NCLM Southern City Volume 71, Issue 2, 2021

NCLM.ORG 27 In 2018, Durham officials faced tough decisions. City council members and staff had been examining zoning changes that they hoped would increase the city’s housing supply and create more affordable housing options. Doing so, they faced a difficult balancing act: How to increase density without damaging neighborhood character and the values of existing homes and take actions that actually achieved their goal of creating more housing options that residents across income levels could afford. The Expanding Housing Choices initiative that was ultimately approved in 2019 was less aggressive than some advocates wanted. It was, though, begrudgingly accepted by residents in affected areas, who by and large understood the need, did not want to be accused of being NIMBYs (“Not in My Backyard”), and wanted their home values and neighborhood character protected from incompatible uses. continues on page 28 The resulting EHC plan allowed for more density in areas near downtown Durham, with duplexes and so-called accessory dwell- ing units in those neighborhoods. Durham’s experience is not unique. In recent decades, cities across North Carolina and across the nation have led the way when it comes to looking for ways to try to meet the housing needs of res- idents, at both the lower and middle levels of the income spectrum. Those efforts have included targeted density changes for specific developments or larger areas, voter-approved bond issues spe- cifically supporting affordable housing ($95 million, Durham; $80 million, Raleigh; $50 million, Charlotte; and $25 million Greens- boro), and various incentives for developers to build houses and apartments sold or rented at below-market rates or below median income thresholds. The three recent bond issues in Durham, Raleigh and Charlotte represent more than the state of North Carolina currently sets aside annually for affordable housing. Attempts to meet the differing housing needs of residents is not confined to North Carolina’s larger cities. Officials in mid-sized municipalities and smaller towns increasingly recognize that many workers struggle to find safe housing which they can afford, as older housing stock often has not been adequately maintained. In tourism communities, the service workers who fill jobs catering to tourists often cannot afford to live in those same communities as the demand for real estate in picturesque beach and mountain towns increases. That growing focus across the state and across cities and towns of different sizes is why NCLM’s members adopted two legislative goals this year focused on affordable housing: • Revitalize vacant and abandoned properties with enhanced legal tools and funding; and, • Increase state and federal funding for affordable housing. Legislation moving in the House, HB 336/SB 363 Uniform Partition of Heirs Property Act, would help accomplish that first goal by offer- ing the owners of properties with multiple heirs an easier path to clearing titles and selling the properties. Under current law, proper- ties in which the original owners left no wills and were then inherited by multiple heirs—sometimes over generations—will often become vacant and rundown due to the inability of those heirs to clear the legal hurdles required to sell them. If the homes remain occupied, the lack of clear title can cause them to fail to qualify for disaster programs and other funding that might go toward repairing them. NCLM is also optimistic that state legislators and Gov. Roy Cooper will put more money into existing programs that help to incentiv- ize affordable housing, as federal COVID relief is creating more available funding. Amid these efforts, other legislation was filed this year purport- ing to assist in creating more affordable housing by essentially ending all single-family zoning across the state. Advocated by homebuilders groups, SB 349/HB 401 Increase Housing Opportu- nities also would restrict conditional zoning and take other steps that could stifling mixed-use developments and limit the ability of neighboring property owners to weigh in on development. NCLM has characterized the bill as the latest attempt “to extin- guish local authority when it comes to determining how growth and development proceed” while being “cloaked in the language of affordable housing.” Cities and towns across the state have joined in the call, passing resolutions and making statements referring to the legislation as a “radical approach.”