Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
The Face of
Affordable Housing, Part II
The reality of affordable housing today is that it Out of that situationand other market factors
need notand often does notlook different emerged the current affordable housing crisis. As
from market rate housing. If well designed and documented in the design brief, The Face of
innovatively financed, affordable housing can be Affordable Housing, Part I, today the shortage of
seamlessly woven into any community. From affordable housing affects middle-income
planners to designers, and developers to policy working families as often as low-income renters.
makers, most people agree that we must do a The first report of the Twin Cities Mayors
better job than in the past at designing and Regional Housing Task Force (2000) stated,
providing affordable housing. Sam Davis, in his Affordable housing is not a separate class or
book, The Architecture of Affordable Housing, stated, type of housing that makes it different from
If we want affordable housing that fits ordinary housing. It is ordinary housing [and]
comfortably into the community, that bestows roughly half of home owners in the Twin Cities
pride and a sense of self-sufficiency on its live in affordable housing. (Mayors Task Force
occupants and helps them assimilate into that 2000, 2)
community, then we cannot continue to build the
stripped-down subsidized projects that we have Although affordable housing exists in the market,
come to accept as low-income housing. The getting new affordable housing built is often a
deterioration and abandonment of subsidized special challenge. In the central city, there is
housing, much of it less than twenty years old, political will, but development costs are
has proven this approach unworthy and unwise. prohibitive; in the suburbs, where land is cheaper,
(Davis 1995, 6364) a lack of political will and community NIMBYism
often defeat efforts to build affordable housing.
Increasingly, affordable housing units are not Nevertheless, from financing to legislation, and
segregated, but are integrated into developments design to construction, financiers, public officials,
that provide housing and amenities for residents developers, architects, and builders are working
with a mix of incomes. At the lower-cost end of to find creative ways to get those needed houses
the spectrum of affordable housing, HUD now built. Rejecting the segregated housing projects of
advocates dispersing former residents of housing the past, they are looking for ways to build
projects, and integrating them with the rest of the affordable housing for families, at a range of
housing market. HUD sets Fair Market Rents income levels, that are integrated into the
(FMR) for metropolitan areas around the nation, community.
and distributes housing choice (Section 8)
vouchers that low-income households can use to A growing number of developments around the
make up the difference between what they can Twin Cities demonstrate that this is possible. This
afford to pay, and the FMR. However, design brief examines the challenges of building
throughout the 1990s, as HUD was tearing down affordable housingfrom financing to
its many publicly-owned units and displacing manufacturingand some recent solutions. It
residents, housing prices shot up dramatically. illustrates projects in the metropolitan area of the
Rents typically far exceeded what HUD Twin Cities, and provides references for local and
established as fair market, and many landlords national resources on affordable housing.
declined Section 8 renters, because they had a
ready market of applicants who were willing and
able to pay more.
Financing Affordable Housing One tool that focuses on the land side of the
equation to increase the supply of affordable
As Tom Jones, et. al. note in their book, Good
housing is the community land trust. According
Neighbors: Affordable Family Housing, the term
to the Institute for Community Economics, which
affordable refers to the financial capability of
developed the concept of the community land
residents, not necessarily to the development cost
trust, A community land trust is a private
of housing. (Jones, et. al. 1995, 63 ) Indeed, one
nonprofit corporation created to acquire and hold
of the biggest impediments to creating more
land for the benefit of a community and provide
affordable housing is the cost of development.
secure affordable access to land and housing for
community residents. In particular, CLTs attempt
One piece of development costs is the price of to meet the needs of residents least served by the
land. In an article in the Minneapolis Southwest prevailing market. (Institute for Community
Journal, 619 March, 2003, Robin Repya reported Economics n.d.)
that locally, in third-ring suburbs, land costs are
$23 per square foot; in Minneapolis land costs
Locally, the Rondo Community Land Trust was
are $2025 per square foot. Former Minneapolis
established in 1993, in the Summit University and
Council Member Steve Minn, interviewed for the
Lexington Hamline neighborhoods of St. Paul.
