Cambridge Mayor Sumbul Siddiqui immigrated to the United States from Karachi, Pakistan, at the age of two, along with her parents and twin brother. Raised in affordable housing in Cambridge and educated in the city’s public schools, she later graduated from Brown University and served as an AmeriCorps fellow at New Profit, a nonprofit organization dedicated to improving social mobility for families. After earning a degree from Northwestern’s Pritzker School of Law, Siddiqui returned to Massachusetts to work as an attorney with Northeast Legal Aid, serving the communities of Lawrence, Lynn, and Lowell. 

Throughout her time as a public servant, Siddiqui has advocated on behalf of the city’s most vulnerable, striving to create affordable housing, protect households facing displacement, and promote equitable access to education. During the pandemic, she helped increase Internet access for low-income families and expanded free COVID testing for all Cambridge residents. Her agenda includes the promotion of clean and climate-resilient streets, parks, and infrastructure as part of making Cambridge a more equitable and civically engaged community. 

Siddiqui recently took time to talk with Senior Fellow Anthony Flint, who is interviewing the mayors of cities that are intertwined with the history of the Lincoln Institute, this year celebrating its 75th anniversary. The following is an edited version of their conversation; the full interview is available as a Land Matters podcast.

Anthony Flint: Cambridge has been gaining quite a lot of attention lately for a new policy that allows for some increases in height and density at appropriate locations—if the projects are 100 percent affordable. Can you tell us about that initiative and how it’s playing out?

Sumbul Siddiqui: The passing of the affordable housing overlay was an important moment for me and for many on the city council. The proposal was to create a citywide zoning overlay to enable 100 percent affordable housing developments in order to better compete with market rate development  . . . the goal is to have multifamily and townhouse development in areas where they are not currently allowed . . . . We have a city that has a widening gap between high- and low-income earners, and we always talk about diversity as well, as a value, and how do we maintain that diversity? For me and others it’s all about creating additional affordable housing options so more people can stay in the city. So far we’re seeing many of our affordable housing developers, like our housing authority and our other community development corporations, doing community meetings around proposals where they are in some cases able to add over 100 units to the affordable housing that they were already going to build.

AF: Changes like this really do seem to percolate up at the local level. I’m thinking, for example, of Minneapolis banning single-family-only zoning to allow more multifamily in more places, and several other cities followed suit. Is the 100 percent affordable overlay something that other cities might adopt, and did you anticipate that this might become a model for other cities?

SS: We certainly think that this can be a model. We know that our neighboring sister city, Somerville, is looking at it . . . . I think it’s all part of the overall mission for many cities to make sure that they are offering and creating more affordable housing options. You know, this is housing that’s affordable to your teachers, to your custodians, to your public servants, legal aid attorneys—you name it, to stay in the city that they maybe have grown up in, and maybe they’ve moved out and want to come back, and we want there to be that opportunity. I think we still see such stark inequality in our city, and as someone who’s grown up in affordable housing in Cambridge . . . I would not be here without it. This is an important initiative and policy, and I do hope it [serves] as a model for other cities across the country.

AF: Cambridge has been such a boomtown for the last several years, and there has been a lot of higher-end housing development. Can you tell us about a few other policies that are effective in maintaining more of that economic diversity?

SS: One of the ways we’ve been able to have the affordable housing stock that we do is through the city’s inclusionary housing program . . . under these provisions, developments of 10 and more units are required to allocate 20 percent of the residential floor area for low- and moderate-income tenants, or moderate- and middle-income home buyers. So it really has been an important way to produce housing under these hot market conditions . . . the more people we bring to the city, the more we’ll have that insatiable housing demand. 

Another thing we really want to focus on is how we use city-owned public property that is available for disposition to develop housing . . . . We’ve done a lot of work around home ownership options for the city and making sure that we have a robust home ownership program for residents to apply to . . . . Preservation is also a big part of the policy around affordability. We this year have been working on the affordability of about 500 units in North Cambridge near the buildings I grew up in, and we’ve put in— probably it’s going to be over $15 million to help preserve these market-rate buildings. Essentially these are expiring use properties. So it’s a little technical, but there’s so many tools—and there’s a long way to go.

