California’s first ADU condo sale offers another path to homeownership

Backdoor Revolution: The Definitive Guide to ADU Development

I have been interested in ADUs for years ("DC and accessory dwelling units," "There are plenty of lots capable of accessory dwelling units in Upper Northwest," "Will carriage houses destroy city life as we know it?."  

And for a time did alley tours in Greater Capitol Hill.

Article from the Orange County Register.  From the article:

San Jose is home to the first accessory dwelling unit sold as a separately owned condo in California, city officials said, setting a potential template for a more affordable path to homeownership. But a lengthy rollout raises questions about whether the model can become a scalable solution to the state’s housing crisis — the sale comes more than two years after the state made such transactions possible.

The 749-square-foot, two-bedroom ADU on Josefina Street near downtown closed last month for $530,000. That’s about a quarter of Santa Clara County’s eye-popping $2.1 million median single-family home price in May, according to the California Association of Realtors. Real estate brokerage Redfin last month listed San Jose among the 10 most expensive U.S. housing markets, based on the share of median income needed to afford to buy a home.

ADUs, also known as in-law units or granny flats, typically have up to 1,200 square feet of living space and must include a kitchen sink, cooking appliance and separate bathroom.

The sale was made possible by a state law passed in 2023, Assembly Bill 1033, which allows homeowners to convert ADUs into condos and sell them separately from the main property, rather than just renting them out. Under the law, ADU condos come with their own property tax bills, but require an HOA agreement with the primary homeowner for common elements, such as roofs or driveways.

Historicity.  I have been intrigued by alleys, historic carriage houses, and ADUs for a long time.  First in terms of historicity.   

• DC Historic Alleys Building Survey, DC Historic Preservation Office
• "The American Alley, Part 1: A Hidden Resource," "The American Alley, Part 2: Origins of the American Alley," "The American Alley, Part 3: The End of the American Alley," "The American Alley, Part 4: Rediscovering the Forgotten Human Scale," Strong Towns/Resilience
• "History: Capitol Hill Alley Dwellings," Hill Rag

• and how on some properties there are historic carriage buildings that have been converted from horse stables to houses.  These are on regular house lots.  
• There are also some carriage houses on their own lots separate from a street facing lot, developed when the interior of large blocks were "programmed" with buildings separate from the street--often for "industrial uses" like stables, machining, storage, drayage, etc., 
• I learned from a guy I talked to once on a rear alley off of H Street NE who said that at the time (before DC liberalized ADU laws) it was legal for these buildings to have a "caretaker" apartment
• Interior blocks often were developed with housing to use up the space, make it profitable, and  sometimes as a way to provide mixed income housing--for servants, lower income people, etc.  
• (Later, instead of dealing with interior blocks, developers created intervening streets, such as Acker Place, Lexington Place, Morris Place, Morton Place, and Orleans Place between 6th and 7th Streets NE, Parker Street NE by Union Station, or blocks of rowhouses west of 5th Street NW in Manor Park like Quackenbos Street NW and Quintana Place NW)
• President's wife Ellen Wilson's claim to DC fame was her work to rid blocks of this interior  housing, probably because often the people settled there were African-Americans.

• Although some sections remained, like Millers Court NE and Brown's Court SE or on Capitol Hill and became models for building similar housing later 
• And because in upper NW, such as the lots east of 4th Street in Manor Park, the deep lots often have free standing garages or nothing, and could accommodate an ADU.  Our lot could, which I'd like to take advantage of some time.
• Transit access is key.  But I think it's best to focus ADU development within walking distance to a Metrorail station, to reduce the demand for driving.  Our house in Manor Park is about three quarters of a mile from Takoma Metrorail Station.

Affordable Housing.  Second in terms of the idea of adding "missing middle housing" and affordable housing. Missing middle housing is smaller types of housing vis a vis "normal sized" single family attached and detached houses.  In DC, it's not missing, it's just very expensive because all housing in DC is expensive.  And because there isn't a lot of it.  As noted above, it's mostly on interiors of blocks, and as a product of its time, pre-1900.

A very small house on Millers Court NE rents for $4,500 per month.  Middle housing indeed!

But the people who can afford to build an ADU might not necessarily want to provide AH.  According to a study in Greater Los Angeles ("The dark side of California’s backyard ADU boom: How much do they ease the housing shortage," LA Times):

He found that “ADU prevalence correlates with lower-income, renter-occupied, and younger households, denser populations, and areas with higher concentrations of non-white residents and registered Democrats.”

