• Skip to main content
  • Skip to secondary menu
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer
  • Home
  • About Us
  • Say hello
Rethink Real Estate. For Good.

Rethink Real Estate. For Good.

  • Podcast
  • Posts
  • In the news
  • Speaking and media
    • About Eve
    • Speaking requests
    • Speaking engagements
    • Press kit
  • Investment opportunities

Zoning

The lost art of small-scale development.

April 29, 2020

Jim Kumon co-founded and leads the Incremental Development Alliance, launched in 2015 as a collaboration between two small scale developers who found that people kept asking them the same question: how do I build a small building in the place I love? They joined with Jim to create an organization with the goal of “resurrecting the small developer.” They built a suite of classroom-based coaching tools and scaled them across the region and the country. In their first year, they did bootcamps in Portland, Dallas, Providence, Fayetteville, Washington DC and Detroit.

Jim’s goal is to help locals strengthen their neighborhoods through small-scale real estate projects. The Alliance provides training and technical assistance to anyone interested in tackling projects that you are probably all familiar with – housing, retail and mixed use projects on main streets and in neighborhoods. Projects typically range from 1 to 20 units. These were once every day development exercises, but have been pushed aside in favor of large, more efficient projects of scale. Today it’s a challenge navigating zoning codes and financial institutions to get projects like this built and that’s what the Alliance focuses on solving.

Over the past five years, the Alliance has grown into a national team of implementers from a myriad of allied real estate industries to create training classes for individuals and provide tactical coaching guidance to cities and community organizations across the country. Having conducted training and technical assistance projects in over 50 cities and with more than 4000 alumni, the Alliance is on the front lines of democratizing access to knowledge about real estate development and help governments, banks and foundations retool the ecosytems to make small scale projects possible.

With over fifteen years experience in the design, transportation and real estate industries, Jim’s career began working in construction management and architecture companies, learning how to deliver multi-family housing, mixed use and institutional buildings in Michigan, California, and Colorado. He transitioned to the non-profit sector in 2013 to become the Executive Director at Strong Towns to follow his long term professional and volunteer efforts in encouraging economically viable, human scaled communities.

In Minneapolis, Jim and his wife, Faith, are also small developers with their company, Heirloom Properties. They focus on backyard cottages, duplexes and small multiplexes. Born and raised in southeastern Michigan, Jim is an alumnus of the University of Michigan with a degree in Architecture.

Read the podcast transcript here

Eve: [00:00:08] Thanks so much for joining me today for the latest episode of Impact Real Estate Investing.

Eve: [00:00:14] My guest today is Jim Kumon who heads the Incremental Development Alliance, which is based in Minneapolis. The Alliance began in 2015 as a collaboration between two small-scale developers who found that people kept asking them the same question: how do I build a small building in the place I love? They joined with Jim to create an organization with the goal of resurrecting the small developer. And they built a suite of classroom-based coaching tools and scaled them across the region and the country. In the first year they did big camps in Portland, Dallas, Providence, Fayetteville, Washington, D.C. and Detroit.

Eve: [00:01:12] Be sure to go to rethinkrealestateforgood.co to find out more about Jim Kumon on the show notes page for this episode. And be sure to sign up for my newsletter so you can access information about impact real estate investing and get the latest news about the exciting projects on my crowdfunding platform, Small Change.

Eve: [00:01:42] Hello, Jim. I’m really happy to have you on my show today.

Jim: [00:01:45] It’s great to be here and actually to see a little bit of Spring coming around the corner here in Minnesota, so it’s actually where I’m at, so it’s good to actually get out to the world and see some things. So, glad we can connect here and talk about stuff since I haven’t been able to leave the house much currently.

Eve: [00:02:04] Right, we’re all kind of stuck. But, you know, I’ve been really fascinated by your organization, the Incremental Development Alliance for a few years now and your work is pretty squarely focused on small-scale projects and small-scale developers, which I really love. So I wanted you to start by telling me a little about why the Incremental Development Alliance exists.

Jim: [00:02:29] Yeah, well, we’re coming up in about five years now of our work as a nonprofit organization. We work nationally to support implementers of small-scale real estate development projects and the ability for local places to have those kind of real estate projects happening in their communities. And so we exist in large part to be able to essentially re-enable and re-share the information that we used to have as a society. All real estate development was largely small-scale development for, you know, really centuries up until really post-World War 2, for the most part, and we did some things in the skyscraper era, you know, the early nineteen hundreds, but for the most part, small-scale, small-lot development was the traditional development pattern. And so, one of the major reasons we exist is essentially trying to re-learn and re-share information that we used to know across a broad spectrum of our society. And it’s now been complicated by the fact that we have had 50 or 70 years of real estate development that has largely become specialized and become highly, highly tuned to scale and largely to scale finance. The kinds of developments that we see in this country are in large part due to the financial mechanisms we have. We see the things we have because they’re easy to finance. And so the traditional pattern that we’ve had up until that point in time in the mid century nineteen hundreds is, is actually the unusual thing now. We can build big box stores and subdivisions and office parks and industrial parks, but the idea of putting a duplex on a 50 foot wide lot is actually pretty foreign in most places. And so we’re trying to help put the knowledge back together within the 2020 framework and not the 1920 framework of what you have to do to follow rules and to get things financed, to make real estate transactions happen. And so we do so.

Eve: [00:04:38] Why is it important?

Jim: [00:04:40] It’s important largely because it’s a lost art. People think it’s, especially when we first started out, in large part people think it’s almost impossible. Like, well, how can we not do this? How can we not be able to do this for so long now? Large part is a) people really hadn’t tried or if they looked into it, they gave up because there were so many barriers. And secondarily, there are places that really want to see this kind of development happen, but they’re missing the know-how within their human resource, their human capacity of a community that’s both public, private and nonprofit sectors. And so really, our organization started as a network of doers who were comparing notes and a couple of my co-founders in particular who were essentially mentoring people on the side. And it got to the point where you couldn’t have that many one-on-one phone calls and still do your job, to make major money. And so, you know, we essentially bound together to help essentially take that wisdom that’s sort of hard earned from the field, in-practice wisdom, and put it into a format that can be shared more widely and both in sort of beginners terms, as well as more advanced work that we have to do, either in markets that are disinvested or in markets that are too hot, they’re over-invested. And so we see the conditions across the US in one or the other. And how you get real estate products done differs greatly, obviously, depending on if you’re in a hotter market or a colder market.

Eve: [00:06:16] How do you help like small-scale developers or places that want to introduce interstitial small projects into their urban fabric?

Jim: [00:06:26] When we started the training work out, we realized that the two biggest issues were: one, the process. Being a small developer was sort of unknown. You had lots of people who are involved in the development industry, people who are contractors or real estate agents or architects. People, sort of, a known kind of related industries to real estate. And so those folks who were in an industry, you know, largely had a sense of the process, but really just knew they’re one stop along the way. And so, many people may have some of the skill sets to put a real estate transaction together, but didn’t have a complete working set, right. And no-one knows everything about each aspect of a development project, there’s too much to know. But you have to know a little bit about each part of the process and know how to find other people who can help you with the things you’re weak at. And so, the ability for us to help, essentially teach people, what is the process and how does it work and particularly how does it work for small scale projects? And we define those projects, you know, 1 to 20 units of housing – they could be mixed use residential or commercial and usually under 15,000 square feet, that’s sort of the max-sized project and really…

Eve: [00:07:40] I fit squarely into that group.

Jim: [00:07:42] Yeah, and we’re usually more talking about buildings between, you know, 500 and 5000 square feet, you know in reality. And so, those buildings are the ones that are overlooked and kind of caught in the the seams, in the cracks and crevices of our regulatory system and our financial system, because the rules change. So one of the things that we teach people is how to line up the financial regulatory system and banking system, how to line up the land use system that actually controls what you can put where and the building codes. And so, the thing is, is for larger projects, most projects fall under the same set of rules. Like there’s certain zones of a city, there’s the international building code, which is basically everything over three units of housing and largely commercial buildings. And the, you know, the financial mechanism of the commercial mortgage, right. The rules are largely the same for big buildings. And what makes it hard for small projects is they straddle an intersection of all three of those elements where the rules shift, right? One in two family zones are different from three and up in zoning land. There’s a completely different building code that regulates one to two family buildings from from how you build a building in its construction. And then we have a financial mechanism for residential buildings that allows for one to four unit buildings. And you have to make sure that you know how those pieces intersect, because otherwise you find out, usually at the most inopportune time, that you’ve got a discongruent operating requirements, right. Hey, I didn’t know that when I went from a duplex to a triplex I need a sprinkler system now. And that’s not the kind of thing you want to find out on accident because sprinkler systems are not cheap. And so that’s kind of how we got people.

Eve: [00:09:40] I’ve had this sort of experience myself when I built a small, it was supposed to be a four residential unit building in downtown Pittsburgh, and I got all the approvals, everything, permits, everything, started building. And one day on-site, the building inspector said, hold on a second, you can’t do four units without an elevator. Because one has to be handicapped accessible. So we had to really on the fly completely redesign a couple of the units because it’s a tiny little site and we could not put an elevator in. So, it seems to me that not even the city kind of really understands how difficult they are for small buildings.

Jim: [00:10:23] Well, and the question, in large part, probably was who is the last person before you tried to build a new construction four unit building? Probably a long time. Yeah. And a lot of folks who are alumni are exactly that person that you were. Right. They’re the first person broaching these subjects within their building departments and zoning departments and with their local officials and their neighbors.

Eve: [00:10:47] This could be my entire career in development that you describing.

Jim: [00:10:54] Right, you did it all the hard way, didn’t you Eve, yeah?

Eve: [00:10:55] Damn, it was fun.

Jim: [00:10:57] Yeah, well, and that’s a part of this shared wisdom that we’re trying to…We don’t have enough time with, especially in the housing sector, we’ve got a lot of housing to build in this country and we don’t really have time for everyone to make the mistakes and to to go through the vagaries that that you went through yourself and others who are faculty members went through, right, to find all this stuff out the hard way.

Eve: [00:11:21] Small-scale development could be perfectly efficient and make developers money except for all of this. Like when you have a banker telling you, oh no one’s going to live downtown and they just won’t give you a loan because you happen to be the first to the loft development in a downtown, that’s a problem even beyond the written regulations that we’re talking about. That’s now a cultural issue that you’ve got to also break through, right?

