Some Information about Affordable Housing

August 21, 2020

Affordable Housing has been an extremely important issue across the country for decades and has continued to become more relevant/topical as societies grow and housing numbers decrease in certain geographic locations.

With the recent comments from the President about Affordable Housing, I believe it is important to provide some information about the topic and clarify some misconceptions that currently exist. Let me explain a little more:

In July 2020, the President said that people living their “Suburban Lifestyle Dream” will no longer be bothered/financially hurt by having low income housing built in their neighborhood. He also said that their housing prices will go up based on the market and crime will go down.

First, it is important to point out that the Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH) provision that the President referenced has never mandated low-income housing or rezoning and does not impose any land use decisions on any local government.

Meaning, there is no factual evidence that any part of the AFFH provision would require or enforce low-income/affordable housing to be built or planned anywhere, let alone suburban areas.

Second, claims that housing prices in suburban areas are negatively affected by affordable housing have been categorically disproven by a wide range of studies over the years. In fact, many studies have consistently shown either no impact or a positive impact on property values.

Examples that have shown negative impacts depended largely on variables such as area/market conditions, quality of design and the type/concentration of housing projects. However, it is inaccurate to definitively claim that an affordable housing development is the sole cause.

Third, in a Stanford University working paper from 2015, they found that local crime rates for 3 metropolitan cities (San Francisco, Chicago and San Diego) showed no increase and even declined in certain areas near properties financed by the Low Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC).

Housing in the United States has historical roots involving housing discrimination and residential segregation which reveal themselves more when we continue to highlight the negative effects of Affordable Housing and fail to mention any positive ones.

In cities, Affordable Housing give households the opportunity to move to higher resource neighborhoods, which boosts local economic activity and creates jobs. In suburban areas, Affordable Units allows property owners to maximize their lot and establish a passive income.

As the affordable housing shortage continues for the foreseeable future, intelligent strategies and solutions, which may include reexamining Single-Family Zoning and locating opportunity housing areas, will not only be important, but necessary.

What is a Planning Commissioner?

June 25, 2020

When I mention to someone that I’m a Planning Commissioner, it’s usually followed by “What is a Planning Commissioner?”. Before I joined in October of 2018, I didn’t know what the role entailed either.

2 years later and I’ve realized that it’s not only important but also relevant to share some knowledge about it. Let me explain a little more:

The Planning Commission is a recommending body consisting of residents from a particular City or Town. They advise the City Council on many types of issues but the most prevalent are community development/design projects that are being proposed.

Being on the Planning Commission is just one of the many ways to volunteer for your respective community. Residents have many options which include Committees, Commissions and potentially City Council. The value for all are the same but each level has increased responsibilities.

The question now becomes, “Why does this matter?”. It matters because many times, residents will join Committees, then become Commissioners, then get elected to City Councils and eventually become Mayors. Sometimes, it’s that exact path.

So along the way, the same residents end up making impactful decisions for a community for multiple years at a time. For many Counties, that may not be an issue but when you examine the demographics of Santa Clara County, some facts start to arise.

The demographics for Santa Clara County, based on the 2019 Census, show that the most common ethnicities are Asian, White and Hispanic or Latino (in that order). It also shows that the average age is 37.2 and the Male/Female ratio is almost 50/50.

But when you look across all 14 Cities that make up Santa Clara County, you see that the ratio for just Planning Commissions is 63% Men and 37% Women (as of June 2020).

There is no source that can definitively verify each commissioner’s race and age but it is fair to assume that the majority is White or Caucasian. It is also fair to assume that only a small percentage of millennials serve on Planning Commissions across the county.

Fair representation is something that is being discussed currently but it has always been important for all types of government. Oftentimes, there’s no checks and balances for local government so these patterns are able to continue and the systems become harder to change.

If one entity (Planning Commission) in one County is not reflecting the demographics of the area it represents, then what about other Committees/Commissions/City Councils? When representation is fair, then it can better represent the community. Make sure you’re being represented.

Architecture Might Need to Evolve

April 28, 2020

For the past few weeks, I have been extremely interested at how many forms of architecture/urban planning might need to evolve. I understand that this is not the most important issue at the moment, but I do think that it should be talked about and discussed so that hopefully, a new mindset will emerge. Let me explain a little more:

At the beginning of the Pandemic, the Government (Federal and Local) started to group architecture into 3 categories: “Residential”, “Essential” and “Non-Essential”. They wanted citizens to stay within their “Residential” spaces, only travel to “Essential” spaces and to avoid all “Non-Essential” ones.

Early on, it became very clear that many “Residential” spaces were never designed to be “Quarantine” spaces. Many individuals have become increasingly frustrated with their residence and the lack of adequate work space, outdoor space and self-isolation areas.

Again, these are all inconsequential in the grand scheme of things, but one starts to question if today’s residential architecture has been about creating a “part-time” shelter and not a “full-time” shelter. Have we been designing for “full-time” shelters? Should we have?

The “Essential” spaces have had to stay open but there is no significant architectural/design change to their layout. These spaces aren’t able to pivot to any type of “safe” set-up. Their solutions are limiting capacity and placing tape/markers on the ground. Is it possible to create a better architectural/modular system for these spaces moving forward?

The “Non-Essential” spaces have had to stay closed but there was no significant plan to reappropriate them. Certain states have started to house the homeless in hotels, but there is so much more that could be explored. Stadiums, Arenas, Theaters, Gyms and Churches are all important spaces that could be reexamined given their use, size and current vacancy.

The reason I bring this up is to simply highlight these inadequacies and figure out a possible solution. Architecture’s largest strength is being able to adapt. If it’s not adapting, especially during a global pandemic, then it might need to evolve.