Policy To Promote Affordable Housing And Alleviate
Affordable Housing is a controversial or complex reality of modern contemporary life of the United States of America. Affordable housing criteria are mainly developed to facilitate those with a median household income or lower as rated by national government while measuring a recognized housing affordability index. However, various distinct impulses such as economic, social and psychological of citizens have created a volatile situation to evaluate housing choices and mode of individual ownership of the housing properties. The notion of affordable housing became an inevitable property of the USA as affordability of housing has become a serious issue to exaggerate efficiently. The government of the USA has developed various significant policies to provide utmost facilities for lower or middle income households while determining affordability index created by systematic empirical framework. Federal policies of affordable housing confine mortgages and numerous forms along with a continuum to incorporate emergency shelter options, transitional housing, subsidized housing and formal rental indigenous housing.
Public policies regarding affordable housing are essential to focus on the demands of the marketplace and to provide facilities for lower socio-economic households to meet financial benchmarks of affordable housing criteria. Implementation of housing policies set significant challenges and issues throughout the entire execution process based on the housing plan. Questions are arising regarding the effectiveness of housing policies and procedures of intergovernmental changes to meet the vast requirements of lower of medium income households. This empirical framework intends to provide a systematic discussion that includes three subjects to discuss regarding various problems of affordable housing policies. The paper also challenges various implication processes of those policies and procedures utmost solutions to incorporate potentiality of those policies within the United States of America.
As urban housing market within the USA increasingly exhibit challenges of affordability, the federal government of the USA has implemented a renewed emphasis on mixed income housing. The taken initiatives by the government intended to facilitate its citizens by developing multifamily development project to meet housing needs. The implementation of housing policies are designed to measure affordability index and provided utmost assurance in housing process. This paper provides highlight significance of labour and construction cost and its impacts on affordability index. Various effective alternatives are also mentioned to minimize the problem due to high construction cost and premium value of housing properties.
Increasing values of raw materials and cost of labour has significantly affected the construction growth and programs. The cost of construction materials have significantly set obstacles for federal government to set affordability index and affected overall cost structure of the program within variable society of the USA (Engelsman et al. 2018). The fluctuating values of construction materials have significantly increased and the builders have generated high charges on base labour prices. The value of residential construction also increased due to the increased price of underdeveloped lands around urban areas where demands and concentration is high. As the developers are more focused on building luxurious housing projects, the construction of affordable housing got affected due to lack of proper accommodations.
The Bureau of Labour Statistics measures the prices of construction raw materials and labour charges with the producer price index. The study evaluated that the price of such materials has risen up to 20.2 percent since the financial crisis of 2008. The price of construction lumber alone increased twice as much as in 2008 as per the monthly lumber price index from Random Lengths (Metcalf, 2018). Due to wildfire in northern region of the USA and dispute foreign trade policies with other countries forced to increase the value of lumber. In addition, rebounding housing market has significantly comprises higher number of labour which significantly affected affordable housing program as a persistent labour shortage which inevitably affected builders to drive up cost and economic restrictions.
According to a nationwide survey conducted by the National Association of Home Builders, 84 percent of the employees believe that availability and cost of labour are the biggest issues that each construction project is facing in 2018 (Metcalf, 2018). Law unemployment ratio and effects of rump up deportations created challenges for builders to meet increasing demands of housing. Furthermore, additional costs of construction sites, taxation policies of federal government and natural disasters have significantly created threats for developers to incorporate adequate growth within affordable housing program.
The issues regarding the price structure of construction materials and labour charges are required to consider evaluating effective solutions within the affordable housing program. Even before the Great Recession, average American were required to pay more than 30 percent of their gross income to afford housing properties. The problems in affordable housing policies have set limitations for those and the gross amount of pay is increasing rapidly, especially in urban areas like New York and San Francisco. However, the prime objectives of the USA government are to facilitate its vast population with affordable range of housing cost to live a healthy and prosperous life (Danell & Olausson, 2016). In order to eliminate threats due to increasing cost, the government must be required to consider price structure of construction goods to control housing costs.
Affordable housing projects often occur as a complex version which comprises various distinct involvement of the government to execute effective solutions regarding various accountability issues. As a whole, the government needs to engage with realistic cost plans that include all construction elements. Development of effective and innovative approaches in controlling cost and requirements can be an effective alternative to reduce cost threats and over budget. Implementation of potential taxation policies and improved price structure of raw materials is also an integral part of successful affordable housing projects. Availability of natural resources such as limber, sand and commercial goods are required to increase to meet project needs. Availability of efficient and expert labours is required to ensure to improve affordable prices (Lawson et al. 2016).
