Housing at hospitals as a benefit for longevity for the wealthy, and housing aimed at achieving health equity goals

Hospital adjacent housing for the well off.  A new hospital development in West Palm Beach, Florida will include mixed use retail and housing ("New Good Samaritan Hospital, with luxury housing and retail planned in West Palm Beach," South Florida Sun-Sentinel).  

The new hospital, which Tenet is calling a next-generation Center of Excellence for health care, will be part of a larger, mixed-use project by Easton Street Capital that will include luxury condominiums, rentals, retail and a hotel.

“We will be reimaging the Good Samaritan campus,” said Maggie Gill, group president of Tenet Healthcare. “In partnership with Easton Street Capital, we are redeveloping the site for housing, wellness and health care. This is a well-funded plan to make state-of-the-art health care facilities and technology more accessible to the region.”

...“The focus of the entire campus is a place where you can live, work and receive health care with an emphasis on wellness and longevity,” Gill said. “We think of it as an integrative approach to looking at the person holistically to help them stay healthy.”

... Housing will include rentals for the hospital workforce, as well as luxury condominiums to attract baby boomers seeking easy access to health care, an alternative to senior living. “I want to build longevity living where we’re trying to enhance the health span and the lifespan of the baby boomers,” Crowell said. “We think there will be buyers from around the country who come into this project.”

Also see "Good Samaritan Medical Center in West Palm Beach plans massive redo," Palm Beach Post. 

I have been somewhat "down" on mixed use proposals like what the Coalition for Smart Growth wanted for the new Prince George's County hospital with the University of Maryland ("University of Maryland could seed a complementary biotechnology and medical education initiative in Prince George's County") because my experience doing some consulting in Pittsburgh was that hospitals pretty much are inward facing places--people don't have much time to eat off campus, shop, etc.  

According to my next door neighbor, a doctor, now, some hospitals even offer private dining facilities with meals prepared by a chef, for physicians.  Try to get them to go to a nearby diner...

However, I have written about the St. Anthony Hospital project in Chicago, which will have housing ("New St. Anthony Hospital to be part of $600 million development at former trade school site in Little Village," Chicago Sun-Times).

Finished affordable housing units for sale in Baltimore with a great interest rate and relatively low cost.

And how Bon Secours Hospital System in Baltimore has developed senior and affordable housing as a part of providing better living facilities for older patients ("Royal Farms, Y of Central Maryland join Saint Agnes' Gibbons Commons project," Baltimore Business Journal. Bon Secours Community Development).  

They have 800 units, plus 147 units in development.  That's a decent amount.

Separately, they are rehabilitating 20 vacant houses and will make them available for sale ("8 things to know: Health system revives 20 vacant West Baltimore homes," Baltimore Business Journal).  

Not a huge project, but given Baltimore's straits, a worthy one, and a risk where others seem to sit back.

Dunn House, Toronto.

And while slightly more oriented to the homeless, there are a couple initiatives in Toronto sparked by hospitals, where they provide housing to chronically homeless or health needy people, in large part because it's cheaper to treat them when they have housing, than when they don't ("This Toronto philanthropist has millions to spend. Here’s why she’s pouring it into the homelessness crisis," "These Toronto hospitals are quietly sheltering homeless patients themselves to avoid discharging them into the cold," "Jason Miles’ addiction cost $260,000 in emergency room, shelter and jail stays. A Toronto hospital’s radical solution: just give him a home," Toronto Star, "Toronto’s University Health Network Takes on the Housing Crisis," Azure).

More on longevity housing projects in Florida ("New condo concept blends real estate and wellness. The goal? Staying young," Sun-Sentinel). 

Florida already has become home to hundreds of medical providers and clinics that promote treatments to slow aging and combat aging-related conditions.

“There is so much interest in it right now,” said Zhe He, director of Florida State University’s Institute for Successful Longevity. Aging, he said, is becoming viewed as a potentially modifiable condition that could be improved with certain interventions. He said that loneliness or social isolation can contribute to aging, so this type of longevity-promoting community environment could in itself have health benefits.

Cromwell said about 300 units in Easton Street Capital’s luxury condominium building will be marketed for $5 million to $25 million each. “The pricing is going to be expensive, but we are also fortunate that the baby boomers have accumulated more wealth than any other generation, and now, as they’re 80, there are two things in their lives that are the most important,” Cromwell said. “One is family and two is living longer because they want to be with their family.”

To help fund the preventive care services, Cromwell said Easton Street Capital plans to sell longevity center memberships. “This allows the general public to come in to access some of these services to cover and drive down the costs to the residents.”

There is two projects, by THE WELL group.

In North Miami-Dade, a condominium with a similar concept is expected to open by the end of the month. THE WELL in Bay Harbor Islands has combined a wellness center with 66 condominium units and some workspace.

Kane Sarhan, co-founder and chief creative officer of THE WELL brand, said the wellness center in the condominium building has a full gym, a bathhouse with a steam room, an infrared sauna, and a cold plunge. There are treatment rooms for IV vitamin therapy and access to functional medicine doctors, hyperbaric oxygen therapy, skin care, acupuncture, physical therapy, and energy work. There is also an organic cafe and grocery store that offers meal programs, and a movement studio for yoga, meditation, and fitness classes.

... Further south in Coconut Grove, THE WELL is underway with a second location: a larger condominium building with 194 residences. The units are larger and more expensive, from $1.5 to more than $10 million, but the concept remains the same — residences combined with 13,000 square feet of fitness and wellness spaces. Like its other locations, the wellness center will include visits with functional medicine doctors, health coaches, nutritionists and massage therapists.

RN Melissa Shaw checked on an IV drip bag for client John Blazo.John Tlumacki/Globe Staff

It will be interesting to see if the "new age-y medicine stuff" which isn't research backed in terms of health benefits will feed into the hospital centric projects ("People are spending hundreds of dollars at IV drip bars in Boston. Are they worth the hype?," Boston Globe).

I had a colonoscopy last week and in talking with the doctor before the procedure, I was talking about people and their belief in things like "detoxing" your liver (I have some liver damage because of the various medicines I take).  We joked about it, and he said he's thought about creating a clinic that caters to that thinking--he'd make a lot of money from it, but he said he couldn't do it ethically.

Health equity and health-housing for the less well off.  The former examples are more about the well off wanting to live longer.  

But why not have housing on hospital campuses for the less well off, as a way to better achieve high ratings when it comes to "social determinants of health"? ("Health equity devolves to cities and states as the federal government cuts taxes for the wealthy").  

Bon Secours, hopefully Focal Point, and various workforce housing initiatives show a way forward, so that such services and benefits may not be limited only to the wealthy.