article, stated that if the city hopes to build
According to the organization, home buyers,
housing that will be affordable to families earning
30 percent of the Metropolitan Median Income
(MMI)1 without subsidies, land prices in the city purchase the house and enter into a 99-year
would have to be around $.70 per square foot. Of ground lease agreement with Rondo CLT for
the land. By taking the cost of the land out of
course, these numbers are linked to the number
the real estate transaction, land trust homes
of houses in a given area. Increasing density often
are more affordable than houses on the open
increases affordability by making more efficient real estate market. Rondo CLT homeowners
use of land. However, high construction costs can agree that when and if they choose to sell their
be a factor, as well. homes, they will sell to another low-to-
moderate income household and that they will
In the same article cited above, Steve Minn sell the house for the original purchase price
presented market-rate construction costs of plus 25% of any increase in appreciation in the
$110,000115,000 for 1,000 square foot units that homes value. (Rondo CLT 2001)
demand monthly rents of $1,150 to break even.
Based on 2002 statistics, a family of four earning Land trusts have the advantage of establishing a
50 percent MMI can afford to pay $959 per month structure to maintain affordability, outside of
rent. A family earning 30 percent MMI can afford often-volatile market forces. The Minneapolis
to pay only $575. suburb of Chaska is in the process of creating a
community land trust that will own parcels of
land throughout the city to keep affordable
housing in the community, long term.
In 1981, the Urban Land Institute (ULI) published The developers met the affordability
the report of the Council on Development requirements by building on smaller lots3042
Choices for the 80s, entitled, The Affordable feet wideand using manufactured, modular
Community: Adapting Todays Communities to housing. They also used a technique pioneered
Tomorrows Needs. That publication, like Cooper- in the late 1940s, in the form of the so-called
Marcus and Sarkissians work, long ago expansion attic, leaving space in many of the
identified the issues that would need to be houses unfinished, for owners to build out when
addressed, if we hoped to build community- and finances permit. Using these techniques and
family-friendly affordable housing. The Council others, Chaska got traditionally-designed homes,
on Development Choices recommendations from including porches and sidewalks, with prices
1981 are well in line with practices that are slowly starting at $120,000, for rowhouses, and $160,000
being accepted and applied today. The Council for small-lot, single-family homes. The
recommended: encouraging compact development also includes 34 small accessory
development; creating infill and revitalization unitsmost built over garages, which may be
projects; mixing land uses; widening rented or soldas well as rental housing over
transportation choices; providing an adequate retail.
supply of affordable housing; and creating urban
villages. (ULI 1981) The recommendations and
Building Affordable Housing
guidelines, for the design of affordable housing
from community, to site, to houseare well Following World War II the nation faced a crisis
established. Only recently, however, in the of housing affordability and availability not
current affordable housing crunch, has the wholly dissimilar from that faced today. Then,
development market begun to respond. both citizens and the government agreed that the
crisis deserved national action. Architects and
The Minneapolis suburb of Chaska has been a builders responded with proposals to maximize
local leader, especially among third-ring suburbs, efficiency and minimize construction costs. Their
in applying principles like those described above proposals examined the nature of the modern
to new developments, such as Clover Ridge. In family and its living and housing needs, but
that development, the city wanted to make overwhelmingly looked to technological
housing that would be an attractive asset to the innovation to make more affordable housing
community, but also affordable to workers such more widely available.
as teachers and fire fighters, who have moderate
incomes. Applying traditional neighborhood The Levitts famously applied the concept of the
design principles, the city has implemented many assembly line to housing production in their
techniques that appear to point the way to the Levittown developments, by dividing the process
future of affordable housing development. into 27 discreet steps, each step with its own
specially trained team that moved from house to
house, performing its task.
