The Case for Mass Upzoning

Minjee Kim

Housing Policy Debate, 2024, vol. 34, issue 2, 246-251

Abstract: Murray and Gordon argue against mass upzonings that are unaccompanied by value capture tools based on the grounds that (a) cities are giving away valuable public air rights to private property owners when undertaking mass upzoning and thus (b) cities should employ value-capture policies to avoid complete privatization of public air rights. I first add a cautionary note that development of value capture strategies must be grounded in country-specific political, cultural, and legal contexts. To spark further scholarly and policy debates, I develop two propositions in response to the article. First, I contend that mass rezoning may be justifiable in the United States even if this means valuable public air rights are privatized. Second, I posit that mass rezoning is not only justifiable but also one of the most cost-effective and least risky policy solutions for tackling housing affordability and supply challenges in the United States. I conclude by suggesting directions for future research on upzoning and value capture.

Date: 2024
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/10511482.2023.2234890 (text/html)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:taf:houspd:v:34:y:2024:i:2:p:246-251

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/RHPD20

DOI: 10.1080/10511482.2023.2234890

Access Statistics for this article

Housing Policy Debate is currently edited by Tom Sanchez, Susanne Viscarra and Derek Hyra

More articles in Housing Policy Debate from Taylor & Francis Journals
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Chris Longhurst ().