Jim: [00:11:47] It’s much harder, actually, the part between the between the ears is a way more difficult issue, especially given that even though if we were talking about the US, while we’re one country we’re many subcultures. And so, the way that different parts of this country and different real estate markets in different parts of the country behave, and the way that people believe that their communities should be, is vastly different. Tinkering with your zoning code is pretty straightforward, it’s mostly numbers and a couple of pictures, if you’re lucky, I can sit down with someone’s zoning code and help them remove things that are barriers fairly quickly. But, you know, banks, neighbors, even people in the construction industry. I was, we were, there were some small houses that one of our faculty was looking at some small houses with one of our alumni in, in Tennessee. And the local building culture in that city basically was like: two by six construction, well, we don’t do that. That’s gonna cost more, I mean, if we gottta take this one stud off the truck and it’s a different size than what used to, that’s just gonna cost way more than putting in a two by four, I mean, obviously, you know. And you’re just like, what?

Eve: [00:13:04] I had a really bizarre issue in Pittsburgh, when I was building a tiny house here and, when a lot of people left and houses were abandoned, people just sort of collapsed them into the basements, so you end up with land that’s pretty unbuildable. And I was talking to Jonathan Tate in New Orleans and he said, well, we just have these little trucks with pile drivers that drive around and drive piles past all of this stuff, right, which is brilliant. But not in Pittsburgh. I couldn’t find a small pile driver. It would have been a very large rig that would have been deployed for a tiny little project. So, from region to region you have like these weird issues popping up.

Jim: [00:13:48] Basements, no basements, right. You don’t put a basement in Louisiana, right, cause you’d be…

Eve: [00:13:53] You had to do something with the ground, so it was like…

Jim: [00:13:58] Years ago I worked in, in a city in, outside of New Orleans, it’s further out, further afield in the state and so a little bit swampier land of the states. And so, there was a local joke about some infrastructure projects was, you know, “my daddy used it to fish for crawfish in your basement” which, of course, there was no basement. Which is to say you built your house in the low ground. You shouldn’t wonder why it’s flooded over and over and over again.And so these, these kind of, you know, climate and regional issues is what is another thing that kind of makes our approach different than most real estate training and technical assistance is that our our commitment to urbanism, our commitment to neighborhoods, and that’s really where we operate, the neighborhood scale, all of our cities and towns in this country are really just increments of neighborhoods.

Jim: [00:14:54] And so what’s important from our perspective is there’s both small scale as well as incrementalism. Those two things go hand-in-hand, but they’re really separate. And one of the things that ties them together is the idea of time and scale. And so, you can be thinking through how something, a process, works in a place for how you build a building. But you have to think through the ways that those technical elements fit together and what’s, how it’s really going to work when you, when you set out. So for us, thinking through a housing project for a small building, you have to really take it into its parts and you can’t strip out the financial piece from the physical piece. And so, most of the real estate training that I took and other people took that are involved with our organization, they were so strictly focused on the financial pro forma. If you can make the numbers work, somebody else would figure out how to make a vertical three-dimensional building out of that spreadsheet later, right. If we could just get these rents and the costs isn’t over this, it’ll be fine. And it’s like, no, actually, you know, what goes in that building matters. If you build the building, that, as you found out, unfortunately requires an elevator, that’s not, that’s not an inconsequential thought process. So our belief that the built environment and its regulatory framework has to be front and center and iterative in the process, along with the financials, along with the the most usually forgotten part, which is the humans, right? Who is the occupant of this building and how is this building achieving needs of humans? And, as I was an architecture student as an undergrad, I always kind of thought that, and in my time when I was in school, I was looking at inspirations like the rural studio. People who were actually going out there and trying to build things and think about the humans, you know, part and parcel and the economic conditions that they were a part of, in that part of the country. And so, to be able to actually look at these things and say, know what? we can’t separate this idea of the financial part of this building from the people and the actual built edifice, we have to think of them together.

Jim: [00:17:23] And small scale buildings are so critical because it’s not, it’s a jewel-box, right. I mean, our buildings, our built environment, is largely an aggregation of many, many, many small buildings. The big building is actually the outlier, the exception in the built environment we have. And so, one of the challenges we have in this country today is that we forgot how to build neighborhoods. We know how to build complexes. We know how to build parks right, of.. the office parks and industrial parks. But the idea that fine-grained elements that differ in use and size can fit together, that’s a skill we lost post-World War Two, in planning, design and construction. And so, being able to teach people how to use that part of their brain, how to use that part of the thought process, is the critical missing piece in implementation, right. We have the ideas, we have desire. We were missing the actual how to. And that’s why we created the Alliance was to sort of fill in that void.

Eve: [00:18:23] Really, what I’m hearing is, and I know this to be true, that small-scale is incredibly challenging, is, you’re sort of up against, you know, the same issues as a large scale development, but maybe even more because of cultural beliefs, because of the way the banks like to lend, because of zoning codes that aren’t really geared towards small. So it can be a lot more challenging than something large and efficient.

Jim: [00:18:51] Yeah. And we like to say and this is one of the, one of the old analogies by one of my co-founders, John Anderson, who said that small developers operate on the economy of means, as opposed to large developments, which really are, as you say, the economy of scale and efficiency. And the economy of means is largely about relationships and time. There’s a finite amount of people and resources that a small-scale developer has. And so, what is important to understand is that small-scale development isn’t inherently hard, it’s only hard within the context that our American society has built its habits and practices about how we finance, value and built. And so what is important and what were some of the ideas that we hang our had on about, you know, what can you do with a 30 year mortgage? That was a question that came out of the last recession, as I’m making the broad assumption here that we are already in a new recession. With the last recession,  is, was a question of what if commercial finance, as we know it doesn’t come back? And so, John was one of the people who was staring, looking at this and saying, gosh, what could I do with a federally backed mortgage product? What does that allow for?

Jim: [00:20:15] And so being able to look at something very basic and very simple really shows what the power of that is. Because if you think about the millions upon millions of 30 year mortgages we have in this country today, it’s a ubiquitous tool, except that there were features of that tool that were underutilized. And so really we were exploring and trying to cross-pollinate what could you do with 1 to 4 units if that was your framework? And so, one of the things that we’ve developed over the last three to four years and my colleague, Grayson Johnson, and co-founder, this is one of her big pieces and contributions to our work, is helping us catalog. And my background comes out of the built environment in architecture and I did housing in California in the boom years and saw all kinds of crazy things that were going on when you could build a courtyard apartment building, which has got 42 units, which is like 42 custom homes like stacked on top of each other and beside each other, all selling for, you know, six hundred thousand dollars. This is sort of the the rarified air of Southern California real estate in 2007, right? And you get down to this, you know, like, wow, this is an amazing building type that no one’s done in 40 years, 50 years. And you realize, gosh, these are all these different ways we could do this. And so that idea of a building type from something very complex, like a courtyard apartment building, multifamily house to something as simple as a duplex or a triple decker as we have in the Northeast or all the various kinds of cottages you find in the south where you’re trying to spread out and keep air between buildings, right, and battle humidity. All these different building types that are from a climate perspective and a local culture perspective akin to a place.

Jim: [00:22:11] And really because we’re a national organization, we gathered up all these different types that largely had a start in a local place and have, you know, regional sort of preferences or regional sort of ability to, you find them often, right. And we said, look, well, how can we use these building types in many places? And so we created this idea called Step Buildings, which would be a way to help people organize through these important thresholds of finance, building code and zoning code and Step Buildings is an important idea, largely because we’re having to reintroduce things that are in plain sight in many places in this country, but we don’t recognize what they are. And the term STEP is also an acronym. It stands for Small-scale, Time-enhanced, Entrepreneurial and Purposeful. And really, the ability for us to understand what these buildings are, and having spent time in Pittsburgh, I love, especially in the working class neighborhoods, the just sheer variety of sizes of building, right, and attachments and additions and that incrementalism of, before we had the 30 year mortgage, we only built as much housing as we could afford, which was not very much. And if we have kids or a family or parents, you know, we made these little additions and, you know, cultivated up a structure. And so as humans, we had all kinds of ways to house ourselves. They just didn’t fit into the model we started doing after World War 2, which was a single family house stamped out in great scale and volume in, sort of, cookie cutter tranches of financial thresholds, right? Like, well, this subdivision is going to be for houses that will cost between two hundred and ten and two hundred twenty five thousand dollars and we’ll build a hundred of them. And then get another plot of land next door and build one hundred that are between three hundred and three hundred ten thousand dollars, right. Somehow we went from this fine-grained ability to house people at different points of their life cycle to, you have to pick up and move yourself to a new hunk of land every 10 years in order for, you know, your housing type, that need that you have, to happen. And so, we’re trying to catalog all the different ways that you can mix and match buildings together and be able to explain them to people who may not realize that they live in a place that has all these things.

Eve: [00:24:44] Can you share an example of a project or a place or a developer that you helped through the alliance that you are proud of, or you think is particularly interesting?

Jim: [00:24:55] Well, there’s a couple different conditions by which we end up coming to a place, Now, first of all, we don’t just show up in a town and do a training class. We only go places that invite us and our sponsoring spills through their hustle and through their financial support. So we go to places that want us and want this type of work. If you don’t want this type of work, it doesn’t get anywhere. And we’ve been to a couple of places who said they really wanted this and then when we got there, they weren’t really all that serious, right. They were checking a box, they were, you know, throwing something, throwing a bone to a neighborhood that’s been overlooked. And they weren’t really serious. There were some people on the ground there who really cared about their place. But the people who brought us, or maybe who paid the bill, not so serious. And so people ask me a different version of the question you just asked me, which is, you know, who’s, what is success or what happens when someone makes it? And the challenges right now is that there’s a lot of people who want to get something going, and for some of things I’ve already mentioned, can’t, right. There are some deal-breaking issues that stop people from getting going. And so, one of the things that’s important, and why we do work that’s both for the individual as well as for the city, is that they need each other. right. Cities, we talk to people in government all the time like, gosh, I would love to make sure that we can legalize cottage courts and then sometimes they go off and do it. And then, like Jim, so we went changed our zoning code and tinkered with a couple of local practices for our infrastructure and, gosh, you know, cottage courts should just be no problem. And I’m like, does anyone know how to build them? And so. Like, has anybody had the idea of putting five small single-family houses together in one lot? Does anyone understand how that fits? Don’t like hah, no, I guess not. Well, that could be why no one’s building them.

