Neat Little Box; Assessing the Questionable Ethos of Affordable Housing in Poway
A research proposal submitted to the Urban Studies and Planning Program
University of California at San Diego
Dylan Hecklau
USP 186 Section A02
Dhecklau@ucsd.edu
October 29th 2009
Abstract
Current research on affordable housing exposes the beneficence of selecting sites
in areas of high opportunity, specifically intimating that affordable housing has
significantly more utility when located in proximity to careers, services, and the cultural
and recreational accoutrement of the community. This has a deleterious effect on the
affordable housing in Poway, California and raises legitimate concerns. Analysis of the
developments in Poway exposes a dichotomy between the affordable housing sites in
South Poway and the luxurious homes of athletes and celebrities in North Poway in terms
of access and opportunity. An appraisal of the opportunities available to residents of
affordable housing in Poway will expose how one’s geographical position can severely
affect social and financial wellbeing. Specifically, the study will be based on spatial
analysis of the polarized regions of North and South Poway and will seek to answer
questions related to residents’ capacity for a financially and socially viable existence
through comparative analysis, observation, and a flexible research design. This
exploration will contribute to the literature and findings concerning affordable housing in
California, and will be critically important given the state’s current fiscal crisis.
Key Terms: Affordable Housing, Opportunity-Based Housing, Site-Selection, Community
Access, NIMBY, Property-Values
Introduction
The city of Poway California has evolved much from its incorporation in 1980 as a ‘City
in the Country” and is today a desirable community for affluent and wealthy individuals seeking
expansive properties and variation from traditional 20th century suburban expansion. Yet these
areas of affluence, aesthetic splendor and wealth do not describe the entirety of Poway or its
residents, and a colloquial dichotomy has been forged between the prestige of Northern Poway
and its foil, Southern Poway where land use, economic activity, and cultural/aesthetic assets are
starkly contrasted to that of Northern Poway. Affordable housing in Poway is conveniently
1|P age
Hecklau
situated in the so-labeled Southern Poway, providing a firm icon of the disparity between the
‘two Poways’. What does this differentiation signify for residents of the affordable housing
located in this area and for their societal and financial sense of inclusion? By selecting a site for
the affordable housing that is severely lacking in its capacity to provide residents with careers, to
encourage citizen participation, and to feel included in the community, the City of Poway seems
to be creating a hierarchy of citizenship. Polarization of populations who share the same
community can result in sharp tensions, bitterness and rivalry, dissolution of feelings of inclusion
and community, and can greatly affect the well being of the community as a unit, and thus is
quite worthy of analysis. In accordance with redevelopment agencies and California State Law,
the City of Poway has constructed eight affordable housing sites to date, with three additional
sites in development and two more sites currently being planned (http://www.ci.poway.ca.us/)
What some may expect is an attack of critique or a blitz of praise for affordable housing policies,
procedures, and players in the City of Poway, yet neither will be the driving force of this case
study. What entices a focus on the affordable housing units available and under development in
the city of Poway are the loci of these units and the consequences for inhabitants, neighbors, and
the entirety of Poway of their particular placement.
Interested parties can easily seek out the addresses of Powegian mansions and learn of the
grandiose athlete, performer, musician, or figure who inhabits it. Without creating a litany of
luxurious personage, I will mention that (affluent) Poway is home to almost half of the San
Diego Chargers, to a host of San Diego Padre Elite, to international pop stars, world-renowned
musicians, authors, and even a former Mayor of Los Angeles. This sect of the Poway population
has found shelter in North Poway, in lavish and sprawling communities high above the town,
surrounded by gates and guards (also in a region very susceptible and in 2003 and 2007 very
2|P age
Hecklau
affected by Wild Fires) and is much removed from the shopping centers and modest store fronts
that dot the Poway boulevards and ‘downtown’. The wealthier sect of Poway can seemingly exist
without ever noticing the affordable housing ‘district’ of Poway so long as they never have to
call on the Sheriff for services. The geographical and spatial isolation in Poway between the
have-a-lots, the have-enough, and the have-some-but-not-enough-to-survive is startling to say the
least. Whether the evolution of Poway’s citizenry and their wealth is an endowment on the
region or a community-disintegrator is difficult to assess, and is of marginal utility. Perhaps it
was a matter of time, or perhaps a coincidence of geography, regardless, there are very distinct
populations inhabiting the city of Poway, relying on the same services, demanding similar
treatment, and expecting similar living conditions, and the placement of one group seems to have
been to some degree influenced by the other, either through direct means, or by a cognizance of
the ‘other half’s’ concerns about the less well-off.
