Democrats in Sacramento are in the habit of creating problems to solve. One of those is the ever-decreasing stock of “affordable housing.”
Some of the contributions these politicians have made to this problem include allowing sanctuary for hundreds of thousands of undocumented aliens; creating incentives for unhoused people; and mandating expensive green energy additions to new homes.
The folks making the laws feel it’s their obligation to put layers upon layers of new laws on the books every legislative session. They give no thought to the impact these new laws will have on the housing stock, or the communities people live in.
The housing “solutions” they usually come up with include cramming as many people as possible onto every square foot of available ground. When this happens, urban blight often follows.
The latest “solution” was to eliminate the R-1, single family-residential zone by mandating that local zoning ordinances be changed to allow so-called Accessory Dwelling Units (ADU) in R-1 zones.
Thus, by allowing an additional dwelling unit on each parcel, it eliminated the single-family zoning designation.
In Lompoc this hasn’t become a serious issue yet, but it will happen once it catches on.
One project, currently under construction on the eastern edge of the city, is seeking approval to replace “the 5-plex (townhomes) residential units with duplexes and single-family units (with revised elevations); updating the custom setbacks to account for building encroachments for the single-family homes (containing Accessory Dwelling Units); reducing the number of covered parking spaces.”
In other words, cram more people into more cramped living conditions.
The original project contained 65 townhomes; the current project contains 75 (see River Terrace EIR addendum). Of course, this project was already approved and designed for single families with covered garages; however, the ADU mandate does not require additional parking, so more on-street parking will become a necessity.
Down south in Santa Barbara it’s another story. The cost of construction and the eventual use of the ADU is an ongoing issue.
Noozhawk reports: “It is significantly more expensive in the South County to build an ADU. According to the survey results, the total cost of construction is about $242,193. In the North County, it is $141,056. And the ADUs are far from affordable. The average accessory dwelling unit in South Santa Barbara County rents for $2,657 per month, but only 59% of the 738 total are used for rental housing.”
That’s $31,884 per year just for housing, and if you use 30 percent of income, which is the standard used to establish the ability of a person to pay for a house and still be able to eat, someone would have to earn more than $90,000 per year (or about $45 an hour).
Then Noozhawk reports, “In contrast to the South County, about 77% of North County ADUs are used for rental housing. The average rent is about $1,904 per month, even though units in the North County are larger.”
This means you’ll have to pay $22,848 per year and earn about $70,000 ($35 an hour) to afford a house.
These are what you’ll pay to rent, not buy, a place to call home. So, is this the affordable solution?
So, did the state mandate to eliminate single-family residential zones and not require additional on-site parking for the addition of ADU’s help the affordable housing situation or create another problem?
It seems to me the political class can’t create affordable housing while adding so many other costly construction requirements, or create undesirable residential neighborhoods by cramming so many people and their cars into tightly packed projects with very few parking spaces.
Accessory Dwelling Units will only cause other problems; and housing prices will continue to go up and be out of reach for medium- and low-income families as long as the political class keeps trying to “fix the housing crisis.”
References:
A Look at Accessory Dwelling Units and Who Lives in Them, Amid Housing Crisis | Local News | Noozhawk
River Terrace EIR addendum: 637673874913170000