This type of housing is a form of what's being called "missing middle housing."  

In some weak markets like a neighborhood in Austin, Texas, ADUs are promoted to support multi-generational living and wealth generation through improving the value of a property by adding a unit, or to have a second income stream from the property to pay the mortgage ("Alley Flat Initiative fits small, green homes into unexpected places," CultureMap Austin, Alley Flat Initiative, Guadalupe Neighborhood Development Corporation). 

Some photos.

Parker Street NE -- the houses are narrow but still expensive because of the location.

Quintana Place NW -- the houses are more colonial, Tudor and not contiguous but in units of two because the National Capital Planning Commission ruled  sometime in the 1920s that rowhouses couldn't be contiguous (seen as an anti-African American policy decision)

Lexington Place NE -- the Queen Anne rowhouse style typified by the houses on Parker Street NE started to be succeeded by a more Craftsman form, often called Wardman style after the developer.  This transition started around 1907. ("What's in a Wardman? A Short Overview of DC's Most Prevalent Architecural Style," DC Urban Turf).

Millers Court SE is super well situated.  A block from the Supreme Court.  Two blocks from the Capitol.

Third, I've wanted to put one on our lot.  But ADUs aren't as cheap to build as people say.

1.  everyone says "oh, they're cheaper because you don't have to buy the land."
2. That's a little true, but the cost of permitting and new construction and financing is still high, over $250/s.f.
3. Plus the cost of installing electricity and water/sewage (and maybe gas).
4. They are hard to finance, although you can do it through a home equity loan I suppose.  And then the rents can't be super cheap because you have to pay off the cost of construction plus the various annual costs.

This is a garage on the rear of a lot on the 4400 block of River Road NW in DC.  It's a similar configuration to our lot in Manor Park.

The amounts of money cities offer to encourage ADU construction aren't very much and usually require renting out at less than market rates.

To facilitate this "the city" or nonprofit should create an ADU clearinghouse working with property owners to finance and build, and then with property owners and renters to facilitate rentals in a systematic way.

CDCs to build and finance at scale.  Gosh a good 12+ years ago I suggested the creation of a community development corporation that would operate city wide doing this.  Ideally, on our block you could build as many as 32 ADUs, they could go in on a block, with a city incentive too, and try to get multiple property owners to do it at the same time, to cut costs.

A number of firms do this now in the Midwest, such as ADU America, and in the Pacific Northwest and California (ADU Resource Center).

Pattern Books to make building ADUs easier.  Some cities have also created ADU pattern books to facilitate permitting and lower cost construction.  Often they include more modern buildings which don't appeal to me.  I prefer that ADUs match the prevailing neighborhood architectural style be it Queen Anne or Craftsman rowhouse, Colonial, etc.

-- ADU D.C. Homeowner’s Manual, Coalition for Smarter Growth

-- Philadelphia Rowhouse Manual (not on ADUs, but historic rowhouses, providing indirect guidance for how to do pre 1914 style ADUs)

-- A Pattern Book for Founders’ Place Neighborhood, Muscogee, Oklahoma, Oklahoma University-Tulsa Urban Design Studio

-- Del Ray Neighborhood Residential Pattern Book, Alexandria, Virginia

-- Accessory Dwelling Unit Guidebook, Boston Planning Department

-- A Pattern Book for Neighborly Houses, Habitat for Humanity, (I like the points about context sensitive development, it's not so much about ADUs)

-- ADU Pattern Book for Mid-Century Homes, Family Housing Fund

-- Building an ADU, Salt Lake City

-- ADU Pattern Book, MB Architecture

-- Changing Lanes: Laneway Suites in Toronto

Problems:  Some people don't want to share.  Granny flats/Yay or Nay.  Originally, were called "granny flats," with the idea that downsizing parents would relocate to an ancillary dwelling on their children's property

But some people don't want to share their lots.  "An Honest Conversation About Toronto Laneway Houses," Toronto Realty Blog.  From the article:

But why do people disagree on laneway housing? And what issues are at the forefront of the discussions? “An honest conversation,” i.s what I called this in today’s blog title, and that’s what I’m aiming for because I feel like the discussion about laneway housing in Toronto is merely getting started. 

