Read on Twitter
One reason (pretext?) why people often oppose affordable housing in their nhood: they expect it to look ugly. Like Robert Taylor Homes. To which I say, ok boomer. My 4th & final piece w/ @hchoyt explains how good design is within reach for affordable hsg. https://www.brookings.edu/research/affordable-housing-doesnt-have-to-look-cheap-inside-or-out/
Visually appealing, environmentally friendly apartments need a good facade. Not plain brick & concrete boxes, obv. Variation in materials, color, & texture add interest, and don't have to cost a fortune. For instance:
How about hot new(ish) trends like modular construction and alternative timber products? Won't they bring down construction costs & improve environmental performance? Maybe someday. But affordable developers haven't worked out all the kinks yet (like transport costs for modular).
Tweaks to apartment layout & floorplan can also improve efficiency, fitting more units per building at lower cost. Cut out hallways (not super useful space), align kitchens & baths along "wet" walls, & voila! (Think Yotel-style layouts--all the essentials but no wasted space.)
Another tweak: design a couple standard floorplans, then rotate & repeat to add variation w/out extra cost. (Not gonna lie, I love all of Hannah's graphics for this piece.)
People obsess over finishes in "luxury" buildings (granite countertops, stainless appliances), but the big costs are structural & required by building code: mechanical, electrical, plumbing systems. Plus elevators. Developers can't cut corners on these big items.
Elevators are obviously important for accessibility. But clever design can create small multifamily bldgs w/ accessible ground-floor units & no elevators--potentially important cost savings for small, infill sites.
How about green design? When affordable apartments are built w/ environmentally friendly building envelopes (think high-performance windows & doors), HVAC & plumbing systems, that can lower operating costs + have health benefits for residents. There's a learning curve, though.
Hannah's interviews uncovered some lessons for project teams (developers, architects, contractors). Close coordination among team members, upfront research on potential snags, & focusing on ways to shorten development process are all important. But there's a big caveat...
Even best project teams have limited control over construction costs b/c they have to operate within a fixed policy environment. Zoning laws & building codes set ground rules for development--complicated or excessively strict policies make apartment construction more costly.
One important policy reform to reduce apartment costs: reduce parking requirements! Especially near transit. https://www.brookings.edu/research/parking-requirements-and-foundations-are-driving-up-the-cost-of-multifamily-housing/
2nd, zoning rules on density should be flexible, so developers can fit an economically efficient number of units on a site. (Be wary of inflexible building height limits, maximum FAR, setbacks, max units/acre...) https://www.brookings.edu/research/making-apartments-more-affordable-starts-with-understanding-the-costs-of-building-them/
3rd, make the development review process shorter, simpler, and more transparent. Time is money. Allow apartments by right. Don't require endless community meetings that empower NIMBYs. Just don't. https://www.brookings.edu/research/flexible-zoning-and-streamlined-procedures-can-make-housing-more-affordable/
US has chosen to make building "affordable" (eg subsidized) apartments complicated, slow, & expensive. Federal, state, & local policy choices all play a role. So if we want low-income families to have decent quality, safe, healthy housing, we need better policies. Now.
B/c this is our last installment, a couple shout-outs. These pieces are based on Hannah's report for @Harvard_JCHS funded by @neighborworks. (Thanks, guys!) All original ideas, insights, & awesome graphics are Hannah. Follow her, she's wicked smart! @hchoyt
Collaborating w/ Hannah has been a terrific learning process for me. I know lots about housing policy, but not much about architecture, design, or construction. Coauthoring w/ people in other disciplines, professions, or fields is GOOD. (Subtweeting economists here, yes.)
Coauthoring with students is VERY GOOD. Those of us who've been around a while can definitely benefit from fresh eyes & ideas. Anything we oldsters can do to encourage bright, creative people to join our field, feel welcomed & supported, we should do. (Subtweeting many fields.)
Finally, scholars are (rightly) grappling w/ motivation for long-term research while world falls apart. This project isn't directly related to COVID or recession. But how to build safe, healthy, affordable hsg for low-income people still matters, so is still worth studying.
And while we're thinking about ways to dismantle systemic racism, let's not forget that community opposition to affordable housing (or really, even market-rate rental hsg) is one of the pillars of systemic racism. Fixing our housing approval process is a civil rights issue. (end)