Higher employment facilities, fixed prices of lands within urban outfitters are inevitable to conquer against rising values of construction sites. The fest government must needs to incorporate innovative solutions to redeem such resources. Technological advances and involvement of potential equipment can also reduce labour shortage and innovative approaches are essential to develop to resolve fireproofing, gypsum crisis and in tumescent paintings. The builders need to develop potential cost effective budgets with detailed description and also needs to create efficient network of raw materials supply chain management to evaluate requirements and preferences within affordable housing program.
Throughout the history of American affordable housing program, affordable housing is used as a public policy tool to upgrade the livelihood of fellow citizens. The taken initiatives were intended to provide housing within a healthy environment for each household based on their median income (Kalugina, 2016). The implications of such policies increased value of market and provided millions of homes for citizens and incorporated potential solutions simultaneously alleviating slum conditions of various distinct cities. Since the initiation phases of affordable housing program, various changing regulations have affected underlying business of Public Housing Authorities (PHA). For example, Brookee amendments have forced subsidized housing categories effectively which reduces the gross earnings of Public Housing Authorities (Scally & Tighe, 2015). The federal government has decreased the availability of subsidized properties for public housing program which significantly affected the conditions of affordable housing program and site deterioration increased rapidly. Such policies made public housing projects less desirable for users due to lack of proper management and maintenance.
The rising values of lands and construction projects are significantly affected the conditions of affordability and the notion of occupancy (Miller, 2015). However, As PHA has become more entrepreneurial over time, the effectiveness of affordable housing program has increased and more facilities have been provided for accommodations. Implication of Low Income Tax Credit and reformed tax acts has facilitated lower median income households in a successive scale. In the next big step, combine efforts of PHA and private construction organization have significantly created multifamily properties mostly based on mixed income criteria. However, Contemporary housing policies are significantly complex which lead local government to incorporate changes within federal regulations and categorized the distribution of affordable housing properties based on three distinct approaches which includes rental assistance, homeownership assistance and land use and regulatory compliance. Rental assistance programs are mainly developed to facilitate lower income renters to accommodate quality rental housing based on Low Income Housing Tax Credit.
Homeownership assistance are designed to facilitate mediocre income individuals with quality housing while providing low interest loans to fulfil accesses of ownership criteria (Martinez et al. 2015). The third approach is designed to allow private developers to use land and also allowed to perform regulatory initiatives while considering location, characteristics and cost of affordable housing development processes.
Based on the current study, it is inevitable to mention the associated problems of affordable housing policies. The study significantly suggested that controlling the costs of labour and construction materials are essential to incorporate effective pricing structure of affordable housing for lower median income households (Bloom & Laser, 2016). The price of construction has potential impacts on accountability and affordability of public housing development program. Increasing values forced US citizens to face difficulties to confine sufficient affordability index. This significant change creates pay deference as home prices are raising twice the rate of wages. As per Advocacy group report Home1, 11 millions of Americans have paid half of their income on housing rental period. Inefficient wage growth and increasing value of housing have created limitations for individuals to afford comfortable housing.
Various engaged vendors and construction companies are responsible for higher housing cost as they are driven to gain higher revenue and adequate profitability within business context. Competitive marketplace and higher demands of luxurious apartments have created limitations to develop sufficient affordable housing programs to incorporate efficiency in providing homes (Appler, 2018). The federal and local governing body must require taking actions regarding the issues and needs to set affordable prices for housing. The government needs to provide higher wages and low interest loan facilities for mediocre families to afford quality housing. Implementation of taxation process and collaborative efforts to demolish construction cost rising factors can be an asset to incorporate adequate affordable housing development program.
Government policies are designed to provide appropriate housing accommodation for its citizens. However significant limitations and exclusive difficulties have challenged to confine such facilities. Increasing labour crisis and price of construction goods have significantly affected development process of affordable housing. Various market forces, federal policy decisions. and demographic changes have conversed to develop construction of affordable housing program with more difficulties.