Luxury Apartments Are Bringing Rent Down in Some Big Cities

 According to Bloomberg.  

This is the filtration/filtering argument, that as newer housing is added, people move up to better housing, and in turn are replaced by others moving up similarly.  

I've argued in strong market cities, where housing demand is greater than supply, that filtration doesn't work. Demand for housing means that there isn't a lot of movement even when new supply is added, because demand remains greater.  So lesser quality housing is priced upward without commensurate improvements.  This has been confirmed by recent research.

I argued that only over long periods of time do new additions to housing supply--being priced at the top of the market because prices reflect today's cost for land, labor, materials, and financing--reduce prices.

So in the cities discussed by Bloomberg, the issue is that housing supply, finally, is greater than demand, hence the price drop.

In Salt Lake, at a public meeting last month, the planning director said a vacancy rate of 15% was good, because that put a damper on housing prices ("Apartment glut in SLC leads to lower rents and incentives from landlords," KSL).

After four years of record supply and double-digit rent growth, now there is a glut, leading to competition, heavy concessions and an average drop in rents of 8.25%.

Smith said that while rents are stable in most areas outside of Salt Lake City, they will start increasing if in-migration grows and the glut of apartments is absorbed.

In Salt Lake, the blog Building Salt Lake reports, "Rent is falling in Salt Lake City. It’s putting the squeeze on low-income housing developers," that the "glut" has made it hard to rent out lower income "affordable housing."

Different smaller housing types other than large apartments

Micro-apartments.   The Boston Globe ("Micro-apartments will become a cost-effective solution for renters — eventually"), reports on the provision of small apartments in the city, 450 s.f. or less, with kitchens and community amenities.  They are a form of what used to be called SRO, or Single Room Occupancy housing, but flashier.  (Also see this BG article from 2015, "Developers, city hope tiny apartments will keep families in Boston").

From the current article:

The idea of living in a micro-unit, or an apartment roughly less than 400 square feet, might send some renters heading for the wide-open spaces of the suburbs. But for others, a small, manageable, and ideally affordable living space would make living closer to downtown feel more approachable. Perhaps unsurprisingly, it’s the affordability piece that Bostonians are still seeking.

In 2016, the city’s Housing Innovation Lab rolled out a traveling model apartment called the Urban Housing Unit, or UHU. At 385 square feet, this micro-apartment traveled to eight neighborhoods across the city, showing Bostonians what life in such a small space could look like. During its tour, the Housing iLab gathered feedback from roughly 2,000 residents to help draft guidelines for a compact living program.

... “We worked with the city of Boston to create these compact-living regulations that changed the [square footage] downward and basically made it so that it was more like an open-ended thing,” Roy said. “You had to just show it to the Boston Planning Department, go through the design, and make sure that you fulfilled certain requirements — there’s some storage, there’s a decent kitchen, there’s a place to put your bed, and there’s a certain amount of light and air.”

... Six years later, micro-units have proliferated throughout Boston — like the ones for rent at Micropolis in Beacon Hill and the studios at Troy Boston in the South End — but they aren’t quite nailing the goal of UHU yet. That’s because many of the micro-apartments for rent today aren’t exactly affordable. A 250-square-foot unit at Micropolis, for example, fetches more than $2,000 per month.

 ... Smaller homes can present advantages, too. Though there’s a shortage of space, there’s also less cleaning and maintenance to be done, Salpoglou said. Utility bills will be smaller, and you’ll likely be buying less “stuff,” like furniture, accessories, and things that might constitute clutter. “There’s no question there’s an added benefit to them,” he said.

... It’s the kind of project Roy thinks could benefit Boston, along with more cohousing models. Both would serve demographics like workforce singles and couples, graduate students, single parents, divorcées, the elderly, artists, and recent immigrants, which make up many of the groups currently priced out of Boston’s housing stock. 

“There has to be a way for the city and the state to subsidize nonprofit development to do this,” Roy said. “It’s necessary for the workforce — for people who don’t make $100,000 a year and just need a place to live.”

What I think's interesting about the initiative is the prototyping they did.  There definitely is a need to extend the range of housing choices available to people, especially singles.  Cost of new housing is an issue, so subsidy might be required.   And it is a way to add "gentle density" to a community, especially if such buildings are built in areas with good transit and other amenities.

Two adjacent rowhouses on Chapin Street NW were combined and renovated to form the first Cohabs building in D.C. There is no signage to suggest that the building is different from the other houses on the block. (Aaron Wiener/The Washington Post)

Co-living.  In "Can 35 roommates cure loneliness? This co-living housing firm thinks so," the Washington Post discusses a firm opening a more expensive of group housing that they call co-housing.  From the article:

Brussels-based Cohabs is buying up properties in D.C. with the aim of converting them into “co-living” spaces, where as many as 36 housemates will share common areas, events and — according to the firm’s marketing — a cure for urban loneliness.

The company opened its first D.C. house last month. The property, formerly two adjacent rowhouses in Columbia Heights, has been turned into a warren of 36 bedrooms, 15 bathrooms, two full kitchens, six kitchenettes and two roof decks.

Cohabs has purchased five other properties in D.C. and is aiming for more. In 2025, the company plans to buy a building a month, according to U.S. managing director Daniel Clark. “We could go pretty quickly to 500 beds, and I think 1,000 beds is possible,” Clark said.

... Those rents include cleaning services, utilities, periodic group breakfasts and events, a full-size bed and other furnishings, and basic communal supplies such as toilet paper, soap and olive oil. 

According to the article, other firms offer a similar kind of experiential housing elsewhere in the city, while the WeLive spin off from WeWork failed. 

It does seem like a good way to add housing density without new construction or teardowns of existing historic building stock.  It extends the range of housing types available--not everyone wants their own apartment.  The programming is a nice touch for people more interested in experiences.

The New York Times article refers to co-living as "dorms for adults," ("As Housing Costs Soar, Co-Living Makes a Comeback").

Co-housing.  I was confused at first, thinking they were calling it co-housing.  I've visited the co-housing development in Takoma DC.  The building is U shaped, with separate attached buildings, like rowhouses, with a commonspace in the middle including kitchen, dining, and other facilities.  But each housing unit has its own facilities: kitchen, washer and dryer ("There’s Community and Consensus. But It’s No Commune," New York Times).  