Jim: [00:26:43] So, we’re at an interesting point in time where there is now, you know, especially compared to five years ago, a much larger acceptance of a lot of great ideas that could happen and could happen in your place. And so, we’re working through trying to figure out what’s the path of least resistance. And so I can describe a couple of those examples of people who are are finding that first step in their place.And we have a couple of longer-term relationships with places, which I think is where our best examples come from, from alumni. We have a bunch of, up on our Web site, we have incrementaldevelopment.org, we have a bunch of little alumni stories about people and projects. So I’ll just cherry-pick a few of those. But it is a project, a couple places that we’re working that we have some really exciting products going on, one of which is South Bend, Indiana. And we’ve been working on and off there now for a little over two years, specifically on the northwestern and western parts of the city. We are brought in typically for two reasons to a place. One, because there is uncontrolled or unhealthy growth, right, which is to say the place is a little too hot, that the real estate market is too hot. People are being either displaced or threatened to be displaced. Or we have the opposite. The place maybe got the wrong end of a bulldozer for a few decades. And the question is now what? How do we piece this back together? And so, interestingly enough, the tools by which we bring to the table are the same, but the the math in many cases is the part that’s really different.

Jim: [00:28:25] So in South Bend, you’ve been brought there by, we were originally brought there by the private sector, a gentleman who really used, he’s a retired professor and really just cared about the area adjacent to where he lived. And he was kind of right a the cusp between two neighborhoods and, sort of, a typical, especially Mid-western legacy of segregation, you know, the white neighborhood and the black neighborhood, he lived kind of right on the edge of it and was like, why is it that right across the, sort of, main street here that I live next to, there are, you know, half the houses are torn down and gone. And on my side of the street, you know, largely the neighborhood’s intact. And so, when you have a neighborhood that is, you know, economically in a down cycle, you know, the first thing you have to do is start the rehab project. And so he came to one of our early training classes and began to understand that, well, rehab is where I have to start.

Jim: [00:29:19] But he originally said, well, I don’t really want to own and lease buildings. I just want to fix some things up and sell it off to somebody else and have them be able to gain wealth. But then he realized that the math problem of when you fix up a building, sometimes it doesn’t appraise for the amount that you’ve now put into it, to buy it and to fix it up. And he realized he couldn’t sell it and couldn’t finance it. You know, he had to kind of hold it for a while and lease it and try to kind of nurse it back into financial health. And this is true of both a couple of residential products and a couple of commercial buildings that he and a few partners bought. And so, the thing that was different about him and is different about the approach that we espouse, was that, while there are a lot of really difficult physical things to overcome – most of the houses in this neighborhood were over 100 years old, many of them were beset with typical issues of neighborhoods of that age where you have a lot of lead paint or other environmental things – and so, you know, these are definite headwinds to doing even rehabilitation of buildings, you know, cheap ones. Not even getting too fancy, but just enough to make it a decent place to to live. And so, I think the story there was that he began to build friends, not only people who were doing work alongside him, but folks who might want to move to that neighborhood, who might want to rent in that neighborhood, people who want to start businesses in cheap commercial spaces that have been largely left vacant.

Jim: [00:30:42] And so, when all else fails with math and with the physical rules, relationships are the thing that bind us together, that helps us overcome when we have issues with rules. And so he’s been slowly building a group of people in the neighborhood to begin to help him. He didn’t want to be the hero. I don’t want to buy up every lot in the neighborhood. And then I have to be responsible for everything that happens. He wanted to have many people share in that work and to support each other. And so, I think His name’s Mike Keane. Mike is one of the success stories, not only of getting a couple of projects off the ground, rehabbing a few things and now he’s working on, probably will be one of the first few non-subsidized, deeply-subsidized new construction buildings in the neighborhood in probably 50 years. And so, you know, but none of that work would be possible unless he’d started with picking up trash in the neighborhood and building relationships with his neighbors and buying a couple of buildings for cheap and fixing them up and finding a few people who would be in them to bring life to those buildings. That’s, that’s one of the places that we are starting to see that the compounding effects of many people like Mike, who are now working there, both in the private and nonprofit sectors.

Eve: [00:32:03] So just generally, how do you, how do you think we need to think about our cities and neighborhoods so that we build better places for everyone?

Jim: [00:32:12] Well, first of all, neighborhoods are living organisms. They’re not static things. And that’s one of the key aha moments that we have to have with government officials and particularly planning and economic development and housing department folks. They’re largely in place to disperse funds and make sure people follow the rules. We like to reframe their job descriptions as: you are stewards of resources and you’re responsible for creating a productive tax base because, you know, that’s really what our public sector has to do for us. Our public sector has to create a ability for services we want to provide as a place and we have to have a tax base for that,  we have to have a productive economy and a local productive economy, not one that’s relying on state or federal subsidies to make it’s ends meet. And so, one of the ways that we need to do that is that we have to make sure that our place is constantly evolving and it’s wherever it’s at now, there’s another place that it can go to to be either economically or socially more welcoming and more accessible. And so, the building types and the Step Building thought process is we actually have little cards we’ve built that essentially have a picture on the front and on the back explain, hey, this building is in the, this building code type and, is largely found in these kinds of zoning codes or have these kind of attributes. These buildings require sprinklers, these ones don’t. These buildings are financeable by a 30 year mortgage or they, or they’re not. And it gives people a sense also for what’s possible, right. An owner-occupied duplex is like one of the most accessible building types you can put in any neighborhood. And yet, you know, most of those types you’re going to find are buildings that are over 100 years old. We don’t have a mechanism that is widespread in this country that takes advantage of the fact that you can build a building that has someone living into it through the wall for maybe you as the owner that’s helping pay the mortgage and also allows us to have a finer-grain control over what rents are charged in a neighborhood. And, because we’re not looking, you know, you, as an owner occupant probably have a day job. And, you know, you’re using this as income or maybe as a long term retirement strategy, right. And so, you don’t need the top-level rents over time. Now, you probably need decent rents upfront, though, because our financial system, unless you’re independently wealthy and can build a duplex out of your own pocket via cash, requires certain amounts of money upfront and requires a certain amount of, of conservative cost estimating.

Eve: [00:34:57] Well, this is something that you and I need to talk about because you’ve been fixing on a 30 year mortgage. But while you’ve been building the Incremental Development Alliance, equity crowdfunding has been [indeed] gathering steam. I really believe that we’re going to see different types of financing available more readily for projects like this. And I don’t know if you’ve been thinking about that at all.

Jim: [00:35:24] Well, I think there is a fantastic role to get into a little bit of of wonkishness for folks who maybe have not, don’t have any background in how a general real estate transaction works but typically, whether you’re building a new building or an old one, you have two components, right? You have debts, right, if you are going to buy a building and finance it, you have the loan, you’re doing it from the bank and you have what we call equity, which is essentially your skin in the game that you or someone who is investing with you provide to basically have a stake in the game. And that is sort of, you know, that the bank security, that somebody has the financial wherewithal to be supporting this project.

Jim: [00:36:09] And so I think where there is a great opportunity for crowdfunding and small dollar funding in terms of aggregation, isn’t that equity piece because, you know, people typically show up and when they come to our class before they go through it and we disabuse them, this idea is that, gosh, I don’t have enough money to be a developer.Well, do you have enough plywood to become a developer and build a building? Well, what do you mean? Well, you say you don’t have enough money. Well, do you have enough plywood? Do you have enough screws? Do you have enough, you know, do you have all the things necessary upfront? No, you don’t go out and buy a truckload of plywood just to have it on hand, right. When you need plywood, you go to a lumber yard and you buy it. That’s the same way loans work. The trick is to get a loan, you need to bring money with you. And so that is the case, right? You do need to have some money, but people have money.

Jim: [00:37:07] What we lack in small development, and this is what our one day workshop, which is sort of our flagship training is focusing on, is actually teaching people A, there’s a process B, this is how the process works and C, one of the biggest things that we lack to make small scale products happen is someone who knows how to put together the “if I could, would you?” proposition, largely in writing? If I had 20 percent down of whatever cost it would take to build or to buy a building, could I get a loan at this rate at this..so much. And so, what we lack is people who actually know how to put the transaction together. We can find people who have money and it may come through one deep-pocketed investor. But it also may come through 10 or 20 neighbors pitching in, you know, five hundred or fifty or five thousand dollars a piece. Now, what’s tricky about that is this little thing called a loan guarantee. This is, this is a tip I can, listen to, leave with your listeners today. If this is the first time you’re hearing about real estate transactions and how they work and why we don’t see the things that we think you should see, one of the tricks about figuring out good ways for us to be able to use small dollar capital is this problem we have that banks want somebody on the hook if something goes wrong, just want a kind of a loan guarantee. And so somebody who has enough net worth to functionally backstop, you know, all of a sudden all your tenants not paying rent or something else going out bad financially. And so, small-dollar capital, while we might be able to amass the capital necessary, unless you are the person who has the balance sheet necessary to backstop a large loan, we need other mechanisms to be able to make that loan guarantee work.

Eve: [00:38:52] Yes, but small-dollar equity can help a developer like Mike Keen do, want a project or another. He may have the balance sheet. He just may not enough to get it going.

Jim: [00:39:01] Indeed. Yes. Absolutely. Yeah, it is, it is absolutely way more accessible to normal people with normal jobs. My wife and I, we know we have two incomes. We don’t either of us make a ton of money, you know, we just, you know, we have a regular, you know, two regular, you know, white collar jobs. But yet, you know, we would be, we would have enough, between some retirement savings that we have, we don’t have very much debt, which is important, especially for qualifying for a 30 year mortgage out the backside is having a low amount of debt and we don’t really have any but the house we own. And so, you know, that’s enough to get a fourplex going, you know? So for most of these buildings you would finance for a 30 year mortgage, you don’t need really that much and there are people you can find who have it if you don’t. And you can just pay for that purpose as well.

