I was surprised to learn from a Monadnock Ledger-Transcript article (“Tour offers look at Union Street site,” Sept. 29) that a house can cost up to $361,662 and still be considered “affordable” in Hillsborough County.
That seemed high, so I looked at the real estate listings for Peterborough as of Oct. 5. There were 21 listings for single-family homes or condos for sale (a few contingent). Of those, 12 were listed below the “affordable cost” of $361,662, and five of those were new construction and so supposedly would not require repair or upgrades.
We all know that workforce housing – affordable housing – is a desperate need in Peterborough. But, according to the standards being applied, we apparently already have such housing for sale. Therefore, it would seem that the maximum cost for purchasing workforce housing is too high, especially if it is being used to provide financial incentives for developers. Shouldn’t we be demanding true affordability before we grant such incentives?
We all know that securing a down payment can be a hurdle for those seeking affordable housing, so I looked at the rentals available in Peterborough. Quite a different story. None of the four open rentals met the threshold of $1,480 per month for “affordable” rent. Maybe our focus should be on ensuring that new affordable housing will not only be offered for sale but also for rent, and at affordable levels. Maybe developers should be asked for a rental plan for their new units as well as a sales plan.
Let’s try to find a way to incentivize more truly affordable new construction and rentals. I have no idea what group could officially demand more “affordability,” but I hope someone will find a way to adjust our expectations for builders’ incentives.
Tori Haring-Smith
Peterborough