But the intent, like the Cohabs version, is to promote interaction, which isn't necessarily the case with group housing, unless people already know each other.  From the NYT article, "Modern Housing With Village Virtues":

Louise Dunlap, 78, has rented a studio apartment in a nine-unit cohousing community for the last six years. “Interdependence,” she says, “goes beyond turning the compost and fixing the washing machine. I get a chance to share meals and deep conversations. There’s a kind of love that grows out of these connections — not romantic love, not family love, but something about our common humanity. I wish everyone could experience this.”

The problem with co-housing is that the first wave of residents are fully committed, while tenants are replaced individually as units go up for sale, and new residents don't necessarily have the same commitment.  Another problem is financing the building in the first place ("They Took a Chance on Collaborative Living. They Lost Everything," NYT).

Co-operatives.  There are two types of co-operative housing.  One is more communal, the other has separate apartments or buildings, with zero focus on co-living.   For example, in Ann Arbor, there are a large number of communal co-ops serving as a form of student housing.  They prepare common meals, at least for dinner, using an in-building commercial kitchen, and have joint spaces for living, with individual small rooms and shared bathrooms.  Rather than jobbing out cleaning etc. like the co-living spaces, the residents do this collectively.

Single Room Occupancy ("Single-room rentals in America's housing ecosystem," Niskanen Center, Single Room Occupancy Task Force Report, Hennepin County).  Units were significantly smaller than co-living options, with a size of 80 to 140 s.f. on average, with shared restrooms and a living room.  Rooms often had a small kitchenette with a hot plate, not a full stove.  

Many cities have seen a small rebirth of the SRO type as a way to address homelessness.

Boarding houses.  A variant of SROs was boarding houses, which included dinner for sure and maybe breakfast.

New library/community space + 100% affordable housing mixed use building in New York City

The building uses brick and is kind of two buildings, with one set back.  There are 175 AH units, from studios to three bedrooms.

It's in NYC, so of course it's larger than similar projects elsewhere ("Inwood development with public library and 100% affordable housing opens," 6sqft).

In "Opposition to affordable housing in Chevy Chase, DC," last year I wrote about a proposal to rebuild the Chevy Chase Community Center to include affordable housing.

The big example nationally is the Hollywood Library in Portland, Oregon.  It has a library and cafe on the ground floor and 40+ AH units on three floors above.  

This building shows that kind of mixed use is possible, and that the architecture can be reasonably decent.

As the blog entry points out, there have been many attempts to do something similar in DC, but mostly they fail.

In the comments, charlie points out this isn't so cheap and that the West End Library mixed use project--I think it has problems--worked because it is luxury housing.  

An anonymous commenter makes a great point that maybe the best thing this new building could do is to help reformulate the street experience on the East Side, which is pretty much disjoint compared to the West Side.

Both mixed use library projects in New York City prove the point that it's about "transformational projects action planning" ("A wrinkle in thinking about the Transformational Projects Action Planning approach: Great public buildings aren't just about design, but what they do," 2022) focused on the building program and quality architecture rather than a focus on startling "design," and the building not connecting to the community around it, managerial capacity and vision, for which DC had a shortage.  It's full of high quality amenities:

Measuring 20,000 square feet, the library retains its previously offered services, including literacy programs and story times. The library’s open and flexible floor plan makes space for computer classes, a community room, co-working spaces, and quiet reading spaces.

Amenities at The Eliza include bike storage lockers, a shared laundry room, a children’s playroom, a recreation room, a gym, rooftop gardens, an outdoor lounge and terrace with views of the Hudson River, and an on-site resident manager. 

All residences feature energy-efficient appliances. Residents will also have direct access to the renovated library facility and a 10,000-square-foot Activities, Culture, and Training Center (ACTS) for job training. The ACTS Center features a cutting-edge STEM Robotics learning hub, a teaching kitchen, a performance space, a sensory room, and classrooms designed to meet the needs of youth and their families.

The NYC building is the second of its kind.  The Sunset Library and Apartments rebuild was first ("NYC’s first 100% affordable housing development with new public library opens in Sunset Park" 6sqft).  

This project was done by the Brooklyn Public Library, which is a separate organization from the NYPL.

By doing the project as mixed use, BPL stated that the cost of creating the library was half the cost of a stand alone, single use library project.

Wizards and Capitals teams staying in DC after all and the failure of the mansion tax referendum in Chicago have one thing in common: failure to take the time to build consensus

 Change is hard.  My experience in the civic arena is that it takes "a couple rounds" of putting the idea out there before there is consensus to go forward.

I wrote a bunch about failures of transit referenda in Tampa Bay and the State of Georgia in the 2010s.  Georgia introduced a new way to create transportation districts, then expected people to vote up or down in less than a year ("Failure of the transit-roads sales tax measure in Metro Atlanta," 2012).  

In Tampa, the two counties can't figure out how to work together on transit, nor can they build support within their counties (Voters reject Greenlight Pinellas," Tampa Bay Times, "My Ride/My Road: Polk County Voters Reject 1-Cent Sales Tax Increase," Lakeland Ledger, 2014).

There are plenty of other examples.

My point was that to do breakthrough initiatives, you have to build the support for it, people are conservative, and that takes time.  The other way I put it is that the more time you spend on the front end, with civic engagement and a slew of meetings and other activities, the faster it goes on the back end.  Finally, I hate losing. So I'd rather set myself up for success by taking the necessary time to build support.

1.  Sports Arena in Alexandria.  Virginia has a Republican Governor and a Democratic State Legislature.  Announced in December ("Lawmakers vote in favor of plan to bring Capitals, Wizards to Virginia," Washington Post), he wanted to move the Capitals hockey team and Wizards basketball team to an arena in Alexandria, claiming billions of dollars of benefits and many thousands of jobs("$730 rooms, $75 parking: Youngkin’s own report calls arena forecasts rosy").

Note while Downtown DC benefits from CapitolOne Arena, it's not like it drives the economy.

To stoke development in that area, a process that has been going on for about 20 years--giving the rights to develop to the team owner, which is the trend in stadium and arena development.  Team owners say they need the extra money to spend on the team, especially with the decline in broadcast revenues and minimal revenues from streaming.

-- "Suburban stadium/arena interest a function of new, younger generations of ownership or a better real estate play?," 2023

-- "Capital One Arena, Wizards and Capitals may move to Alexandria | Why not the RFK campus?," 2024
-- "Framework of characteristics that support successful community development in association with the development of professional sports facilities," 2021

The deal called for at least $1.35 billion in tax incentives ("Caps, Wizards complex in Virginia could get largest arena subsidy ever").  

It was a shocking move.  And not all the state, especially State Senator Caroline Lucas, was on board ("Leonsis finally met arena nemesis Lucas, but maybe too late to save it").

