— by Fred Klein —
First off, OPAL is to be congratulated for thinking big and initiating the first large, affordable rental housing initiative that Eastsound’s seen since Wally and Gretchen Gudgell’s creation of Lavender Hollow over twenty years ago.
Likewise, OPAL’s approach to gather community input via an initial public meeting on June 23rd, the design workshop and open house last week, and the promise of additional opportunities for public involvement including a booth at the Saturday Market is exemplary and extraordinary in its scope.
Estimated to run $9.2 million dollars, the project is indeed, a major undertaking.
As a participant in the design workshop, during the hour long site design effort when everyone was earnestly struggling to address the myriad issues involved in creating a coherent and sensitive mini-community, I had concerns of a more fundemental nature…namely, that dividing the project cost by the number of apartments led to the inescapable conclusion that the average cost of each apartment becomes $306 thousand dollars and change. Now…because of the financial magic made possible thru government grants, tax credits, volunteerism, and generous contributions by local philanthropists, the rent for the apartments will bear no relationship to these costs…but still…
OPAL runs a tight ship…the costs are real…and I’ll stick out my neck and assert that less than 50% of the project costs are for the sticks and bricks of the apartments themselves…with more than half of the costs paying for the raw land, site utilities and land development, services, memberships, and hook-up fees, costs for permits, professional services, and administration of the project. (I’ve not seen OPAL’s data which backs up the $9.2M figure.)
I can’t help but wonder if there isn’t some way for our community to get a greater value than when, collectively, we commit what to me is a staggering amount of resources for a total of 30 one, two, and three bedroom apartments…particularly when I’m told that young people working at island wages struggle to pay more than $250 to $350 monthly rents.
One idea which came from several tables at the June 23rd public meeting was to include within the project something akin to a boarding house…an idea which the OPAL Board considered and, perhaps timidly, rejected.
But consider for a moment that a one-bedroom apartment “counts” as a single dwelling unit which soaks up 1/30th of all those project costs listed above. And consider that our Unified Development Code defines a “family” as “up to eight unrelated persons”…just think about the implications here…and how these facts point towards a way to serve more than the thirty individuals, couples, or families as presently envisioned, and spread the costs accordingly.
So here’s an idea…re-conceptualize that one-bedroom apartment as a kitchen, living / dining area, and up to FOUR suites, each consisting of a bedroom, small sitting area, and private bath…a single dwelling by all relevant definitions, capable of housing up to eight persons. Imagine how several dwellings like this would expand the impact of this new rental community. Consider the impact on the overall economics…in terms of presenting an option for singles or young couples who can’t afford projected rates for (say) a two bedroom apartment, even if they shared?…consider the overall project economics…the increase in gross rental income while lowering the rent rate to individuals and expanding the range of persons able to be served.
Many of us have experienced sharing living quarters at some time in our lives…imagine how much easier doing so would be in a structure designed from the get-go for that purpose rather than attempting to make do with a house designed for a nuclear family. Hey…even some seniors might find this desirable for the companionship and social interaction.
Of course, such a sharing of living space, even with zones of privacy, offers considerable challenges. But consider the building as the “hardware”, and everyone knows “hardware” needs “software”, properly configured, in order for it to function properly. So, most certainly, some “software” would need to be created…agreements entered into by residents to resolve the inevitable issues which arise from our humanity…really just extensions of the civil society which we all enjoy…a few commitments about mutual respect and communication…concepts which OPAL already practices and embodies.
From its inception, OPAL has broken new ground with the community land trust (CLT) model and the creation of permanent affordable housing. As a founding member, first board president, and architect for its first project, I recall that innovation in a number of aspects of Opal Commons took us to the head of the line for financing. Many communities and non-profit developers are addressing today’s challenging housing market by using a variety of innovative approaches such as granny-flats, tiny houses, and single-room-occupancy units, to serve targeted populations in need. My experience is that housing financiers are often on the alert for innovative ways to leverage their funds and reward applicants with creative solutions.
I invite the OPAL Board to reconsider the conventionality of its initial conception for its first, large, rental development. Explore some possibilities outside the box…recapture the sense of pioneering which is the root of OPAL’s success. Don’t settle for some one, two, and three bedroom apartments, just because they’re easy to manage.
…See ALSO
Good idea about the shared suites; might it be more appropriate for an assisted-living, SNF facility that would open up a lot more eldercare jobs for seniors who would buy into it?
I completely understand the message in the letter, and agree with the financial benefits within. However, it has been proven time and time again that communal living (at least in the country), never works. What would become of the grand experiment, and its investment, if it fails? I believe biting the bullet financially now for individual dwellings will pay off in the long run.
How about 4 suites w/ kitchenette and a shared common room. In my experience, most maintenance /shared living issues center around kitchen use and guests. It could even be studio apartments w/access to a shared Common building w/ laundry facilities and outdoor/entertaining space.
