16% of all units for households earning 80% of the AMI. I'm not sure if it was or is possible to do a blend of the two income levels. After the first year, the requirement was supposed to step up to 10% and 20% of all units, respectively. But that step up was never enacted, which had many industry analysts arguing that it was a clear signal the ordinance was not performing as intended. According to Joe Cortright of City Observatory (which is based in Portland), the new ordinance largely resulted in 3 things happening: (1) Developers rushed to get new applications in during the transition period so that they would not be subjected to the new IZ rules; (2) applications increased for projects with less than 20 units (avoid the rules by building smaller); and (3), following the initial transition surge, building permit applications, as a whole, dropped off. This last point is what usually comes up in debates around inclusionary zoning. Does the requirement to build affordable housing actually reduce overall housing supply? I've written about this before, but the math is pretty simple. Inclusionary zoning policies are a drag on revenue and a direct cost to the project. What that means is that something else will need to give in order for the numbers to balance. That could come in the form of lower costs (such as an impact fee abatement) or in higher rents on the balance of the units. But this latter approach is easier said than done. Sometimes you need to wait for the market to "catch up", which could be what some developers in Portland are doing. They're waiting for housing to get more expensive -- overall -- so they can then offset the pro forma drag from the affordable units.

Below is a photo of Interstate 95 near Miami, which, for the record, I myself did not take while driving.

The two empty lanes that you see are the “Express Lanes.” The price for using these lanes varies based on demand.
During periods of low demand, the toll could be around $0.20 per mile.
During periods of high demand, such as during rush hour, it might be $1 per mile.
And during unusually heavy periods, like when there’s an accident, it could be more.
We used these lanes while driving around the Miami area on this trip. The pricing always seemed reasonable and the lanes were never congested.
I think the above picture is a good demonstration of how dynamic road pricing can be used alleviate traffic congestion.
That’s why many cities, such as Portland, are exploring it as a solution. I wish Toronto would do the same.
I am reading up on a few different things this morning.
Southwest Florida, which is where I am right now, is in the midst of a “red tide” that began last November. These happen fairly regularly along the Gulf Coast, but this one is high up on the severity scale. There doesn’t appear to be a clear explanation for what causes them, but sustained warmer temperatures and fertilizer and other pollutant runoff are thought to stoke it. Whatever the cause, they are devastating to the environment. We are switching coasts tomorrow morning.
Portland now has electric scooters. (Why don’t we have these in Toronto?) But to combat possible concerns around urban clutter, the company, Bird, has committed to collecting all of its scooters each night and has agreed to remit $1 per scooter per day to the city. These scooters are pissing off some cities (or maybe it’s just San Francisco), but I still believe the problem will eventually get resolved. City Observatory also has this interesting piece where it compares the above scooter pricing to car pricing. Are we underpricing cars?
Finally, here is a short film on civic security in Paris. In an effort to mitigate terrorism, the city has, of course, been implementing and erecting fencing, barricades and other reactive security measures. But sadly, now that this has become a new reality, the capital is spending more time considering how these measures could be more thoughtfully designed. The video showcases some of them. Certainly a more deliberate approach, but are they just as reactive?
Maybe one of these topics will be of interest to you too.
Photo by Andreas Selter on Unsplash
