SLO: County Needs Affordable Housing - Part I

*****Update 3/23/2014: I just came across this story about the "Tiny House Family" that you can read about by clicking here. Here's a brief description from the article:

They used their small savings to buy a plot of land in Virginia in 2011. There, they built a home that’s smaller than 200 square feet. And they couldn’t be happier. During 2008, Hari and Karl Berzins lost their home and restaurant business. The recession hit them hard, but they didn’t let their misfortunes stop them from moving forward. They learned their lesson and vowed never to use credit again. So when they rebuilt, they did so on a small scale. (Literally.) They are the Tiny House Family.

*****Update 1/28/2014: Question: Why is it so hard to build affordable housing, or new housing in general? Answer: fees, red tape, regulations, and NIMBY ("Not In My Back Yard") opposition. Read this article on how difficult it is to build new housing in San Francisco by clicking here. 

Article Summary: 

San Francisco is facing a housing shortage. Locals are so irate about the slow pace of residential construction that they have lit a fire under their local politicians to get construction moving. Now the politicians are (finally) motivated to increase workforce housing. Unfortunately, a sustained increase in new housing construction runs head first into a wall of neighborhood and political opposition. Every building permit is subject to discretionary review, and this regulatory process allows ANYONE to fight ANY development at ANY time. San Francisco is one of the least affordable cities in the nation, with only 14% of homes affordable to those making the median area income.  A developer notes that it costs $650,000 to build an 800-square-foot unit in a midrise building, and about $100,000 of that is attributed to various delaying regulations.

So what does this have to do with San Luis Obispo? Our housing is almost as unaffordable as San Francisco, and our policies prevent affordable housing from being built in a cost efficient manner. My recent findings are that the powers-that-be find it advantageous in the city of SLO to have lots of jobs and companies here, but not enough workforce housing. 

Once again, I will repeat my housing mantra: I believe that a city such as SLO (where the jobs are) has an obligation to at least attempt to provide adequate workforce housing to middle and low income families that the city attracts to work here. I also believe that it should be done through easing regulations and reducing fees, rather than supplementing costs so that the lucky few (the housing lottery winners) can live in town affordably. What do you think?

*****Update 12/20/2013: The Wall Street Journal ran an article on 12/20/2013  entitled "Tiny Apartments, Big Hopes" which you can read by clicking here. This supports what I have been promoting as one aspect of a solution to affordable housing in San Luis Obispo without government or developer subsidies. My ideas have been met with silence.

Yet in large cities across the US, micro apartments, alternatively described as 300 square feet or less, or more generously, 500 square feet or less, are being built. These are roughly the size of a generous hotel room. They often are laid out in a manner similar to a traditional studio apartment. 

Developers believe that they will be popular with singles in their 20's and 30's, who are willing to give up space for the savings in rent. I believe they would also be popular with the working homeless, seniors and people who would rather have a short commute to work than a large house farther from the expensive city areas of San Luis Obispo. 

The article goes on to indicate that the experts believe that this is not a temporary phenomenon. Many of these developments are done in existing commercial buildings that have been converted to micro apartments. What they lack in individual size, they make up with larger common areas that can be shared by all tenants - a trade-off that many socially active people are willing to make (I would!). They call it co-living space, and its often found near a lobby area or on a rooftop patio. I think this is something that SLO should look into right away.

To encourage affordable micro housing, I would encourage the city to adopt reasonable fees for developments such as these, at least until they are proven to be viable solutions to our affordability housing crisis. 

*****Update 12/16/2013: The SLO Tribune ran an article recently on the need for affordable housing, which you can read by clicking here. The bottom line is that I believe that affordable housing is achievable within the existing market forces, but that the politicians and the people will never let it happen. See my 7/14/2013 update below that describes many types of affordable housing solutions that I believe will never see the light of day here in SLO - but they would work if they were implemented. 