AF: How did the pandemic reveal the disparities and racial justice issues that seem to be ingrained, in a way, in the economic outcomes of the city and the region?

SS: The pandemic has revealed a lot of the fault lines . . . and we saw firsthand the disproportionate impact COVID has had on the Black and brown community. It’s highlighted longstanding issues around health-care equity, and we’ve seen how so many of our low-income families have been unable to make ends meet. Many of them lost their jobs because of the public health crisis, but still needed to pay rent, [pay] utilities, and purchase food for themselves and their families. A lot of the issues we saw [during] the pandemic have been issues all along, but as I’ve said, the pandemic has revealed those ugly truths even in our city . . . and you know, we can’t turn a blind eye anymore.

And we have to do things in a manner that is much more urgent. I always use the example of schools that had to close. We quickly got kids laptops and hot spots. [Before the pandemic], we knew kids didn’t have Internet at home, we knew kids didn’t have computers, but we said, ‘Oh, you know, we’re going to study that’ . . . . We should have been doing these things all along. And so I think the one good part of it has just been [that] we’ve been able to figure out solutions really quickly . . . . We can make our city more accessible and affordable and we have to really call out the injustices when we see them.

AF: The pandemic also arguably has been an opportunity to do some things with regard to sustainability, reconfiguring the public space. I wondered if you could talk about that and other ways you’re helping to reduce carbon emissions and build resilience.

SS: This is an area of work where there’s so much going on, and yet sometimes it feels like we’re not moving fast enough, given what we know. We are committed to accelerating the transition to net zero greenhouse gas emissions for all our buildings in the city. We have a goal of net zero emissions by 2050. There are various types of incentives, regulations, and various working groups that are looking at how do we procure 100 percent of our municipal electricity from renewable sources; how do we streamline existing efforts to expand access to energy efficiency funding and technical assistance. 

We’re revising our zoning ordinance to make sure that the sustainable design [standards] require higher levels of green building design and energy efficiency for new construction and major renovation. We’re a city that loves our trees, right? So we are constantly looking at ways to preserve our tree canopy. We have a tree protection ordinance on the books that we are going to continue to strengthen this term. We continue to install high visibility electric vehicle charging stations at publicly accessible locations. There’s . . . a big push to incorporate green infrastructure into city parks and open spaces and street reconstruction projects. It’s all hands on deck.

AF: The Lincoln Institute of Land Policy has called Cambridge home since 1974, when David C. Lincoln, son of our founder, chose to locate in a place with world-famous universities and other nonprofit organizations. Can you reflect on that distinctive feature of Cambridge—that is, the nonprofit, educational, medical, and other institutions being such a big part of the community?

SS: I think the universities in particular play a huge role. With the pandemic, I’ve seen a really important collaboration between our educational institutions, community organizations, small businesses, and residents to work collaboratively to address some of the most pressing issues . . . . The Broad Institute of Harvard and MIT, working with the City of Cambridge Public Health Department, were the first in the state to offer COVID testing for residents and workers and all of Cambridge’s elder facilities. Now, we have seven-day-a-week testing in Cambridge. So that’s the direct result of this partnership and having them here in our space. Both have made contributions to the Mayor’s Disaster Relief Fund . . . we were setting up an emergency shelter for un-housed individuals and each of the universities contributed funding towards that; gave rent relief to our retail and restaurant tenants that they have; [and] they do a lot in the schools. So I think the partnership has strengthened this year as the pandemic’s hit, and they’ve been a key partner in the work that we’ve done in the city. They are such a big part of the community . . . and [they have risen] to the occasion whenever I’ve called on them.

Anthony Flint is senior fellow at the Lincoln Institute of Land Policy and a contributing editor of Land Lines.

Photograph: Sumbul Siddiqui was elected mayor of Cambridge, Massachusetts, in 2020. Credit: Courtesy of Sumbul Siddiqui.