Jim: [00:39:52] We’re also finding if you, if you’re working in a neighborhood that is maybe disinvested, though, that’s one of the great places that we’re working to try to get local governments, foundations and institutions, whether they’re hospitals, universities or corporations who are civically minded, to be a part of that because if, and we’re working on a project in Memphis that is sort of structured this way, we’re essentially creating a consortium, kind of an umbrella for, as sort of a master developer who sort of say, hey, you know what, we’re gonna create an ecosystem by which many small developers, of which we’ve trained through the Alliance, can actually have the backstop where they don’t need to go get, you know, a huge loan guarantee, right, where, there’s going to be capital and we’re going to be able to know that when we’re going to build five or 10 or 20 buildings at a small area, because there’s a bunch of empty lots and they’re controlled by property owners, we can use one at a time, help each other build up the value in those buildings so that they do regain their value. The first one’s going to be difficult to get the right appraisal for. The second one, less difficult. The third one less. And hopefully by the fourth or fifth or sixth that are all on the same block or nearby to each other, we overcome some of those structural problems that we have in disinvested neighborhoods.

Jim: [00:41:09] And so, I think the biggest thing that we stress when we come to a place and we talk to people in both public, private and then sometimes nonprofit sectors, is that you’re all gonna have to come to the table and think a little bit differently, right. We can band together as neighborhoods and as neighbors and put together enough capital to have the downpayment to buy that house on the corner that Miss Mary used to live in but, you know, she passed and the house got boarded up because people were breaking into it and now it’s sitting vacant but what a great house that was. But, there’s a couple of things we have to overcome and so, being able to have a have a community dialogue about how do we help a bank make a loan in a neighborhood it’s supposed to be making a loan in anyways, but banks are regulated. We have to make sure that banks can check their boxes, too. Well, how do we do that? So community resources being able to bring together different aspects. Governments don’t want to be responsible for buildings, right. But they can provide balance sheets. They can provide downpayment assistance. They can provide facade grants. So if everybody comes together and understands the process, they can figure out how to work it out.

Eve: [00:42:20] Yeah, they could provide relationships with banks and banks to the table. They could provide a lot of things. This has been really fascinating but I want to ask you one wrap-up question before we finish for today. Or actually two, I have to say, and that’s what’s next for you and what’s next for the Alliance?

Jim: [00:42:37] Well, two things. Myself, personally, my wife and I have a small development company called Heirloom Properties. So, we have been evaluating both opportunities we have on our own lot, we have a single family house on a lot that at one point in time, in the past before we bought it, had a garage on it. And so as rules in Minneapolis have changed over the past couple of years, you know, we were looking into an accessory dwelling unit, a backyard cottage. And then, and now with the new rules we’re contemplating, hey, why just stop with a backyard college? Why not a backyard duplex? And so we started thinking about that. But in the meantime, as that happened, we were saving some money up to work on a project like that. There was another vacant lot in our neighborhood that we are pursuing to build a small multiplex. And so, my wife works in affordable housing and so she does project management for big projects. But even, even affordable housing these days is not what it used to be. And so she’s spending a lot of her time trying to figure out how to provide housing for folks who are not at the lowest of low income levels, because at this point, most of our federal and state subsidies are going toward the lowest of low income levels. And that’s great. And that’s desperately needed. But the challenge is, is that’s not enough to house the rest of the folks need to house. And so both her projects at her day job, they’re a bit larger, maybe 60, 70, 80 unit buildings and then some of the products that we’re looking at that are 2 or 6 or 12 units that we’re looking at personally in our in our neighborhood are kind of getting at that in-between scale that we luckily now, as a city, have come to a conclusion that we’re actually going to allow again, we’re actually going to make sure that it’s possible to put more than a single family house on, you know, 60 or 70 percent of the land in our city that was previously allowed to only have one unit on it.

Jim: [00:44:31] So we’re seeing in the last five years that the Alliance has been around, we’re seeing places start to get some of those pieces of the puzzle right. And we’re happy to have been a part both politically as well as from a technical perspective of some of those changes here in Minneapolis. But the work is is large. There are a lot of lot of places that need both cultural and technical changes to the way that they look at real estate, especially at the small scale of buildings, and so the Alliance is kind of doing a couple of things moving forward. We are expanding our services to support governments and non-profits and institutions, many of which have neighborhoods directly, either target neighborhoods if they’re a city or if they are an institution where they have a neighborhood adjacent to the place that they maybe have their campus or facilities. And so, largely those places are trying to help jumpstart a real estate process and/or if you’re, if they’re in a hotter market, provide housing. If you’re a hospital and you employ a massive cross-section of humanity in terms of income levels and household sizes and you’re trying to make sure your workforce is nearby and doesn’t have to commute an hour one way, there’s probably a lack of housing of some type. And so we’re trying to help those places create or recreate a viable housing market in the neighborhood. We’re also helping to make sure that there are neighborhood services. So just because you have housing doesn’t mean you have all the services you need that make it desirable to live there. And so, we’re doing mixed use buildings, especially older ones that you can rehab, which is its own sort of trick in itself. How do you help those pieces come together and in assisting in that way? So, sort of, master developers as well as we continue to expand our services both electronically as well as in person to help cities get their rules right and get their processes to re-legalize, in many cases, the developments they already have, the neighborhoods they already have which have 30 and 40 and 50 foot wide lots and small buildings that don’t quite conform to the rules that were created after those buildings were built. And so we’re unwinding a lot of things, but we’re also starting to create really fun new things. And one of the projects that we’re gonna be working on here this Spring, especially as we have a little downtime, as many of our in-person events have been postponed, is working on getting some of these technical tools to all line up, to have the right financing tool box, to have the right building and zoning recommendations and policies, to be able to use the tool Step Buildings to help people envision the kinds of buildings they want, not just the buildings that someone has figured out maybe they can make some money at doing and we’ll just keep doing it over and over and over. But to say, hey, you know, we want these kind of buildings in our neighborhood. How do we make those happen, and how do we join together as neighbors to maybe do it ourselves if no-one’s going to come for us to do it? And that’s largely the case. No one’s coming to your neighborhood to do the real estate development you want to see, most likely. If they were, they’d be there already. And so we’re trying to help democratize the information so that people can use their relationships and create the local systems to encourage the kind of things and to make them happen, actually just to make them happen. You know, we’re here. We can run around the country and as an organization and just train people all day or give them advice. That’s not what we’re here to do. Our goal is really here to actually help people learn the skills, but to use those skills to actually make the buildings happen, to rehab them, to make, to build them new. That’s that’s what we’re here to do. We’re not here just to talk about this. We got plenty of advocacy and policy organizations. And so we hope that those of you who may be listening to this hearing about us for the first time. If you’re waiting for someone to come, that person you’re waiting for might be you and your neighbor. And so, think about what your role could be as a small developer and even if that’s not your role, we need champions for many of the changes we need to re-legalize our places, to make them vibrant, to make them, and especially in the wake of our current crisis, ant-fragile. To be able to grow in strength through adversity, not just survive. So we think small-scale development is probably the way forward, once we get over the near-term humanitarian crisis of warding off a virus. We’re still going to have the very same housing challenges, the very same economic challenges that we did six weeks ago. And so how do we deal with that as a country and as our neighborhoods?

Eve: [00:49:11] Well, this has been really, really fabulous. And I think that in the next five years, we’re going to see a whole lot more incremental developments. So thank you very much for your time. and I’m sure we’re gonna be talking again.

Jim: [00:49:22] Appreciate the opportunity, Eve. Thank you so much.

Eve: [00:49:27] Bye.

Eve: [00:49:27] That was Jim Kumon who leads the Incremental Development Alliance. The alliance is focused on helping locals strengthen their neighborhoods through small-scale real estate projects. They provide training and technical assistance to anyone interested in tackling projects that you are probably all familiar with. Housing, retail and mixed uses projects on main streets and in neighborhoods. Projects typically range from one to 20 units. These were once everyday development exercises, but have been pushed aside in favor of larger, more efficient projects of scale. Today, it’s a challenge navigating zoning codes and financial institutions to get projects like this built. And that’s what the alliance focuses on.

Eve: [00:50:34] You can find out more about impact real estate investing and access the show notes for today’s episode at my website rethinkrealestateforgood.co. While you’re there, sign up for my newsletter to find out more about how to make money in real estate while building better cities.

Eve: [00:50:51] Thank you so much for spending your time with me today. And thank you, Jim, for sharing your thoughts. We’ll talk again soon. But for now, this is Eve Picker signing off to go make some change.

Image courtesy of Jim Kumon

Elected officials and place-making.

December 6, 2019

Most elected officials have no background in real estate development, architecture, design or place-making. Their knowledge extends no further than the home mortgage process. It should come as no surprise then that elected officials have little if no civic skills. Politicians are elected based on their charm and popularity – not on their ability to understand every issue affecting their constituents. And certainly not on their place-making skills.

This lack of knowledge has had some unfortunate consequences. But if we were to educate local leaders and focus on helping them to develop civic skill sets, perhaps we’d remedy many place-based issues. New development opportunities for investors and developers alike may even emerge.

The following are some mission-critical study items which would turn politicians into place-making ninjas.

Placemaking

Place-making is to study and deploy strategies that relate to designing, planning, and managing our shared public spaces. Place-making draws upon social, cultural and financial capital to better the health, life satisfaction and general well-being of a city’s residents. A basic understanding of place-making can help local authorities to plan long-term improvements for their citizens. Many wildly successful redevelopments have embraced this holistic approach, including edge cities like the Rosslyn–Ballston Corridor in Arlington or Walnut Creek, both of which transformed from sleepy suburbs to among the region’s premier shopping, retail, and residential areas.

Zoning

Zoning refers to rules and regulations enacted to ensure the general welfare of residents through control of the built environment. Zoning should also ensure the most efficient and equitable use of the land resources in a city or town. It can have tremendous impact on the quality, type and accessibility of housing, commercial and industrial businesses, and of course, the character of a place. For instance, a 2016 Presidential Report found that a major contributing factor to the urban affordability crisis is onerous and overzealous zoning laws. Zoning changes have the potential to dramatically reshape and improve an area, and vice versa.

Architecture

The physical structure of the built environment can have a profound effect on the physical and mental well-being of residents. Architectural design elements can alter air quality, physical activity, sunlight and even opportunities available to residents. An embrace of participatory design practices can help create more inclusive communities and bridge the substantial gaps between the quality of housing for lower-income and disadvantaged groups and those with better economic circumstances.

