Ep 59: The Costs of Discretion with Paavo Monkkonen and Mike Manville
Oct 18, 2023
auto_awesome
Exploring the costs of discretion in housing development, comparing approval timelines between discretionary and by-right projects. Discussing impacts on affordability, public trust, and the importance of understanding city development processes. Delving into Transit Oriented Communities program in LA, corruption in zoning approvals, and challenges for small developers in affordable housing projects.
Discretionary approval processes prolong timelines and raise costs, hindering housing development and affordability.
Buy-right approvals offer clarity, consistency, and faster timelines, encouraging more affordable housing construction.
Transit-Oriented Communities program demonstrates benefits of buy-right approvals in accelerating housing development and streamlining processes.
Deep dives
Impact of Discretion on Housing Approval Timelines and Costs
Discretionary approval processes in urban planning can significantly slow down housing development timelines and increase costs. By subjecting projects to subjective decision-making, there is added uncertainty leading to delays and potential rejection. The study highlights how discretionary processes, compared to buy-right approvals, result in wasted time, increased expenses, and hurdles that could turn profitable developments into failures.
Beneficiaries of Buy-Right Approvals in Housing Development
Cities shifting from discretionary to buy-right or ministerial approvals have shown shorter, more consistent approval timelines, benefiting affordable housing developers. Buy-right processes, driven by clear guidelines and standards, streamline approvals, reduce uncertainty, and mitigate financial risks for developers. The study emphasizes how buy-right approvals lead to increased housing supply by removing barriers to entry for a broader range of developers.
Transit-Oriented Communities Program in Los Angeles: Impact on Approval Pathways
The Transit-Oriented Communities (TOC) program in Los Angeles offers a unique lens to study the effects of different approval pathways on housing projects. By exempting certain developments from discretionary review and utilizing buy-right approvals, TOC allows for quicker processes and increased development. The program creates a distinct comparison between discretionary and buy-right pathways, offering researchers a clearer understanding of the impact of approval methods on housing production.
Additional Insights on Discretion and Buy-Right in Housing Development
Discretion in housing approvals varies along a spectrum, influencing uncertainty, delays, and financial burdens. The distinction between buy-right and discretionary processes is crucial, with buy-right processes providing more transparency and efficiency. The TOC program formalizes negotiation processes, linking variants in project designs to affordable housing units, setting a new standard for approvals. By analyzing the nuances of different approval pathways, researchers gain insight into how decision-making processes affect housing affordability and production.
Comparison of Approval Timelines Between TOC and Non-TOC Projects
In analyzing 352 projects, the podcast delved into the approval timelines of different projects, highlighting the significant differences between TOC and non-TOC projects. The median approval time for non-TOC discretionary projects exceeded two years, while buy-right non-TOC projects took less than 500 days. Interestingly, TOC discretionary projects took 500 days, with buy-right projects being 60 days faster. This comparison showcased how the type of project designation significantly impacts the speed of approval.
Impact of By-Right Approval Process on Public Benefits and Housing Diversity
The discussion extended to the impact of shifting to more by-right approvals, emphasizing the potential benefits beyond traditional considerations. By reducing barriers to entry, the by-right process could enable a more diverse group of developers to engage in housing projects. Furthermore, streamlining approvals may accelerate the development of affordable housing and foster a more inclusive housing landscape. This shift could not only enhance planning efficiency but also contribute to broader societal goals such as improved urban development and housing affordability.
Does discretion delay development, or do deliberate decisions divert disaster? Paavo and Mike M. share new Lewis Center research comparing approval timelines for discretionary and by-right projects, and they discuss the consequences of slow and uncertain approval processes for housing production, affordability, and public trust.