Related Content

Land Matters Podcast: Season 2, Episode 4: Cambridge Mayor Sumbul Siddiqui

Home to global tech companies and a record number of millionaires, Cambridge, Massachusetts, has been hard at work trying to make the city more accessible for all. One zoning measure, passed last fall, is attracting attention nationwide–an affordable housing overlay that awards extra height and density and includes a streamlined permitting process for below market-rate residential projects.

“This is housing that’s affordable to your teachers, to your custodians, to your public servant, legal aid attorneys—you name it,” says Cambridge Mayor Sumbul Siddiqui, interviewed on the Land Matters podcast.

Siddiqui, who immigrated to the U.S. from Karachi, Pakistan at the age of two with her parents and twin brother, herself lived in subsidized housing in Cambridge. It’s critical to provide a range of housing options for both newcomers of at all income levels, she says, and those who want to stay in, or return to, the city where they grew up. “We still see such stark inequality in our city, and as someone who’s grown up in affordable housing in Cambridge—I would not be here without it. This is an important initiative and policy and I do hope it as a model for other cities across the country.”

The conversation is part of a series of episodes looking at the people and places that have been interwoven with the Lincoln Institute, as the organization marks its 75th anniversary. After the founder, John C. Lincoln, established the Lincoln Foundation in 1946, his son, David C. Lincoln, created the Lincoln Institute of Land Policy in 1974—and chose Cambridge as its home.

David Lincoln’s daughter, current Board Chair and Chief Investment Officer Kathryn J. Lincoln, recalls that in the early seventies her father wrote to several college and university presidents testing interest in collaborating with a new research center focused on land use and taxation related to land, and then-Harvard president Derek Bok was the only one to write back with enthusiasm.

Nonprofit organizations have a special role in the life of Cambridge, Siddiqui says, and have been especially helpful during the pandemic.

The interview is also available online as the latest installment of the Mayor’s Desk feature—interviews with chief executives of cities from around the world, and during the 75th anniversary years those in cities that have been closely tied to the Lincoln Institute.

You can listen to the show and subscribe to Land Matters on Apple Podcasts, Google Play, Spotify, Stitcher, or wherever you listen to podcasts.

Anthony Flint is a senior fellow at the Lincoln Institute of Land Policy and a contributing editor of Land Lines.

Photograph: Mayor Siddiqui stands in front of Rindge Towers, the housing in Cambridge that she grew up in. Credit: Courtesy of City of Cambridge.

Related Content

City of Cambridge’s 100 Percent Affordable Housing Overlay

Through the Roof: What Communities Can Do About the High Cost of Rental Housing

Inclusionary Housing: Creating and Maintaining Equitable Communities

75th Anniversary Page
 

In 2017, the city of Louisville, Kentucky, analyzed the average life expectancy of its residents. Those in the more affluent, predominantly white neighborhoods in the eastern section of the city lived longest, the city found, with an average life expectancy of 79 to 83 years. In West Louisville—a historically disinvested area with a predominantly Black population—the average life expectancy was a full decade shorter. The stark difference, the city concluded, was “in part due to systemic oppression.” That systemic oppression includes a long history of discriminatory land use policies. 

Throughout the 20th century, governments across the United States promoted segregation and inequity through planning and zoning policies including deed restrictions, redlining, and urban renewal. Like many other cities, Louisville is now confronting its legacy of unjust policies, including a racially restrictive zoning ordinance overturned by the U.S. Supreme court in 1917. Planners in this southeastern U.S. city created an interactive online exhibit that documents that history and have undertaken a comprehensive, community-based equity review of the city’s Land Development Code.

“Discrimination might not always be blatant, but it is still embedded throughout policy—not just in Louisville, but in many cities,” said Louisville Planning Director Emily Liu. “Just acknowledging that this history exists is very important. It’s not created by our current government structure, but we still must deal with this historical racial injustice.” Louisville announced the review of its Land Development Code in July 2020, and Liu’s department has now recommended a set of zoning reforms that will begin to dismantle unfair policies and help create a more equitable, affordable city.

