Podcast: | Download

Rick Holliday talks to The Real Story today about the perception of affordable housing—especially when it is announced in a neighborhood near one’s own. Rick, the Chairman and co-founder of BRIDGE Housing, makes no bones about the fact that the general perception of affordable housing is not positive—as he says, people worry about all the things that could go wrong, and don’t imagine any of the things that could go right.

So here are a few heartening things about affordable housing to help allay the fear factor: renters in BRIDGE communities have to compete for each available unit. That means that they have to have good credit, and a good history as a renter. Because BRIDGE manages its properties, its managers know that they can’t look the other way if there is a problem. BRIDGE is judged on the basis of its existing projects every day—if a representative from a city considering BRIDGE sees a property that doesn’t measure up to the market rate stock, they have little incentive to invite BRIDGE in.

On another note, we asked Rick: is it possible to build affordable housing, and keep it green? He tells us that green considerations have been a part of the envisioning process for new BRIDGE communities for years. Rick reminds The Real Story that one of the key goals of the green movement is to help get working people living closer to their work, so BRIDGE looks at location even more closely than it looks at individual green amenities, which may take years to pay back. A shorter commute, or a commute on public transportation makes an immediate, positive impact.

Podcast: | Download

Because BRIDGE Housing builds so many of its affordable homes as apartments, the original design and construction quality of the units, and the management standards set in place all have to hit a level of quality – otherwise, says BRIDGE CEO and co-founder Rick Holliday, the apartments don’t compare favorably to market rate units. And working at blurring the edges between market rate housing and affordable housing is good for the community at large.

Rick reminds The Real Story that affordable housing is built all over the Bay Area, including some toney zip codes. He recalls building waterside apartments in Mill Valley that were mistaken for market rate product, because everything about their design and landscaping was planned to fit seamlessly into Mill Valley.

That is why there is not a common design recipe for BRIDGE communities —they are designed to fit into the towns and neighborhoods in which they are built, just as market rate for sale and rental properties are envisioned. For more information on BRIDGE, go to its website: http://bridgehousing.com.

Bay Area housing is “persistently and pervasively” unaffordable for working families, according to new research published by the Urban Land Institute (ULI) Terwilliger Center for Workforce Housing.

The report, “Priced Out: Persistence of the Workforce Housing Gap in the San Francisco Bay Area,” examines the availability of for-sale and renal housing to workforce households. Approximately 30 percent of the metro area’s 2.7 million households fall in this category. The study found that only 15 percent of the existing for-sale housing stock in the Bay Area is affordable to workforce households earning the median family income. This compares to between 50 and 60 percent in many of the Bay Area’s peer metropolitan regions.

The study suggests  “if current trends are any indication, housing production between 2009 and 2025 will leave unmet additional demand for at least 6,000 for-sale housing units appropriate for workforce households. Demand for new rental housing is projected to exceed supply by almost 23,000 units resulting in a total shortage of almost 29,000 workforce housing units.
”

Although released last week, the study cites figures from mid 2009. This raises the question: With home prices in many parts of the greater Bay Area under $300,000 and sliding, is it still so unaffordable?

Check out the report (www.bayareaburden.org) and an interesting calculator that factors the time/cost of transportation into the total cost of housing.

Podcast: | Download

The Real Story is talking to Rick Holliday, co-founder and CEO of BRIDGE Housing, Northern California’s leading affordable housing developer. Rick explains the differences between non-profit, affordable and public housing, since the words are often used interchangeably—which is absolutely incorrect. Public housing is built and owned by the government to serve those members of the community with the lowest income. Affordable housing is just that—housing built for people whose monthly salaries are not high enough to keep up with the cost of housing in the communities where they work. Affordable housing is often built with school teachers, firefighters and policemen in mind. Non-profit housing is built, owned and managed by private organizations and operated at cost.

The idea of BRIDGE Housing came about just a little more than 25 years ago, when local Bay Area business leaders came together to talk about stopping the outmigration of workers from the central employment centers to suburban residential neighborhoods. At the time, the BRIDGE business plan was to look for opportunities to build affordable housing within the nine-county Bay Area; today BRIDGE is building in Southern California and Sacramento as well.

Interestingly, over all of its years in business, BRIDGE’s target audience hasn’t changed—which is a reflection of the way Bay Area housing prices were outpacing salaries—until the current market downturn. Rick points out that the silver lining in this housing crisis is that with foreclosures and short sales, there are now more affordable housing choices available than the state has seen in years.

Podcast: | Download

Finishing up his week with The Real Story, Peter Palmisano of Pacific Union Development talks today about the kind of development we might be seeing in these capital-starved days. He likens himself and a number of other local developers as the kind of people who first ask themselves: what does the site say? That starts the envisioning process. The other extreme is represented by large institutional groups, who start with a formula and a product, and look for a site that will accommodate it. So will the near future of development be formulaic, or individualistic?

Peter puts his faith in the up-and-comers, the next generation of architects, designers and planners with vision and the ability to subordinate their own self-interest for the common good. The generational shift that we see coming can provide the development industry with a new breed of thinker, who brings technology and psychology together, uses common sense, and has enough sense of self to demand authenticity in that which is designed and built.

Podcast: | Download

In talking about creating community at Hamilton, Peter Palmisano refers to some of the guiding principles that he has lived by in his years in the development business: he calls them The Three Big E’s, and they stand for Economics, Environment and Expectations.

Looking at bringing a decommissioned airbase back to life as a neighborhood-based mixed use community, the development team had to take a realistic look at the economics of the proposed venture: the clean-up of the materials left behind from the base’s glory years with the Army Air Corps and the knock-down or retrofitting of old buildings on the site is a huge factor in the cost side of the equation YEARS before there is any return in terms of land or homes sales. So the question had to be asked: given the market conditions, given the condition of the site, and given the vision that would be necessary to underwrite to create enough momentum to launch this new community, could it fly?

The issues brought forward by the environment created a natural push-pull: the development team had to look beyond the enormous task of remediation and cleanup to focus on the out-of-the-box thinking so necessary to create a community of restored natural open spaces, walking trails, and even wild birds’ migration paths.

Finally, managing expectations—especially those of the community, who waited so long for Hamilton to open its gates and welcome the locals home. The neighbors were mindful of what a treasure they had in the historic Hamilton; they stayed engaged in the planning and building process to see firsthand just how the new Hamilton would live.