Architectural Design Strategies
Allow for
Seamless Integration of Affordable Housing
Four years ago, in August 2001, an article appeared in the
The Washington Post highlighting a program in which
developers and Fairfax County, Virginia officials worked together
to create a “Great House” – multifamily
housing constructed to be both architecturally harmonious
with other homes in the surrounding single-family neighborhood,
and to comply with the county’s affordable housing and
density bonus program. In addition, the Great House concept
seeks to incorporate design elements that help ensure long-term
compatibility with the neighborhood’s aesthetic values,
thereby minimizing potential objections to multifamily housing.
Since families have lived in these units for a few years now,
we thought it would be worthwhile to visit a few of the sites
to see if the original objectives are being fulfilled.
Fairfax County, Virginia’s Affordable Housing
Program
Located just outside of Washington D.C., Fairfax County
has a population of over 1,000,000 and a growth rate of over
3 percent during the last five years. In the early 1990s,
local authorities enacted a program wherein developers provided
affordable housing in exchange for increases in the allowable
density for a development. According to Gordon Goodlett, Affordable
Dwelling Unit Administrator for Fairfax County, officials
revised the program in the late 1990s to make it more appealing
to the development community. The revised ordinance reduced
the compliance period from 50 to 15 years, and increased the
minimum number of units to which the program applied from
15 to 50.
The program is voluntary. It only applies if a developer
seeks a change in zoning or other regulation for developments
of 50 units or more. The county uses a formula to determine
the number of affordable units, rather than leaving the decision
to negotiation between county staff and the developer. The
ordinance balances the affordable requirement with an increase
in the density allowed by the county. The county does not
require that the affordable housing be comparable (in terms
of size or amenities) with other units in the development;
and they may be either rental or for-sale units.
Goodlett observed that another attractive aspect of the program
is the flexibility that can be exercised in setting the sale
prices for affordable units. He said that the county’s
program has a maximum sale price for affordable units based
on the size of the unit, but allows pricing adjustments for
a number of different amenities. Such amenities might include
unfinished basement or garage space, additional baths, or
exterior architectural upgrades, such as a brick façade.
Market Concerns
“Still,” Goodlett said, “developers and
the county were very concerned that the affordable units might
appear out of character with the rest of the neighborhood.”
The county wanted the affordable units to have the same look
as other units in a development and wanted them distributed
throughout the neighborhood. For their part, developers feared
that the affordable units might have a negative impact on
sales of market units. As a result of these fears, some developers
offered to build townhouses in one section of the development.
Market Response
Dissatisfied with the status quo, a few creative developers
conceived a design for affordable housing that eventually became
known as the “Great House” – a multifamily
structure that would be aesthetically and size compatible with
the surrounding single-family neighborhood. One company, Edgemoore
Homes, designed a quadraplex incorporating exterior aesthetics
that blended almost seamlessly into the neighborhood. Each four-unit
structure…
Has approximately the same total square footage as surrounding
properties;
Contains two stories and has a brick veneer;
Incorporates bay windows and other offsetting features
that break up the roof lines and façades; and
Includes garages and entrances that do not face the street.
Sue Robertson with Edgemoore Homes says it makes good business
sense to participate in the program. These houses face less
neighborhood opposition, and the county has assisted in marketing
these units by selecting potential property owners and pre-qualifying
buyers for the homes.
Another concept features a duplex design with entrances and
garages facing different directions, thus giving the appearance
of a single-family home. According to Stan Settle, Pulte Homes’
Regional Director of Operations, this duplex model fits in
very well with the county’s requirements. “These
well-designed units reduced local resistance, and we thought
they would be a great asset to our single-family product in
Fairfax County,” Settle observed. “The two-family
home works very well in neighborhoods that are exclusively
single-family detached housing.”
Continuing to Conform
Goodlett reports that since the inception of the program,
four projects have used the Great House concept. On a recent
visit to several of the sites where these units were constructed,
we had to refer several times to maps of the neighborhood
to ensure that we found the right units. The bay windows,
entrances that face different directions, and garages that
open from the rear of the structures continue to allow the
structures to effectively blend in with others in the neighborhood.
Off-street parking, in particular, results in less crowded
streets. The only visible sign that these are multifamily
units is the number of mailboxes that can be found out front.
Converting Motels into Affordable
Housing Through Regulatory Reform
Mary Ann Walsh hates to see a good idea go to waste.