The Kirwan Institute for the Study of Race and Ethnicity at The Ohio State University
has advocated for an ‘opportunity based housing model’ which makes great strides toward
utility, functionality, and equity which I feel are critical aspects of affordable housing site
selection. This model requires that
The creation and preservation of affordable housing must be deliberately and
intelligently connected on a regional scale to high performing schools,
sustained employment, adequate and affordable transportation, and institutions
that facilitate civic and political engagement (kirwininstitute.org)
This examination of the affordable housing units already in existence and soon to be
completed will use these standards as an appraisal mechanism to determine the effectiveness of
current units.
NIMBYism (sentiment of ‘not in my backyard’) has been thoroughly and convincingly
documented as a legitimate, tried and tested tool used by some majority to preserve a particular
3|P age
Hecklau
status quo. Yet these examinations focus on times when racially or fiscally exclusive zoning
were turning blocks of Chicago into Black Belts or translating neighborhoods into housing
projects like Henry Horner or Cabrini Green. Ethnically uniform neighborhoods of blight
certainly still exist, are surely suitable subjects for discourse, and have an apt place for
discussion in Urban Studies and Planning academia. Yet the issues presented by Poway’s
agglomerated affordable housing present a contemporary and eye opening look at the politics
and participants that today shape the lives of the economically unstable. What was once quite
looming and ever-present, symbolized by a dilapidated high-rise project building, is today
encapsulated by a city that wishes to keep its urban-low-wage-earners neatly in one area. While
Poway may not be a sprawling metropolis or a internationally or even nationally renowned city,
analysis of the affordable housing site-selection and its ramifications for all residents of the
community are legitimate inquiries because of the profound implication that space, its use, and
its location have on populations, and this feature is true of all structures and parcels, in famous
and influential metropolis as well as moderately-populated municipalities of limited national
presence.
Conceptual Framework
This research endeavors to discuss the ethos of the site-location of affordable housing in
Poway. Specific concerns include the hyper-concentration of affordable housing in Poway in a
small area and what this signifies for residents’ connotations of their own space, of their homes,
and of their community. Also critical to this discussion is the differentiation between Poway’s
affluent and wealthy residents in the North (where there are zero affordable housing sites) and
the urban working class, seemingly wrangled up and placed in 4 developments that nest between
4|P age
Hecklau
the sheriff station and city hall. There is much to analyze in terms of the opportunity available to
residents of Poway’s affordable housing in order to gather a firm grasp of their conditions of
living and the insecurity of space they are subjected to. As deconcentrated affordable housing is
seemingly a foregone option, there is a need to analyze the degree to which affordable housing
developments affect oft cited criticisms of affordable housing; waning property values, increases
in crime, jeopardization of education, and general ignorant fears of individuals who make decent
salaries, just not sufficient to enjoy Poway in the same way some do.
The polarization of a once unified community is justification enough for research, yet
when the dichotomy has extended so far as to limit one groups capacity for employment,
education, recreation, culture, and community inclusion. Poway is not unique in the NIMBY
sentiments expressed over affordable housing and fears over crime influxes, property value
reduction and neighborhood culture. These same fears are echoed in communities all over the
nation and are worthy of discussion, and further, there is a necessity to affect these attitudes and
negative sentiments. Security of place, of defensible, personal space is critical to well being and
development, and if a significant population of a city is being excluded from this capacity for
healthy existence, there is firm office for appraisal and analysis of the relationships,
communication, and assumptions of both populations.
