Neighborhoods of color impacted by industrial zoning and industrial uses
Issue:
Major cities have policies that have zoned Black and Hispanic single-family neighborhoods to be adjacent to or located within industrial zoning districts. The industrial uses within this industrial zoning puts these neighborhoods of color at risk of harm to their health. White non-Hispanic single-family neighborhoods are not burdened with the same risks.
See DPBC law firm unequal zoning tab at https://www.danielbesharalawfirm.com/unequal-industrial-zoning
The City of Dallas planning documents describe the discriminatory effect of the industrial zoning affecting the single-family homes in Black and Hispanic neighborhoods. The City of Dallas February 25, 2022 Racial Equity Assessment of Comprehensive Housing Policy Update states:
“Industrial zones generally follow predominantly Black or Hispanic neighborhoods and are noticeably absent in areas with a predominantly white population.” [page 20]
“Even today many residential areas of Southern Dallas… have zoning that has allowed heavy industrial development to flourish right up against long-time Black and Brown residential neighborhoods.” [page 24]
“The 2019 Fair Housing Study shares examples of “local, state and federal policies that mandated segregation and inevitably shaped the landscape of housing and opportunity for generations to come” in Dallas and other communities across the nation. These examples include:
Zoning laws: Neighborhoods that once had African American residents were rezoned to permit industrial and toxic uses. Those rezonings turned those neighborhoods into slums.” [page 19].
The history of City of Dallas shows the official City plans to zone separate neighborhoods by race. In 1944, the Harland Bartholomew & Associates Master Plan for the City of Dallas zoned the neighborhoods as they were – racially segregated.
1944 City Bartholomew Plan Map of Black Districts
The Black and Hispanic neighborhoods outlined in the 1944 City Master Plan continue to be the same neighborhoods burdened by industrial zoning adjacency today:
Harms for residents adjacent to industrial uses:
hazardous and nuisance emissions and contaminants adversely affect the health and safety of residents of adjacent and nearby neighborhoods. Most of these affected neighborhoods are occupied by people of color,
single-family homes in or adjacent to industrial zoning may be considered to be illegal uses under the city code with detrimental impacts to the homeowners such as loss of residential rights and inability to get home repair or financing loans,
nuisance conditions such as industrial truck traffic in and around homes,
the effects of these nuisance and hazards cause the value of the homes and the resulting financial security of the owners to be substantially less than the value without those effects.
the expansion and encroachment of industrial uses result in the elimination of the single-family neighborhoods,
residential areas adversely affected by industrial uses frequently suffer from the inadequate residential neighborhood amenities as result of the lowering of property values and related taxes that cities require to provide adequate municipal services. The industrial uses of residential infrastructure also cause accelerated deterioration of infrastructure designed for residential uses but subject to heavier industrial uses.
White single-family neighborhoods typically do not suffer these injuries.
The City of Dallas recognizes the harms to neighborhoods of color:
“These disparities include… greater exposure to airborne toxins and other environmental hazards associated with industrial operations abutting residential neighborhoods.” City of Dallas February 25, 2022 Racial Equity Update, page 2.
“Inequitable land use controls have long precipitated the concentration of environmental hazards like hazardous waste facilities, heavy industrial uses, and other polluting facilities in communities of color and low-income communities.” City of Dallas, ForwardDallas Comprehensive Land Use Plan Existing Conditions Report, October 7, 2022, page 63.
Some advocacy actions that can remedy or mitigate these injuries:
Obtain the evidence to show existence and causes of the injuries.
Obtain effective enforcement of existing environmental and other protective laws or zoning codes to require industries to reduce or eliminate the emissions and conditions that harm residential neighbors. This can include the conversion of the land to harmless uses, e.g. convert an illegal landfill to a nature preserve;
Advocacy to prevent expansion of industrial zoning and uses to currently safe and viable neighborhoods;
Advocacy to change the currently vacant land with industrial zoning to zoning uses compatible with adjacent and nearby single-family homes;
Check the Environmental Justice Index link on the Resources page to look up your location.
LIHTC projects in or near environmentally hazardous or degraded locations
Issue:
The state of Texas allocates the vast majority of LIHTC housing, a critical housing source for federal housing choice voucher families, to projects in racially concentrated urban areas. Within those Black and Hispanic neighborhoods, most of the LIHTC projects’ locations are subject to risk of environmental hazards and pollution that white neighborhoods do not face.
There is a failure at the national, state and local level to prevent the development of LIHTC housing in racially concentrated areas with risk of environmental degradation and health risks.
There is no national LIHTC regulation by the US Treasury/IRS (the agency in charge of regulating the LIHTC program) to require states to examine the environmental location of a proposed project and allocate LIHTC projects in non-environmentally challenged locations.
The state of Texas’ rules for evaluating environmental harms of a proposed site are mostly inadequate and are usually waived by the state. This results in new LIHTC projects developed near harmful industries, on top of old landfills, on or near oil pipelines, and near areas of environmental contamination with health risks to future generations.
