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.