This was originally posted to the Adams Morgan Listserv on July 30, 2018, as message #49061, groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/AdamsMorgan/conversations/messages/49061
A couple of weeks ago Ward 1 CM Nadeau was a guest on the Kojo Nnandi Show (WAMU) and spoke proudly of her work in bringing 500 units of affordable housing to Ward 1. Unfortunately, at best this number is a result of some very fuzzy and at worse deceptive, harmful and discriminatory math. Even if we count the phantom units, on paper and in the pipeline, the number is less than half the 500.
The city measures unit affordability based on HUD standards for ADUs (Affordable Dwelling Units) and AMI (Area Median Income). HUD basis ADU and AMI measurements on housing a family of four. Therefore one (1) full ADU is one that can house a family of four, which generally speaking a 3-bedroom housing unit. CM Madeau’s numbers, like the numbers we often hear from the Mayor’s team, and groups like the Coalition for Smarter Growth count fractional units studios, one-bedrooms, two-bedrooms as full ADUs misleading the general public.
If we were being honest in our affordable housing policies a studio ADU would only count as 1/4 an affordable unit. A one-bedroom unit would count as 1/3, a two-bedroom 2/3 an ADU and so on. In most cases, the additional value derived from counting a fractional ADU as a full ADU is on a city sponsored project just puts more money the developers pocket. These are is part of the spoils from our pay-to-play system.
If we use the city sponsored project at 965 Florida Avenue, The Wren, as an example, we not only can see that Nadeau’s 500 unit number is not solid, but also that increasing a project’s density through the use of PUDs (Planned Unit Developments) does not truly lead to greater affordability, most likely the opposite. When the city approved the Wren’s LDA (Land Disposition Agreement) the developer received a piece of public property in valued at $17.1M for $1.4M to build a 352 unit project with 106 affordable units. After the approval of a PUD, the project increased to 428 total units, 129 affordable. The 129 number is one which is used to tout the project and Nadeu’s 500 number. But this number falsely counts fractional ADUs as full Units.
If we look closer, there are NO full ADUs, 3-bedroom units in the project. The project is approximately 11.5% (15 units) studios, 60.5% 1 bedrooms (78 units) and 27% 2 bedrooms (36 units). Completing the math:
Making the true number of affordable units (15 * 0.25) + (78 * 0.33) + (36 * 0.67) = 54 ADUs, not the advertised 129, but less than half.
The difference amounting the the equivalent of 79 units which goes to the developer for creating market rate units and greater profits. But the deception does stop there. The city with CM Nadeau’s support reported that the PUD negotiations increased the project’s density resulting in additional 23 affordable units. More fuzzy math.
The original agreement via the LDA called for a total of 106 affordable units with 75% of those units being at the 30% AMI level and 25% at the 50% AMI level. However, the PUD’s zoning order flips the ratio, to 25% at 30% AMI level and 75% at the 50% AMI level. So the increase from 106 to 129 is actually a decrease when the fuzzy is cleared away.
Here’s how, the 30% AMI level we started was 79 units (106 * 0.75) but after the PUD withe so called addition of 23 units, we end up with the number of 30% AMI units decreasing to 32 units (129 * 0.25). A net loss of 47 of the most affordable units, from the increase. On the other hand, the developer got in additional 57 market-rate units with the PUD increase.
If we use 965 Florida as typical example of the Nadeau’s Fuzzy Math, the quoted affordable number is only worth about 42% in true affordability. The 500 number often quoted by Nadeau actually being more like 210. With a little work we can not only see through the fuzzy math, but the related mythology that increasing a project’s density via a PUD, negotiated by the city results in increased affordability. In factas in the case of 965 Florida a net the lost of 47 of the most affordable units. Nadeau’s Fuzzy Math on Affordability is the same math we get from the Mayor’s people and density advocates who post to blogs such as Greater Greater Washington and favor OP’s density friendly updates to the City’s Comprehensive Plan. updates.
Nadeau’s Fuzzy Math on Affordable Housing don’t add up.
William