Harms with LIHTC project near industrial uses:
Low-income tenants of color residing in the LIHTC projects in racially concentrated areas do not receive the same degree of protection from environmental and health hazards as do the tenants in LIHTC projects located in majority white, non-Hispanic locations.
The development of LIHTC housing also impacts the availability of housing for federal housing voucher families. Much of the available housing for voucher families is in racially concentrated locations. With the state continuing to allocate new LIHTC housing in segregated areas with environmental degradation, risks of pollution, and health hazards harms this limits available housing in healthy locales for voucher families.
This is a national issue for major urban cities. Reports show the failure of states to examine the environmental aspects of locating LIHTC housing.
Advocacy Actions:
Advocacy for national, state, and local governments to require consideration of racial segregation and require consideration of environmental pollution, harms, and health hazards when allocating federal LIHTC housing
Use Environmental Justice Index resources to notify communities of color of risks of environmental justice issues
Over concentration of low-income subsidized housing in and near single-family neighborhoods of color
Issue:
Modern segregation is perpetuated by the federal, state, and local governments’ approval of different types of federally subsidized housing all in one racially concentrate, high poverty neighborhood. These multiple forms of low-income housing located close together include:
LIHTC projects;
Project Based Rental Assistance (PBRA HUD assisted housing) where HUD contracts with private apartment owners to subsidize low-income housing;
Housing Choice vouchers in apartments; and
Project-based vouchers in apartments.
Despite state rules to prevent over-concentration of LIHTC projects and to prevent increasing poverty in a location, these rules are often waived by municipalities in order to develop the housing.
Approving LIHTC housing in areas of high poverty without concerted community revitalization plans violates the LIHTC tax code and fails to provide much needed community resources for the homeowners and for the residents of the LIHTC housing.
Project Name
Terrace at Highland Hills
Estelle Village
Palladium Simpson Stuart
Pecan Grove Townhomes (aka Highland Hills Apartments
Homes of Persimmon
Type
4% LIHTC and HCV
4% LIHTC and PBRA
4% LIHTC and HCV
4% LIHTC and HCV
9% LIHTC and HCV
Date Approved
2022
2022
2021
2013, 2005
1998
This housing is concentrated near single-family homes in a Black and Hispanic neighborhood.
Harms with overconcentration of poverty:
Overconcentration of poverty for this neighborhood that includes single family homes.
High violent crime – located in the City of Dallas Simpson Stuart Bonnie View Crime Hot Spot
Lack of housing choices for voucher families and low-income tenants outside of areas of high poverty
Advocacy Actions:
Enforcement of concerted community revitalization plan requirement of LIHTC tax code to provide resources for neighborhoods;
Enforcement of over concentration of poverty state rules;
Enforcement of civil rights and fair housing laws
Enforcement of habitual criminal nuisance ordinance
Bank ownership of LIHTC projects in racially concentrated areas of poverty without revitalization and without home loans
Issue:
The Low-Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) is the federal government’s largest program for developing affordable housing. The national government allocates LIHTC credits to states who allocate the funds to developers based on state Qualified Allocation Plans (QAPs).
The owner of the LIHTC property receives a tax credit to offset federal income taxes in return for development of affordable housing. LIHTC housing is a primary source of housing for federal Housing Choice Voucher tenants because LIHTC projects may not deny housing to voucher families because of the use of a voucher.
It is not well known that banks own a majority of LIHTC projects. Bank ownership of LIHTC housing is estimated to be over 73%. Such investment is motivated by Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) requirements. With the vast majority of LIHTC housing located in racially and ethnically concentrated neighborhoods, most bank ownership of projects mirrors such locations. While a bank may own LIHTC housing in such a neighborhood, the banks typically do not make a significant number of single-family home loans in the same locations.
“WFAA news story, ‘You’re only crippling us’: Banks own many of Dallas’ low-income, high-crime apartments — and they're rewarded for it” Banking Below 30, February 28, 2021, is at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SARhcjaN5m0”
The U.S. Dept. of Treasury (IRS) administers the LIHTC program to the states and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) supervises national banks, including bank investments and ownership of LIHTC housing. Both agencies are obligated under the Fair Housing Act to affirmatively further fair housing in their activities relating to housing.
All executive departments and agencies shall administer their programs and activities relating to housing and urban development (including any Federal agency having regulatory or supervisory authority over financial institutions) in a manner affirmatively to further the purposes of this subchapter and shall cooperate with the Secretary to further such purposes. 42 U.S.C. §3608(d).
Harms from locating LIHTC housing in high poverty locales:
Lack of home loans to adjoining single family neighborhoods leads to further disinvestment of the neighborhood
Instead of investing in affordable homeownership opportunities, cities are continuing to concentrate multifamily LIHTC rental housing in such neighborhoods of color.