Review of Pertinent Literature
The opportunity to inhabit personal, defensible space, in which one is comfortable and
able to interact on equal terms with neighbors and community members, is no doubt a basic
human entitlement. Yet in parts of the United States, this seemingly within-reach right is one that
individuals in certain populations and social groups never get to enjoy. Consider the poor of the
3rd world. While it is certainly true that their domiciles are significantly below western standards
5|P age
Hecklau
of comfort and aesthetics, the impoverished populations of the 3rd world still, for the most part,
own their own homes and take pride in their dwellings (Gilderboom, 179). American urban
society, with its dual spectrums of blight and splendor eliminates more basic freedoms than
simply homeownership. Individuals are not free to choose to a complete degree their own
communities, many lack the freedom to budget their resources themselves, and certainly true in
Poway’s affordable housing development, individuals lack the basic freedom to shape his/her
own environment (Gilderboom 179-181). The meaning that residents give to the places that they
inhabit are certainly shaped by their daily interactions, their sense of belonging, the social
resources available to them (Logan & Molotch 10), yet residents of many affordable housing
developments that are concentrated with other affordable housing sites are not entitled to this
freedom of place. No one will argue that every American is entitled to a four-bedroom two-bath
suburban fantasy, my point is simply that residents of affordable housing are in a position of
vulnerability that they cannot shed, not even in the comfort of home, because in most cases, it
isn’t their home, detracting more from feelings of comfortable space. Property is inextricable
from power, and when property is rented and not owned, there is an undeniable inseparability
between rented property and power over another’s happiness, well being, and feelings of
inclusion (Gilderboom 180). Affordable housing will never be an end-all-be-all to enhancing
community utility. Affordable housing must not only enable individuals to partake in personal,
defensible space, but must also endeavor to make our cities fit places to live, work, and coalesce.
(Jacobs 436)
Simply constructing affordable housing sites cannot satisfy the litany of other needs and
voids that accompany residing in a home in a community. Feeling as if you belong, as if you are
not only yourself an asset to the community, but that others are an asset for you as well. Four
6|P age
Hecklau
walls, no matter their façade will not situate urban populations already feeling isolated in a
community-environment. Minority and low-income populations are at a severe disadvantage, not
in any way because of their actual status, but because in addition to lacking a cultural bond with
the dominant population, and lacking the financial clout to seem equal with one’s fellow
community members, these individuals are severely lacking in their capacity to make
connections and interrelate with the ‘outside’ affluent world (Logan & Molotch XI). If affordable
housing site selection is done in a way that shies away from agglomeration, that is instead
aligned with the ethos of the Gautreaux Project and scattered site selection for affordable
housing, there is firm possibility to bridge populations that may seem or may even be at odds or
just fearful and confused of the other’s status (Gilderbloom 180). Social justice necessitates that
communities accept the needs of the underprivileged, the disabled, and the disadvantaged
without ostrizing that group or plunking them down in a commercially-dominated district.
(Mueller 371). This is not to say that development for affordable housing is never conducted
properly. The Mid Peninsula Housing Coalition has been committed to protecting not only the
right for defensible and personal space, but has also sought to maintain community stability and
foster economic growth and opportunity in a way that permits diversity to flourish (Urban Land
Institute 112). Affordable housing in Poway can accomplish this as well and reintroduce
community into a once vibrant and expansive escape from suburbia.
Concerns over the inclusion of affordable housing sites into areas of middle-class single
family dwelling has certainly been a contentious subject in many communities, yet the most oft
cited critique of affordable housing in deconcentrated-doses is that it significantly hurts property
values (Nguyen 18). Yet somewhat unsurprising is the fact that when 14 different teams
performed regression analysis and appraised housing values post-inclusion of affordable
7|P age
Hecklau
housing, 13/14 could be said to have been in no way negatively impacted (Galster et al 78).
The same irony is felt when considering another repeatedly abused explanation for why “not in
my backyard”, that affordable housing that is scattered throughout the community and not
secluded on one commercial block severely influences crime. Yet the fact remains that crime
cannot be said with certainty to increase when affordable housing looms near (Galster et al 8285). If anything, the only convincing research analyzing both categories seems to indicate that
affordable housing has a positive impact on housing prices as has been documented in Houston
(Nguyen 18).