This section of the systematic empirical study refers to the problems related to inclusionary zoning policy taken by the USA government. Inclusionary zoning policy refers to a systematic construction development process of affordable housing to facilitate lower and moderate income holders within the USA. The policy has been developed to incorporate effective housing distribution for mixed income individuals and focused on the development of multifamily properties. However, significant difficulties occurred within such development process as they faced significant challenges due to the affordability cost of housing and its objectives to meet income targeting development.
Most of the inclusionary zoning ordinance has been operated by private organizations while focusing on market rate real estate development programs. As a result, the price structure of the property got affected and motion of affordable housing program strategies has been diminished due to the privatization of such policies. Mainly private owners have control to redeem inclusionary zoning development which significantly the balance of public interest in affordable housing program. The development programs related to inclusionary zoning is highly challenging lower income individuals to accommodate such facilities into account. As suggested by Danell & Olausson, (2016), inclusionary development programs developed by private organizations mainly targeting the moderate income households rather than serving very low income residents. However, the structure of the policies significantly affects the developers to accommodate such facilities for the low income households.
Inclusionary housing programs are mainly controlled by the power of local government while regulating the distribution of land and using patterns. Several discussion and legal obligations have challenged the implementation process of inclusion housing program and its efficiency to accommodate low-income families to incorporate potential housing facilities. However, in recent years, federal court of various states such as New York City and San Francisco have provided exclusive legal advice to reduce zoning power of the local government and provided guidance to incorporate effective inclusionary housing program (Ward, 2019).
Based on the Lincoln Institute of Land Policy’s report “Inclusionary Housing: Building More Equitable Communities” provides a detailed proposal relevant to the case law by Ben Beach which suggests:
The state and federal courts have simultaneously upheld inclusionary housing measures which have been incorporated by various jurisdictions within the country. The power of local government in inclusionary housing program has been restricted and also provided effective and efficient policies to incorporate successful enforcement of policies regarding inclusionary zoning.
In addition, various state laws can have significant impact on the design of inclusionary zoning. Three states such as Texas, Arizona and Tennessee have state laws to prohibit mandatory inclusionary zoning but allow performing voluntary programs that offers incentives can be implemented successful. However, the federal government has provided efficient policies for regional policymakers to incorporate effective inclusionary housing programs under legal counsel and must required to ensure affordable housing strategies within its core decision making processes.
Inclusionary zoning is an important policy to accommodate effective housing program that includes all categories of affordability index. Although the program has faced significant challenges due to the deceptive involvements of various local government and legal obligations are enforced against to protect land and usage of building. The associated companies gradually shifted their intentions from providing facilities for low-income families to making profits from selling properties to upper income individuals.
In order to improve the existing structure of inclusionary zoning, the governments from all levels must required to enhance collective and collaborative efforts to expand affordable supplies in the form of housing and community development programs. The growing recognition and appreciation of the citizen’s life can be improved by supplying sufficient support while considering health, education, income and healthy living conditions of living (Massey & Rugh, 2017). The policymakers must need to ensure betterment in developing access to connect efficiently with low-income households to higher opportunity communities. The enforcement of state policies and involvement in the decision making process of inclusionary housing programs can be an effective alternative to sustain productive development for affordable housing. The government must be required to provide sufficient resources to facilitate low-income households incorporating basic needs of life including better education, healthcare facilities and services.
Inclusionary zoning is inevitable to restore community relationships as it promotes inclusive communities by locating affordable accommodation in low-income to high opportunity neighbourhoods (Callies & Simon, 2017). The federal government needs to facilitate local policymakers to exaggerate accurate inclusionary zoning strategies by developing potential model and strategies. Constant maintenance and supportive environment are essential to establish mixed communities.
What kind of jurisdictions have adopted IZ: the inclusionary jurisdiction system can vary highly depending upon the region. This variation can show key differences such as population composition, housing stock, and political goals. For example, some jurisdictions are trying stronger their economic condition while others try to form affordable housing projects. These are also their differences in the work frame. There are differences in the goals of each jurisdiction but one thing that’s constant is trying to develop affordable housing at significantly lower values than the original market-rates (Udawattha & Halwatura, 2017). The main difference between the implanted IZ programmers whether they are mandatory or voluntary, affordability length, affordable units that need to be built, and the income of the household that needs to be moved in that unit.
