Counterpoint: Housing gets built where it's welcome

Opinion editor's note: Star Tribune Opinion publishes a mix of national and local commentaries online and in print each day. To contribute, click here.

•••

In response to "The Fair Housing Act, 55 years later" (Oct. 25) I'd like to respond: "Yes, and ... ."

Yes, we absolutely need more housing that's affordable and accessible. Yes, like many other critical topics, this discussion is frequently bogged down by nuance, disagreement and antiquated funding structures. Yes, we need to build everywhere, not just in Minneapolis and St. Paul.

And, I'd like to offer, this is where many conclusions are oversimplified. In my experience, there are plenty of financiers, developers and property managers who are eager to bring housing projects to suburbs and exurbs. Where I see more of a sticking point is navigating conversations in those exact communities. A long history of risk aversion, NIMBYism, mistrust and slow, unclear bureaucracy are bigger impediments than developers' interests.

The two realities that slow and even kill development are: 1) Developers go where they are wanted and where they can get projects capitalized, and 2) developers want to move faster than many cities are able or willing to move.

To the first point, developers will go to communities that encourage the construction of new housing. Just look at Minneapolis and St. Paul for a side-by-side comparison.

In Minneapolis, the 2040 Plan clearly outlined what the city wanted in housing and where it wanted it. Conversely, St. Paul's rent control ordinance discourages new development and, as a result, has effectively chilled new residential development. According to the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), in 2022 — the year following the passing of rent control in St. Paul — Minneapolis broke ground on 3.4 times as many housing units as St. Paul despite only having 1.4 times as many residents.

To the second point, a developer's greatest enemy is uncertainty and the resulting risk of a project stalling out entirely. Successful cities — including the area's suburbs that contributed 75% of all the new housing that was delivered in the first half of 2023 — establish a clear vision and path to build new housing. This mitigates uncertainty, manages risk and sets a course for long-term, strategic growth.

Where a city like Minneapolis has done an exemplary job of setting a housing vision and updating zoning codes accordingly, all too often cities do not plan for growth or zone for growth, kicking the can further down in the planning process and inviting the skepticism and influence of NIMBY-minded residents who don't understand why a city is giving variances or rezoning land use for a specific development.

Twin Cities Housing Alliance has, since its inception, worked to build relationships with — and tools for — local government leaders as they balance recognizing and addressing the legitimate concerns of residents while distinguishing these concerns from NIMBY-driven opposition. We're actively working with city leaders to navigate these conversations to more productive ends.

At the end of the day, developers want to build in the suburbs and exurbs and cities want that development, too. Yes we can, and yes we must, work together if we are to have any hope of creating a more affordable housing ecosystem that supports Minnesotans.

Cathy Capone Bennett is executive director, Twin Cities Housing Alliance.