The city, which is home to more than 600,000 people, has been building a foundation for this kind of policy change over the last few years. An updated Comprehensive Plan released in 2018 and a Housing Needs Assessment released in 2019 both focus on removing barriers to affordable housing and investing in communities affected by discriminatory policies. In early 2020, Develop Louisville—an interagency effort focused on planning, community development, and sustainability—commissioned an analysis of local housing regulations that create barriers to equitable and inclusive development. The events of 2020, including the high-profile shooting of Black medical worker Breonna Taylor by Louisville police and the economic uncertainties sparked by the pandemic, brought new urgency to the work. 

“I believe this may be the first time in Louisville’s history that the concepts of equity and planning have been explored with an explicit intention to change or amend the code to achieve meaningful outcomes,” said Jeana Dunlap, an urbanist, strategic advisor, and 15-year veteran of community development in local government. “Local practitioners and policy makers have been chipping away for years, in many ways, to place underutilized properties into productive use and to advance housing choices and alternatives for everyone in the Metro area . . . [but] the concurrent crises related to the pandemic, evictions, and police brutality are informing the current response. Recognizing the need for continuous improvement in a racially charged climate and doing so in a post-COVID-19 environment is imperative to achieving better quality of life and place for everyone in Louisville.”

Dunlap, who grew up in Louisville, facilitated several community listening sessions held by the city’s Planning & Design Department last year. “A lot of people, when they hear about planning and zoning, it automatically puts them to sleep,” she noted wryly at one session. “But some of us may not fully appreciate just how much the Land Development Code, the regulations and how they’re enforced . . . impacts our daily lives.”

The online listening sessions were followed by online workshops on housing, environmental justice, and education. Planning & Design also created a phone and email hotline for those who were unable to participate virtually and doubled the public comment from four to eight weeks. Liu said the department has received a range of input, from residents who want the city to make more changes and do it faster, to those who are wary about the impact of specific changes such as allowing more accessory dwelling units.

The three phases of recommended zoning changes under consideration represent a holistic approach to rezoning that considers aspects of life beyond housing. Liu hopes the recommendations will be approved by the Louisville Metro Planning Commission this spring, at which point they will be taken up by Metro Council, a combined city-county governing body.

The first phase of recommendations includes removing barriers to constructing accessory dwelling units or duplexes to increase housing options and affordability. It would also reduce obstacles to creating small urban farms, community gardens, and similar enterprises to make use of vacant land and increase access to healthy food and open space, and would require that notices about potential development be mailed to nearby renters as well as property owners, to better inform communities of pending changes. These initial recommendations reflect policies that have begun to catch hold in other cities; for example, Portland, Oregon, now allows accessory dwelling units by right and Minneapolis has done away with single-family zoning entirely. 

The second phase, which would be executed in the next 12 to 18 months, includes allowing more multiplexes and tiny homes. It would also require a review of covenants and deed restrictions associated with new subdivisions to ensure they are equitable. The second and third phases also include environmental justice actions such as mitigating pollution in residential areas near highways and requiring environmental impact reviews for certain underserved areas. “We’re trying to correct and mitigate as much as possible,” Liu said. 

“We increasingly are seeing cities grapple with the racist history of their zoning,” said Jessie Grogan, associate director of Reduced Poverty and Spatial Inequality at the Lincoln Institute. “Louisville is providing a model for other cities by taking the time to talk about it directly, and to say, ‘Our previous zoning—sometimes explicitly and sometimes implicitly—had racist designs. We need to think about how specifically to correct that.’”

Yonah Freemark and Gabriella Velasco of the Urban Institute, who wrote about the organization’s experience advising Louisville on its rezoning effort, agree that the city is at the forefront of this work: “This thorough review of rulemaking and the public process that accompanies it provides a model for other cities looking for ways to reform their land-use regulations.”

While the comprehensive review and the proposed reforms resulting from it represent a significant step, Liu knows that creating a more equitable city will likely be an ongoing process. “I’d say it’s a lifetime commitment for any planner,” she said. “We have a lot of young planners here who are committed to making changes, so . . . I’m very hopeful for the future that our generation and the next generation of planners will continue to make sure that everything we build or create is for all.”