Financing

An in-depth understanding of public and private financial housing resources is an essential piece of the puzzle when it comes to solving housing affordability and sustainability. Alternative methods of generating revenue for new projects, or new ways to incentivize development using bonds, taxes, or federal funds can give municipalities and other governing entities a significant advantage when planning and promoting new development.


It isn’t easy to create fantastic places, inclusive communities and the next generation of comfortable and affordable housing. But there are plenty of educated professionals with the knowledge to make it happen. Let’s make sure we equip elected officials as well, giving them the very best resources and knowledge to tackle today’s challenging urban issues.

Image of Rome, by Eve Picker

Small lots. One solution to the housing problem.

November 1, 2019


At times the housing crisis can seem just insurmountable. Upwards of 11 million Americans spend half of their monthly take-home pay in rent, an increase of more than 30% over the last five years. Almost 25% of housing markets across the country are considered to be unaffordable for the vast majority of citizens. Many different factors influence the rising cost and availability of housing. But there is one that is often overlooked – the design of housing developments. One way to avoid the mistakes of the past and work towards building a better housing future is to think about design from multiple perspectives.

New solutions for old problems

It may seem like housing has only recently become an issue. But while the housing affordability problem has grown in size and scope over the past few decades, it is not unique to our time and place. Over the years, both public and private sectors have tried, but largely failed, to solve the problem. Some infamous examples include housing projects, rent control, Section-8 vouchers, and a whole host of other strategies implemented not just locally but also state and nationwide. In order to change this failing narrative investors and developers should consider identifying and embracing entirely new development models.

Small-lot subdivisions

In the early 2000s, the Los Angeles City Planning Department collaborated with designers, developers, investors, city planners and other stakeholders to tackle the issue of affordable housing. Their collaboration led to several policy ideas that they believed would spur affordable housing production. Among the many ideas proposed at the time, one that stands out is the Small Lot Subdivision Ordinance.

The Planning Department introduced the ordinance in 2005. The Small Lot Ordinance regulates the construction of single-family infill housing in commercial and multi-family neighborhoods. It aims to create a new path for home ownership for first-time buyers by permitting developers to sub-divide small lots and build multiple homes.

Buying a home can be a demanding exercise. Aside from the substantial financial costs, there is also reams of paperwork, lots of professional fees, taxes and many other hurdles along the way. Small-lot or zero-lot-line housing aims to scale down homeownership to make it more accessible to potential buyers, without the use of a traditional condo model – instead, small parcels of land are developed and marketed towards entry-level buyers, or those who may be willing to trade size and aesthetic considerations for the ability to get into a home and start building equity immediately.

At the same time, developers can mitigate expensive land costs through subdivision or the ability to build on off-shape parcels of land, in areas that may not be viable for large-scale development. They get the added bonus of saving on costly risk-insurance premiums that come with developing standard condominium projects.

Unintended consequences

Unfortunately, as is often the case, this new small-lot approach was not as effective as hoped for – as evidenced by the continued and growing housing crisis in the Los Angeles Metro area. As land and housing prices in these areas continued to skyrocket, once affordable small-lot developments became increasingly desirable. Instead of providing a pressure-valve for housing, these homes have been scooped up by speculators, investors, and homeowners of means who wish to buy a piece of these now thriving neighborhoods.

This is not entirely the fault of the originators of the small-lot ordinance. Far from being seen as a panacea to get people into housing, small-lot development was and is viewed as one tool out of many to increase the total housing supply in an area, thus theoretically reducing prices. And it was effective in this goal. What planners in the early 2000s could not account for was the dramatic tide of urbanization, the reversal of residents from suburban and rural areas back to the cities, particularly pronounced in high-dollar regions on the coast, like Los Angeles and San Francisco.

_

Small-lot development has a great deal of potential for making housing more accessible, as long as it is used in conjunction with other potential solutions like mixed-income developments, grants to first-time homeowners, and other well-thought-out, rigorously tested solutions. It is not and was never meant to be an all-encompassing solution to the housing crisis. Rather it was meant to be just one tool in a toolbox, a piece of the puzzle that is the modern housing crisis.  

Image of Rosewood, a small lot subdivision, courtesy of the The 4Corners Group

By right, by design.

October 30, 2019

I spent a most enjoyable hour recording this podcast with Liz Falletta, who is deeply immersed in the nuances of the Los Angeles building codes and their impact on housing production.

Liz just published a book, By-Right l By-Design, an interdisciplinary housing reference text. It studies significant Los Angeles housing design precedents and their related development types. A side-by-side comparison of these projects – real estate development models built in large numbers as of right, versus singular examples of innovative architecture built by variance – reveals new insights for future housing production in Los Angeles and elsewhere. Projects are examined through the lenses of real estate development, urban planning and design, expanding the context in which these works can be understood, evaluated, and, ultimately, built upon.

Liz teaches architectural and urban design at USC’s Price School of Public Policy where she’s taught for over 15 years. Her courses focus on design as an interdisciplinary activity and explore how the intersecting values of architecture, planning and development can inform the design process and improve design outcomes.

In addition to teaching full time, Liz is principal of Falletta Development, which developed one of the first small lot subdivisions in Los Angeles, located on Huntington Drive in El Sereno. She has consulted on many small lot subdivisions throughout Los Angeles and worked as an entitlements consultant on various single and multi-family housing projects. Liz is a licensed architect and a licensed real estate broker in the state of California.

In recognition of the breadth of her expertise, Liz was recently appointed to the City of Los Angeles’ Zoning Advisory Committee (ZAC). This 21-member group is the first line of critique for the city’s recode LA project, a $5 million dollar, five year plan to overhaul the zoning code. Liz is leading the Housing Working Group, a subcommittee of the ZAC working to prioritize issues of housing production, affordability and sustainability throughout the recode project. Ms. Falletta is also a member of the California Planning Roundtable.

Insights and Inspirations

  • Through research for her book “By-right, By-design” Liz learned that more design is not always better.
  • She found that some of the best housing solutions might not be the most innovative designs.
  • Over the years her students have evolved from not caring one iota about design, to caring very much today. And that bodes well for the future of cities.
  • To Liz impactful real estate projects are those that balance design, planning and real estate development well.

Information and Links

  • You can buy Liz’s book, By-Right l By-Design here.
  • Liz loves the Penland School of Craft in NC. She’s been several times for a creative recharge and plans to go more often in the future. (I want to go too.)
  • Something important to Liz is her participation in the Ross Minority Program in Real Estate (Home | Lusk Center for Real Estate) fostering minority participation in real estate development in emerging communities.
Read the podcast transcript here

Eve Picker: Hey, everyone, this is Eve Picker, and if you listen to this podcast series, you’re going to learn how to make some change.

Eve Picker: Hi there. Thanks so much for joining me today for the latest episode of Impact Real Estate Investing. My guest today is Liz Falletta. Liz teaches architectural and urban design at USC’s Price School of Public Policy, where she’s taught for over 15 years. But that’s not all Liz does by a long stretch. Liz is also a small-scale developer, having developed, painfully, one of LA’s first small-lot subdivision projects. She sits on LA’s Zoning Advisory Committee, which is tasked with critiquing the city’s Recode LA Project, a $5 million five-year plan to overhaul the zoning code. Last, but not least, Liz has just published a book, “By-Right, By-Design,” where she researched housing solutions. Be sure to go to EvePicker.com to find out more about Liz on the show notes page for this episode and be sure to sign up for my newsletter so you can access information about impact real estate investing and get the latest news about the exciting projects on my crowdfunding platform, Small Change.

Eve Picker: Hi, Liz. Thank you very much for joining me all the way from California. It’s earlier for you than me, right?

Liz Falletta: Yes.

Eve Picker: I know you teach architecture and urban design at the University of Southern California’s Price School of Public Policy. I think you also have your own development firm, wrote a book, and you were one of the first developers to develop a small-lot subdivision in LA. You’re a very busy woman.

Liz Falletta: Yes. I do teach design across disciplines at the Price School at USC. I’m an architect and, for a long time, I taught in our architecture school, but now I’m exclusively in our policy-planning environment. Thinking about design from multiple perspectives is something that I do a lot. I guess it’s been a long time now since I did that small-lot subdivision project, and I think I’ve blocked a lot of it out.

Eve Picker: Well, I wanted to hear a little bit about your development work. What prompted you to test out the small-lot subdivision? It might be worth telling our listeners a little bit about that zoning-code overlay, which I kind of find fascinating.

Liz Falletta: Sure. The small-lot subdivision came out of an effort by the LA Planning Department, in 2004/2005, to really address housing and our mounting housing crisis, which is now even more of a crisis. They actually invited an interdisciplinary group of designers, developers, planners, other stakeholders in housing to brainstorm what are some ideas, from a policy-planning perspective, that could engender housing production.

Liz Falletta: The small-lot, or, aka, zero-lot-line housing was one of hundreds, I think, and was really the one that got pursued. I think the idea was if you were able to scale down homeownership and also allow development outside a condominium model … Because, really, what the small-lot allows is feasible homeownership on a smaller scale. Contractors and builders don’t have to get onerous builders risk insurance like they do when they build condominiums.

Eve Picker: Interesting.

Liz Falletta: Yeah, no, it’s … I think planners really thought that the smaller scale would create for more affordable housing.

Eve Picker: I’ve seen some of that, and it’s not affordable, is it?

Liz Falletta: No, no. That is the thing that struck me the most is that, if you build a small-lot in Venice on the west side, it’s going to be $2 million a unit, because it’s the west side. Build one in Silver Lake, it’ll be a $1.5 million. Smaller-scale solutions, I think, are a good option. I think ultimately, after having done one, and having seen how the small-lot has evolved since I did the one that I worked on, I think it’s one tool amongst many [cross talk]

Eve Picker: I think what it does do is it sort of maximizes the use of infrastructure that’s already in place. I know that there are cities all over the world kind of densifying areas through zoning so that they can maximize their transit [cross talk] and utility lines. One little house in the middle of a very large lot in a highly desirable neighborhood doesn’t really … It just makes the sprawl go further, right?

Liz Falletta: Exactly. I think one of the things that was actually brilliant about the way the ordinance was written is that it didn’t have anything to do with the zone change at all. It had nothing to do with zoning. It just allowed you to use lower-density, multifamily-zoned sites in a different way. They might have been built as apartments or condominiums before, but this allowed … We have a restricted-density zone, for example, probably 20 dwelling units an acre, density-wise; it allowed those sites to be developed with for-sale housing, which, at the time, was … The small-lot subdivision came out pre-crash.

