Our view: Plan for Martindale renovation seems too pricey

The homeless suffer under the best of economic conditions, but the past two years have been especially harsh in Spokane.

In 2007 about 200 needy tenants were displaced when three downtown apartment buildings were closed – the Otis Hotel, Commercial Building and New Madison Building. In April 45 more people had to move when the Martindale apartment building in Hillyard closed because the owner wasn’t paying utility bills.

Give the city and several nonprofit groups credit for a commendable job of getting most displaced residents relocated. Nevertheless, the community has lost about 250 subsidized living units at a time when they’re in limited supply.

It is noteworthy, then, that a plan is in the works to reclaim the Martindale. Northeast Washington Housing Solutions – the Spokane County housing authority – spent $651,000 to acquire the aging, neglected structure and intends to start raising funds to restore the 50 units.

But at $11.8 million, the cost is a startling $236,000 per unit.

A century ago the Martindale began life as Hillyard High School. In the 1940s it was converted to apartments for returning World War II veterans. By this year, it was occupied but in disrepair. Upper-floor tenants – some disabled – contended for the final year with a non-working elevator.

On one level, the hope of reopening the Martindale, complete with on-site social services, is heartwarming. But at nearly a quarter-million dollars a unit, affordable housing advocates have to ask whether the funds envisioned would be used more efficiently building a new structure.

Nonprofit organizations such as Northeast Washington Housing Solutions enjoy certain advantages, including the ability to issue tax-free bonds. But those who work in the field point out that certain burdens such as the organizational overhead expenses associated with assembling funding packages add to their costs.

Further, addressing the situations of those most in need means setting rents at 30 percent of the area’s median income and promising to hold them at that level for 40 years. One consequence of that commitment is the need to build units and equip them with appliances and fixtures – all expected to last for decades, sometimes under less than gentle use. That’s another expense.

Still, $236,000 a unit? If the housing authority can raise $11.8 million for low-income housing, the agency needs to weigh its options and make sure it spends those funds as efficiently as possible.