Affordability in New Urbanist Development: Principle, Practice, and Strategy

ABSTRACT:

This article investigates the question of social diversity by assessing affordability in New Urbanist developments. The article begins with a review of the principle of social mixing—specifically income mix—and how it is linked to physical planning and design. An assessment is made of the ways in which planning and design are enlisted in the effort to produce and support social mix, focusing especially on the goal of “affordability by design.” The article next reviews the empirical record, and assesses whether there is evidence that New Urbanist developments are capable of accommodating income mix and promoting economic diversity. Data for 152 New Urbanist projects were obtained, and it was found that 23 out of 152 developments or 15% were affordable to someone making the Area Median Income. The evidence suggests that while design-based approaches to diversity in New Urbanism are within the realm of possibilities, the supply of developers willing to pursue a multi-pronged strategy composed of good location, creative financing, innovation, government support, and self-determination is necessarily limited. Finally, a framework is offered to help planners and New Urbanists conceptualize the problem of affordability in walkable neighborhoods and determine future courses of action.

Notes

1 Although there is no exact count, possibly 10–15% of neighborhood-scale New Urbanist developments make use of some sort of government or quasi-government program in order to integrate affordable housing, including HOPE VI funding, Low Income Housing Tax Credits, Block Grants, state affordable housing funds, and TIF monies (Steffel Johnson & Talen, 2008).

2 The cottage has received widespread national publicity (featured in USA Today, The New York Times, and The Washington Post), and was recently awarded the Cooper-Hewitt National Design Museum’s People’s Design Award. Recently, the U.S. Congress appropriated $280 million under an “Alternative Housing Pilot Program” in support of Mississippi’s “Katrina Cottages” initiative.

3 Two lists were consulted at the start of this research project, in 2006. First is a list of 448 projects maintained by the editors of New Urban News, a professional newsletter for planners, architects and others involved in “the creation of human-scale communities” (http://www.newurbannews.com/). That list contained many plans (as opposed to actual built projects) and other uncompleted works that had to be eliminated. Since this survey was conducted, the list maintained by the editors of New Urban News has been expanded and formalized into a publication called Directory of the New Urbanism 2008: People, Places Products (Ithaca, NY: New Urban News). The earlier list was cross-referenced with a second, smaller list of 370 projects maintained by Laurence Aurbach of The Town Paper publication, for the purpose of tracking and rating TNDs or “traditional neighborhood development” (http://www.tndtownpaper.com/rating.htm).

4 The following formula was used: (monthly income × 0.30) ×[1 − (1.0051∧− 360)]× (12/0.06125). This assumes a 30-year mortgage, an interest rate of 6.125%, and 10% downpayment. It was assumed that there would be only a basic level of additional monthly expenses, but it was also assumed that the mortgagor would have no additional available income.

5 A community land trust is defined by the Institute for Community Economics as “a private non-profit corporation created to acquire and hold land for the benefit of a community and provide secure affordable access to land and housing for community residents” (http://www.iceclt.org/clt/). The CLT movement is expanding significantly—nearly 20 CLTs are started every year, according to Davis (2008). See also CLT Network (http://www.cltnetwork.org).