This is an important idea worth study. Twice in my life I have operated a rooming house, not a boarding house, with shared bath and cooking facilities. The tenants paid a small fraction of apartment rents and it was a cash machine for me. It begins to provide for singles and seasonal workers in a fundamentally economical manner.
Janice’s statement that, “it has been proven time and time again that communal living (at least in the country), never works” is certainly open to challenge from a number of quarters and for starters, what would be the definition of “communal living”?…and would the above-described dwelling meet that definition?..It’s a discussion in which I’d be happy to participate.
I would answer Janice’s question about what to do if such a “grand experiment…fails” by stating that any architect worth his salt would be able to design such a dwelling so that the space could easily revert to being two, two bedroom apartments.
I am excited with your ideas Fred, and applaud you for thinking creatively. The original OPAL community housing, designed by you, has proved to be outstanding in design.
I like the idea of the old fashioned boarding house. I lived in boarding houses in Europe and they can be a friendly, economical, and excellent solution for single people or even small families. Economics really should be considered in this project and the present nuclear 30 unit housing plans seem outdated, unexciting, financially over the top, frighteningly expensive to put it mildly, and this especially when you consider all the amazing and affordable ideas popping up everywhere – like the tiny house revolution/solution happening all over the globe. We must not be afraid of thinking outside of the archaic residential box.
As you say, Fred, there are many variations within the theme of cluster or shared housing and we have a golden opportunity to really brainstorm here. I hope we give ourselves time to create a brilliant, innovative and financially self sustaining plan.
Fred, your genius is showing, make it happen.
Bravo, Fred, for speaking up and thinking/drawing outside the box. It is clear that the economics of building today demand creative solutions as opposed to the tired every-man-in-his-own-castle solutions to housing which are really a throwback to the mid-20th century era of cheap land, cheap gasoline, and cheap cars. A “boarding house” or “communal living” perhaps do not capture the creative mix of private and common space you are proposing, and given the baggage some of those descriptions seem to carry for some readers, perhaps it’s time for a new vocabulary to free us from outdated prejudices about so-called communal living.
P.S. My university experience supports the contention that shared cooking facilities were conflict-prone in communal settings, bathrooms less so.
I’d love responses from OPAL re Fred’s and others’ comments. Perhaps here is not the place to do it. Have a few more gatherings/articles to brain storm?
Do I understand that the site plan work we were invited to comment on is necessary in order to get initial funding, and that specific building design/use will come later?
Make it happen! and soon. Spot on, Fred. Communal living problems during college years,yes, do have problems re kitchen clean up, etc. But the folks desperately needing housing are mature families, seasonal workers, new graduates who want to stay and work on Orcas..the idea of a separate common building is a good one; with microwaves, small fridges, etc. in each suite– in a way similar to hotel suites where business travelers frequently live for long periods. It’s a no-brainer. AFFORDABLE housing is the primary problem presented to ASK ORCAS; one for which there is no solution now.
OR: do we want to become an island without artists, restaurant staff–( 2 local restaurants had to close, on a weekend!, due to lack of staff)–the pop-up shops, markets, et al that depend on seasonal workers?
Fred, I think that you’ve had an excellent idea.
But Ms. Williams has commented: “…it has been proven time and time again that communal living (at least in the country), never works.” And, to some extent, she’s right.
So here’s one way of having an OPAL boarding house, and still avoiding the difficulties of communal living:
The communal dwelling must have an on-site, live-in manager, just as old-time boarding houses used to-have.
The manager gets his or her own room-and-bath, within the dwelling. The manager actually manages the place:
• The manager has the power to take in renters, and also to evict renters.
• The manager assigns rotating household chores and duties to the tenants.
• The manager keeps the peace.
That should solve the community-dwelling problem.
Steve…please recognize that I have not suggested “an OPAL boarding house”…what i’ve suggested is one way to comply with the various code issues and (1) serve more persons at lower rents, and (2) spread the indirect costs of development over a larger number of beneficiaries. The underlying thrust of my Guest Opinion is to urge OPAL to match their skills at creative financing with an equivalent level of creativity in their conception of the living units. While I understand your reasoning for the need for on-site management of a traditional boarding house, I do not believe for a nanosecond that it would be required in what I’ve described. In any event, now’s the time to think outside the box and creatively address a problem.
I’d no more suggest an affordable housing arrangement which would require the level of management which you believe is essential than suggest that outgoing telephone service require speaking with an operator.
Let’s talk…coffee’s on me…shoot me an email.
I am so happy to see the interest and heart showing up here regarding this predicament for Orcas Island housing for its residents.
I am a 22 year resident-home owner of the first OPAL development (built-1990-1940), OPAL Commons. I am very grateful for my home and the stability to create life that being it one place has afforded me It has given me a foundation for offering three part time services for the community, and raising a daughter. There is NO WAY I could afford this same home in today’s economic atmosphere on this island. Housing costs have risen and wages have not kept pace.
I also feel as a single person entering what used to be retirement age, that living alone and struggling to support so much infrastructure in the present economic environment is both lonely and very stressful. .
