Submitted photos
Guest columnists Wes Marner and William Ochowicz.
Wes Marner, left, and Will Ochowicz: Rising housing prices and the 'subsequent displacement of lower-income individuals and families is not an inevitability as cities grow.'
City planning and zoning are once again the focus of arguments about shaping the future of Madison. Cap Times publisher Paul Fanlund, a Hill Farms resident, recently wrote a hyperbolic opinion column about changes to the draft West Area Plan, arguing that the city is “taking aim at homeowners’ neighborhoods.” Just a few days later, city employees were heckled by a roomful of angry residents during an informational meeting. The whole episode raises opportunities to take a measured look at the changes proposed and challenge some of the rhetoric we’ve heard.
Other cities wish they had the problems Madison has! A growing population and job base, and a high quality of life are much better than the alternatives. But we know that these benefits come with challenges. According to the city’s Housing Snapshot, from 2019-2021 Madison’s population grew at an annualized rate of 2.0%, while the number of households earning less $50,000 shrank alarmingly fast, nearly 6% per year. Lower-income households are being displaced by new residents, and housing costs are rising just as they have in many other booming U.S. cities, including San Francisco, San Jose, Boston and Austin. Extensive reporting by local media has explored why this is happening: Housing costs are rising in part because we are not building enough housing for everyone who wants to live in Madison.
To state the obvious, we are in a housing crisis and we need to build more housing. This does not mean we need exclusively more market-rate housing, or only affordable housing. We need both, and there is not a conflict between the two.
The Furman Center recently summarized a number of studies on the effects of new housing on rents. They found that increased housing supply slows rent growth in a region, that new construction can sometimes reduce rents or rent growth in the surrounding area, and that new construction frees up apartments that are then rented (or retained) by households across the income spectrum.
There are recent real-life examples of these impacts. Minneapolis made national news for eliminating single-family zoning in 2020, banning parking requirements, and encouraging new apartment construction along commercial corridors. Since then, rents have decreased, even as the city continues to grow. Austin, one of the fastest growing cities in the country, saw rents decrease more than 12% in 2023 after constructing over 34,000 apartments since 2021. The increase in apartments led to an increase in vacancies, which shifts power from landlords to renters.
We cannot emphasize enough — this rise in housing prices and subsequent displacement of lower-income individuals and families is not an inevitability as cities grow. It is a policy choice made by residents and elected officials.
So what are Madison’s city planners, tasked with preparing for Madison’s future, doing about it? The planning framework is designed to set a 10-year outlook for each area of the city and needs to account for growth, transportation and housing needs over that time.
Naysayers, like those at the recent public meeting, would have you believe that city planners are taking a chainsaw to neighborhoods dominated by single-family housing. Instead, the city appears to be using a scalpel to enable modest growth in precise locations.
Let’s look closely at what is in the draft plan for Hill Farms. The updates to the Generalized Future Land Use (GFLU) map affect only three large lots that are home to the private Hill Farm Swim Club and two churches, each with large buildings and parking lots. And the zoning changes are modest. At the pool site, new zoning would permit a two- to five-story apartment building (less than a block from other, larger buildings). The proposed rezone of the two church sites permits a mix of even smaller apartment buildings, townhouses and single family homes. Other changes in these plans are aimed at encouraging more modes of transit (instead of only cars) and reducing injuries at high-fatality intersections. Every changed lot is near a transit route.
The city is making these proactive zoning plans to open up development options in lot-specific ways, allowing landowners to construct future infill housing while minimally disrupting a neighborhood. And the city is being transparent about it by holding public meetings and opening the document for public comment.
Are these proactive zoning changes guaranteed? No. Updating the area plans is a first step in the process, and the rezoning only addresses the two church lots. The draft West Area Plan notes that the pool lot may be used for other purposes later, but they are not recommending proactive rezoning at this time.
Are these lots going to be developed if zoning changes? No, not unless the current owners of the individual lots decide to sell to a developer.
So, why the hubbub? Undoubtedly, some of the opponents are people frightened by overhyped headlines. We also believe that much of the vocal opposition is a minority of homeowners seeking an even louder voice. Neighborhoods like Hill Farms are like the Hill Farm Swim Club: a desirable place with limited space available to people who can afford it. According to the Neighborhood Indicators Project, more than 80% of Hill Farms homes are owner-occupied, almost twice the city average of 44%. The value of those owner-occupied houses averages nearly $100,000 more than the city average of $418,000.
But living in an exclusive neighborhood or being a “taxpaying homeowner” should not convey special status to be heard. Renters also pay property taxes through their rent.
Ald. Bill Tishler represents the Hill Farms neighborhood on the city council. His district also includes several apartment complexes, many renters, younger residents, working parents, and people without cars. We hope that Tishler and the other alders are hearing their voices, too. Last Tuesday’s public meeting seemed heavily attended by folks with the free time and resources to attend an early weeknight meeting. Ald. MGR Govindarajan has asked important questions about whether these meetings are equitable in how they are scheduled, located and publicized.
Hopefully, a diverse set of voices will show up for a book club discussion of M. Nolan Gray’s Arbitrary Lines: How Zoning Broke the American City and How to Fix It, hosted by Tishler on March 20. With Tishler’s permission, we have invited Gray, who will attend the meeting virtually to answer questions.
We applaud Madison’s planning experts who are working to address Madison’s inevitable growth, and we hope our alders welcome creative use of planning tools that encourage new housing while discouraging sprawl. Tishler and the rest of the city council have a choice: They can bow to the fears of a small, vocal few who would cede our growth to car-centric and environmentally damaging sprawl in the suburbs, or they can embrace a proven progressive vision that promotes sustainable, affordable and equitable growth. That choice also requires every neighborhood in Madison to recognize the issues that we as a city are facing, and contribute — together — to new housing everywhere.
Dr. Wes Marner lives in the University Hill Farms neighborhood. Professionally, he works in the community to promote equitable access to science education.
Will Ochowicz lives in the Tenney-Lapham neighborhood. He is the founder and a lead for Madison is for People, a group that advocates for more housing.
