Laserfiche WebLink
Considerable variations exist across states. IH <br />programs vary in design when addressing the program <br />type (mandatory orvoluntary), maximum income <br />level, the length of time units must remain affordable, <br />and the share of units that must be set aside to remain <br />affordable. States that mandate IH show similarities <br />among IH programs in local jurisdictions within those <br />states, but not necessarily across states. In particular, <br />programs in California, Massachusetts, and New Jersey, <br />the three states with the highest numberof programs, <br />show distinct patterns within each state about program <br />type, the income targeting requirement, and the <br />affordability term. <br />400 <br />350 <br />300 <br />N <br />E <br />L. 250 <br />to0 <br />I- <br />CL w 200 <br />0 <br />L <br />150 <br />Z 100 <br />50 5% <br />i <br />0 - - <br />Less than 10% <br />Average set-aside for affordable units: By definition, <br />the vast majority of traditional IH programs impacting <br />new developments of single-family homes and <br />multifamily rentals offer developers the option to <br />build affordable units on-site. In fact, building on-site <br />affordable units is the only option offered by 41% of IH <br />programs. The average set-aside for affordable units <br />across the 652 programs that reported an on-site option <br />is 16% of housing units, and 29% of IH programs require <br />20% or more of housing units to be set aside at affordable <br />prices on-site (Figure 3). <br />29% <br />7% <br />10%-19% 20% or more <br />4% <br />� F <br />No set-aside Other measure <br />U.S., excluding 0 California Massachusetts , New Jersey <br />CA, MA, & NJ <br />Figure 3. Program count and program share of minimum percentage of affordable housing required (affordable housing set- <br />aside) (n = 652, or 97% of all programs with on-site option) <br />9 <br />