Middle-segment housing by implementing passive land policyMiddle-policy

Abstract

The Dutch housing market has a shortage and especially a shortage in its middle-segment between, low-income, social housing, and higher-income, homeownership. Because of this, municipalities have become more active in creating middle-segment housing, but most Dutch municipalities have few land positions which has urged them to create middle-segment housing in developments with no or low municipal landownership. The so-called passive land policy. However, this has proved difficult as there no longer are extensive national housing plans which were used in the past. In addition, Dutch municipalities do not have much knowledge on creating more middle-segment housing in developments with a passive land policy. Therefore, this thesis asks what land-use instruments exists in the Dutch passive land policy to create more middle-segment housing and how successful these instruments are in creating middle segment housing.

The passive land use instruments are within their relative typology the regulatory minimal percentages and eternal land lease, stimulating by anterior agreements, and communicational means by policy documents. When analysed it was found that these instruments are more often used in combination with each other. So, in implementation, this meant that some regulatory pressure was given on a developer to make them negotiate with the municipality. After this, the municipalities used stimuli to help create a financially feasible project with middle-segment housing and gave permits or sold (small portions of) land. Moreover, the policy documents were used more in advance to let any market party know what conditions were necessary to make the municipality cooperate with a plan.

Dutch municipalities thus influence the amount of middle-segment housing made by the passive land-use instruments used. Therefore, the municipality negotiated with market parties on projects in a context to create an agreement that is possible. In this several factors and actors played an important role. Most important for the agreement were the financial feasibility and the gaining of permits. The procedure for the permits started after the negotiations and the financial feasibility would be reached through the negotiations in which the municipalities stimulated in kind, by lowering other requirements, or by lowering taxes. The context could also play a role through an abundance of social housing in the area, political will, or land positions. There also seemed to be a correlation between more regulative instruments and less trust or a more strained relationship between the municipality and the developer in the network.