When she saw that the owner of a rundown motel on Cape
Cod had abandoned plans to convert the property into
affordable housing, she decided to do something about
it. Just as the permit was about to expire, she stepped
in to rescue the project. As a first-time developer,
she had the money to complete construction, but was
not sure she could count on the town’s cooperation.
Rather than obstructing her efforts (as she’d
initially feared), she soon discovered that the Town
of Dennis’ land use regulations would actually
be of great help in her efforts to redevelop the property.
Dennis, Massachusetts’ Zoning Bylaw
The Town of Dennis has a population of 13,900 residents
and is located at the center of Cape Cod, 75 miles southeast
of Boston. In 2001, the town faced two important housing
issues. According to Town Planner Dan Fortier, the town
wanted to establish guidelines that would allow them
to exercise better control over housing development.
In addition, the Town of Dennis faced a decision about
the fate of a number of older commercial structures,
such as hotels and motels that no longer meet the needs
of the traveling public.
The town’s zoning bylaw, adopted in 2001, contains
a number of new incentives to encourage affordable housing
development. Many of the incentives focus on using existing
structures and encouraging the creation of new housing
within these underutilized buildings. Section 4.9 of
the town’s zoning bylaw allows the Planning Board
to grant special permits for affordable housing. To
qualify, at least 25 percent of the for-sale or rental
housing units must be affordable to those earning at
or below 80 percent of the county’s median income.
Affordable Housing Apartment Regulations
The bylaw encourages developers to create affordable
housing as part of a new or existing residential or
commercial use. It contains specific minimum square
footage requirements for units, depending on the number
of bedrooms in the unit. One section of the ordinance
also allows the Planning Board to approve proposals
from developers to convert existing hotels or motels
into dwelling units. The original version of the bylaw
placed two requirements on such conversions. First,
there were minimum square footage requirements for each
unit. Second, the Board has the right to require that
up to 10 percent of the units be two-bedroom units.
To encourage Affordable Housing Apartments, including
the conversion of hotels and motels, the Planning Board
can grant density increases and reduce or suspend the
minimum lot area requirements. If the current use is
nonconforming, the Board can allow a conversion of that
nonconforming use to another nonconforming use, but
only if it is dedicated for use as affordable housing.
The Board also has the authority to reduce off-street
parking requirements when the developer agrees to restrict
more than 25 percent of the units to low- and moderate-income
people, and can prove that the reduced parking is sufficient
to meet demand.
The Board of Selectmen may act as a sponsor for certain
affordable developments known as Municipally Sponsored
Housing Projects. Should the Board deem the project
worthy, it can reduce the minimums for the lot area
per unit, the area of the entire tract, the lot area
per bedroom, and can also reduce parking requirements.
In this instance, the town requires that at least 50
percent of the units be affordable to those earning
less than 80 percent of the median income, and that
the remainder of the units be affordable to those earning
no more than 120 percent of the area’s median.
Now that the parameters have been set, let’s check
back in with our intrepid developer to see how it plays
out in practice.
South Cape Apartments
Mary Ann Walsh secured title to a 24-unit motel located
on State Route 28 in West Dennis. The motel sits on
commercially zoned land, surrounded by commercial uses.
The previous owner abandoned any attempt to convert
the motel, but Walsh stepped in with a plan to gut the
entire building and create a mix of studios and one-
and two-bedroom units. She also wanted to include a
laundry.
During negotiations, the town allowed the conversion
of the nonconforming use (motel) to another nonconforming
use (housing) and reduced the amount of land required
for each unit. Because the applicant could show that
the structure was adjacent to a transit route, the town
also agreed to reduce the number of required parking
spaces. In return, Walsh must restrict 12 of the 24
units to those earning less than 80 percent of the median
income. The owner also agreed to convert the motel manager’s
unit into a two-bedroom unit. Currently under construction,
the completed project will contain six studios, 17 one-bedroom
units, and one two-bedroom unit.
When asked if she thought Dennis’ bylaw assisted
in making the project financially feasible, Walsh responded,
“Absolutely. This project would not have happened
without the affordable housing bylaw regulations.”
The conversion of older motels into affordable housing
is one tool that communities can use to promote housing
for low- and moderate-income households. In undertaking
such efforts, however, special care must be taken by
communities to ensure that such housing is not only
affordable, but that it’s developed in appropriate,
‘people-friendly’ neighborhoods, so that
the resulting project contributes to the quality of
life for both its residents and neighbors in the surrounding
area.