Inclusionary policies vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction: the policies of local jurisdiction can differ from each other greatly. Certain characteristics must be kept in observation and analyzed thoroughly so that the given result can be satisfactory and benefit the targeted jurisdiction. For this purpose, the researcher of the University of Maryland and the National Housing Conference are using the statistical model for the identification of different jurisdictions’ characteristics. The result from the statistical model shows the biggest differences in the policies that are adopted by different jurisdictions.
How much affordable housing has been produced in different IZ programmers and the factors that affect the production level: depending upon the length of the time the programmers has been running, it can be predicted how many programs are running there. The time is the predictor of a number of running projects. This is a sensible method as the IZ programmed is running for several years to complete; they can generate new IZ units. Developers and administrators need more time to become familiar with the system so they can remove obstacles from the project. In the San Francisco project, the evidence is found for the argument that exempted smaller projects or giving density bonuses is tends to produce more, which indicates a more flexible program can result in greater production. While in the San Francisco area, the IZ program can make some affordable units in Boston, 43% of suburbs area, it cannot produce any units. The one-third areas are unable to report on how many units are produced. The results have shown that the jurisdiction area in Boston is adapted to the IZ program other than creating affordable housing projects. It can be a reason for the low production of affordable housing as the IZ program are a relatively new phenomenon, and in the Boston area, it applied to a narrow range of developments.
Effect of IZ program on price and production of market house production: the revenue can get by renting or selling an affordable unit is generally lower than the cost of production of the unit. The developer wants to avoid those units at any cost as they are not here for losing any money or to get lower profit rated. Developers are reacting to mandatory IZ units in various ways.
First, they do not want to work where IZ units are compulsory. Second, they may have a higher value than the market rates to overcome loses. They may have lowered the prices of the land they are using. The developer can use any of these above ideas, but the only constant thing that happens is housing in the jurisdiction is likely to fall. If the housing units in those areas fall and the market demand and other factors remain constant then there will be a rise in housing prices as per the rule of supply and demand.
Affordability is a term that varies from person to person. What is affordable to one person is not necessary that others can afford it. It depends on who is the person in charge and what is a geographic region. When affordability term is using against housing, the first thing that came to mind generally is the price of the house and when it can be acquired over a period of time.
In chapter 3 the problem that will be discussed is Gentrification and its effect on social life. The life youth, veteran people, LGBTQ, elderly people are hugely affected by the policies that are taken by the US government. This chapter will thoroughly discuss the policies and their impact.
Gentrification is a term that relates to the remodeling of the house, property, or locality. Gentrification often leads to changing the lifestyle of people and increasing the property value in an area where government functions gentrification. The government mainly chooses an urban area for demodulation, which ultimately leads to rising in the price of that area. The process often accompanied by an influx of middle class people in deteriorating areas and displaces poorer people. Gentrification often results in displacing poor as outsiders rich people enter after remodeling an area. It can be described as an injustice method that is done against economically backdated people and used pejoratively.
Gentrification had started in the early 20th century in America, where large areas of slums and colony were demolished, and new structures were ready to revitalized cities. The remodeling issue became controversial as it displaces poor people from their roots and leads inflation of taxes, pricing of houses. The issue also influences the political, cultural, and architectural value of many cities in the US like New York, Washington DC, and New Orleans and Seattle as these cities remodeled in the 20th century. The wealthier class moved to this remodeled sites of cities as they need easy access to their work and entertainment. In that time, a renovation movement was started by youth as they moved to gentrified areas and refurbished their home, and it is continued in the ’90s. In between the ’60s and ’70s, the gentrification remained private and unplanned. This stage was known as “Pioneer Stage.” Later in the 1980s, the district was transformed into a post-industrial neighborhood where the rich were living a couple of blocks away from poorer. In the late 1990s, the speculative stage of gentrification arrived where the rent of houses become sky-high as private developers became associated with projects. The government allowed subsidized by introducing tax brackets in some areas. In 2000, the Super gentrification stage arrived where wealthy people were removed from busy business streets. It has been already discussed that the gentrification movement already current residents from their area as they become excluded socially and financially. They had started living in the suburbs area where they could find employment, transportation, and safety for their families. Gentrification process was able to start a conflict between the new and old residents as the new buyers take credits for upgrading the neighborhood.