*****Update July 14, 2013: My Letter to the Editor appear in the July 14, 2013 edition of the Tribune Newspaper (click on this link for the letter:  SLO housing needs help Published: July 14, 2013. By Tim Waag — San Luis Obispo

I agree with Susan Pyburn (“SLO can do better”) that SLO is in need of affordable housing. As far as I can tell, it currently has none available. A large number of employers do their business in SLO. These jobs benefit the city of SLO in numerous ways. I believe that the city of SLO has an obligation to set building codes and practices in such a manner that affordable housing can be built to house SLO workers. In general, I believe that cities have an obligation to enable affordable housing to be built to house workers of all income levels. Note that I did not say that the city must provide this affordable housing — just that it should allow it to be built. There are solutions to this problem, but the powers that be will not allow them for political reasons.

*****Update 7/14/2013:  While at UCLA, I lived in a privately owned dorm in Westwood. I'm guessing that real estate land in Westwood is EASILY 10 times more expensive than SLO. The property still exists, and its called the CO-OP. At the time, it was $360 per quarter (basically, 3 months at $120 per month) for room & board, plus you had to work there 4 hours per week (cleaning bathrooms, fixing meals in the cafeteria, washing dishes, etc.). A quote from the CO-OP website: "Regular quarter - All prices listed below, are per person, and are for an entire quarter's room and board (11 weeks).  Prices include food (19 meals per week) and utilities." This policy has not changed since I lived at the CO-OP.

According to the CO-OP's website,  it is currently about $1,400 per quarter ($500 per month) for room and board, with 4 hours of work per week. I am suggesting something similar for SLO, but on a much smaller scale. Also, I am pointing out that there is need for affordable housing that is NOT subsidized - just like the CO-OP in Westwood is NOT subsidized by the government or builders. Many people are homeless or rent-poor because housing costs in SLO (where the jobs are) are so high, or they have poor credit or criminal records.

Above: very poor photo of the co-op that was copied from their website at www.cuhaonline.com (sorry!). The co-op is located in some of the most expensive real estate in the country - far more expensive than anywhere in SLO County.

Anyways, I am realistic. I know that solutions like the CO-OP on a DRAMATICALLY smaller scale COULD be done in SLO, but never will be - the politicians and the NIMBYs would not allow it. Not being a pessimist - just a realist. Too bad, because it would work. It would not be luxury housing - far from it - but it would allow people to afford to live near work, save money on commuting, rescue the working poor from homelessness, and form a part of the community in which they currently only work.

Other Solutions, such as Granny Units and Homeshare: I have owned rentals in SLO County since 1989, so I am familiar with the subject. I am in favor of allowing new granny units in town, but I know that is not going to ever happen either. (note: I tried to do research on the current laws in SLO in granny units, but could NOT find anything conclusive, so am not 100% sure about the previous statement).

People make decisions to protect their own interest at the expense of others; I am not naive - I know that is how the world works (not just SLOtown).

Also, one would think that environmentalists would be more in favor of having affordable housing close to where the jobs are (think: bicycle to work and not own a car, or own an electric car, or a scooter, etc.), but they aren't hot on the idea either, for reasons only they know.

Affordable housing is also possible by allowing residential unit construciton on upper floors of commercial / retail structures, as has been done to a limited degree in downtown SLO, but should be done on a greater scale. 

*****SLO Can Do Better, by Susan Pyburn:

Thank you for pointing out the need for affordable housing in our county (and city). I recall your excellent seven-day coverage some years back on this subject. I was new to the area and quite impressed that this would make front page. Alas, the issue has slipped (as, historically, it always has).

Whatever happened to the workforce housing push? The fact is that many of us cannot afford to buy. Period.

Where do the workers live? As usual, they must commute and pollute. Or, crowd into the slum hidden behind a wall on South Street, near Higuera. There are options, yet the powers-that be lean in favor of the developer community every time. What about co-ops? A Villages model is catching on around the country, offering livable rental options for seniors. No doubt subsidies are required. Still, we subsidize homeowners, at every level. A sacred cow, that.

I do not want to live in a rich-retiree haven. Surely, SLO, the “happiest” town in the United States, and one of the most progressive , can do better than this. We could become a model, if we could find the will. Let’s keep this conversation going.

*****Also, see this article in the Tribune: County should get back to work on affordable housing. The article concludes with:

If we do not want to be a “ghetto” of rich retirees, we must learn from the past and insist on a mix of housing types for all income levels.

We strongly urge the Board of Supervisors to lead by example by re-examining the county’s affordable housing ordinance as soon as possible.

Click Here to go back to "Tim Waag Blog" Home Page!