Free Compliments of our Advertisers
Sonoma County Gazette
Tiny Affordable Homes

Focus on Affordable Housing

May 29, 2018


By John Lowry, Housing Opportunities

While there is a widespread understanding that our housing situation is becoming increasingly desperate, some local public policy seems to be turning away from low and very low income housing and implying that the problem that can be addressed by expanding the supply of market rate rental housing and accessory dwelling units (ADUs). 

The assertion seems to be that an increased supply of market rate rentals and ADUs will create a downward pressure on rents for existing apartments.

While any increase in supply does remove some of the upward pressure on rents and prices, no amount of supply will provide any new housing for lower income households because development costs increasingly exceed income growth for lower income people.   And the amount of new building needed to push down the value of current housing stock to the point that it would become low income affordable would be unrealistically large, particularly with limited supply of buildable land and other costly constraints placed on housing development. 

With regard to ADUs, there is no reason to believe that rents will be any lower than market rate rentals. They may even be seen as more desirable than apartments with higher rents.

As for opportunities for moderate income households, it seems that access to homeownership, most likely in the form of town homes and condominiums should be a priority. Homeownership provides greater personal autonomy and choice. And it provides a path for asset growth, which has been the basis of a middle class in the USA and around the world. The situation where you need to have an income well over the median income to own a home is clearly undesirable. Public policy should be crafted to expand ownership opportunities.

The Bottom Line here is that market rate rentals and ADUs provide no reliable low income affordable housing and make no contribution tohomeownership opportunities. 

This is not to imply that the development of market rate rental housing or ADUs is a bad thing. They should be encouraged through the relaxation of constraints and faster entitlement and plan check processes, but to see them as the solutions to our affordable housing dilemma is a mistake.

Of course some low income affordable rental housing can be produced as a component market rate rental housing development where government has provided a benefit such as in the sale of public land to developers. But in these projects the numbers of affordable units is small in relation to the total number of units produced, and the variety of levels of affordability is generally limited.

The alternative is a greater policy focus on low income affordable rental housing. While these developments could be combined with market rate rentals or homeownership on the same site, the proportion of affordable apartments, with opportunities raging from 30% to 80% of median income should be a policy priority. This housing could also include supportive housing and housing that could be available to homeless persons.

Of course this type of housing can support only a modest level of mortgage financing, so most of the costs need to be paid from direct or indirect subsidy sources. However, Sonoma County has had a history of success in obtaining these resources based on the commitment of local governments and the available development capacity. Burbank Housing, based in Sonoma County, has been the largest single producer, with over 2500 low income affordable apartments, but other Bay Area regional nonprofits have produced significant low income affordable rental housing as well. 

Additionally, for profit developers using many of the same resources, including low income housing tax credits, have produced long term rent restricted housing in Sonoma County. On a per capita basis Sonoma is among the most successful counties in the state in providing affordable rental housing.

An important consideration for the decision on the part of local government to support the development of low income affordable rental housing is the location of sites.

For example, some sites will not be eligible for low income housing tax credits based on insufficient proximity to a variety of community services including shopping, schools, medical facilities, employment and public transportation. Sites with proximities to these amenities should be given serious consideration for low income affordable housing. Another state program targets significant funding resources for developments in proximity to public transit.

One of the key factors in successfully obtaining a commitment of low income housing tax credits, which can provide 60% of development funding, is the degree to which a development has financial support from other public sources. It is important that local governments strategically plan for the most effective use of their housing resources.


Jun 14, 2018
VIA EMAIL: Thanks for your participation and input on affordable housing Vesta and John! And of course Lynda you are our hero! I’ve been watching the board of sups meetings and actually spoke at one. I agree John and Vesta that adding lots of standard ADU’s does not necessarily make it easy for young people to own (except when they are children of us old back to the landers and can stay on the land if we build them cottages or convert garages barns etc.- the only way many of them can do it) But here's an idea I and some of my West County friends have been exploring; OWNER OCCUPIED TINY HOMES AND SMALL SCALE RURAL TINY HOME VILLAGES WHERE YOUNG PEOPLE CAN RENT TO OWN. I’ve got a number of friends who would invest in a project where they finance tiny homes or beautiful house style Park Models that are then made available as a lease option or rent to own basis, either on their own land or in small rural tiny home permaculture village parks. This allows: 1) young people to put their money into equity on a monthly basis 2) a reasonable return on investment for people like us who need to manage our retirement nest-egg and would love to use it to support the next generation that is currently being driven out by high prices 3) a sense off community- owners could provide shared use infrastructure like community kitchens, meeting spaces, guest rooms, gardens, tools, child care facilities etc (many of us are empty nesters and our houses would make great community spaces for people living in tiny homes. I think this is not only an invest local solution, but is a good carbon footprint when focused on rural permaculture style living that lots of young poeple want- especially in place like this where it is so easy to grow food and sell to the local farmers market, and “buy local” restaurants like Peter Lowell’s, Backyard, Handline etc. What do you think? I know you are very vocal and active so I thought it would be worth getting your thoughts on this approach. You know this is what some of the old-guard of back-to-the-landers have been trying to do at Ecotopia and La Tiera and OAEC somewhat under the radar. Maybe now that we have Linda Hopkins and an “outside of the box” thinking board of Sups trying to solve the problem we may have a chance. I personally think its way better than the townhouse condo cheap urban apartment model. “It makes a village” Michael Heumann
- Vesta Copestakes

Login to Make a Comment

Please support our sponsors:

Your Pets Market in Sebastopol and Cotati, Sonoma County, CA
Order Bees Now from BeeKind

Your GUIDE to support locally-owned garden businesses and natural landscaping practices.

Fine Tree Care - Sonoma County Tree Services

Visit Fine Tree Care WEBSITE for a List of our SERVICES - Testimonials and to request a FREE Estimate

Locally-Owned Jewelry Businesses in Sonoma County

Find Goldsmiths and Jewelers who create custom designs, offer jewelry repair, estate appraisals, and gems.

Flower Shops and Florists of Sonoma County

Please support locally-owned businesses and tell them the Gazette sent you - THANK YOU!