Drastic changes in newly gentrified areas present an opportunity for high-class people to relocate to their favorite place. This causes changes in neighborhood culture, and the process has redefined their life which was already living in all those areas before gentrification. In the 21st century, gentrification has reached its peak, and many cities got rebirth for the process like San Francisco, Boston, New York, and Seattle. The effect of gentrification is very complex, and they contradict and vary on a regional basis. The positive changes that are emerging from gentrifications are, there was new investment, increases tax that will ultimately lead to a strong economy for any country. The negative side is that it displaces the old residence from their places and creates conflict on a socio-economic basis. It has made people leave their old life and adapt to a new life (Cooper, Wang& Singh, 2017).
There is a change that can be observed in US homelessness trends, the number of homeless people is declined, but there is a long way to go before completely removes this problem. According to their data, 2015, half a million people were homeless in the US on any given night. Either they were sleeping outside or in the transitional housing program.
The study will focus on four types of homeless people; they are LGBTQ, veterans, families, and chronically ills.
The main reason families are becoming homeless is because of the huge rise in rent prices but wages are not simultaneously increasing, people are losing their jobs, shortage in affordable housing are also related with each other. The number of single mothers is high on the list of homeless people. The mother with little education was separated from their partner in order to protect the child from their abusive partner. They have very poor credit limits which prevent them from renting any house. Others who became homeless are by the sudden death of an earning member in the family or job loss or bills that cause them to get evicted from home. Other reasons can be depression, mental illness, or post-traumatic stress disorder. The government needs to take care of these families by giving them jobs or at least training to become ready for any kind of job. They need to create such programmers that create awareness at a very grassroots level of every department and take measures to avoid such problems.
LGBTQ: The main problem for them to become homeless as their parents throws them out for their sexual preferences, and they need to face challenges on their own. The LGBTQ youth face a higher amount of homelessness; they will stay at riskier locations with an unknown person and less likely to take shelter. They are misunderstood by their parents and society, and they are discriminated from the public. There is no such program on how to deal with them and finding shelter that can accept and understand them. They are subjected to greater risk, and them fae more abuse than heterosexual peers. Transgender is also faced with risk on a physical basis if turned by shelters. Many shelters are refusing them for are just because of who they are. The government needs to think of something which can give them protection and assurance.
Homeless veterans: the number of homeless veterans is high in male; only 9% of homeless veterans are females. Homeless veterans are suffering from mental illness have drug or alcohol problems. The main reason veterans are becoming homeless is because of affordable housing prices. Many veterans don’t have a regular income, and access to health care programs can be a problem for them. Many veterans spent their service years just as a regular man, they did not show any exemplary work, so they did not promote to officer level. Veterans have specialization in special jobs that they did not perform in the civilian world, so it becomes a problem for them to manage new jobs as they had no knowledge of it (Del Pero et al. 2017).
Chronically homeless: according to HUD, a chronically homeless person is a person who is unaccompanied for his or her disabled condition. They can be homeless for about a year for more or have at least three or more episodes of homelessness in the past three years. A person can be called homeless if they are living in a situation that is not a habitat for humans (Mallach, 2016). The federal government takes the initiative in 2006 to end the homeless problem. They mostly look for those who had problems with mental illness, substance abuse, or anything which can be cured with any type of assistance. They have encouraged the local government to take the ten years to plan to end the chronic homeless problem. A chronically homeless person is a very complex person, they do not only need constant assistance, but the loneliness comes from a great cause. To treat the homeless person’s government needed to spend $44733 annually, which will be a huge burden for them.
Conclusion
Homelessness is a social problem which is diminishing a person’s confidant and self-respect. The system has managed those problems with too much sensitivity. Policymakers know that treating this social problem as a whole will not work. They have to break down the problems into segments. The federal government can get help from the local governments, which will help to understand the problem better. Policymakers need to form more programmers. With the help of local members they can reach to homeless person by creating groups. They need to build more shelters, soup kitchens, create more awareness of this problem. They try to start educational programmes for youth which helps them to gain their confidence and also create an opportunity to earn for themselves. The homeless problem can be solved if the people from all communities, regions come together and reach for those who are in need of help. Government policies can cause desire changes if it has the support of local people. The extra hand of local people will strengthen the project taken by the federal government.
