Disclaimer: The comments in this blog are my personal opinion and may or may not reflect an adopted position of the city of Glendale and its city council
Recently Tucker Carlson had a segment on affordable housing and its impact on Buckhead, Georgia. More about this later in this article. It reminded me of the blog I posted this February about the federal government’s push to create more affordable housing throughout the country.
The Progressives in the Biden administration are working overtime to require more affordable housing everywhere. Under the HOME Act in a strategy to increase affordable housing stock, CDBG grantees, such as Glendale, requires “Each grantee receiving assistance under this title shall—
‘‘(A) include in the consolidated plan required under part 91 of title 24, Code of Federal Regulations (or any successor thereto) a strategy to support new inclusive zoning policies, programs, or regulatory initiatives that create a more affordable, elastic, and diverse housing supply and thereby increase economic growth and access to jobs and housing;
and‘‘(B) include in the annual performance report submitted under section 91.520 of title 24, Code of Federal Regulations (or any successor thereto) the progress and implementation of the strategy…”
Measures to increase the amount of affordable housing include:
- “Increasing both the percentage and absolute number of affordable units
- “Authorizing high-density and multifamily zoning
- “Eliminating off-street parking requirements
- “Establishment of density bonuses
- “Streamlining or shortening permitting processes and timelines
- “Removing height limitations
- “Establishing by-right development
- “Using property tax abatements
- “Relaxing lot size restrictions
- “Prohibiting source of income discrimination
- “Taxing vacant land or donating vacant land to nonprofit developers
- “Allowing accessory dwelling units
- “Establishing development tax or value capture incentives
- “Prohibiting landlords from asking prospective tenants for their criminal history
- “Provide that affordable housing units should, to the maximum extent practicable—be designated as affordable for not less than 30 years; comprise not less than 20 percent of the new housing stock in the community; and be accessible to the population served by the program established under this title”
Let’s take a snapshot of Glendale. There are 82,810 housing units (homes and apartments). Of those, 2,629 are affordable apartments in 25 low income complexes in Glendale. This represents 3% of the current housing stock as affordable and a far cry from the 20% required under the soon-to-be enacted federal HOME Act. Here are the 25 apartment complexes:
6549 W Maryland Ave
Glendale, Arizona
Income Based 1 BR Subsidized 62+ Accessible Elderly Supportive Housing
8232 N 59th Ave
Glendale, Arizona
Income Based 1 BR 62+
4937 W. Myrtle Avenue Glendale, AZ 85301
Glendale, Arizona
$475-600 1-2 BR
6113 N. 60th Ave
Glendale, Arizona
Call For Rent Studio BR Subsidized 62+ Accessible Elderly Supportive Housing
6238 N 63rd Avenue
Glendale, Arizona
Call For Rent Studio-1 BR Subsidized 62+ Accessible Elderly Supportive Housing
6001 W Missouri Ave
Glendale, Arizona
Subsidized 62+ Accessible Elderly Supportive Housing
- Valley of the Sun School 6
5239 W Tonto Rd
Glendale, Arizona
Subsidized Accessible Accessible Disabled Supportive Housing
4788 W Bethany Home Rd
Glendale, Arizona
Subsidized
5325 W Butler Dr
Glendale, Arizona
Subsidized 62+ Accessible Elderly Supportive Housing
8620 N 65th Ave
Glendale, Arizona
Subsidized 62+ Accessible Elderly Supportive Housing
7987 N 53rd Ave
Glendale, Arizona
Subsidized 62+ Accessible Elderly Supportive Housing
7229 N 51st Avenue
Glendale, Arizona
Subsidized 62+ Accessible Elderly Supportive Housing
5755 N 59th Ave
Glendale, Arizona
- Valley of the Sun School 5
4649 W Haywood
Glendale, Arizona
Subsidized Accessible Accessible Disabled Supportive Housing
7138 N 45th Ave
Glendale, Arizona
Subsidized 62+ Accessible Elderly Supportive Housing
6112 N 67th Ave
Glendale, Arizona
6917 N 71st Ave
Glendale, Arizona
- Faith House a L a Prospect Park Apartments
8581 N 61st Ave
Glendale, Arizona
6755 N 83rd Ave
Glendale, Arizona
6617 N 52nd Ave
Glendale, Arizona
6802 N 67th Ave
Glendale, Arizona
5136 W Glenn Dr
Glendale, Arizona
6839 N 63rd Ave
Glendale, Arizona
- Los Vecinos Housing Development, Inc
7131 N 54th Ave
Glendale, Arizona
10854 N 60th Ave
Glendale, Arizona
Ten of these complexes are for elderly housing and two complexes are for disabled housing. Thirteen are non-restrictive subsidized housing. Note that almost all are in the Ocotillo District—an unhealthy situation for that district at best.