 A client of mine remarked last weekend, “I have no problem if somebody else wants to build a laneway home on our street. But I don’t think I’d take one if it were free. I don’t want somebody living in my backyard with a window that looks out to where my kids play, and I don’t want to park my car under their living room.”

The LA Times has a series of articles on ADUs, and many involve multi-generational families, so sharing the lot isn't an issue.  And sometimes it's not for granny, but for the adult children. ("She couldn’t afford L.A. rent after law school. Her parents’ ADU came to the rescue").  

There are many in the Belmont Heights neighborhood of Long Beach.  We stayed in one as an airbnb.  A less than one mile walk to the beach...

For others, it's an ancillary studio not to be rented out ("Thanks to a tiny ADU, an L.A. home transforms into a stunning art gallery and studio," "Surprising ADU with tricked-out garage, rooftop deck matches family’s playfulness").  This is a big issue now with work from home.

But for unrelated people, if they aren't into the idea of having renters, an ADU may not be appealing.

Problems:  Financing.  It's still difficult to get traditional financing.  And adding an ADU if you have a mortgage, you have to notify the lender. ("Should I take a bridge loan to build an ADU?," LA Times); 

Problems:  Parking.  DC requires that building an ADU doesn't reduce parking on the lot.  In an area like Manor Park, this is dumb because there is plenty of street parking.  Less so in rowhouse neighborhoods in the core.  Basically, people can create "parking pads" that double as patios. Also see "A Koreatown parking protest: Tenants stage sit-in to protest loss of parking to make way for ADUs," LA Times.

Green Alley initiatives.  Separately, a number of cities are pursuing "green alley" initiatives where they are focusing on plantings, stormwater capture, and sometimes placemaking (" In Miles of Alleys, Chicago Finds Its Next Environmental Frontier," New York Times, "To Battle Floods, Cities Revive Their Long-Forgotten Alleyways,"JSTOR, "Cities Give Alleys New Life," Governing).  

-- Chicago Green Alley Handbook

In the early 2000s I read an article in (I think) Southern Living about Calder Loth, then State Architectural Historian for Virginia, and his initiative planting flowers in his alley in the Fan District ("The Self-Taught Gardener: Division Street," Berkshire Edge).

Alley repaving.  DC had a green alleys program but it never did much.  

Separately the Department of Transportation created a program still in operation that actively repaves alleys, many of which were in disrepair, with a polyglot of materials, using brick or asphalt block where it had been in use.  

Except that originally they only used red brick, and some alleys originally had yellow brick or other treatments.  I know I called for a change in this to be more historically accurate and they did change, according to this Instagram post.

This image shows yellow brick on the alley, and red brick fronting the sidewalk/apron to the street.

There is an alley off North Capitol SE, where one of the abutting property owners put in (or maintains) historically accurate cobblestones, with a brick track for "carriage wheels."  

Although, if you walk on cobbles, like some streets in Georgetown, it's not comfortable.

Placemaking and retail laneways initiatives.  ("Hidden in Plain Sight: Activating Urban Alleys," MRSC)

-- Living Alleys Toolkit, Austin

For at least 15 years, Melbourne has been reactivating alleys as retail spots.  In the US, larger real estate projects are often using the laneway concept as a way to activate interior spaces and add a fun element to the development.

Sydney, Austrailia

Retail laneways initiatives.   

-- Melbourne's Revitalized Laneways, Gehl Architects

-- Pocket Book of Melbourne Laneways

-- "Australia’s laneways investment is breathing new life into its cities," Monocle

-- Pioneer Square Alleys Design Manual

WTF? Detroit News op-ed: Ease building secondary dwellings in Detroit | Is no solution to lack of housing demand

Before my life disintegrated with the death of my father, the middle house is where we lived in Detroit.  Our Congresswoman lived down the street.  The Zillow estimate is $242,000.

The op-ed ("Ease building secondary dwellings in Detroit," Detroit News) argues that the solution to Detroit's broken micro-economy is making it easier to build accessory dwelling units.  He suggests lowering permit fees, among other steps.

ADUs can pull double duty for the city. They build generational wealth for Detroiters, while supporting housing affordability. It’s a simple amendment that does not upend the general plan of the city and frees citizens to utilize their properties how they please. It’s time to start building back a city meant for everyone, not just the few who can afford it.