Eve Picker: If you were to rewrite that today, what would you change about that small-lot subdivision overlay?

Liz Falletta: That’s such a good question. I do think … Because it’s actually not an overlay, but I think using it as an overlay, and being more targeted and specific about where it could be used and how, I think, would be helpful [cross talk]

Eve Picker: So, it’s LA-wide. It’s just a change for the zoning-

Liz Falletta: It’s LA-wide, yeah [cross talk] It’s an ordinance that allows you to develop with a different model. It was sort of marketed as small houses on small lots, and it really has turned into giant houses on small lots.

Eve Picker: Yeah.

Liz Falletta: So, I think [cross talk]

Eve Picker: It’s an interesting- it’s like an interesting lesson in how much you’d have to think about the details of a code like that.

Liz Falletta: Oh, yeah. Also, you have to … I feel terrible saying this – you have to think about the bad actors.

Eve Picker: Yeah. I think that’s right.

Liz Falletta: Who’s going to abuse this, and how, and-

Eve Picker: So, this is not a democracy. It’s [cross talk]

Liz Falletta: Yeah. How do we head off the bad acting? I think we saw a lot of really bulky design that communities pushed back against. You saw a lot of projects … There were a lot of single-family homes that were built on multifamily-zoned sites, so you saw a lot of turnover of those kinds of sites, and communities … You know, communities, in the main, don’t really understand zoning.

Eve Picker: Yes, that’s right.

Liz Falletta: And were very upset to see houses being demolished to build these giant things. Then a lot of rent-controlled small-scale housing from the ’20s, ’30s, and ’40s has been demolished to build them, also.

Eve Picker: Maybe even just saying that if you have the privilege of adding more units to a lot like that, there’s a maximum size to each of them would have kind of stopped that. It’s interesting. What other development are you doing?

Liz Falletta: I have done development in the past. I did two or three small-lots, also, that, in the end, didn’t get built. Then, the market crash happened, and then I started teaching full-time, and then, I started writing this book, which, it turns out, takes a long time to write a book. So [cross talk]

Eve Picker: Yes. So that’s taken over. Okay- [cross talk]

Liz Falletta: -yeah, but I am actually, I should say, looking to do another development. I feel like I learned a lot by doing all the research for the book. I would like to get back into small-scale development in LA.

Eve Picker: What’s interesting about small-scale development?

Liz Falletta: Personally, it’s just the financial scale [cross talk]

Eve Picker: -in LA, small-scale is still really big, and expensive, right?

Liz Falletta: -yeah, still pretty expensive. But also, I think that’s where we can build successful communities. Not that we can’t have large-scale communities that are successful, but I think neighborhood change in giant steps is not palatable to communities. I think smaller-scale changes can be really impactful [cross talk]

Eve Picker: Right. It’s a way to innovate change slowly and gently, right?

Liz Falletta: Yeah, and in ways that people can embrace and see immediate benefit from, as opposed to this 200-unit housing project that assembled 10 lots, and suddenly, the neighborhood is totally different.

Eve Picker: Yeah, I think that’s right. Your work focuses a lot on LA. What conditions have you found that are unique to LA versus just across the country [cross talk] in the research that you’ve done?

Liz Falletta: One of the reasons why this research was well-suited to LA is we really do have a strong history of design innovation, but also a really interesting history of multifamily housing and different multifamily housing types. They’re different types than we see maybe in Chicago or New York. Then we also see these types have persisted. Our city is younger than many on the East Coast, so these types are still extant in a way that maybe they aren’t in some other communities. I think, also, LA has the reputation – and it’s somewhat true – super pro-growth; really driven by development and developers. There’s long been a close association with the city with the development- development as a profession.

Eve Picker: Be sure to go to EvePicker.com and sign up for my free educational newsletter about impact real estate investing. You’ll be among the first to hear about new projects you can invest in. That’s EvePicker.com. Thanks so much.

Eve Picker: Your book is called “By-Right, By-Design.” I’d love to know how you came to that name.

Liz Falletta: So, by-right, as I’m sure you know, just means by-right projects can be built with ministerial approval – approvals where nobody can say … If you meet all the criteria, and the criteria are laid out, nobody can deny approval for your project. Developers really like by-right projects, or permissionless projects, because they’re a lot more certain, and they’re less risky, and they usually take less time. Developers would prefer to build by-right if they can. That’s become increasingly impossible in Los Angeles. There’s been a lot of discussion about by-right housing- elevating the threshold of by-right and actually making more projects able to be built by-right.

Liz Falletta: For my purposes, I needed a second category that was a corollary to by-right, and that’s where by-design came from, because the book really looks at a set of six case studies that look at really famous Los Angeles housing precedents by famous architects, aka by-design, with their by-right counterparts. By-design could also mean by-discretion, or by-variance. All of the by-design projects actually required some sort of discretionary approval to be built.

Eve Picker: Interesting. And do you think they’re better?

Liz Falletta: Not always, actually.

Eve Picker: That’s interesting.

Liz Falletta: No, I was … Because one of the questions I had when I started out on this is like I wonder if all these projects that are really famous, you know, that I studied in architecture school, I wonder if they broke the rules; if they could only do these innovative things by not following the rules. It was true. They all required variances of different kinds. I don’t think being by-design means they’re necessarily better, or better designed, or that if they’re in the by-right category, they’re poorly designed.

Liz Falletta: One of the things that really started this research is some annoyance at the fact that architects always … A. they always believe that unless it was designed by them, it’s not really well-designed, and B. that – I should also say that I’m a licensed architect – but that they really thought more design was always better in every situation, and it’s not necessarily true. I was frustrated-

Eve Picker: That’s a pretty damning thing for an architect to say.

Liz Falletta: I know. I’m sorry [cross talk] bad. I guess typically what I say is I think design really, really, really matters. It just doesn’t matter in the way that many architects think it does.

Eve Picker: How so?

Liz Falletta: I think architects are trained to be innovative all the time, to be focused on image, to be focused on creating things that are new, that are this, that are that. I think that allows them to not see, or to discount other aspects of design that are maybe tried and true, or repetitive, or something that actually really matter to quality of life; because I think the design of housing, for example, really matters, but I think what really matters about it is a lot about density, about spatial organization, about circulation, about how common space and open spaces organize. I should say, also, I think there are a lot of amazing architects doing really great projects who don’t maybe share these attitudes, but I think the profession focuses less on these things; doesn’t feel like these things are as important.

Eve Picker: Yeah. As you know, I’m also a trained architect, and I went to the dark side, too, and became a developer.

Liz Falletta: Yay!

Eve Picker: Yeah, but, you know, I have a sort of similar frustrations with the architecture profession, which I adore. I think that architects are trained in a unique and priceless way, but I think they are not necessarily … Especially young architects don’t really understand how much they’ve learned and how they can put that to use in other ways and follow a traditional path in sort of that branded architecture studio that may not always make the world better.

Liz Falletta: Yeah.

Eve Picker: I wish they’d learn a little more about real estate development, as well, because the pragmatic side of architecture is sometimes overlooked, right? I remember having conversations with an architect about the fact that five units would be so much nicer than six. I’m thinking, “Well, five units won’t be built and six will be …” It’s that sort of basic thinking, yeah …

Liz Falletta: Yeah, because that sixth unit is your profit; that’s your cash flow [cross talk].

Eve Picker: -or I’ll break even. It may not even be profit, you know?

Liz Falletta: Exactly. One of the reasons I wanted to write this book is because I wanted to help architects, and planners, and real estate developers better understand each other’s goals and values so that that architect could use his understanding of the profit motive in real estate to get his or her own goals addressed, or met, or something. Because, if architects just sit there and say real estate developers are terrible because they don’t understand that the five-unit design is going to be better than the six-unit design, that’s completely unhelpful. It’s not going to get us anywhere.

Liz Falletta: I think what architects don’t understand is they have an interest, a vested interest, in the planning and real estate development strategies of the projects they design, right? A good example from the book is Gregory Ain’s Mar Vista Tract, which had a very enlightened developer who had done some development in the ’20s, or early 20’s; hadn’t done anything in the ’30s, during the Depression, and really wanted to build a community, which is fantastic. Ain was also very interested in that. They got a lot of pushback from lenders, and they got a lot of pushback from the city planning department, in terms of how it was laid out, and the style the houses; did it have flat roofs or not? Ultimately, they could only build half of the tract, and that half was a financial failure. So, if people wonder why we don’t have modernist communities, that is one reason.

Eve Picker: Yeah.

Liz Falletta: They had to sell off the rest of their land. and it got developed in the traditional kind of manner.

Eve Picker: Talking about by-right, I know you’re a fan of the recent offering we had on Small Change, Bungalow Gardens, which is in your neck of the woods. It’s a little homeless housing project. I believe that’s a by-right project [cross talk] and I’m wondering why you like that project.

Liz Falletta: I personally would love to build a bungalow court for myself. My goal – I think a lot of people have this goal – it’s going to be hard to do here in Los Angeles. Everybody wants to build a compound, where you can live with your friends and have communal dinners. Actually, also, I should say that the first place I lived when I moved to Los Angeles was a very small bungalow court, and that-

Eve Picker: Oh, cool!

Liz Falletta: It was interesting. I moved out here from D.C. to go to SCI-Arc, actually, for grad school. Finding housing was really interesting, because I had lived in a rowhouse, I think, in D.C., in a basement apartment. I’d never encountered a bungalow court, but I was driving around, and they’re just … Everybody loves them. They are the best places to live.

Eve Picker: That’s really sweet.

Liz Falletta: You know your neighbors immediately [cross talk].

Eve Picker: How big are they, typically?

Liz Falletta: Oh, gosh. They can be relatively large. The one I lived in was probably six units, eight units-

Eve Picker: For our listeners, the bungalow court typology, I think, start being built in the ’50s, right?

Liz Falletta: Really much earlier than that. Probably the latest ones are in the ’30s.

Eve Picker: In the ’30s. This little one that Jason and John built – a building, Bungalow Gardens – is the first one in almost 100 years.

Liz Falletta: You can’t build them now, mainly because of the parking requirements, but also just underlying density is reflected in land values, so you can’t … Basically, if I wanted to build a bungalow court, I would overpay for land and then under-develop it. Part of what makes the bungalow court work, really, is the scale and the individuality of units.