Other issues also brought more opposition ("Plan to move Capitals, Wizards to Virginia draws transportation worries," "Plan for new Caps, Wizards arena in Va. stirs up its would-be neighbors") including a casino proposal ("JBG Smith blames Tysons casino conspiracy for derailing Potomac Yard deal," Alexandria Now).

Governor Youngkin just sprung this on everybody.  And "everybody" needed more than 3 1/2 months to get on board.  Let alone vote on it.

An article about the aftermath in the Post , "Va. Gov. Youngkin arrived like a GOP star, but arena failure clouds legacy," made the point about Youngkin, on most new initiatives he proposes, doesn't attempt to build support for them in advance, therefore fails.  (Also see "After Va. arena plan collapses, politicians and dealmakers trade blame" and " Proclamation: Governor Glenn Youngkin Statement On Monumental Sports & Entertainment Project.")

But Holsworth, the political analyst, said he saw a significant difference in the way Youngkin approaches big initiatives compared with previous governors. When Republican George Allen wanted to impose new education standards in the 1990s and had a Democratic legislature, he said, the governor appointed prominent Virginia educators to key administration roles and mounted a campaign around the state to build support from lawmakers and local officials — all before any votes were taken. 

Similarly, in the 2000s, Democrat Mark R. Warner logged miles around the state and made endless PowerPoint presentations to persuade business groups and a GOP legislature that Virginia had to raise taxes to preserve its high bond rating. 

Youngkin made no such broad effort to pave the way for the arena ... “It’s just not a very keen understanding of the political dynamics of Virginia,” Holsworth said.

So it failed and the teams are staying in DC ("Caps, Wizards will stay in D.C. under deal announced by Bowser, Leonsis," Washington Post) getting $500+ million from the city to do so, and getting the rights to redevelop the adjacent Gallery Place development to add some revenue streams ("MRP Realty to buy Gallery Place, make room for Monumental Sports & Entertainment," Washington Business Journal).

Under the terms of the deal signed Wednesday, pending expected D.C. Council approval next week, the District will send $515 million over three years to finance Capital One Arena’s modernization. In addition, the agreement provides for 200,000 square feet “of newly programmed space throughout Capital One Arena and in the Gallery Place building next door.” The terms also call for a new downtown practice facility for the Wizards, with “options including top floors of Gallery Place,” per Monumental’s release.

Campaign flyers for the Bring Chicago Home referendum at a march to the polls event March 9, 2024, in Chicago. (Vincent Alban/Chicago Tribune)

2.  Real estate transfer tax in Chicago.  In Chicago, new mayor Brandon Johnson proposed a higher transfer tax rate on properties selling for more than $1 million, to pay for affordable housing.  

Called "Bring Chicago Home," he proposed it in September ("Chicago mayor introduces real estate transfer tax plan to combat homelessness," Axios) for a vote this March.   That's 6 months!

It was estimated the tax could raise $100 million per year.

Naturally, the business community especially the real estate development community was against and could spend a lot of money fighting it.  Plus a lot of citizens were indifferent.

A number of cities, including DC, have such a tax, so it's not novel (Local Mansion Taxes: Building Stronger Communities with Progressive Taxes on High-Value Real Estate, report, Institute for Taxes and Economic Policy), the issue is getting it passed.

• As of early 2024, 17 cities and counties have progressive taxes on high-price real estate sales, also known as “mansion taxes.” Several others are currently considering adopting these policies.
• Together these taxes raise nearly $3 billion in annual revenue, equipping communities with resources to make progress on critical priorities of local and national concern including housing, education, and infrastructure. 
• Local mansion taxes have been around since 1982, but the momentum for them has built in recent years. 
• Nearly all of today’s mansion taxes were enacted or expanded between 2018 and 2023. 
• Local mansion taxes play an important role in rebalancing upside-down tax codes, advancing racial and economic equity, and raising new revenue to build more resilient and inclusive communities. 
• Mansion taxes have proven popular with voters: When put on the ballot, measures to enact or expand mansion taxes have succeeded 86 percent of the time.

Which they didn't.  It was also challenged in court by real estate interests, who didn't even want the votes to be counted ("Real estate group appeals Bring Chicago Home to state Supreme Court," Chicago Tribune).  The court said no, count the votes.  

But it didn't pass anyway, losing roughly 54% to 46%, a 21,000 vote difference in a low turnout election ("Chicago Voters Reject Mansion Tax in Blow to Mayor Johnson," Bloomberg).

Some electeds are chastened ("City Council’s Progressive Caucus responds to ‘Bring Chicago Home’ defeat with ‘we heard you’ humility," Chicago Sun Times). Not the mayor ("Johnson, defiant after 'Bring Chicago Home' loss, vows agenda push will 'get stronger'," Crain's Chicago Business).

But they shouldn't be so chastened, just recognize that they mishandled the initiative, by trying too soon for a vote without building the consensus for the need.  From the Axios article, "Why the Bring Chicago Home ballot measure failed"

1. People not affected by homelessness don't understand it
2. Voters fear rising residential taxes if the measure further hurts commercial real estate
3. People worry that the tax could stifle future development
4. Citizens have little faith in city leaders
5. Voters were confused by the measure's changing legal status and swayed by opponents' commercials
6. The measure lacked spending specifics

Conclusion.  My point is pretty clear.  Losing sucks.  So take the time necessary to build the consensus and coalition so you can win.  I don't understand why elected officials can't figure this out.

Especially in Chicago when you know from the outset that monied interests, in this case the commercial real estate industry, will fight you hard.  Or in Virginia, where the governor was asking to subsidize a billionaire with $1.35 billion, based on dubious claims about the economic value of doing so.

When I used to work in restaurants, there was a woman who was really fast but made mistakes and I would say "speed kills."

In this case, "Speed kills good ideas."

Quote on housing that's very apt: "As demand for housing rises, Philadelphia’s neighborhoods can either remain affordable or remain low-density. They cannot do both"

This is true everywhere, not just in Philadelphia.  It's relevant to both strong and weak markets, because even in weak markets, there probably isn't enough housing.

In the discussions about school closures in Salt Lake City, the g word, gentrification came up.  People blamed it for the decline of families in the center city--therefore a bunch of center city schools were on the chopping block--when that is a trend that is national, that people with no children or few children tend to live in the core, while people with families tend to live in the outer city or the suburbs.

Similarly, the West Side of Salt Lake is more heavily minority and equity issues for the West Side are touted all the time.  But it's complicated.  First, the west side is really three sections: the part that is east of the railroad tracks, so it's really part of "the east".  The residential section west of the freeway and railroad tracks.  And farther out, the mostly industrial section of the west side.  