This is misguided.  Detroit has tens of thousands of vacant properties and lots ("Detroit Shrinks Itself, Historic Homes and All," Wall Street Journal, 2010).  From the article:

Mayor Dave Bing has pledged to knock down 10,000 structures in his first term as part of a nascent plan to "right-size" Detroit, or reconfigure the city to reflect its shrinking population. When it's all over, said Karla Henderson, director of the Detroit Building Department, 

This house, in the upscale Palmer Woods neighborhood, was demolished but looks recoverable to me.

"There's going to be a lot of empty space." Mr. Bing hasn't yet fully articulated his ultimate vision for what comes after demolition, but he has said entire areas will have to be rebuilt from the ground up. For now, his plan calls for the tracts to be converted to other uses, such as parks or farms.

Even when the demolitions are complete, Detroit will still have a huge problem on its hands. The city has roughly 90,000 abandoned or vacant homes and residential lots, according to Data Driven Detroit, a nonprofit that tracks demographic data for the city.

... "Neighborhoods that are considered stable are now at 20% vacancy," said Deborah Younger, a development consultant involved in the demolition effort.

Making ADUs a little easier to build isn't the answer to an "over supply" of recovarable properties.

At a conference a number of years ago, Alan Mallach and I had a conversation where we expressed incredulity that advocates in Baltimore were advocating for inclusionary zoning, when the city has thousands of vacant properties.  The same goes with ADUs in Detroit.

This op-ed discusses "gentrification."  Yes, some neighborhoods will experience inward investment and this brings sometimes unwanted change.  But the solution to disinvestment is investment, and that's part of the equation of gentrification.

Detroit has tens of thousands of vacant properties and lots.  It is in desperate need of increased demand for housing.  

In the meantime the city demolishes hundreds of buildings each year because of lack of demand ("City of Detroit demolished 6000 homes since 2020," CBS, Detroit Demolition Program, "Detroiters spent $49M on demolition. Where did the money go?," BridgeDetroit).  

The City of Detroit has spent more than $10 million demolishing blighted homes in District 7 on the city’s west side. Some residents say they are glad to see vacant properties being torn down, while others wonder how the money is being spent. (BridgeDetroit photo by Bryce Huffman)

Looking at images of distressed homes in Detroit is particularly depressing.  From the article:

2023 was as a special year for Detroit. For the first time in decades the city gained 1,852 new residents, reflecting a city finally out of its rut and ready to prosper again. True to Detroit’s commitment, property values across the city increased.

On paper, this seems like nothing but fantastic news, but if you ask Detroiters, they tell a different story of gentrification. Gentrification is a process where less wealthy neighborhoods have money invested into them. This can be advantageous for only those who can afford it. With rising property values come higher property taxes. High taxes can be a factor that pushes original residents out of the area, and it’s no secret that many Detroit neighborhoods are ripe for gentrification. 

The article argues that zoning is used to maintain segregation, although rather than term it race based, it expands the definition economically, according to income and the cost of a property.

Detroit, for example, still supports civil-rights era zoning codes that actively enforce segregation based on income. This is slyly done under the guise of mandating setback lines and density maximums to force builders into only one type of development: single-family homes. 

The article suggests that ADUs can help bring about affordability.  Detroit has decades of affordability ahead because of lack of demand and a huge overage of potential housing supply.

A single-family home is not a vice within itself, it is the overabundance and lack of affordable units that artificially spikes housing prices, leaving those less fortunate in the dust. This is not what Detroit needs.

Besides Detroit having lots of small lots, making it a bit harder for ADUs to have space, the reality is that they aren't "that cheap" to build.  Yes, you don't have to pay for land, but you do have to pay for utility hookups including sewer, water, and electricity, and that can be expensive.  A $300,000 or more new to build ADU is a lot more expensive than it is to renovate a $25,000 house.

Plus, in a weak market like Detroit an ADU is harder to finance.  Since it's possible in Detroit to buy and renovate houses for much less than $300,000, an ADU isn't likely to appraise at the cost of construction for a mortgage loan, because it is higher priced than the market.  So ADU builders will have to self-finance.

=====

By contrast, in Pittsburgh, Robert Fragasso recommends another course ("What the city of Pittsburgh can do with abandoned houses," Pittsburgh Post-Gazette).  It's nothing new, been done by cities over the decades.  But renovation is better than demolition.

