Redefining A Common Phrase
For many years I and others in my town have been trying to think differently about what is commonly called affordable housing. What’s wrong with this phrase? It has been my experience that when most people hear the phase “affordable housing,” they stop listening. Unfortunately, most have one definition: affordable housing is federally funded housing, (Section 8 housing), and is for those who are different from us. They are, poorly educated, work for minimum wage or less, probably lazy or even prone to criminal acts or abuse of drugs and alcohol, etc. This listener believes, “I have worked hard for my place in life and deserve to live with others like me. I should not have to live near those who are not like me.” “Everyone” knows that when “they”’ move in, property values go down and trash, noise, traffic, and crime increase.
So, it comes down to an us and them mindset resulting in opposition to affordable housing. The fact is, nothing in this common description is true, and most judgements of people who need affordable housing are inaccurate.
Anyone trying to increase the availability of housing most people can afford would want to avoid using the phrase “affordable housing”’ so communication could continue. So, I and others have tried to use phrases like “homes that residents can afford,” or “achievable/attainable housing.” Such a trick of language enables listening to continue, and hopefully the listener can gain new understanding or at best feel empathy for people who can’t afford market rate housing. Empathy usually stems from knowing someone who is having housing problems: a senior resident who can no longer stay in their expensive neighborhood, or an aging local firefighter who still works because young volunteers cannot afford to live nearby, or someone whose own children have moved away because of housing costs. Or possibly they are a local business owner, or know someone who is, who cannot find workers who live in town, or whose workers can’t live on what they earn and own a car, too, in a town with no public transportation. For quite a while, the list of who cannot afford the local rents or mortgages has been getting longer. I know numerous people of all ages and circumstances who have been displaced from their home town. It’s the newest form of trauma in our communities. Yet, it’s hard to see what has disappeared: housing people can afford.
Recently, Governor Kathy Hochul, the first woman governor in New York State, talked about the need for affordable housing. These days many leaders in federal, state, regional, and local governments have been talking about it. What caught my attention was that Governor Hochul also redefined the meaning of these words. She described her own experience as a child growing up here in New York State — how her humble housing beginnings slowly changed to other forms of affordable homes that continued to serve the growing needs of her family. This redefinition captured what so many of us have experienced, yet few of us would be classified as “them” as described above. I loved the fact that Governor Hochul changed the definition of affordable housing drawing on her own experience, too. Wow, so powerful!
As many people know, Woodstock is currently revising its zoning and housing laws. The revised housing code will not attempt to reframe the idea of affordable housing by using other words or euphemisms. Instead, it redefines the meaning of affordable housing to incorporate the reality of our situation. Those who think they know what “affordable housing” is need to learn the new meaning—housing that includes middle-income households, longstanding seniors of our community, young families, creators that contribute to the rich culture of the arts, first-responders and other essential workers in our communities, and more. These residents make up the fabric of our towns.
In the second half of the 20th century the model of affordable housing was to build apartment buildings that, by their very appearance and location, advertised that the housing was for “them,” those other people, while we lived in neighborhoods meant for “us,” mostly single-family homes and luxury apartment buildings. But this needs to change. The 21st century meaning of affordable housing should include social justice and no longer promote an us-versus-them scenario. We can choose to see this cultural shift and understand why these changes are good for everyone.
Beginning in the 1950s, the trend has been toward building either single-family “McMansions” or condo complexes and large apartment buildings. Homes known as middle housing stopped being built. Middle housing buildings are the same size as the neighboring single-family homes but may be two, three, or four family dwellings. Also common were clustered cottages and small garden apartments surrounded by a shared open space.
All around the country, local governments are beginning to emphasize development of middle housing: cluster cottages, duplexes, small garden apartments, and accessory dwelling units (ADUs). These middle housing buildings blend into and look similar to the surrounding neighborhood. They accomplish greater density without large, out-of-scale apartment houses, a blending of livable spaces that promotes social justice, and avoids the “us and them” result. Some communities have even gone as far as placing a moratorium on building single-family homes.
Woodstock Housing Alliance, a community land trust based in New York’s Eastern Catskill Mountain Region, is focused on creating affordable housing solutions for rural towns by developing middle-housing options. Learn more about our mission and view our middle housing models by visiting our website at www.WoodstockHousingAlliance.org.