My thing about the west side is that it doesn't have centers, the equivalent of commercial districts on the east side like 9th and 9th ("In Salt Lake City, a dynamic enclave gives new life to neighborhood," Washington Post) or 15th and 15th ("Thinking about the opportunities for success with neighborhood commercial districts: comparing Manor Park in DC to 15th and 15th in Salt Lake," 2021).  

There are two commercial districts on major streets (North Temple, Redwood Road), but there aren't neighborhood commercial districts.  

A lot of retail on the west side looks like this.

There are some putative attempts but they are disjoint urban design wise, not very compact.  There needs to be a focused program to develop them into coherent wholes ("Lee's Market to close its 400 West location in Salt Lake City" and "Lee's Market is reopening in Salt Lake City," Salt Lake Tribune, "Grocery stores in cities: the failure of the "15 minute grocery store"," 2023;. "Fairpark neighborhood in Salt Lake gets new coffee shop: A team of business owners on the west side of SLC saw a ‘desert’ for coffee shops, so they’ve opened their own," Tribune).

Stoneground Bakery sells wholesale and retail, baking and selling from an industrial building on the west side that isn't part of a commercial district.

And, not unlike how there is all kinds of outlier commercial retail space in the other part of the city, space that isn't part of a commercial district, the same is true of the west side, there are a bunch of interesting businesses there, but like how mayors say more people need to work in the office ("'We need more London Underground commuters on Fridays to help shops, restaurants and pubs'," My London, "Mayor of Washington, D.C., pushes for workers to return to the office," NPR), these buildings need to be in business districts to better generate economic activity that cross promotes other businesses.

I haven't figured out how to write it up, but Salt Lake City and County have invested in a lot of social infrastructure like libraries and recreation centers on the west side, but they haven't been developed in a manner that promotes the development of centers.

Lack of centers is blamed on disinvestment, but again I think that's a stretch.  

I think back in the day when the center city downtown was so thriving, it was close enough to the west side that there wasn't a big push to develop retail districts there.  There was no need.

Especially because back then and today the population of the city (210,000) and the west side is small.  

Like a lot of Salt Lake west side is mostly single family housing.  People may earn less, so the properties languish some, but as economically deprived areas go, Salt Lake's Westside isn't so bad.

But people claimed such issues were relevant to the proposed school closures on the west side also.  Whereas like in center city it is about demographics, and lack of enough population to support full classrooms at existing schools, even if west side households tend to have more children.  

If you want to support schools, you need more population, and given the housing demographics there, that means multiunit housing.  It is happening, but in the North Temple corridor mostly, and closer to the east side.  

So a lot of this addition to the housing stock isn't going to help the schools on the west side, because it is clustered east.

So this op-ed in the Philadelphia Inquirer, "What the ‘poop building’ tells us about affordable housing in Philadelphia," feels very relevant to me because it's merely about numbers and demographics.  

I wrote about this wrt retail within the entry on the Bridge Park ("Revisiting the 11th Street Bridge Park project as an opportunity rather than a folly: a new revitalization agenda for East of the River, DC"), but it's the same about housing affordability.  If you want it, you need a lot of housing.  Just like if you want retail, you need way more people than you realize--many thousands, not hundreds.

A sign on a fence in 2021 expressed the opposition of some West Philadelphia residents against the construction of an apartment building at 48th Street and Chester Avenue. Photo: Tom Gralish, Philadelphia Inquirer.  

Otherwise, especially with single family housing districts, there isn't enough to keep it low cost as demand rises and supply doesn't ("Understanding the DC housing market: demand for urban living, not the construction of new housing, is the driving force").

The article discusses how a Philadelphia neighborhood could have had as redevelopment a multiunit building with 76 units, 20% affordable.  Instead, to placate resident opposition, it will become 22 luxury rowhouses:

Philadelphia’s neighborhoods can either remain affordable or remain low-density. They cannot do both. Squirrel Hill, a cozy corner of Southwest Philadelphia, was given this choice. We overwhelmingly chose the latter. Other neighborhoods would do well not to copy our mistakes. 

... One neighbor, objecting to density, dismissed the apartments as “slum housing.” Meanwhile, the neighborhood group Protect Squirrel Hill referred to the four-story mixed-income project as a “monstrosity,” fearing an apartment building would gentrify the neighborhood. 

... But new development did not cause the neighborhood to become whiter, wealthier, and less affordable. Take a walk around the neighborhood and you will see that essentially no new development has occurred. Data from the U.S. Census Bureau estimate that the number of housing units here decreased by 132 over two decades. The building that once stood on the site of the dog park hosted 61 apartments. 

... When housing supply is constrained, property owners have more power to dictate prices; new residents and existing tenants must compete for units. Research supports this intuition, finding that new apartments lower, rather than raise, the risk of rent hikes and displacement. Even market-rate development “frees up” low-income units; blocking development has the opposite effect.

... Neighbors used the guise of housing justice to block the development. Other times, we wore no such mask. But in each case, we have chipped away at affordability, walkability, and the urban fabric that makes this neighborhood diverse, unique, and sustainable. When we frame the fight over an apartment building as a community-stands-up-to-greedy-developer story, the tenants who might have called the new building home are forgotten and erased. And when a building gets blocked, those tenants don’t vanish into the ether.

(There is a project in my neighborhood where a church is selling out to be redeveloped as housing.  Someone complained about it as "gentrification."  While there are apartments on that street, the fact is our zip code is the highest income in Salt Lake.  By definition it can't be gentrification.)

The article mentioned how one person against the development suggested a bird sanctuary or a cat oriented project instead of the dog park it would replace.  That's like the anti-76ers arena people suggesting small ground up grassroots development projects for Market Street, the downtown retail district of Philadelphia ("Penn professors spearhead workshop reimagining uses for proposed 76ers arena site near Chinatown," Daily Pennsylvanian, "Community groups say forget 76ers arena plan" WHYY/NPR).

Opposition to affordable housing in Chevy Chase, DC

Chevy Chase Community Center, Washington, DC.

The Washington Post has an article, "D.C.’s Chevy Chase neighborhood in uproar over affordable housing," about how proposals for a new Chevy Chase Community Center, incorporating a variety of improvements as well as housing above, which could be either 100% affordable housing or partial, are being met by opposition.

What bugs the s* out of me about this, is how DC goes in circles perpetually.  

A fine looking mixed use building with a library on the ground floor and affordable housing above, in Portland, Oregon.