Pittsburgh has 10,000 abandoned houses and empty lots, of which 1300 have reported code violations, and restoring these properties to the tax rolls would go far in helping to balance the city and school district budgets. Using the average city property tax of $2500 on those 10,000 properties, adding $25 million in new revenues.

Our political leaders seek governmental solutions to this problem, solutions the city cannot afford, when the private sector offers a potential answer. Here’s my proposal: Instead of expending scarce public funds for demolition and leaving empty lots behind, allow individuals to buy properties for $1 in return for a signed contract to demolish or gut the structure within 60 days (unless it can be successfully rehabbed), build a new residence within 12 months and agree to owner-occupy.

... Once renovation begins in a neighborhood more follows. We have seen this in areas that have been restored.

There is a conundrum.  If you offer such properties to lower income households out of the goal of equity, they may lack the capital necessary to fix the house in 12 months.  OTOH, if you focus on developers, the houses end up being rentals, disallowing individual homeowners the opportunity to build equity.

Note the math compared to an ADU.

The math for the buyer is compelling. The cost of home construction in Pittsburgh begins at around $150 per square foot. Remember the land was obtained in the original $1 transaction. The median home size in Pittsburgh is 1500 square feet, which equates to a construction cost of $225,000. /p>

If the buyer can do some of the work, the resultant cost could be less. That total cost would be much less if the existing structure could remain, be gutted and rebuilt from the inside out. Add $10,000 for demolition or gutting of the structure and the upward estimate of total construction would be $235,000. That is about the average cost of an existing home in Pittsburgh, but this would be a new home.

In Detroit, the cost of demolition is about $20,000.

Scattered site buying of houses in high cost neighborhoods doesn't seem to be a good way to develop scale for a community land trust

The Douglass Community Land Trust in DC was created to ward off gentrification in Ward 8 that was predicted to occur as a response to the creation of the 11th Street Bridge Park connecting East and West of the Anacostia River.

Personally, I don't see the bridge park as a likely high velocity augur of gentrification because it isn't located near housing, on either side of the river.

It will be a trek to get to.  I think it's cool and disclosure, I was on the Design Review Committee for its initial development, but it's a lot of money and because of locational issues, isn't likely to have the impact that is predicted.

In general, my criticism of land trusts is they need to be created long before the velocity of community change is heightened and demand has been stoked in neighborhoods once ignored, like 15 years ago at least, not 5 years ago.  And that's my criticism of cities (and DC) and housing policy more generally.

There needed to be a plan, and a lot of money to fund it, around 2000, not many years later.  Although to be fair, DC has funded a fair amount of housing through its Housing Production Trust Fund.

Anyway, the Washington Post has an article, "A ‘clerical error’ could cost D.C. 65 new units of affordable housing," that the Douglass Community Land Trust is in danger of losing a $2 million grant, because of errors on the part of the DC government.

Within the article there is an interesting subsection, about how the Trust is buying high cost houses, albeit for less than market value, West of the River, as a way to build their portfolio.  I understand the sentiment, but it seems like mission creep of massive proportions, and a poor use of scarce funds.

From the article:

To provide permanent affordable housing, the trust acquires homes at a below-market rate and sells them to households earning 80 percent or below the median family income, Executive Director Ginger Rumph said. The trust also creates affordable homes by purchasing land and leasing it to developers, establishing co-op housing and partnering with construction companies. Using these methods, Rumph said, the council’s $2 million award would have financed the creation of 65 affordable units. 

With Douglass’s mission in mind, Ed Lazere, a former D.C. Council chair candidate, and his wife went to the trust in September 2022 to sell it the Brookland home they purchased in 1992. “We wanted to pass our home to someone that was like we were — people early in their career, moderate income — rather than be a part of gentrification in Brookland,” Lazere said. 

But the city didn’t disburse the $2 million as promised in March, Rumph said, and the land trust couldn’t immediately complete the sale. “It wasn’t clear to us that [the sale] was going to happen,” Lazere said. “We were prepared to sell the house at market rate.” 

The trust ended up taking out a loan to finance the purchase, Rumph said, on top of another loan it took out to buy a property in Northwest Washington. The sellers in that case were also private citizens who agreed to a sale price well below market rate because they wanted to help preserve affordable housing. The two purchases left the trust $1.2 million in debt. 

A couple million for two houses, versus what they say, that $2 million could leverage 65 houses in Anacostia.