Future Regulatory Reforms on the Cape
According to Dan Fortier, the results of the new bylaw
have been somewhat mixed. The town is very excited that
developers used provisions of the bylaw to create affordable
housing. At present, the town has approved 128 new housing
units under this bylaw, and 51 of these (39.8%) are
deed-restricted to those earning less than 80 percent
of median income. To date, 50 units have actually been
built and occupied under the bylaw, with 19 of these
(38%) deed-restricted. By the end of the summer of 2005,
developers expect to finish 37 additional units of housing,
with 19 of these (51%) deed-restricted. On the other
hand, the town was disappointed that many of the new
units created by the conversion of hotels and motels
were quite small. In 2004, the Dennis Board of Selection
placed additional restrictions on the hotel/motel conversions
that utilize these ordinances, so that the town now
requires a minimum size of 250 square feet. In addition,
25 percent of the units must be at least 700 square
feet, and no more than 25 percent of the units can be
less than 400 square feet. Walsh says, however, that
these types of regulatory reforms are spreading to other
communities on the Cape. Yarmouth is currently considering
similar regulations to increase affordable housing,
and it is hoped that other communities will soon follow
suit.
Regulating
Duplexes
Duplex housing has long been a path toward affordable
homeownership. Early in the twentieth century,
the great cities of the east met affordable housing
needs by building hundreds of thousands of two-
and even three-family (‘triple decker’)
homes that housed a generation of newly arriving
immigrants. As populations in these cities have
changed, these homes have provided opportunities
for homeownership and rental housing for new generations
of immigrants.
Such housing has long been seen as a way for
people to purchase a first home, and build equity
more quickly through rental income. Those wishing
to purchase a duplex can use the income of the
rental unit to help them qualify for a mortgage
loan. Others consider duplexes as a buffer between
single-family neighborhoods and more intensely
developed residential neighborhoods or commercial
and manufacturing land uses. How a community uses
this type of dwelling to meet the community’s
housing needs is reflected in its decisions regarding
whether to allow duplexes in single-family zoned
areas, to increase lot size requirements, and
to create special duplex districts.
Unfortunately, in most developing suburban communities,
zoning that allows duplexes (and other variations
on the two-family home concept) has become increasingly
rare. Fear of depreciating property values, a
distaste for renters, an increased burden upon
schools, and the desire to avoid changing the
neighborhood’s ‘character’ have
all contributed to reducing the number of locations
where such housing can be built ‘as of right.’
Some communities have broken free of this somewhat
myopic pattern by recognizing the importance of
duplex housing, and the contribution that such
housing can make toward meeting the need for affordable
homeownership and rental housing.
Spokane, Washington
Authorities in Spokane
allow duplexes in the most restrictive residential
zones (CR, RS) under certain circumstances. Developers
in CR1 zones can propose one- to four-family housing
structures as part of an innovative residential
development project. The residential lots in the
development can be of any size, but overall density
cannot exceed one dwelling per gross acre. Similar
requirements apply to innovative developments proposed
for the slightly less restrictive RS zone. Spokane
only allows duplexes in areas zoned R1 if the property
adjoins property zoned for business, commercial,
or manufacturing uses. Spokane authorities allow
two-family residences in residential zones that
are less restrictive than the R1 zone. Owners may
also build or renovate three dwelling units in certain
designated zones (R2D) to encourage neighborhood
preservation and reuse of older residences. Spokane
also allows duplexes on smaller lots in the R2 zone
if the lot contains at least 9,000 square feet and
existed before 1958
Recent building permit statistics suggest that
in 2005, Spokane’s ordinances allow the
development of duplex housing. In 2000, duplex
units accounted for 2.8 percent of all housing
stock. For the first five months of 2005, duplex
units represented 5.4 percent of all building
permits.
Indianapolis, Indiana
Indianapolis
allows duplexes in certain residential zones,
but not in the most restrictive residential zone
(D-1). In less restrictive residential zones,
the city permits duplexes, but imposes certain
limitations. Indianapolis allows duplexes only
on corner lots and each unit must face a different
street. In addition, the city requires slightly
larger minimum lot areas and lot widths, as you’ll
see in the table below.
