Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Infill Housing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Redevelopment authority presents modular infill plan for 22nd & German; commissioners balk at $350k–$400k unit costs
Summary
A feasibility study proposed six modular infill homes on four parcels; development costs and an appraisal gap—estimated subsidies of roughly $150k–$180k per unit—prompted discussion about affordability and alternatives such as rehabs or higher-density housing.
Get email alerts on the Infill Housing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Redevelopment Authority of the City of Erie presented a feasibility study on June 16 proposing six modular infill homes on four parcels at 22nd and German, but commissioners and colleagues questioned whether the per‑unit cost (estimated roughly $359,000–$383,000 for some models) makes the approach viable for the neighborhood.
Aaron Snipper, executive director of the redevelopment authority, said the study modeled two modular home types—an "Alma" two‑story unit and a single‑story accessible "Clevelander"—and estimated total development costs for five Alma units at just over $1.9 million and roughly $359,000 for the Clevelander. "We have a large appraisal gap," Snipper said, noting sale‑price estimates of roughly $150,000–$165,000 that would require substantial subsidy to close the gap.
Commissioners and attendees pressed on affordability and alternatives. One commissioner said modular pricing in current markets makes these homes impractical for the city and suggested exploring rehabbing existing housing stock or building higher‑density units to achieve economies of scale. Redevelopment Authority staff said some funding streams earmarked for new construction make this approach necessary to meet grant requirements and neighborhood‑priority investments.
Why this matters: The project tests how the city can use modular construction and targeted subsidies to deliver new modest housing in infill locations, balancing neighborhood preferences, funding restrictions and realistic cost assumptions.
What’s next: Staff and the redevelopment authority said the feasibility findings inform future design and funding decisions; the study is informational and does not require a commission vote.