Members of a community are by all means entitled to feel a sense of belonging there, to
not feel second-tier, to be comfortable in space and not feel like a contagion of disease (Meuller
372-374). Affordable housing in Poway simply does not need to subsist in this animosity, fear,
and resentment that only isolates the Southern population further from opportunity and service.
Research Design and Methodology
Research focusing on the effectiveness of a given program necessarily depends on
observation and interpretation of current conditions and participants; else it is simply ungrounded
postulation with little utility for the group/program in focus. Thus, this research will follow a
flexible or qualitative design that utilizes both an ethnographic approach and grounded theory
study to interpret and assess the affordable housing sites in Poway, California. In concert with
these research elements will be detailed and revelatory spatial analysis of the ‘two Poways’
performed with the intention of better-grasping the social consequences induced by the sitelocation of affordable housing in Poway.
Ethnographic research will yield “a description and interpretation of the culture and
social structure,” (Robson 186) surrounding Poway’s affordable housing and will delineate
8|P age
Hecklau
pertinent analysis of those who inhabit it, those who advocate or oppose the developments, and
the general symbiosis of the two economically divergent populations. As conducting
ethnography is primarily centered on the production of data and observation that is not limited by
exterior theory and contention, (Robson 186-188) it is an optimum tool for assessing the
opportunity available to residents of Poway’s affordable housing, and will grant an
understanding of the true nature of their status in relation to the loftier populations in the North
of Poway.
The ethnographic features of this research will consist in semi-structured interviews of
Powegians who are close to the matter either by the circumstance of their habitation, through
governmental ties to the project’s development, or finally through an occupational parlay to the
development. Interviews of residents will focus primarily on the perception of dichotomy, that
is, the purpose of consulting with residents is to garner a sound comprehension of the sentiments
of exclusion either intimated or not by those exposed to the dichotomy daily. The interviews will
be conducted with professionalism and an understanding of the sensitive nature of this
exploration. Interviews of government officials who played a role in Poway’s affordable
housing’s approval and site selection will be conducted to “acknowledge that there are
phenomenon independent of (my) claims about them,” (Robson 189) and also to gain a complete
perspective; talking to those inhabiting the development is not sufficient, discussion with those
who decided where these residents would eventually call home provides a more compelling and
complete analysis of the ethos of Poway’s low-income housing. Finally, insight from developers
and planners who worked close to the project will be beneficial in drawing an understanding of
the issues and phenomenon at play, details residents or government officials may not be privy
too or information that would only be pertinent to those constructing and planning the site are the
9|P age
Hecklau
desired extraction from these interviews.
This research’s ethnographic component will also function to provide observation of
participants, specifically concerning the access and opportunity concerns of this project. To
understand if Poway’s affordable housing is in an area of low opportunity and access, ample
observation is critical. Through weekly pilgrimages to the site, I intend to observe residents as
they exit the development and emerge into the community to work, eat, shop, and partake in
community life. In this endeavor I seek to gain an understanding of the modes of transportation
used, of the relative walkability and sense of belonging residents seem to show as they shed their
label of Southern Poway resident and become chameleons of the urban population in their daily
exchanges with the community and its built environment. Understanding the degree to which
residents of Poway’s affordable housing are isolated from services, viable occupation, and
community features simply cannot be done without ample and detailed observation, as I consider
the generation of first-hand data from a specific context, as it actually happens, to be a far more
valuable tool of interpretation and analysis than retrospective accounts or ones subject to the
fleeting nature of memory (Robson 188-89). These issues of access, opportunity, and social and
financial wellbeing will of course be addressed in the interviews as well, but the beneficence of
direct participant observation will yield unabashed data, which may not be the case when adults
are interviewed by an undergraduate student whose interest in these individuals is dependent on
their being in a limited economic position.