Lot
Areas and Widths in Indianapolis Single
Family Zones
Zone
Minimum
Lot Area
Minimum
Lot Width
Single
Family
Duplex
Single
Family
Duplex
D-2
15,000
20,000
80
120 (on
each street)
D-3
10,000
15,000
70
105
D-4
7,200
10,000
60
90
D-5
5,000
9,000
50
90
In subdivisions of five or more lots, the city
will reduce the size of lot allowances for up
to 20 percent of the lots, if the average of all
lots remains at least 15,000 square feet.
Building permit statistics for the first half
of 2005 suggest that Indianapolis’ ordinances
allow the development of duplex housing. In 2000,
duplex units accounted for 3.4 percent of all
housing stock. For the first five months of 2005
duplex units accounted for 4.2 percent of all
building permits.
Burlington, Vermont
Burlington
authorities allow duplexes on lots in the most
restrictive residential (RL) zone if the lot existed
before 1973 and measures at least 9,900 square
feet. RL zones have slightly higher duplex densities:
5.5 units per acre versus 4.4 units per acre for
single-family homes. Burlington permits duplexes
in all other less restrictive residential zones
(RM, RH), as well as commercial zones in the city.
Recent building permit statistics do not point
to a trend in duplex construction in Burlington.
Although duplex units accounted for 7.2 percent
of all units in 2000, the city did not issue a
building permit for any duplexes during the first
half of 2005. On the other hand, they only issued
nine single-family permits.
St Paul, Minnesota
Authorities in St.
Paul do not allow duplexes in single-family
zoned residential districts. There is a zoning
classification, RT1, that applies to one- and
two-family dwellings. The city identifies certain
areas where owners can convert larger houses from
single-family to two-family residences as a means
of extending the useful life of the property.
St. Paul also permits duplexes in townhouse residential
and low-density multifamily districts.
A comparison of requirements for single-family
housing in the least restrictive single-family
zones with requirements for two-family dwellings
indicates that there are few additional requirements
on two-family homes. The city’s requirement
for minimum lot sizes and yard setbacks are similar
for single-family and duplex housing.
St. Paul also has a traditional neighborhood
district designation that allows for a mix of
residential uses. The city allows single-family,
duplex, and multifamily housing in each of three
traditional neighborhood districts. In these zones,
densities for two-family/townhouse developments
are higher than those established for single-family
developments. As in other communities, there are
minimal differences for building heights, lot
size, and yard setbacks.
Traditional
Neighborhood Zoning Requirements
Building
Type/Zoning District
Density/acre
Lot
Size
Lot
Width
TN1
Single-family
6- 12
units
3,500
30
Two-family
8-20
units
4,000
20
TN2
Single-
family
6-12
units
3,500
30
Two-family
8-20
units
4,000
20
TN3
Single-
family
8-12
units
3,500
30
Two-family
10-20
units
4,000
20
Recent building permit statistics suggest that
in 2005, St. Paul’s ordinances do restrict
the development of duplex housing. In 2000, duplex
units accounted for three percent of all housing
stock. For the first five months of 2005, duplex
units equaled only one percent of all building
permits.
Los Angeles, California
The Los
Angeles code allows duplexes in single-family
zones under limited circumstances. Each duplex
lot must adjoin a commercial or industrial-zoned
lot. Moreover, the lot on which the duplex is
located cannot extend more than a certain number
of feet from the less-restricted lot. Lot sizes
vary by residential zoning district, but are similar
for duplexes and single-family homes. The city
also has a two-family zone (R2) wherein it allows
two-family dwellings or two single-family dwellings
on a single lot. Generally, minimum lot sizes
in the R2 zone are 2,500 square feet per unit
for both single-family and duplex housing.
Los Angeles’ building permit statistics
suggest that in 2005 the city encourages the development
of duplex housing. In 2000, duplex units accounted
for 2.7 percent of all housing stock. For the
first five months of 2005, duplex units accounted
for three percent of all units that received a
building permit.
Conclusion
While some different approaches are represented
in this admittedly brief cross-country analysis,
the ordinances adopted by these five cities have
all been crafted to allow and ease the use of
duplex housing. However, each ordinance places
specific conditions on duplexes that can limit
their use as a viable source of affordable housing.
It may be that a kind of gradual introduction
process could be at work in some of these communities,
whereby local acceptance of these types of properties
is being cultivated a little bit at a time.
Disclaimer: Archived pages are no longer updated and may contain broken external links.