Liz Falletta: Many of the units actually- these were often built for tourists, because people would come to LA for their health, but would also … It took a long time to get here, then, so you stayed for months. They had all this built-in furniture and fun things that allowed you to live in the unit, easily, for a few months, as opposed to having to bring all your belongings and actually move here for real.

Liz Falletta: They’re very efficient; they’re laid out, really, very functional. They’ve got a lot … They’re high, in terms of individuality, so you have a lot of identity with your unit and your space, but then there’s that communal scale. That actual courtyard usually then connects to the block and the street [cross talk]

Eve Picker: It’s very nice [cross talk]

Liz Falletta: -if we could all live in bungalow courts, we would [cross talk]

Eve Picker: -maybe the issue is not … Maybe the issue is not just by-right, and by-design, but also by-cost, because the cost of land clearly drives development, as well, right?

Liz Falletta: You have done your deal when you bought the land, right?

Eve Picker: Yes.

Liz Falletta: If you overpay for land, you’re done. You have determined sort of what kind of project you’re going to do and whether that project’s going to be a success or not.

Eve Picker: How does all of that fit in with affordable housing?

Liz Falletta: One of the other benefits of building small-scale housing and even this- the whole explosion of ADUs is many of those are going to hopefully provide inherently affordable housing, as opposed to subsidized affordable housing. Getting subsidized affordable housing, we just haven’t been able to build a huge number of units. There’s a lot of competition for those funds. We now have transit-oriented communities. It does incentivize the development of affordable units in mixed-use projects. You get some extra density and some parking reductions, if you’re near transit, and they have a pretty liberal definition of transit. I do think that is generating way more affordable units than maybe some of our other mechanisms have in the past [cross talk]

Eve Picker: Interesting. Zoning becomes a serious mechanism for affordable housing. Actually, that brings me to the other thing I’d like to talk to you about. I think you were appointed to LA’s Zoning Advisory Committee? The Recode Project-

Liz Falletta: Yeah. Mm-hmm.

Eve Picker: You’re one of not many people who are critiquing that and leading a subcommittee on housing, right?

Liz Falletta: Yes. I was just talking about this with my students yesterday and realizing that I needed to check in with people at the City, because we haven’t had a meeting in a while. LA’s zoning code that we are still using today was officially created in 1946, even though we had a code prior to that. We had residential districts as early as 1908.

Liz Falletta: Our code has been frustrating to use for … It makes it really difficult for people to do good projects; the kind of projects that the city wants to see. Mixed-use has always been a problem with our code, because it’s very single-use oriented, so it’s confusing to use. There was also a substantial sort of phantom code, or ghost code that, if you were in the know, you knew [cross talk]

Eve Picker: Oh, really?

Liz Falletta: -you didn’t? Yeah, that wasn’t very transparent. It meant that certain people got certain favors. The planning department wanted to do several things. One, make the code more user-friendly; I think, two, make it more modular. Basically, it’s a form-based light code. It disassociates use and form. The idea is that the modularity will make the code more flexible, but then, also, as people want to do different kinds of projects, the tools are already there, in terms of making a zone combination that will facilitate that kind of project. I think the third thing they wanted to do is elevate by-right processes. So-.

Eve Picker: Interesting.

Liz Falletta: -allow more projects to be built by-right, because virtually no projects are built by-right.

Eve Picker: Yeah, and the entitlement process takes a really long time in LA [cross talk]

Liz Falletta: Oh, yeah. No, the first small-lot project I did was the real education because I was like, “This makes no sense …”

Eve Picker: How long did it take?

Liz Falletta: Oh, my God. At least two years, yeah. It was like banging your head against a wall.

Eve Picker: Now, I know, with the Bungalow Court listing, I talked to them probably for two years before we listed it. All along the way, there was entitlement, entitlement, entitlement, right up until the end.

Liz Falletta: Yeah. What I learned is that part of that is inherent in development. Every week, something happens that’s going to kill your project. It’s just how it is, here. I would get upset and there would be crying. Finally, after a few months of this, I was like, “Oh, this is what development is. This is how it works. Okay. I need not get so upset about this, because it’ll kill me, A, and B. that’s the work site traffic control inspector. Sure, he’s going to deny your work site traffic control plan …” That I even had to have a work site traffic control plan was ridiculous, but-

Eve Picker: How many units are we talking about?

Liz Falletta: Four!

Eve Picker: That’s crazy. That’s crazy.

Liz Falletta: It’s crazy, and they already existed. I was using the ordinance. The ordinance was silent on whether it had to be new construction or if it could be existing construction. Basically, I bought two duplexes on a big lot, and cut the duplexes apart, and cut the big lot into four.

Eve Picker: And it took two years to get it approved.

Liz Falletta: Yeah.

Eve Picker: That’s nuts.

Liz Falletta: It was insane. Then they wanted me to build a public sewer.

Eve Picker: Oh …

Liz Falletta: Yeah! It was … I think my experience was maybe more extreme than some.

Eve Picker: I had the public sewer experience in Pittsburgh once.

Liz Falletta: Did you?

Eve Picker: Yes. The sewer was out on the main street, and they’d been wanting to move it into the alley for a long time, behind the building. Our building was at least 600 feet from the crossroad. They wanted us to lay an entire line to the [cross talk] So, every other building on the both sides of the alley could feed into it. It was really awful.

Liz Falletta: Yeah. No, they wanted me to build an eight-inch line with a manhole on my property for four one-bedroom/one-bath units.

Eve Picker: Now you’re in the middle of the Recode Project. How long has that been going on?

Liz Falletta: You know, it was supposed to be a five-year project, so it’s gone on six and maybe seven years, now.

Eve Picker: For a five-year project?

Liz Falletta: Yeah, five years; $5 million dollars. It’s going to be interesting to see how it plays out.

Eve Picker: Do you think that it’s going to be successful? Are there pitfalls that you’re seeing already?

Liz Falletta: There are several. There are many pitfalls, I think. One is mixed messaging about the project and what it would do. I think they promoted it differently to different constituencies. That’s fine, but they have not been very clear about that. I think, two, they have- this is a critique of urban planning. I think there’s a whole sector of urban planning that feels like if they did 800 community outreach meetings, they’ve done their job, and I don’t think that’s the measure of whether this is successful or not [cross talk] I kept getting emails; “We’ve had 800 meetings …” and I’m like, “Great …”

Eve Picker: Wow, that’s a lot meetings.

Liz Falletta: It was a lot of meetings. It definitely was. Then, thirdly, these zones are basically being applied in a community planning process … I unfortunately know very little about planning on the other cities or the East Coast but, in California, every city has a general plan, which is sort of the constitution for growth and development; has different elements. One of them is about land use and planning for land use. In the city of LA, we have 35 different community plans that basically apply zoning and apply various planning tools to specific parcels and talk about how neighborhoods are going to grow and change.

Eve Picker: Right.

Liz Falletta: We update … We don’t update those very often. Five or six years ago, we’d updated four or five in the past 20 years. We didn’t update them very often. What that meant for the zoning code was that most communities wouldn’t see the benefit of this new code for decades. We’d have a dual kind of code system. The mayor, then, vowed to update all the community plans within six years. I don’t know the status of that, right now [cross talk]

Eve Picker: It sounds like a monster project.

Liz Falletta: Yeah, no, it’s just … I fear that it was oversold, and people aren’t really going to see the benefit of it.

Eve Picker: That’s a shame. What do you think is the best possible outcome for this code overhaul for LA?

Liz Falletta: What all of us really focused on was identifying and reducing the barriers, which are legion. But then there was a lot of … I think there are a lot of people out there … I’m one of these people who want- I want to do interesting small projects, and I can’t, for a variety of reasons. You have to cobble together … It’s so interesting to me that the Bungalow Gardens project really could only exist because it’s in a TOC designation, because they don’t have to have parking.

Eve Picker: Oh, and probably because the developers are non-profit [cross talk] they spent two years on that project, and I don’t know what for-profit developer could do that.

Liz Falletta: Right. No. A for-profit developer would slide right past that project, or at least definitely not do it in the same way-

Eve Picker: Yet they got an award for innovation on that project. So, there’s something really broken, right?

Liz Falletta: Yes, that is- that’s exactly right. Part of the reason, also, that I wrote the book is I think … We’re having to have a citywide conversation about housing and how to produce it. Our ability to have that conversation is just as broken as all the tools that we use to try to generate housing – affordable housing that costs $500,000 to $700,000 a unit to build. I’m even beginning to think that these sort of silos that we exist in are a problem, when we think about gentrification, also. It stops the conversation. We just don’t get anywhere.

Eve Picker: Yeah, I think that’s right. It’s kind of depressing.

Liz Falletta: Yes. I’m sorry. No, I mean-

Eve Picker: You know, John Perfitt said something, actually, in the podcast I did with him and Jason about the work they do as a nonprofit housing developer that I think was really sad. That was engagement of community is very difficult for them and very expensive, if they’re going to … It’s kind of had the reverse impact on involving community because if they’re going to spend a long time on a housing project, they simply can’t afford to have it shut down by someone at the end of a two-year process. They don’t have the money for it. That means that they almost have to avoid some community engagement, which is kind of the reverse that you want, right?

Liz Falletta: I think that’s one of the big reasons, also, that you’ve seen more housing initiatives in California at the state level. People interested in taking local control over housing away, because communities have shut down projects, basically because they’re only looking at them from a singular perspective, which is their own. We can’t move forward, as a city, with that.

Liz Falletta: For a long time, Christopher Hawthorne, who is now the city designer; I forget exactly what his title is, but he was the architecture critic for the LA Times for a long time. Then, Mayor Garcetti hired him recently. Basically, his analysis of the city really was for a long time we had so much- enough space to be 10 different cities. We could be the industrial engine. We could be the idyllic single-family home and the garden. We could be the diverse multifamily community. But now, we’ve run out of space, so all of those images and versions of the city are competing with one another and conflicting. We have to have a higher-level conversation. There needs to be a lot better education of the public about housing and how housing works [cross talk]

Eve Picker: -just on a broader level, impact investing … How do you think it’s aligned with real estate and the importance of it in your mind?

