Several recent posts have expressed the viewpoint that new affordable housing should be located in neighborhoods where such housing is not already concentrated. I share this view, and more importantly it is very much in line with City policy.
As an example, the following goal statement is stated in the City's comprehensive plan: "Diversify the location distribution of affordable housing in order to allay the historic patterns of concentration of poverty that characterizes some neighborhoods." This intent is followed up in the City's affordable housing resolutions--1999 and 2001 resolutions that set specific goals for the production of affordable housing. These documents established the goal that "at least 50% of new City-produced affordable housing units will be in the areas of the city where it is presently lacking." However, while most of the numerical goals of the affordable housing resolutions have been met, it has been difficult to meet the locational goal of 50% of new units in non-impacted areas. I know there are some questions of intent out there. That suspicion is understandable, but from where I sit it misses the mark. The main thing is we just see a lot fewer project proposals in non-impacted areas. For example, I was part of the staff group that just got done reviewing the 20 or so projects that applied for funding from the City's Affordable Housing Trust Fund. 75% of these proposed projects were in impacted areas. So the key question is: why are most proposed affordable housing projects in impacted areas of the City? Some of the reasons for this have been discussed recently on the list. But because some important reasons haven't, I thought I'd put 'em out there. 1. Reason numero uno: Land for housing development is more available in impacted areas. In areas where all is thriving, there is very little vacant land to assemble for a medium or large scale housing project, and buying out viable properties is extremely expensive. It is much easier to assemble land for a project where there are vacant or marginally viable properties. 2. Land costs are higher in impacted areas. This equals greater site assembly costs. Which equals greater per-unit subsidies. 3. The map has changed. A census tract is considered "impacted" if it meets one of two numerical thresholds. One is related to poverty. The other to race. The 2000 Census gave us new information on which to determine what census tracts qualify as minority-impacted or poverty-impacted. There were fewer poverty-impacted census tracts in 2000 than in 1990, but many more minority-impacted census tracts. As a result, the City's "impacted" area has grown and "non-impacted" area has shrunk. 4. If a strictly private housing development can happen in a non-impacted area, there is little incentive for a developer to jump through a bunch more hoops to add affordable units to the project mix. 5. Non-impacted neighborhoods sometimes oppose affordable housing projects. 6. Impacted neighborhoods often support affordable housing projects. There are some very good reasons for this, so it's worth saying some more about it. 6a. First of all, I see a lot of plain old empathy in impacted neighborhoods for meeting the needs of the City's disadvantaged population. After all, these are the people who can relate to the need for affordable housing because they've often experienced this need personally. In fact, the flip side of this is sometimes true as well. While it looks to me like impacted neighborhoods are getting more comfortable saying they'd take a bunch more market rate and even upscale development, neighborhood residents will sometimes still raise suspicion and fears about gentrification. 6b. Secondly, for pragmatic reasons, affordable housing projects really make sense for a lot of impacted neighborhoods in order to attract investment into the neighborhood. Although low-density, infill housing development in impacted areas is more and more frequently being accomplished by the market, the market by itself is still not doing the kind of high quality larger scale development that impacted neighborhoods need along and near their transit corridors and commercial nodes. The subsidy that is available to support this kind of investment is almost exclusively tied to the provision of affordable housing. Franklin Avenue in the Ventura Village neighborhood is a great example of this. From Many Rivers to the Franklin-Portland Gateway development in progress, new development along Franklin, and investment in the neighborhood, was made possible by the Metropolitan Council, Family Housing Fund, Minnesota Housing Finance Agency, and City of Minneapolis/MCDA--who financed these development because of their affordable housing components. Strategically speaking, affordable housing projects can bring investment into impacted neighborhoods. They can also set a new standard for high-quality design. 6c. In order to find a balance between the importance of supporting new investment in impacted areas, and a desire to diversify the income mix of residents in these neighborhoods, mixed-income housing projects are encouraged in impacted areas. This means that they have a mix of affordable and market-rate housing units. CONCLUSION I've tried to illustrate what we're up against when we try to "diversify the location distribution" of affordable housing. But this isn't an argument for complacency. I believe that steps can be taken both inside and outside of City Hall to improve our performance in this area. Further dialog and suggestions on what these steps might be would be welcome. I am aware, for instance, of a couple of programs underway to improve understanding of, and reduce resistance to, affordable housing in the City's more affluent areas. I might post again on that in the near future. Tom Leighton City Planner Seward REMINDERS: 1. Think a member has violated the rules? Email the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list. 2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait. For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract ________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
