Our View: Getting our housing going

Advertisement

— The Yampa Valley Housing Authority turned a $250,000 investment into the $5 million Fox Creek project, creating 30 affordable housing units for Steamboat Springs residents.

That kind of leveraging is something the City Council should keep in mind Tuesday as it again looks at its affordable housing policies.

This is the third time that the City Council has held a work session on revising its inclusionary zoning ordinance, which isn't even a year old. (Note to council: Perhaps this is the sort of due diligence that should have been done before approving the ordinance.)

The ordinance mandates that 15 percent of all new residential development in the city limits be deed-restricted affordable housing units. The current discussions have been about linkage, payments in lieu and where and when affordable housing should be built - on site as new development is built or somewhere else in the future. We appreciate the discussion, but we are concerned about the apparent lack of consensus and direction.

Unfortunately, instead of inviting the housing authority to the table, the council has chosen to exclude it from these recent discussions. That's odd, considering the city was a co-creator of the housing authority and that it seems the best use of any funds generated by the inclusionary zoning ordinance would be to help the housing authority accomplish its mission.

There are other considerations for the council as it looks at affordable housing policies.

- The council needs better data. Housing consultant Melanie Rees has said the city needs as many as 500 affordable residences to catch up with growing demand. But that doesn't tell us the kind of affordable housing that's needed. Single-family homes priced below $500,000? Multi-family rentals? Research should be a significant driver of the city's policy; we're not convinced there has been enough of it.

- As Loui Antonucci said at last month's meeting, the council must avoid over-reaching in terms of what it asks of developers. If the city's inclusionary zoning ordinance is too restrictive, then a policy meant to spur affordable housing will become an impediment.

- The city must look at its urban growth boundaries, its open space mission and its planning and zoning regulations to ensure they are conducive to - rather than restrictive of - the creation of new housing.

- Finally, the council ultimately must be willing to make some concessions if it truly wants to create affordable housing. Council members say they want affordable housing, but they don't want the city to have to pay for it. They want it to be beautiful. They want it spread evenly throughout the community. They want to force developers to absorb the cost. Something has to give.

We applaud the city for devoting so much time to addressing affordable housing. The availability of housing is critical to the future of our work force. But to make real progress, we believe the council has to change its approach.

The council needs better research. The council needs to engage the housing authority and partner with the development community. Above all, the council must be willing to compromise on conflicting principles that are in the way of new housing.

The city has to be ready to let go of past policies that have widened, instead of closing, our housing gap.

Comments

OneFly 7 years, 7 months ago

What is it that Steamboat has in the bank-32 or 48mil rings a bell. It's not like they don't have any like other places. A bit of that would go a long way. So many contributed and if those numbers are correct may be spreading some of it around could help.

0

steamboatsprings 7 years, 7 months ago

Excellent Editorial! The City needs to apply some reason, some balance and bring all of the parties to the table. If we want to solve this problem it can't just be a one way street. We need to enable policies that maximize the amount of affordable housing created per $ of cost not postion for percieved political favor. Results will talk so let's get to work. Since this is a community wide and county wide problem that had developed over decades we need to address it across the community. It is impossible to solve the problem on the last 3-5 % of undeveloped land without making far more existing unit much more expensive since they are the alternative to new units and taknig the problem to a whole new level.

If we hope to address the problem is should be from several fronts starting with property tax.

0

another_local 7 years, 7 months ago

Enough about property tax! We have enacted new property taxes in the last two years that will already raise these taxes by nearly 20%. It is our local small businesses that shoulder this burden, not second home owners as so many seem to think, and they are already under stress from the changes around here.

The solution to the use of city funds is what the editorial stated, turn the money over to the housing authority. Get the city OUT of the housing business.

Incorporate some more land into the city for the creation of neighborhoods. Whistler, Silver Spur and other areas were all "affordable" when they were first available and are now occupied by local families who work here. Yes, they are more expensive now, but that is what works; it is a proven model in THIS market. Neighborhoods with families are much more attractive than a handful of "affordable" condos in the middle of a vacation ghetto at the base of the mountain. We want long term stable working residents. Inclusionary zoning is not going to give us that.

Rewrite the inclusionary zoning and allow REASONABLE payment in lieu for the base area. P.I.L. is not supposed to be enough to build a new unit in the location that generates the payment; it is supposed to be enough to allow an affordable price on a 900 foot unit, by subsidy, in ANOTHER location. It is disturbing that even some of our council is unclear on this concept.

Linkage is socialism. Let's at least make it socialism that works. Our coucil is headed to La-La land on this issue.

Make sure that there are real incentives for private development to produce housing that will be attractive and affordable to folks working here. Create new neighborhoods with maximum home size and increased density. Let the housing authority do it. Waive tap fees with public money from P.I.L. to reduce costs.

Increase public transportation up and down the Yampa valley. Solve the parking issue for commuters.

Work more proactivly with Milner, Hayden, Oak Creek, P-burg and Yampa.

0

Requires free registration

Posting comments requires a free account and verification.