Given the launch of the Housing Affordability Task Force – and an interim report due by March – now’s the time for lots of good ideas. Here’s one from Chicago:
Sustainability advocates often start with the premise that dense, transit-accessible community save energy. But start with saving money for individual households — savings that people might feel more connected to — and the end point is the same.
Finding sustainable housing doesn’t necessarily mean living in the city, either. Some suburban locations keep transportation costs low, offering access to good schools and safer streets. … Just being near a train or bus line isn’t enough to ensure lower costs, for instance: frequency of service matters, too.
The Center for Neighborhood Technology thinks the key is to make decisions about the location of affordable housing developments based on the combined cost of housing and transportation. Instead of limiting housing costs to 30 percent of a household’s budget, CNT is recommending agencies limit total housing and transportation costs to 45 percent.
Nice idea, but transportation to where? Authorities can’t dictate where you work. And what about time? Translink may be cheap, but it’s often highly impractical.
Transportation to work, errands, and play, I’d say. No, we can’t dictate where anyone works, but we can build affordable housing closer to public transit, pedestrian, and cycling corridors.
If Translink (or other public transit options) are impractical, the solution is to improve them – not to place affordable housing far from public transit corridors.