FWIW, the book Streets of Hope: the Fall and Rise of an Urban Neighborhood, published in 1999, describes the creation of a community development corporation/land trust in the Roxbury neighborhood of Boston.  Over 30 years, the Dudley Street Neighborhood Initiative has developed not quite 300 units of housing.  That doesn't seem like a lot to me.

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.

Amazon, Sound Transit join to build affordable housing in Suburban Seattle: an example of creating affordable housing initiatives in association with transit infrastructure programs

======

Update with regard to Amazon funding projects in the DC area.  WTOP Radio reports on two projects, at the New Carrollton and College Park Metrorail Stations, totaling $82 million for almost 750 units of new affordable housing with low rents guaranteed for 98 years.  This isn't related to the Purple Line so much, but is an example of how such a program for the Purple Line could be created.

-- "$82M in Amazon loans to fund affordable housing at 2 Metro stops"

===

Independent of the introduction of new transit infrastructure, there is an "affordable housing" crisis because the population has increased and housing production hasn't kept up.

It's only accentuated by the introduction of new transit infrastructure, which usually leads to an increase in housing demand in response to better mobility conditions,

This is why many advocates decry transit infrastructure improvements as an element of gentrification, even though the process is much more complicated.

And that it is unfair that when neighborhoods improve because of the addition of transit and the resultant revitalization that instead of benefiting, legacy residents are instead displaced.

Which is why I argue that:

1.  In association with the development of new transit infrastructure there should be a simultaneous complementary plan for transit network improvements, to improve the rider experience, to increase ridership, and to increase the success of the new infrastructure from the outset.

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

2.  Simultaneously, there should be a community development initiative to buy, hold, fund, and develop housing, station improvements, and neighborhood and commercial district improvements, with the aim of preserving housing affordability for existing residents, as well as new housing.  (This doesn't necessarily require the participation of the transit agency as lead developer.)

3.  And another way to target neighborhood improvements at the nexus of new transit stations is to create public improvement districts, to plan for and implement improvements in a concerted way.

-- "Revisiting creating Public Improvement Districts in transit station catchment areas," 2020

WRT #2, for the Suburban Maryland Purple Line light rail project, which will integrate into the Metrorail system, since 2007 I've suggested that a bi-county community development corporation be created to do this.

-- "Creating a transportation development authority in Montgomery and Prince George's County to effectuate placemaking, retail development, and housing programs in association with the Purple Line," 2017

Although it hasn't happened.

Mount Dennis, Toronto.  An article about the Mount Dennis neighborhood in Toronto, which is about to be served by the Eglinton light rail line, describes how the neighborhood is supportive of the new infrastructure, in part because there is a simultaneous program for neighborhood improvements ("Sidewalks, bike lanes and shops: why this neglected neighbourhood is saying ‘yes in my backyard’ to LRT development," Toronto Star), which illustrates the importance of the kind of complementary approach suggested here. 

The plans aim to make Mount Dennis a new transit hub with superior connections 

to Downtown Toronto and the Airport

The new planning framework builds on the 2019 community-initiated Mount Dennis Eco-Neighborhood Action Plan.

Note that because it's Toronto, the most populated city in Canada, densities for new development are much higher than in Suburban Seattle or DC.

From the article:

The “Picture Mount Dennis” report contains a host of recommendations to improve Mount Dennis. Among them: 

• Encouraging the development of Weston Road, which cuts diagonally through the area, as Mount Dennis’s historic main street. 
• Low and midrise buildings would continue to dominate both sides of Weston Road. The height limit would be eight stories and the goal would be to create a “pedestrian-scaled” main street character. 
• A height peak of 45 stories would apply for buildings immediately adjacent to Mount Dennis station, with those heights gradually decreasing to the north and south of the station and towards Weston Road. Choice Properties wants to build seven towers with about 2,356 units all told, with heights ranging from 20 to 49 storeys. 
• Encourage a “balanced mix of housing types, unit sizes and tenures” in all new developments in order to provide housing opportunities for a variety of income levels and family sizes. For example, new buildings with more than 80 residential units should include more space for families, so 10 per cent of the units should be three-bedroom or larger, 15 per cent of units should be two-bedroom, while an additional 15 per cent should be a combination of two and three-bedrooms. 
• New buildings with 80 or more units should have 10 per cent of units be affordable rental or affordable condos. 
• Connect a new network of bike paths — including one that runs along the length of Weston Road — to planned cycling corridors in Toronto. 
• A “post-secondary satellite campus” should be built in Mount Dennis, that could align with clean tech or an eco-business or some form of green-friendly transportation.
• Attract jobs by promoting and attracting a major business such as a mass timber production facility that provides material for wood frame buildings, a food or social innovation hub, a photography or film museum or a major arts/cultural centre.

