Suburban Nation - Andres Duany [27]
Of the two rules discussed above, it appears that the federal government has learned the first but not the second. By the late nineties, the majority of housing constructed with federal assistance has come to be designed according to traditional models—houses and town houses in a network of streets, a vast improvement over the discredited “tower in the park.” The Department of Housing and Urban Development has officially embraced the neighborhood concept, and their newest projects embody many of the planning principles described here. Some of these developments, like Ray Gindroz’s redesign of several dysfunctional HUD projects, have received deserved attention for turning around the public housing experience. But, whatever its form, most subsidized housing is still highly concentrated, with only limited integration of market-rate units—well below the 10:1 ratio advocated here. One hopes that these new projects, with their improved architecture and urbanism, will engender good long-term management and not suffer the fate of St. Louis’s Pruitt Igoe, Chicago’s Cabrini Green, and similar projects that succumbed to social meltdowns so complete that they had to be demolished. But even architects should remain skeptical of the power of well-tested traditional models in the face of extreme social isolation.
Diggstown, in Norfolk, Virginia: a neighborhood-style retrofit of a previously distressed inner-city project that epitomizes HUD’s new standards
THE MIDDLE-CLASS HOUSING CRISIS
Virtually all the thought brought to bear on the housing crisis has been directed toward the urban poor, and rightly so, for they inhabit an environment that most would find unbearable. But the housing crisis is a middle-class issue, too. It has become increasingly difficult for the middle class to own satisfactory housing. In 1970, about 50 percent of all families could afford a median-priced home; by 1990, this number had dropped below 25 percent.4 There are many reasons behind this phenomenon, but the most significant factor is evident in the image on the left. In what has become a typical sight in suburbia, this family appears to own almost as many square feet of vehicles as it does of housing. Since every single adult in the household must drive a car in order to function, this situation is unavoidable. The impact it has on housing affordability is profound.
Two cars per bedroom: investment in mandatory automobiles leaves little money for housing
According to the American Automobile Association, the average cost of owning a Ford Escort—one of the cheapest cars available—is over $6,000 per year. At conventional mortgage rates, that figure translates into more than $60,000 in home-purchasing power. In other words, two cars will pay for a starter home, and a better one than this photograph portrays.ac
This is not just a theory. The banks that qualify mortgages are well aware of the burden that cars can present to homeownership. When qualifying a loan, bankers calculate the “back ratio,” which reduces income by the borrower’s existing debt, often primarily automotive. Bankers have been known to