Liz Farmer is a fiscal policy expert and journalist whose areas of expertise include budgets, fiscal distress, and tax policy. She is currently a research fellow at the Rockefeller Institute’s Future of Labor Research Center. 

Photograph: Waterfront Park in downtown Louisville. Credit: Bill Griffin, U.S. Department of Interior via Flickr CC BY-SA 2.0.

Related Content

Rezoning History: Influential Minneapolis Policy Shift Links Affordability, Equity

Economists have long theorized that restrictive land use regulations are limiting growth and exacerbating inequalities in developing countries. Now, in the first study of its kind, researchers will explore this question by analyzing data on the 100 largest cities in India—home, collectively, to some 153 million people.

The economic opportunities provided by cities are central to the processes of development and inclusive economic growth. This is especially true in many developing, fast-urbanizing countries. Land policies determine whether cities will be dense or sprawling, what kinds of firms and workers they will attract, the cost of living, and whether they will produce an adequate supply of housing for present and future residents. 

When the barriers to land transactions and land development are high, economic theory and empirical evidence suggest developers will be unable to build the housing stock demanded by urban residents, leading to cities with less productive firms; more sprawling, larger slums; and a reduced ability to absorb large numbers of potential migrants seeking a better life.

Development Data Lab (DDL), a nonprofit research organization, is undertaking a project in collaboration with the Lincoln Institute of Land Policy to explore the impact of restrictive, inefficient, and inefficiently administered urban land policies on economic growth and poverty. Researchers will assemble data on three major features of urban land governance in cities across India: land litigation, land taxation, and restrictions on land development. They will build a pilot data set with a small number of variables for India’s 100 largest cities, along with richer data for the three largest cities—Delhi, Mumbai, and Bangalore. 

In the developing world, cities are not only engines of economic growth but also key facilitators of access to opportunity for people in rural areas through temporary and permanent migration. The majority of the world’s very poor are now in rural areas, in large part because cities in low-income countries erect many formal and informal barriers to affordable housing, education, and higher wages.

Improving urban land use regulations is likely to reap major returns for efficiency and equity in developing countries. But without data on urban land governance, it will be impossible to provide policy makers with the evidence they need to enact effective reforms.

In a proposed second stage of the project, the researchers would build a publicly available database on a wide range of land use indicators for all of India’s urban areas. This larger data set will build on the Socioeconomic High-resolution Rural-Urban Geographic data platform (SHRUG), which DDL’s research team constructed over the last 10 years and made freely available to the public. This platform describes a wide range of development outcomes at the city level in India, including consumption, industrial structure, and public goods. The SHRUG is thus an ideal complement to the proposed data set on urban governance, and is the only large-scale data set with social, economic, and demographic data covering the universe of Indian cities. The final data platform is intended to be analogous to the Lincoln Institute of Land Policy’s Place Database, with the goal of facilitating a range of research projects. 

Most existing studies focus either on simply documenting the inefficiencies in existing urban regulation or making a theoretical case for changes in urban governance (e.g., Bertaud and Brueckner 2005, Sridhar 2010, and Vishwanath et al 2013), or focusing on the urban governance environment in individual cities (e.g. Brueckner and Sridhar 2012 and Rajagopalan and Tabarrok 2014). The planned public database will allow a flourishing of research on the systematic effects of land use regulation on economic outcomes across India, in the spirit of a growing literature in richer countries (see, e.g., Hsieh and Moretti 2019).

DDL’s new platform will lay the foundation for researchers to understanding exactly how barriers to land development inhibit effective urban growth, and to inform policy changes that can improve outcomes for cities and their residents.

To learn more about Development Data Lab, visit www.devdatalab.org, or explore the SHRUG data platform at http://www.devdatalab.org/shrug.

Sam Asher is assistant professor of international economics at the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies (SAIS). Paul Novosad is associate professor of economics at Dartmouth College. Asher and Novosad cofounded the Development Data Lab.

Photograph Credit: Sam Asher.