Liz Falletta: Well, like I said, I was super-excited to be able to invest in John and Jason’s project. I actually have been teaching design to real estate development students for about 15 years, 16 years; increasingly horrifying amount of time. It’s interesting, the evolution of the students that I’ve encountered, because when I first started doing it, none of them thought design was important. None of them wanted to be there. I got ones on my evaluations. Everybody hated me. It was demoralizing and terrible.

Liz Falletta: Now, the students are not only aware of issues of gentrification; really aware of the perception communities have of developers and development; aware of social issues, like homelessness. Also, they’re really interested in building communities, and innovative communities. I think the interest in impact investing is going to track that. I think my generation screwed it up or it was part of the problem. I think the students- I think kids in their 20s and 30s are going to really change things.

Eve Picker: They really care about the world, I think, in a way-

Liz Falletta: They do. Climate change … I think they really understand development as a responsibility, as opposed to a way to make money. Don’t get me wrong; they want to make money, totally, but it’s interesting; a lot of them have fathers or mothers who are developers, and their parents’ development practices really bother them. They’re like, “You know, my dad doesn’t spend any money on this part; this thing that I think is really important.”

Eve Picker: Interesting, yeah-

Liz Falletta: Things are changing.

Eve Picker: I think that’s right. I think my parents didn’t think that way either. It’s a definite shift, which is great.

Liz Falletta: Yeah, and I’m wondering how it happened. I’m not sure I know. I don’t know if you have children, because I don’t. I just see the students and see how they how they shift and change.

Eve Picker: Yeah. I think climate change is probably- is there, and people are thinking about it at a much earlier age. That surely has to impact the way they think about the world. Then, there’s so much access to information easily-

Liz Falletta: That’s true.

Eve Picker: -that a generation or two ago, we just didn’t have [cross talk] there’s more knowledge to-  or more access to knowledge, whether it’s fake or not. I mean, you have to sift through it all, but there’s just more access. I don’t know. I think all of those things together change things.

Liz Falletta: I think, too, their expectations have changed, in terms of how they’re going to live. They don’t all assume they’re going to buy single-family homes; either because that’s out of reach or because it’s just not something they’re going to value-.

Eve Picker: Or because it’s illegal in some cities, now.

Liz Falletta: Right, exactly.

Eve Picker: So, I’m going to I’m going to sign off now. We’ve been talking for a while, but I wanted to ask you three questions that I ask everyone. That is what’s the key factor that makes a real estate project impactful to you? What really matters to you?

Liz Falletta: I talk about triple-win projects in the book, and these are projects that perform well from the perspective of design, planning, and development. For me, that’s the real hard hallmark of a good quality project. Because the interesting thing to me was the projects that balanced those perspectives from their inception really were the more resilient projects, over time, in terms of being valuable projects from all three perspectives. The Village Green, which is a really famous Garden City garden-apartment projects in LA is a really good example. It was definitely innovative, when it was built, but also very financially successful, when it was built, and really created a community. It’s performed well in all those measures, throughout its history.

Eve Picker: That’s really interesting. Other than by raising money, do you think that crowdfunding could benefit small-scale or impact real estate developers like you?

Liz Falletta: Yeah, I hadn’t really thought about using it as a tool, but I do think, as John and Jason talked about, it is an interesting way to do community outreach and involve neighbors in projects. I think that is pretty brilliant, giving people the opportunity to invest in something next door. I think it’s probably also a really great networking tool. I could imagine that, for John and Jason, the people who invested in this project are probably going to invest in other projects [cross talk]

Eve Picker: -we can only hope, right?

Liz Falletta: Yeah, no, I’m up for it-

Eve Picker: We hope that they build more. Then, if there was one thing that you would change to improve real estate development in the United States, what would that be?

Liz Falletta: Oh, gosh, what would that be? That’s such a good question. I think it really comes down to bad acting. I think a lot of our policy is retroactive and is responding to bad acting instead of promoting high-quality, community-oriented projects created by people with good intention.

Eve Picker: Oh, yeah.

Liz Falletta: So, I guess that’s really about changing the culture of the profession, which I do think is changing. Maybe it could change quicker.

Eve Picker: Well, thank you very much. I really enjoyed talking to you and good luck with everything.

Liz Falletta: Yeah, thank you. You, as well.

Eve Picker: Actually, I have another question for you, Liz, I think I’m going to add in. What’s next for you, now you’ve written the book?

Liz Falletta: Oh, gosh, I have to say that-

Eve Picker: A break?

Liz Falletta: -yes, it is … I’m doing some book promotion, and I am looking for a real estate project right now, in between teaching, and also sort of … I’ve been teaching now for nearly 25 years, and I’m wondering if it might be time for a larger-scale change; maybe doing something more entrepreneurial with real estate.

Eve Picker: Oh, wow.

Liz Falletta: Yeah.

Eve Picker: Keep me posted!

Liz Falletta: I will.

Eve Picker: Okay. Thanks, Liz.

Liz Falletta: Okay, thanks so much. Take care.

Eve Picker: That was Liz Falletta. What an amazing woman. Here are some of the takeaways from what Liz shared with us today. First, through research from her book, “By-Right, By-Design,” Liz learned that more design is not always better. She also learned that some of the best housing solutions might not be the most innovative designs. Over the years, her students have evolved from not caring one iota about design to caring very much today, and that bodes well for the future of cities.

Eve Picker: You can find out more about impact real estate investing and access the show notes for today’s episode at my website, EvePicker.com. While you’re there, sign up for my newsletter to find out more about how to make money in real estate while building better cities. Thank you so much for spending your time with me today, and thank you, Liz, for sharing your thoughts with me. We’ll talk again soon, but for now, this is Eve Picker signing off to go make some change.

Image courtesy of Liz Falletta.

Closing loopholes for better neighborhoods.

October 25, 2019

Unfortunately, loopholes are far too easy to find in the real estate development industry. They are hiding in plain sight in lots of places. Taxation, zoning, affordable housing programs or even government incentives jointly provide an abundance of loopholes and unscrupulous developers will find a way to take advantage of them. For many years, unethical, or at the very least short-sighted development has been the norm. Now, with the rise of sustainable and socially conscious development, a new generation of investors and developers are shedding the profit-driven dogma of the past to work towards a more ethical real estate industry. This includes creating more livable and equitable housing which can generate returns similar to traditional, profit-driven development projects.

The worst outcome

Perhaps the worst outcome of unethical real estate development is displacement. Projects initially pitched to provide a rebirth and revitalization for underserved neighborhoods can instead, sometimes unwittingly, lead towards gentrification, in turn driving long-term residents from their communities and homes.

Many areas slated for “urban renewal” in the past were primarily filled with single-family homes while the neighborhood itself was zoned for both single-family and multifamily properties. This provided a particularly attractive opportunity to profit-driven developers since the density of the neighborhood could be increased with apartments and condominiums many of which were out of the price range of current residents. This in turn led to a great deal of residential turnover in these communities and an acceleration of the harms associated with that turnover.

Community pushback

After years of such unchecked development, many communities- and aligned developers and investors- have started to push back. More appropriate zoning, sustainable and energy efficient housing, community cohesion, walkability, bike-ability and equality, amongst others, have moved to the forefront of the conversation. Often these conversations have been led by local organizations dedicated to preserving neighborhood character and ensuring positive growth in housing and commercial enterprises. Now, single-minded profit-driven real estate development is being supplanted by a collaborative approach- with local stakeholders and community-minded real estate professionals, developers and investors all talking to each other to plan for the best community outcomes.

Mix it up

Bigger or more of the same is not always better if your goal is to create diverse and livable communities. Studies have shown that mixed-income neighborhoods thrive compared to monoculture neighborhoods primarily comprised of a single social or economic class. Many of the worst examples of suburban sprawl or overzealous urban luxury development prioritize high-income, white-collar workers and families at the expense of others who may not be as socioeconomically well-off. 

These monoculture neighborhoods can be islands that residents commute to and from, only serving a small and elite sub-set of our country’s demographic. And let’s not forget what these isolated communities spawn – environmental and health issues related to commuting, lack of walkability and lack of long-term sustainability. These neighborhoods also degrade over time from A to B and C Class housing, and residents are left with vast tracts of homes, with little commercial or social activity within the bounds of their neighborhood. 

Smaller steps

A focus on developing smaller projects, such as micro/economical single-family homes, duplexes, or apartment buildings can avoid many of the headaches and harms that come with large-scale, homogenous development. Rather than knocking down existing affordable housing, or dominating an area with mega-structures, developers can work to maximize usable real estate and land (even non-traditional, unique and oddly shaped lots) while largely preserving the character and makeup of the neighborhood. These smaller projects can be much easier to finance for developers, as capital investment costs will be lower. And investors can benefit from the diversification value of multiple small projects as opposed to a single large project.

_

We can’t change the mistakes of the past, but we can work to ensure they are not repeated. Housing affects every facet of our society, from employment opportunities to the environment, to social and economic justice within a neighborhood. While legislative and community-based solutions are absolutely necessary to weed out bad actors and unethical development, pro-social developers and investors can also make a contribution to a future with carefully planned communities and neighborhoods.

Image, Riverview Terrace, courtesy of Small Change.

« Previous Page
Next Page »

Primary Sidebar

sign up here

APPLY TO BE A PODCAST GUEST

More to See

(no title)

February 22, 2025

Bellevue Montgomery

February 11, 2025

West Lombard

January 28, 2025

FOLLOW

  • LinkedIn
  • RSS

Tag Cloud

Affordable housing Climate Community Creative economy Crowdfunding Design Development Environment Equity Finance FinTech Gentrification Impact Investing Mobility Offering Opportunity zones PropTech Technology Visionary Zoning

Footer

©rethinkrealestateforgood.co. The information contained on this website is for general information purposes only. Nothing on this website is intended as investment, legal, tax or accounting strategy or advice, or constitutes an offer to sell, solicit or buy securities.
 
Any projections discussed or made may not be accurate and do not guarantee a specific outcome. All projections or investments are subject to risk due to uncertainty and change, including the risk of loss, and past performance is not indicative of future results. You should make independent decisions and seek independent advice regarding investments or strategies mentioned on this website.

Recent

  • The Mulberry
  • Mount Vernon Plaza
  • The Seven
  • Real estate and women.
  • Oculis Domes.

Search

Categories

Climate Community Crowdfunding Development Equity Fintech Investing Mobility Proptech Visionary

 

Copyright © 2026 · Magazine Pro on Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in