No substantive plan for affordable housing preservation in the Purple Line corridor.  While advocates have been calling for affordable housing initiatives in the Purple Line corridor ("Op-Ed in Washington Post about preserving affordable housing in the Purple Line corridor (Department of Duh)," 2022), not much has happened in a substantive way, especially given the reality that we know what will happen in terms of increased demand ("New apartments leasing in Chevy Chase Lake in Montgomery County," Washington Post), given the experience with Metrorail and the massive increase in demand for housing near subway stations in DC, Arlington and Montgomery Counties..

Also see:

-- "East County, Montgomery County, Maryland: Council redistricting spurs ideas for revitalization | Part 1 -- Overview," 2021

Seattle.  Which is why an article in the Seattle Times, "Amazon, Sound Transit will build hundreds of apartments in Bellevue, SeaTac in affordable-housing push," sticks out.    From the article:

Sound Transit and Amazon are partnering to build 318 affordable-housing units near light-rail stations in Bellevue and SeaTac. The new apartments, funded through $42.5 million in low-rate loans and grants from Amazon, are slated for the Spring District/120th Station in Bellevue and the Angle Lake Station in SeaTac. 

The units are targeting residents who earn 30-80% area median income. In Seattle, that ranges from $24,300 to $63,300 for a single-earner household, according to the Seattle Housing Authority. Construction is likely to start in 2023 in Angle Lake and 2024 in Bellevue. 

These are the first projects announced since Amazon committed $100 million in June to build 1,200 affordable-housing units on Sound Transit properties. That funding comes from an even larger commitment Amazon made in January 2021 to launch its Housing Equity Fund, a $2 billion initiative to preserve and create 20,000 affordable homes. “

Transportation and housing costs are linked,” said Catherine Buell, director of the Housing Equity Fund. “Our hope is we’re able to not only reduce the amount that families are spending on their housing but also reduce the amount that families are spending on transportation costs.”

This is part of Amazon's Housing Equity Fund initiative, which will invest $2 Billion in affordable housing initiatives in association with its three main HQ operations in Seattle, Arlington County Virginia ("Amazon and Arlington County are providing capital to support a landmark preservation deal to create long-term affordability for over 1,300 apartment homes for a period of 99 years.," press release) and Nashville.

Granted the new initiative is in Suburban Seattle, not the center city, but to see the transit agency come together with a major area corporation, to develop specifically affordable housing is impressive, although even so, in markets where many tens of thousands of units are required, 20,000 units of new affordable housing is a drop in the bucket.

Conclusion.  At the 2014 advocacy meetings for the Purple Line, I said similar kinds of arrangements needed to be created then, to be proactive, based on the DC experience with Metrorail.

-- "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,"

I thought it was odd that they focused on examples from Denver and Minneapolis--I was told later that it was because those were light rail programs, and the Purple Line is light rail--without acknowledging the richness of examples of the impact of transit on economic development, housing cost, and neighborhood revitalization from the DC area, in association with the development of Metrorail.

Which is why 8 years later, I'm not particularly impressed by the January op-ed in the Washington Post.

Note that Greater Phoenix ("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), Minneapolis ("Affordable Housing Contributes to Equitable Transit-Oriented Development in Saint Paul’s Corridor of Opportunity," HUD), and Denver ("RTD Wants More Housing Near Stations. It May Sacrifice Unused Parking Spots To Make That Happen," Colorado Public Radio) have created affordable housing initiatives in association with light rail.  

Sheridan Station Apartments in Denver is a 133-unit, 100% affordable building 

constructed at a light rail station. 

At 8 stories, it's bigger than many comparable buildings in the DC area.

The Phoenix program has some heft, while the others don't, but even so it pales compared to Seattle.  Then again, it's more significant than what's going on with the Purple Line.

Note that along the lines of the CDC approach I suggested for Suburban Maryland, in Denver, the Urban Land Conservancy is a nonprofit real estate developer focused on constructing affordable housing developments across Metropolitan Denver.