For example, I remember in a DC planning meeting in the very early 2000s, learning about how the Hollywood branch of the Portland library system had a library and cafe on the ground floor, and 47 units of affordable housing above (" Putting housing above a public library, Portland takes another pioneering step toward urban density," Metropolis Magazine, 2002).  That's 20! years ago.

Baldwin Apartments on H Street NE; 37 apartments, 100% affordable, over ground floor retail and building amenities.

Similar proposals were made for some libraries in DC--the West End Library site was redeveloped as high income housing, and high quality affordable housing was built on H Street NE on the site of a modular, dinky library ("All-Affordable Apartment Building Headed to H Street NE," NBCWashington).

A proposal in Tenleytown ("Fenty Announces Development Partner for Tenley-Janney Site," DC press release, 2008) was successfully fought off, and in Southeast DC, in the Benning Road neighborhood, residents fought the idea fearing that pedophiles would live in the housing, and prey on children using the ground floor library ("Mixed-Use Messages," Washington City Paper, 2006).   

Obviously, DC itself has successful examples of doing this, although more with replacing the civic asset rather than including it going forward.  Still you can take the civic asset example from Portland, and the successful housing examples from DC and Portland, and apply it to Chevy Chase.

Although Chevy Chase is also right to be worried.  DC has actively placed Section 8 tenants in apartment buildings up and down Connecticut Avenue, and many of the households have been a scourge, bringing the 'hood to Ward 3 ("D.C. housed the homeless in upscale apartments. It hasn’t gone as planned," Washington Post, "Mayor Bowser meets with Connecticut Ave. tenant leaders," Forest Hills Connection).

But buildings like The Baldwin Apartments show it can be done successfully, in a manner that improves the range of what's available in a neighborhood.  But DC Government shows a lot that its management capacity is weak.

Normally, I'd not recommend such a location because it's practically in Maryland, and low income residents need good transit access.  OTOH, it would provide options for DC residents who might work in Montgomery County, and there is decent bus service on Connecticut Avenue, and the Friendship Heights Metrorail Station is a 15 minute walk to Wisconsin Avenue (and even faster by bike).

Academics argue there isn't a housing shortage as much as a problem with income and the mix of housing available

 -- "Housing Prices Are Too High. Building More Homes Won’t Solve the Problem," Barron's

A longer-term perspective, however, shows that America isn’t suffering from a housing shortage. Housing production has lagged behind household growth since 2010, but this doesn’t account for the massive overhang of housing produced in the previous decade. Fueled by the housing bubble of 2000-07, 160 homes were added to the stock for every 100 households formed during the aughts, our analysis of Census Bureau data shows. This level of production created a huge surplus of housing, which has yet to be fully absorbed. 

Put differently, from 2000-21, the nation grew by 18.5 million households. To maintain an adequate inventory of vacant housing, which historically would be 9.3% of the total, the housing stock needed to expand by 20.2 million units. Instead, it grew by 23.7 million housing units, producing a surplus of 3.5 million units. 

... The belief that there is a housing shortage is correctly motivated by concern over the housing-affordability problems that confront so many households. But census data show that these housing-affordability problems largely reflect a mismatch between household incomes and housing prices. 

Here, prices refer to housing prices in the market as a whole, not just the prices of new-to-the-market homes, which fluctuate widely with the pace of housing production. Housing-affordability problems for the population as a whole aren’t related to housing shortages or low vacancy rates. Rather, they are driven by high overall housing prices and low household incomes.

Innumeracy and the affordable housing discussion

 The Salt Lake Tribune has an article, "Utah needs 41,000 units of affordable housing. Robert Gehrke explains how the state aims to help," on how the State of Utah is increasing its commitment to addressing the lack of supply of affordable housing, by increasing the amount of tax credits available, from $1 million to $10 million per year, for the next 10 years, totaling $100 million.  From the article: 

The Legislature significantly expanded a tax credit that has been called the most important source of financing for affordable housing in history

At $200,000 per unit, to build 41,000 units requires $8.2 billion.  At $150,000 per unit, $6.15 billion.

In either case, $10 million per year doesn't go very far, especially as demand for affordable housing will continue to increase.

Goodwill of Greater Washington to build Arlington affordable housing as part of a first-of-its-kind redevelopment + the Flint YMCA

The Washington Business Journal reports that in Arlington County, Virginia, Goodwill is working with the Arlington Housing Corporation, a nonprofit, to redevelop a store site where they will have their store on the ground floor, with affordable housing above.  From the article:

Goodwill, a nonprofit that provides job training, education and other services to people with disabilities or who face other employment challenges, has owned the 1.4-acre parcel at 10 South Glebe Road since 1999. The property includes a 1950s-era, 26,000-square-foot building and parking lot, where the charity collects and resells donated items to help fund its operations. Goodwill now aims, in a joint venture with a Arlington-based nonprofit developer AHC Inc., to demolish and redevelop that site with a multistory housing complex, including something like 100 affordable units over a new store and donation center.

Nonprofits tend to not be particularly innovative so this is a big thing.  But I don't understand why nonprofits don't think of themselves as more intrepid, as "social enterprises" and become more oriented to this kind of activity.

Some nonprofits run social enterprises as a way to generate income for their program.  In fact, Goodwill, which works with the disabled, has done this for decades with their thrift stores.  In the early 2000s, some Goodwill stores repositioned around higher end thrift and fashion, by differentiating among the goods that were donated.

The Orange County Register reports ("Tiyya Foundation expands culinary program to help young immigrant mothers begin careers") on an immigrant support group, that runs a catering operation and a one star Michelin restaurant in Los Angeles to raise funds and employ people.

By contrast, a church in my greater neighborhood in Salt Lake is dissolving, and rather than sell their property so it can be redeveloped for affordable housing, they've sold it to a developer who will build market rate housing.

In "When BTMFBA isn't enough: keeping civic assets public through cy pres review" (2016), I've suggested that Attorney General offices need to pay more attention to nonprofits and how they deal with their real estate.  There is the tension between getting the most money and doing "good works."  But it seems to me that the Church missed the boat, compared to Goodwill in Arlington.

Basically, I guess I'm saying apply the "transformational projects action planning" lens to nonprofits when it comes to opportunities for better using real estate resources, and for seeding projects like social enterprises that can contribute to communities in extranormal ways.

=======

The Flint Michigan YMCA building is beyond its useful life and needs to be replaced.  They are doing a development ("Downtown Flint YMCA project gets $1.5M grant, $5.5M loan from state," Flint Journal) that will include:

a 2,400-square-foot medical rehabilitation facility, 50 apartments and more than 7,500 square feet of office space.

YMCA officials have said their new facility is expected to include a competitive lap pool, family splash pad, basketball court, exercise studios, a running/walking track, men, women’s and universal locker rooms.