Obviously, Glendale as a federal recipient of Community Development Block Grants (CDBG) and Surface Transportation Block Grants (STBG) would be subject to this federal law or become ineligible to receive either of these block grants. Practically, Glendale in its annual report, would have to show that it is using any or all of the measurements listed above to achieve a goal of 20% of its housing units as affordable and that they would remain so for 30 years (for a generation).
How does this situation apply to Buckhead, Georgia? Buckhead, unlike Glendale, is not an incorporated city but rather a suburb of Atlanta, Georgia. Therefore, it is subject to whatever zoning code amendments are enacted by the Atlanta City Council and its Mayor, Keisha Lance Bottoms. Much of what is in the federal HOME Act is suggested for use in Buckhead as well as other communities considered to be the suburbs of Atlanta proper.
In March of this year, Atlanta issued a report, Atlanta City Design Housing. It says, “The first step toward making Atlanta a more inclusive place to live should be to end exclusive single-family zoning by allowing an additional dwelling unit in all existing single-family zoned areas in the city.” Other ideas promoted in this report include reducing minimum lot sizes, allowing small apartment buildings in some neighborhoods currently limited to single-family homes, and mandating those wealthy neighborhoods have their per-capita share of ‘affordable housing’.“ Yet other strategies include: creating basement apartments, converting garages, allowing accessory dwelling units on the same lot; elimination of parking minimums for apartments complexes; elimination of low density housing; reduction of minimum lot size requirements; distribute affordable housing throughout the city including wealthy neighborhoods; creation of overlay affordability districts; and the use of city owned vacant land for affordable units.
There is also the creation of an Atlanta Housing Affordability Tracker which “provides a snapshot of progress made in reaching the goals of (1) creating or preserving 20,000 affordable homes by 2026 and increase overall supply and (2) investing $500 million from City-controlled public sources in the production and preservation of affordable housing as part of the larger goal of investing $1 billion (the other $500 million coming from private and philanthropic sources).”
In the name of diversity or equality what is happening in this country? When, not if, this amendment to the HOME Act becomes law, the incentive to work hard and become successful will be disincentivized. It doesn’t matter if you are black, white or brown. The most important and meaningful purchase of anyone’s life will have been diminished. It smacks of reverse discrimination not based on skin color but rather on one’s ability to be financially successful in life.
We live on an acre of land in a 3,000 SF home. For 30 years our family lived in a typical R1-6 residential subdivision. Twenty years ago, we were fortunate and found our current home and large lot property. We worked hard all our lives to have the necessary funds to buy. If the HOME Act amendment becomes federal law, our opportunity to live on a large lot today would evaporate.
I suspect that the residents of Buckhead and other Atlanta suburbs have the same attitude, and it will not surprise me in the least if they take Atlanta’s zoning amendments to court—perhaps even the Supreme Court. It is clearly a “takings” issue.
© Joyce Clark, 2021
FAIR USE NOTICE
This site contains copyrighted material the use of which is in accordance with Title 17 U.S. C., Section 107. The ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Section 107 of the US Copyright Law and who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democratic, scientific and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such material. For more information go to http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use,’ you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
Like this:
Like Loading...