In an article that appeared in the Minneapolis Star
Tribune, 20 January 2002, reporter Steve Brandt
In Columbus, Ohio, Carl Strandlund converted a
wrote that Chaska allowed the developers to
military aircraft assembly plant to fabricate the
build three times the number of units typically
porcelain-enameled steel kits-of-parts that were
allowed, and required that half the additional
shipped to sites around the country to be
units be affordable (a density bonus).
assembled into Lustron Houses. The production
and sale of such houses was heavily subsidized
by the federal government,
6
Illustrating Affordable Housing
For-profit, Mixed-income Developments
Many market rate developments include a
percentage of units that are sold or rented as
affordable. In the Twin Cities there are many
examples of recently built projects that
incorporate affordable units. They demonstrate
how our response to the need for affordable
housing has changed since the much-derided
public housing projects of the mid-twentieth
century were built. Although most of todays
affordable housing developments are new North Quadrant development, St. Paul
construction, some are rehabilitations of existing
buildings. Located in mixed-income
communities, these mixed-income buildings are
well designed and look like typical market-rate
housing. However, in most cases, affordability is
achieved not through differences in design,
materials, or construction, but through financing
and higher densities that bring greater returns on
expensive land.
7
Heritage Park, Minneapolis
8
Nonprofit, Mixed-income Developments
CommonBond Communities, a local nonprofit
developer has built and managed affordable
housing units in both city and suburban
locations. The developer places an emphasis on
providing affordable units within these mixed-
income projects.
9
Notes Photo Credits
1. In 2002, the household Metropolitan Median Income All photos, Design Center for American Urban
(MMI) in the Twin Cities was $76,700. Landscape, 200203.
Reference List
Baxandall, Rosalyn and Elizabeth Ewen. 2000. Picture
Windows: How the Suburbs Happened. New York: Basic
Books.
Burchell, Robert and Catherine Galley. 2000.
Inclusionary Zoning: Pros and Cons. New Century
Housing 2:312. http://www.nhc.org/
comm_and_pubs_publication.htm
Davis, Sam . 1995. The Architecture of Affordable
Housing. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of
California Press.
Greater Minnesota Housing Fund and Cermak
Rhoades Architects. 2001. Building Better
Neighborhoods: Creating Affordable Homes and Livable
Communities. St. Paul: Greater Minnesota Housing
Fund.
Institute for Community Economics. n.d. Community
Land Trusts. Springfield, MA: Institute for
Community Economics. http://www.iceclt.org/clt/
Jones, Tom, et. al. 1995. Good Neighbors: Affordable
Family Housing. New York: McGraw Hill.
Marcus, Clare Cooper and Wendy Sarkissian, et. al.
1986. Housing As If People Mattered: Site Design Design Center for American Urban Landscape
Guidelines for Medium-density Family Housing. 1 Rapson Hall
89 Church Street
Berkeley and London: University of California Press. Minneapolis, MN 55455
Mayors Regional Housing Task Force. 2000. Affordable 612.624.9000
Housing for the Region: Strategies for Building Strong www.dcaul.umn.edu
Communities, A Report of the Mayors Regional Housing
Task Force. St. Paul: Metropolitan Council. Funding for this project was provided by The McKnight
Foundation.
Repya, Robin . 2003. Affordable housing at $158,828 a
pop. (Minneapolis) Southwest Journal, March 619. 2003
Rondo Community Land Trust. 2001. St Paul, Design Center for American Urban Landscape (DCAUL)
MN: Rondo Community Land Trust. http:// College of Architecture and Landscape Architecture
University of Minnesota
www.rondoclt.org/
Urban Land Institute. 1981. The Affordable Permission is granted for non-profit education purposes for
Community: Adapting Todays Communities to reproduction of all or part of written material or images,
except that reprinted with permission from other sources.
Tomorrows Needs. Washington, DC: Urban Land Acknowledgment is required and the Design Center requests
Institute. two copies of any material thus produced.
Weber, William. 2003. Interview by author.
The University of Minnesota is committed to the policy that
Minneapolis, MN, June.
all persons shall have equal access to its programs,
facilities, and employment without regard to race, color,
creed, religion, national origin, sex, age, marital status,
disability, public assistance status, veteran status, or sexual
orientation.
10