Years ago the Boys and Girls Club on 14th Street NW in Washington DC suggested a similar kind of project, with housing above, as a way to generate revenue from the land to support their programs but it was opposed by the Ward 1 City Councilman. Apparently, a development did occur on the parking lot later, but the facility still there, seems to be closed.  And the development doesn't look like it's affordable housing.

The Port of Greater Cincinnati Development Authority outbids Wall Street to buy houses in Cincinnati

Arts and retail focused community development corporations.  In "Revisiting stories: cultural planning and the need for arts-based community development corporations as real estate operators" I argue that to best buy, hold, develop, and maintain arts-related uses you need an arts and culture focused community development corporation (or the city or county government) to act at the city-wide/county scale.  

The Pittsburgh Cultural Trust, the Playhouse Square Development Corporation, and Jubilee Housing of Baltimore (focused on live work housing) are particularly good examples.

In "The SEMAEST Vital Quartier program remains the best model for helping independent retail," I state that SEMAEST in Paris is probably the best example of a city-chartered authority doing this.  Their focus is on maintaining independent retail.

Transit and real estate appreciation.  Transit focused community development corporations.  Similarly, in the face of real estate price increases in response to new transit infrastructure, I've suggested that a CDC could operate similarly, wrt both commercial and residential property, specifically for the Purple Line in Suburban Maryland ("Purple Line Corridor Coalition study: Same Old, Same Old | Gentrification will result from investment in transit infrastructure"). 

Sadly, wrt the Purple Line I first suggested this in 2007.  Fifteen years later, still no action.

Historic preservation.  Same for historic preservation.  The best way to arrest the possible demolition of a property is to buy it.  Having revolving funds and other mechanisms to be able to respond quickly to do so solves the problem ("Saving urban corner stores needs public assistance: Mott's Market on Capitol Hill, Washington, DC ").  

In Cleveland, not so much lately, the Cleveland Restoration Society was a leader in buying properties, sometimes using receivership statutes to cure notorious nuisances, rehabilitating them, and selling them at a loss if necessary, as a stabilization measure. Other preservation groups have done this similarly in places like Macon, Georgia, and Galveston, Texas. 

Serendipity and opportunity. And in my writings on "transformational projects action planning," one of the points about successful wide-scale revitalization programs is that there needs to be serendipity and the ability to seize opportunities as long as they fit within the outline of the master plan ("Why can't the "Bilbao Effect" be reproduced? | Bilbao as an example of Transformational Projects Action Planning").  

1. A commitment to the development and production of a broad, comprehensive, visionary, and detailed revitalization plan/s (Bilbao, Hamburg, Liverpool);
2. the creation of innovative and successful implementation organizations (Bilbao, Hamburg, Liverpool, Helsinki);
3. strong accountability mechanisms that ensure that the critical distance provided by semi-independent implementation organizations isn't taken advantage of in terms of deleterious action;
4. funding to realize the plan;
5. integrated branding and marketing programs to support the realization of the plan (Hamburg, Vienna, Liverpool, Bilbao, Dublin);
6. flexibility and a willingness to take advantage of serendipitous events and opportunities and integrate new projects into the overall planning and implementation framework (Bilbao, Liverpool, Helsinki).
   

Two examples of serendipity come from Bilbao.  First, in getting the Guggenheim Museum to open there, after Graz, Austria rejected their proposal.  Second, once the Museum opened recognizing that in addition to the subway, they need better surface rail transit (tram/streetcar) to serve the Museum District, and they got it running within a few years--one-third of the time it took DC to open a streetcar line.

Bias for action.  I guess this presupposes that the agency is predisposed to act instead of sit around.  I've written "bias for government inaction" is a problem, that government agencies aren't always that proactive, and tend to not have much of "a sense of urgency" when it comes for a need to act.  

Winston Churchill is famous for the quote:

You can always trust America to do the right thing... after she has exhausted all other alternatives.

Now, the bias is to not act, often because of ideological grounds, and an unwillingness to come up with the money for the change, even if the cost of not acting is much more expensive.

Housing market, venture capital and single family housing as rentals.  Since the 2008 Recession, Wall Street venture capital firms have developed large portfolios of single family housing, converting the properties to rental from owner occupied.  This was facilitated by banks wanting to simplify their REO (real estate owned) portfolios created by rampant foreclosures.

Because financiers have quick access to large amounts of capital, they can generally offer better terms than any individual or small company.  This has changed the nature of the real estate market in many communities, especially weaker markets.

A home recently purchased by The Port of Greater Cincinnati Development Authority.Jeff Dean for NPR.

Cincinnati.  The Port Authority in Cincinnati, recognizing that it is chartered as a community development corporation, realized it could step in and compete against venture capital and acquire REO portfolios ("It's harder to buy a house. This city fought back by outbidding corporate landlords," NPR).  From the article:

So when that California company, Raineth Housing, went under, the Port moved to buy up its properties scattered around Cincinnati. It's a first — she doesn't know of any other public agency like hers in the U.S. that's done it — and it's risky.

Brunner says the agency outbid 12 other investors, taking on $14.5 million in debt for those 194 homes. It has since paid $2 million more toward fixing them up.

Because large institutional owners are not usually committed to local communities, they may run the properties poorly (some do, others don't), so local ownership can also be an opportunity to improve the house and stabilize the neighborhood. ...

It's a challenge to fix up homes and keep sales prices low

The Port's purchase price per home averages out to roughly $78,000. But the amount it will sell them for depends on how much it has to spend to fix them up. And once the agency was able to look inside all 194 homes, it was clear many needed a lot more work than expected.

Their intent is to keep the properties as affordable, and that ideally they can sell them to tenants.  But this is complicated by the poor condition of many of the properties.

Conclusion.  The Port Authority in Cincinnati illustrates my points about having a (1) community development corporation or similar entity already created (2) that is ADEQUATELY CAPITALIZED, (3) with the wherewithal to act when important, transformational opportunities are presented.

No more housing filtration? (at least in big cities)

Filtration is an old concept in urban planning (also called "ecological succession," "invasion-succession theory," or "concentric zone theory").

I thought from the University of Chicago sociologists in the 1920s, but it actually was first posited in the UK.  

It presumes that people with more money move outward from the core.  As they do so they are replaced by people who on a relative basis, have improved their circumstances compared to lower income deciles.

The Toronto Star reports ("Curse of the renter: In some neighbourhoods, not owning a home now costs more than owning one") that renters there are paying more for housing than housing owners in some parts of the city.  From the article:

Homeowners have long outspent renters in Toronto’s census metropolitan area; a decade ago, their average bills were $1,516 per month versus tenants’ $1,043. That trend is still visible in areas like Toronto’s Little Italy, or a large swath of southwest Brampton.