I like the ideas presented here to create a resilient living scenario that allows for people with lesser means, people serving you at the restaurant, building your deck, growing your food, etc., to have a supportive housing solution and also one that fosters varied ages , skill sharing and, and larger community regenerative gifts. There are co-housing models, shared asset models around the world.
I am currently housing( 1.5 years) two young adults that cannot find affordable housing on the island. I am also considering my older years and wishing for a place I can enjoy both privacy AND shared interaction ; producing food, and playing with all ages. Though I live close to wonderful neighbors here at OPAL Commons., I notice how isolated most of life here is because we all have our own everything and little built in need to interact.. and.. we are all working so much to pay expenses. I hope there will be enough openness and creativity to manifest something that is a huge boon for those that need truly affordable rental housing and ALSO fosters resilient local economy.
Another, more contemporary term for what Fred is talking about is “co-housing,” and you will find lots of information about current co-housing communities on-line and in the library. What’s interesting is that most of these communities are owner-occupied–i.e., there’s a more permanent stake. It would be interesting to try this in a lower-stakes, and more flexible rental situation, and interesting if OPAL were to do a local “market demand” survey.
Kudos to Lesley Liddle, above, for mentioning the “tiny house revolution/solution happening all over the globe”. I am a firm believer that these could provide an affordable option for many people.
My knowledge regarding the details of OPAL’s plan for this housing development is admittedly limited, but I’m inclined to agree with the suggestion being put out by Fred here. My experience as a young person on this island has confirmed for me beyond all doubt that there is currently a housing crisis of epic proportions. Many of my peers are considering themselves lucky to stay in tent camps, RV trailers, or even large closets-turned-rooms in shared houses. Compared to these options, a four-plex with some shared space would be a significant upgrade.
I do, however, have some minor caveats with this notion. The issue of shared facilities is the first, on which I would echo what others have said regarding the problems raised by a shared kitchen. I’ve lived in roommate situations on several occasions in my life, and each one inevitably came with a struggle regarding the cleanliness/orderliness of the kitchen and bathroom, and that was with only one other person, not three. Sandy’s suggestion of kitchenettes with shared common space instead seems easier to regulate. That or the live in manager idea.
My other concern is that in addition to providing this kind of micro-housing, we keep working as a community to make actual family size affordable housing available. This kind of option is to my mind great for young single people, seasonal workers, etc, but we should not forget the vacation rental epidemic which led to this shameful state of affairs. When I was a kid growing up on Orcas (not that long ago), working people could find affordable and fairly spacious housing in the kind of secluded naturally beautiful locations which exemplify island living. Now, as in the rest of our country, the gap between have and have-not seems to have grown exponentially. I believe we can do better than this on Orcas, and as we move to solve the housing crisis, we should also reconsider whatever mentality has led us to put the well being and lodging of tourists above and beyond that of those in our own community. Micro-housing is great, but let’s not make it the new normal for the island working class.
With all that said, I think this is a great idea and would go a long way toward solving the housing problem.
I just have to say that I feel incredibly lucky to live in a community where people care enough to not only have these conversations but to act on them. As the general manager of the Orcas Food Co-op, which now employs 26 people, I have seen how hard it is for many of those we employ to find adequate housing. At the rate we are growing as a business I project we will have 32-36 employees by this time next year. Housing and the available labor pool will certainly continue to be an issue for workers and businesses on Orcas looking to employ. I have lived on Orcas for 15 years. We are extremely fortunate to have a local organization such as OPAL, with their wisdom and leadership, working to provide affordable housing options to islanders. OPAL provides a type of leadership that promotes islanders being involved in creating the solutions that match our diverse needs. There seems to be general agreement in the above comments that there is not a “one size fits all” affordable housing model that will meet the community’s needs but rather a variety of options that take into consideration the needs of our diverse population, both seasonal and year-round, young and old. The reality is that with land costs what they are vacation rentals, bed and breakfasts, farm stays, etc. provide a critical revenue stream for landowners who are often working class folks themselves just trying to pay the bills and make it on the island. We should be careful not to alienate those in the community who happen to have a vacation rental on their property instead of a year-round affordable rental. Owning land is not easy and there needs to be an acknowledgement and sensitivity about that. Rather than blaming those who have gone the route of vacation rentals, lets continue to come up with solutions, starting with participating in this conversation with OPAL. Let’s remember also that any landowner can potentially offer to sell or donate a piece of land to OPAL or other qualified entity for the purpose of Rural Residential Cluster Development. https://www.codepublishing.com/wa/sanjuancounty/html/sanjuancounty18/SanJuanCounty1860.html#18.60.230
This is applicable to rural farm and forest parcels, which make up the majority of Orcas Island. I don’t personally believe there is a lack of resources, land or money, for this kind of thing. I think the primary determining factor in our success here will be our ability to dedicate ourselves, both as individuals and as a community, to growing our own knowledge and enhancing our relationships to one another. Working together and being open and kind is the key to creating the world we want. I’m in. Lets do it!