Lengthy observation of, explorative interaction with, and detailed inquiry of those either
living in Poway’s affordable housing or related to its existence will certainly succeed in
garnering information and detail not available without first-hand engagement or observation, it
fails to completely answer any of the foci of this research. Thus this analysis and observation
10 | P a g e
Hecklau
must seek a loftier goal than observing particular phenomenon or having it described, it must
endeavor to function as ethnographic study “approached by means of grounded theory” (Robson
190). The grounded theory methodology is beneficial as both a tool of observation and data
collection, but more importantly as an analytical device for that data, and the information
sequestered from interviews and observation. A grounded theory approach to research on
affordable housing in Poway will be based on the data collected in future months concerning
access, opportunity, and community inclusion and will culminate in an analytical framework that
assesses possible theories for the data collected. By grounding the then fully developed
theory/explanation with data collected directly, a more precise understanding of the focal
elements can be achieved than if one simply collected and presented ethnographic detail. I mean
not to imply that my research in Poway will necessarily generate new-order theory that
transcends geography and applies to affordable housing or neglected populations universally. I
simply expect to form, from extensive data collection and observation, a set of concepts and
possible theoretical explanations for whatever conclusion the data points to, but it is critical to
understand that this will deal with specifics of Poway, and thus all theory, grounded in Powaycollected-data, can only significantly apply to the city of Poway.
Finally, through the use of Geographical Information Systems and comprehensive
analytical mapping, this research will provide a spatial component for analysis of the ethos of
affordable housing in Poway’s location. Key to this inquisition will be an understanding of the
civic, financial, occupational, health, education, and recreational facilities that are within
reasonable access for the residents of Poway’s affordable housing and their contrasted
proximities to residents of affluent-Poway.
The research design and methodology above described is achievable only through
11 | P a g e
Hecklau
dedicated and routine data collection, and through sensitive means of interview and interaction
that limits anyone’s capacity to be offended or hurt. Thus, while few financial costs are
associated with this research, it is worth noting the ‘costs’ are more time concerning and is
important to keep in mind as the process begins. Another metaphorical cost is presented by the
necessity for a soft-tread when interviewing and interpreting; there would be significant
information to gain if one did not need to worry about offense, yet this is not the case and it is
important to note that residents of affordable housing face a cost that outweighs this
aforementioned pseudo-cost. Residents are potentially subjected themselves to a cost of pride,
comfort, and privacy, costs which I take seriously and must always be considered.
I have firm expectations that observation and analysis of Poway’s affordable housing,
and the residents who were plunked there will translate to a firmer understanding of the division
in Poway and its origins. Interview data will lend specific insight, personal insight, into the
condition of those subject to the North/South dichotomy. Analysis of the opportunity in the
region including health services, nutritional sources, entertainment, community, and occupation
will speak volumes for the division in Poway and will distinguish possible areas of greater
opportunity for future development. At the conclusion of this analysis I am hopeful that a greater
understanding of the tension and polarity in Poway will be integrated into a framework that
considers the differences between populations, and then allows for the bridging of these groups.
12 | P a g e
Hecklau
Works Cited
Dardia, Michael, Hans P. Johnson, Rosa Maria, and Ph.D. Moller. In Short Supply: Cycles and
Trends in California Housing. San Francisco: Public Policy Institute Of California,
2004.
Gilderbloom, John I.. Invisible City: Poverty, Housing, and New Urbanism. Austin: University
of Texas Press, 2008.
Jacobs, Jane. The Death and Life of Great American Cities. New York: Vintage Books, 1961.
Logan, John R., and Harvey L. Molotch. Urban Fortunes: The Political Economy of Place.
Berkeley: University of California Press, 2007.
Mueller, Elizabeth, and Rosie Tighe. "Making the Case for Affordable Housing: Connecting
Housing with Health and Education." Journal of Planning Literature 21 (2007): 371386, http://jpl.sagepub.com.
Myerson, Deborah. The Business of Affordable Housing: Ten Developers' Perspectives.
Washington, D.C.: Urban Land Institute, 2007.
Nguyen, Mai Thi. "Does Affordable Housing Detrimentally Affect Property Values?." Journal of
Planning Literature 20 (2005): 16-26.
Wassmer, R.W.. Why Not in My Backyard? Neighborhood Impacts of Deconcentrating Assisted
Housing [A book review from: Cities]. St. Louis : Elsevier, 2004.
13 | P a g e
Hecklau