References
Appler, D. R. (2016). Affordable housing in National Register districts: recognizing the advantages of historic urban neighborhoods in Louisville and Covington, Kentucky, USA. Journal of Urbanism: International Research on Placemaking and Urban Sustainability, 9(3), 237-253. Retrieved on 7th October, 2019 Retrieved from https://scholar.google.com/scholar?as_ylo=2015&q=affordable+housing+in+USA&hl=en&as_sdt=0,5#d=gs_qabs&u=%23p%3DbVNw9gSg-IEJ
Bloom, N. D., & Laser, M. G. (Eds.). (2016). Affordable housing in New York: The people, places, and policies that transformed a city. Princeton University Press. Retrieved on 7th October, 2019 Retrieved from https://books.google.co.in/books?hl=en&lr=&id=9mpsCgAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PP11&dq=affordable+housing+policies&ots=RFJtjcLWE4&sig=d31thyqfBtTv94cortjm1gFHM50&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=affordable%20housing%20policies&f=false
Callies, D. L., & Simon, D. B. (2017). Fair Housing, Discrimination and Inclusionary Zoning in the United States. J. Int’l & Comp. L., 4, 39. Retrieved on 7th October, 2019 Retrieved fromhttps://www.jicl.org.uk/pdf13/4-1-2.pdf
Cooper, R.A., Wang, C. & Singh, N., 2016.Evaluation of a model community?wide bed bug management program in affordable housing.Pest management science, 72(1), pp.45-56. Retrieved on 7th October, 2019 Retrieved from https://entomology.rutgers.edu/personnel/changlu-wang/pdfs/Cooper2015Community-wideManagementBB.pdf
Danell, J., & Olausson, M. (2016). Affordable housing through inclusionary zoning–the case of Frihamnen, Gothenburg. Retrieved on 7th October, 2019 Retrieved fromhttps://www.diva-portal.org/smash/record.jsf?pid=diva2:952106
Del Pero, A.S., Adema, W., Ferraro, V. and Frey, V., 2016.Policies to promote access to good-quality affordable housing in OECD countries. Retrieved on 7th October, 2019 Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Angelica_Salvi/publication/297409618_Policies_to_promote_access_to_good-quality_affordable_housing_in_OECD_countries/links/56dee8ac08aedd1e515009b4.pdf
Engelsman, U., Rowe, M., & Southern, A. (2018). Community Land Trusts, affordable housing and community organising in low-income neighbourhoods. International Journal of Housing Policy, 18(1), 103-123. Retrieved on 7th October, 2019 Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Udi_Engelsman/publication/304905965_Community_Land_Trusts_affordable_housing_and_community_organising_in_low-income_neighbourhoods/links/580893ba08ae07cbaa545bff/Community-Land-Trusts-affordable-housing-and-community-organising-in-low-income-neighbourhoods.pdf
Ghent, A.C., Hernández?Murillo, R. and Owyang, M.T., 2015. Did affordable housing legislation contribute to the subprime securities boom?. Real Estate Economics, 43(4), pp.820-854. Retrieved on 7th October, 2019 Retrieved from https://files.stlouisfed.org/files/htdocs/wp/2012/2012-005.pdf
Kalugina, A. (2016). Affordable housing policies: An overview. Cornell Real Estate Review, 14(1), 10. Retrieved on 7th October, 2019 Retrieved from https://scholarship.sha.cornell.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1156&context=crer
Kegler, M. C., Lebow-Skelley, E., Lea, J., Haardörfer, R., Lefevre, A., Diggs, P., & Herndon, S. (2019). A qualitative study of the process of adoption, implementation and enforcement of smoke-free policies in privately-owned affordable housing. BMC public health, 19(1), 1071. Retrieved on 7th October, 2019 Retrieved from https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12889-019-7404-y
Lawson, J., Legacy, C., & Parkinson, S. (2016). Transforming public housing in a federal context: Inquiry into affordable housing industry capacity. Retrieved on 7th October, 2019 Retrieved from https://scholar.google.com/scholar?as_ylo=2015&q=affordable+housing+in+USA&hl=en&as_sdt=0,5#d=gs_qabs&u=%23p%3DB-DJKb8SM0oJ
Mallach, A. (2017). A decent home: Planning, building, and preserving affordable housing. Routledge Retrieved on 7th October, 2019 Retrieved from.https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0970389615000336
Martinez, E. H., Alvear, A. M., Tommelein, I. D., & Ballard, G. (2015). FORMWORK STANDARDIZATION AND PRODUCTION FLOW: LESSONS FROM AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECT IN ECUADOR. IGLC 23, 53. Retrieved on 7th October, 2019 Retrieved from https://scholar.google.com/scholar?as_ylo=2015&q=affordable+housing+in+USA&hl=en&as_sdt=0,5#d=gs_qabs&u=%23p%3DbVNw9gSg-IEJ