But over the last decade, the gap has been narrowing. Where owners in all areas spent 45.35 per cent more than tenants in 2011, it fell to 38.84 per cent in 2016, and to 30.28 per cent in 2021.

Statistics Canada has noted a countrywide trend, meanwhile, of renters’ bills climbing faster than homeowners. The average tenant in Canada last year paid 17.6 per cent more than they did in 2016. The average homeowner’s bills increased by 9.5 per cent over that period. 

Toronto is home to some more extreme examples, such as the area between Queen Street and Wright Avenue, from Lansdowne to Sorauren avenues. Here, though owners are still paying several hundred dollars more per month — $2,092 to renters’ $1,790 — renters’ bills are growing much faster. From 2016 to 2021, renters’ average bills went up 48.2 per cent, versus just five per cent for owners.

“It’s quite startling,” Majid said. Generally, the area in and around Parkdale has contended with gentrification, she said, and an increase in housing “financialization” as large companies have come in and purchased older rental apartment blocks as investments. In several cases, those companies have applied for above-guideline rent increases, Majid said, requesting Landlord and Tenant Board permission to charge higher rents for reasons such as major repairs.

If older tenants are pushed out by those costs, she said the rents could surge even higher.

The concept of filtration presumes that older properties remain lower cost.

In today's economy properties are being priced as if they are new, regardless of condition, age, etc.  Maybe it's just about the price per square foot, regardless of condition.

This results in part because an increasing share of the rental housing sector is owned and managed by large firms.

And because demand is greater than supply, especially for comparatively lower cost housing.

An urban planner quoted in the article suggests a greater role for the nonprofit social housing sector as a way to counter constant repricing upward.

-- "Rents are rising everywhere: with continued supply-demand mismatch, shouldn't renter protections be universal? ," 2022

Purple Line Corridor Coalition study: Same Old, Same Old | Gentrification will result from investment in transit infrastructure

This is in response to this Washington Post article, "Purple Line study: Without help, light-rail line will bring gentrification." From the article:

The 16-mile light-rail line that will connect Montgomery and Prince George’s counties — the first direct suburb-to-suburb rail line in the Washington region — is designed to help revitalize older, inner-ring suburbs while providing faster, more reliable mass transit. Some local officials and community leaders have long worried that, without attention, rising land values and rents around the 21 stations will price out business and residents, particularly in lower-income communities in Prince George’s international corridor.

Communities most at risk include Long Branch, Langley Park and Riverdale Park, study leaders said.

 

Poster board from the 2014 meetings.

The study came from the public-private Purple Line Corridor Coalition, a group composed of government officials, community activists, nonprofits, companies and academics. The group organized in 2013 to try to prevent the kind of displacement that has traditionally followed many Metro stations and new transit lines across the country.

 Um, duh.  Transit, like roads, is designed to promote real estate intensification.  It's what you call a "priming effect."  And you want that to happen, since you're spending billions of dollars on it.  

Also see "Op-Ed in Washington Post about preserving affordable housing in the Purple Line corridor (Department of Duh)" from earlier in the year on the same topic.

 

CAF Urbos light rail vehicles will be used for the Purple Line.

This entry summarizes the transit and land use recommendations I've made over the years wrt the Purple Line, but not the CDC-related one, or the need to have a preservation initiative for existing businesses.

-- "Codifying the complementary transit network improvements and planning initiatives recommended in the Purple Line writings," 2022

In 2014, the University of Maryland College Park Public Policy School sponsored a couple of conferences about Purple Line related issues.  

The Purple Line will be a light rail connecting the east and west legs of the Red Line, north leg of the Green and Yellow Lines, and east leg of the Orange Line Metrorail lines, as well as (through transfers) the Penn, Camden, and Brunswick lines of the MARC commuter railroad.

I was kinda surprised about the conference, because they were big on examples from Minneapolis and Denver, which have light rail lines or networks, and not the DC area, which has Metrorail and at the time, almost 40 years of experience with transit oriented development.

When they discussed affordable housing initiatives in those cities I wasn't particularly impressed, both because the projects weren't all that big (especially by comparison to Greater Phoenix, also home to light rail, ("Light rail housing fund spurs 15 projects in metro Phoenix" and "Why you don't see more vacant lots along light-rail route," Arizona Republic) or well funded, not to mention that the DC area doesn't have a particularly powerful philanthropic community--the wealthy tend to focus on projects meaningful to themselves, not others, although these days, surprisingly, Amazon--developing a headquarters in Arlington County ("Crystal City Arlington as Amazon one-half of HQ2," 2018), has committed significant sums to the preservation of affordable housing ("Bowser’s affordable housing push gets a $147M boost from Amazon," "Amazon helps nonprofit purchase Arlington building for affordable housing," Washington Post).

Anyway, my initial response--which was not acted upon--is that if you want to address affordable housing in substantive ways, you need to create a bi-county community development corporation acting in the transit shed of the Purple Line in Montgomery and Prince George's Counties, to buy, hold, preserve, develop and fund affordable housing.

-- Purple line planning in suburban Maryland as an opportunity to integrate place and people focused initiatives into delivery of new transit systems"
--  "Quick follow up to the Purple Line piece about creating a Transportation Renewal District and selling bonds to fund equitable development").  

And it turns out I had written something similar in 2007!!!!!!

-- "It's time to create the "Port Authority" of Montgomery and Prince George's Counties"

That was true in 2014 and 2007, and is still true in 2022.

The biggest thing I learned from my involvement in DC urban revitalization matters was that once the velocity of development starts to change and revs up, it's too late to come up with plans, you need plans beforehand, otherwise you are reactive, not proactive and can never catch up.

The second biggest thing I learned was the need for focused and effective implementation organizations.  CDCs can be such a tool.  

On effective CDCs and economic development organizations see "The Howard and Lincoln Theatres: run them like the Pittsburgh Cultural Trust/Playhouse Square Cleveland model," 2012, and the discussion of "transformational projects action planning," "Why can't the "Bilbao Effect" be reproduced? | Bilbao as an example of Transformational Projects Action Planning." 2017.

Granted for the most part DC proper doesn't have great CDCs ("The community development approach and the revitalization of DC's H Street corridor: congruent or oppositional approaches?," 2013) with the exception of Jubilee Housing ("Building stronger community support for public/social housing," 2012) although some of the area housing CDCs, such as in Arlington and Montgomery Counties are reasonably effective.