Advocacy Actions:
Civil rights enforcement
Enforcement of Community Reinvestment Act obligations by banks
Lending discrimination enforcement
Unequal municipal services
Introduction
Separate and unequal neighborhoods are found in all major metropolitan areas in Texas. Studies show that the majority of white homeowners live in white neighborhoods with quality schools, grocery stores, retail stores, job opportunities, protection from crime, low poverty, and without pollution or environmental hazards. This is the opposite for Black and Hispanic neighborhoods where homeowners live with conditions of high poverty, risks of environmental and health hazards, high crime, and without adequate amenities or services.
Separate and unequal neighborhoods did not arise because of person preferences or income differences but rather are the result of intentional racial segregation caused by local, state and federal government actions. The unequal neighborhoods did not magically disappear with the civil rights laws and Fair Housing Act enactment. The U.S. National Advisory Commission on Civil Disorders (Kerner Commission) was tasked with investigating the 1967 riots in major U.S. cities to document the conditions of inner-city segregation.
The Kerner Commission described these severely unequal conditions as unknown to most whites: “Our nation is moving toward two societies, one black, one white—separate and unequal… Segregation and poverty have created in the racial ghetto a destructive environment totally unknown to most white Americans.” The National Advisory Commission on Civil Disorders. 1988. The Kerner Report. New York: Pantheon Book, 1-2. The in-depth report documents the extreme inequities with failing schools, substandard housing, blight, poor sanitation, high crime, and degradation of the communities.
The local, state and national government’s ongoing failure to address the deeply unequal and conditions and ongoing policies have continued to leave our nations’ neighborhoods racially and ethnically separate with enduring unequal neighborhood living conditions. The unequal conditions continue to daily impact neighborhoods of color, affect their health, and limit their wealth.
After the passage of the Fair Housing Act in 1968, municipalities have failed to address the deeply unequal and segregated neighborhoods with a coherent approach to equalization. When a municipality annexes new territory, it must come up with a plan to ensure that the newly annexed area is made equal to and receives the benefits of the municipality’s full services including adequate streets, sanitation, code enforcement, and other city services. These services must be provided: Police and Fire protection, emergency medical services, Solid waste collection, Water and wastewater, Maintenance of roads, parks, playgrounds, proper zoning. Municipalities have not provided these equalization plans or services to racially segregated areas of their cities.
Issue:
There are ongoing policies causing unequal neighborhood conditions in Black and Hispanic neighborhoods. Unequal zoning patterns disproportionately impact communities of color with health and safety and environmental issues. Cities routinely fail to enforce existing zoning code against industries that impact and influence Black and Hispanic communities. For example, numerous industries next to Black and Hispanic neighborhoods operate without the proper certificate of occupancy, building permits, or refuse to abide by the conditions of the industrial zoning.
Harms from unequal municipal services:
Noxious industries that harm adjoining residents
Long term health effects
Truck traffic and other nuisance conditions in Black and Hispanic neighborhoods
Advocacy Actions:
Enforcement of zoning code, permits, and environmental regulations for single-family homes near industrial uses
Enforcement of fair housing and civil rights laws
Advocacy for amortization of industries that are nonconforming uses in locations adjacent to Black and Hispanic neighborhoods
Environmental inequities
Issue:
Discriminatory industrial zoning disproportionately harms neighborhoods of color. Heavy industries, illegal landfills, un-remediated, old landfills, illegal dumping of industrial waste, pipelines, foundries, rendering plants, warehouses, trucking facilities are disproportionately located next to Black and Hispanic single-family neighborhoods.
Harms:
Health effects for residents
Industrial nuisance conditions that do not belong in residential communities such as semi-truck traffic, pollution, odor, risks of fire
Impacts on property values and wealth
Impacts on financial resources and loans for infusion of resources into neighborhoods
The environmentally contaminated neighborhood of Cadillac Heights is an example of the harms. In a case by HNLP founders Michael Daniel and Laura Beshara, a federal court found that the Cadillac Heights homeowners had produced substantial evidence of the discriminatory effects of the City's zoning policies:
“Residential land in Cadillac Heights is surrounded by industrial uses that utilize hazardous and toxic materials. The neighborhood is home to two lead smelters whose emissions expose residents to hazardous levels of lead, both in the soil and in neighborhood landfills.”
“According to 1990 statistics, African-Americans constituted 47.25% of the Dallas population living in Census blocks that were either within an industrial-zoned district or within five hundred feet of one….Hispanics constituted 28.36% of the Dallas population living in such blocks… But as of 1990, the overall population of Dallas was 28.89% African-American, 20.88% Hispanic, and 50.23% other.”
Miller, et al. v. City of Dallas, 2002 WL 230834 (N.D. Tex. 2002)
Advocacy Actions:
Petition for health surveys of residents to be conducted by government agencies
Enforcement of civil rights, environmental, and fair housing laws