Massey, D. S., & Rugh, J. S. (2017). Zoning, Affordable Housing, and Segregation in US Metropolitan Areas. The Fight for Fair Housing: Causes, Consequences, and Future Implications of the 1968 Federal Fair Housing Act, 14. Retrieved on 7th October, 2019 Retrieved from https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&as_ylo=2015&q=inclusionary+zoning+affordable+housing+in+USA&btnG=#d=gs_qabs&u=%23p%3DtXGco_xIhKsJ
Metcalf, G. (2018). Sand castles before the tide? Affordable housing in expensive cities. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 32(1), 59-80. Retrieved on 7th October, 2019 Retrieved from https://pubs.aeaweb.org/doi/pdf/10.1257/jep.32.1.59
Metcalf, G. (2018). Sand castles before the tide? Affordable housing in expensive cities. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 32(1), 59-80. Retrieved on 7th October, 2019 Retrieved from https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/jep.32.1.59
Miller, S. R. (2015). Community Land Trusts: Why Now Is the Time to Integrate This Housing Activists’ Tool into Local Government Affordable Housing Policies. Journal of Affordable Housing & Community Development Law, 23(3-4), 349-372. Retrieved on 7th October, 2019 Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/26408145
Ren, X., Yan, D. and Hong, T., 2015.Data mining of space heating system performance in affordable housing. Building and Environment, 89, pp.1-13. Retrieved on 7th October, 2019 Retrieved from https://cloudfront.escholarship.org/dist/prd/content/qt84r6102w/qt84r6102w.pdf
Scally, C. P., & Tighe, J. R. (2015). Democracy in action?: NIMBY as impediment to equitable affordable housing siting. Housing Studies, 30(5), 749-769. Retrieved on 7th October, 2019 Retrieved from https://scholar.google.com/scholar?as_ylo=2015&q=affordable+housing+in+USA&hl=en&as_sdt=0,5#d=gs_qabs&u=%23p%3DMHnCceGFlMgJ
Udawattha, C., &Halwatura, R. (2017). Life cycle cost of different Walling material used for affordable housing in tropics. Case studies in construction materials, 7, 15-29. Retrieved on 7th October, 2019 Retrieved from https://digitalscholarship.unlv.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1000&context=bmw_lincy_hre
Ward, P. M. (2019). Self-help housing. The Wiley Blackwell Encyclopedia of Urban and Regional Studies, 1-6. Retrieved on 7th October, 2019 Retrieved fromhttps://www.researchgate.net/profile/Peter_Ward12/publication/332951146_Self_Help_Housing_Preprint_of_Peter_M_Ward_Self-help_Housing_In_Antony_Orum_Editor_The_Wiley-Blackwell_Encyclopedia_of_Urban_and_Regional_Studies_httpsdoiorg1010029781118568446eurs0281/links/5cd35f38458515712e9b5908/Self-Help-Housing-Preprint-of-Peter-M-Ward-Self-help-Housing-In-Antony-Orum-Editor-The-Wiley-Blackwell-Encyclopedia-of-Urban-and-Regional-Studies-https-doiorg-101002-9781118568446eurs0281
Essay Writing Service Features
Our Experience
No matter how complex your assignment is, we can find the right professional for your specific task. Contact Essay is an essay writing company that hires only the smartest minds to help you with your projects. Our expertise allows us to provide students with high-quality academic writing, editing & proofreading services.
Free Features
Free revision policy
$10Free bibliography & reference
$8Free title page
$8Free formatting
$8How Our Essay Writing Service Works
First, you will need to complete an order form. It's not difficult but, in case there is anything you find not to be clear, you may always call us so that we can guide you through it. On the order form, you will need to include some basic information concerning your order: subject, topic, number of pages, etc. We also encourage our clients to upload any relevant information or sources that will help.
Complete the order form
Once we have all the information and instructions that we need, we select the most suitable writer for your assignment. While everything seems to be clear, the writer, who has complete knowledge of the subject, may need clarification from you. It is at that point that you would receive a call or email from us.
Writer’s assignment
As soon as the writer has finished, it will be delivered both to the website and to your email address so that you will not miss it. If your deadline is close at hand, we will place a call to you to make sure that you receive the paper on time.
Completing the order and download
