In an market where housing prices seem to continue to go up while wages…..well lets be honest, don’t increase that much, the idea of affordable housing is certainly appealing. We all know someone, or are that someone who works hard, has a decent job and good credit, but simply can’t buy a home because they are too expensive.

Kulshan Land Trust, a community organization which provides perpetual affordable housing, organized a trip last month to see how other communities in the USA were keeping at least some of their housing affordable.

Whatcom County Councilman Seth Fleetwood went on that trip and is now making a new proposal based on what he has seen: anyone building 4 or more homes would have to keep at least 25% of them “affordable”. I’m guessing affordable means an amount which a person making the average household income in Whatcom County could afford. Fleetwood claims that the high housing prices are simply market driven, but I’ve heard that building supplies such as wood have also increased in price over the past several years which also contributes to price increase of new homes.

Fleetwood proposes allowing higher densities, waiving impact fees and expediting permits to help offset the costs of keeping a quarter of all new homes affordable. While all those will certainly help, there is a good chance that it will not completely offset the costs which means that builders will have to pass it on to the other buyers. Is it fair to make people who can afford new homes pay more so that people who can’t afford it can buy a home? I don’t know the answer there but I’m open to comments…

The reaction from developers has been mixed. Like most people, they want everyone to be able to afford a home and are open to trying new things. Builder Gary Reid however has his reservations. He claims that the increased density won’t help much in rural settings. Also, he says “It’s kind of like social engineering. If you’re building a $700,000 house, socially, would the people in a $150,000 house be compatible?” It’s also a very good question to ask.

Another part of this plan that I wonder about: if the housing is to be permanently affordable, the people who buy those homes will not be able to build much equity because although their homes market value may increase at the same rate as the rest of the county, they will not be able to sell their homes for market value as they will have to keep them permanently affordable. They will still build equity through paying off their mortgage, but will not get the “extra” equity that comes from increased market value. So even if they sell their home, will they be able to afford a “normal” house, or will they be back in another permanently “affordable” house.

Will we start to have social divisions in our community? This person lives in a “normal” house, that person lives in a “affordable” house…..will it be a new class division?

I agree with Fleetwood that we need to do something to help average wage earners in our county who cannot afford a home. However, I’m not sure that forcing a quarter of new homes to be “affordable” is the answer. Unfortunately, I don’t have any other potential solutions on hand. Anyone else have any ideas?