Roundtable 1: Workforce Housing

WORKFORCE HOUSE

Brainstorming on priority issues the group wishes to cover

·        Workforce housing and affordable housing spectrum… diff. income levels

·        How make more effective… so out of reach

·        How other communities framing strategies to move policy

·        Employer driven workforce solutions

·        Suggestions around semantics and ways to convey

·        Incentive programs / alternative funding/ private partners

·        Want others stories – ideas of larger communities who are further ahead

·        Staff housing in 1 season communities (more rural communities)

·        Affordability through design – how to incentives

·        How to regulate rental housing

·        Short-term housing – man camps

·        Partnerships/Housing authorities

 

TWO ISSUES COVERED IN DEPTH

1.          Incentive programs / alternative funding/ private partners (all wanted)

·        What works

o   Fee elimination for all affordable housing (deed restricted etc.)… reason was no new houses. If reduce fees to nothing (Telluride). Have what need but looking to forward

o   Affordable housing in all districts

o   Find private sector where can put some money to incentivize housing where reduce fee and densification no longer work

o   Know the developers and individualize the incentives that will work for the developers… find out what will move the needle

o   Giving developers free land incentivizes developers in one community

o   Extra height/floor area ratio goes up the quid pro quo = additional affordable housing… either as right or discretionary (prefer Telluride the latter as sometimes incentives don’t work)

o   Transit-oriented design integrated into development process (Aspen)

o   Regional housing study (Tahoe)… house exist and projections …. Projects needs of workforce housing… peaked interest of developers to fill that need. This was done through a mountain housing council that came together to address this issue

§  Helps to address perceptions to a clear needs assessment

o   In the US will market available stock for housing, brown-fill, EPA remediation and get to developers  (called Main Street programs);

 

·        Challenges

o   Reduced fee and densification doesn’t make more money,

o   Incentives backfire: Alternate development standards (e.g. Less parking)… problem is that multi-roommates = higher parking needs.  Key would be close to transfer zone

o   Fees in one high income/expensive communities might not be affective.

 

2) How other communities framing strategies to move policy

·        Ideas

o   Suite of policies and suite of language (appeal to emotional component) and rationale (rltn between business

§  (Grand County, UT); challenge is that language and appeal specific to different parts of community

·        Generational – want housing for kids

·        Businesses want employers/profit

·        Social minded – social cohesion

o   Ski area, local gov’t, and local funds pooled together –

§  Housing for workers and general public Keystone/Vail

o   Increasing density for affordable housing = just reviewing project and not tying it up with exceptions

o   Where no land, can change r1 to r3 like in Nelson… problem is that more units and still prices going up.

 

·        Challenge

o   Hard for people to disassociate housing from other growth and issues in the community

o   Diversity of types of affordable housing doesn’t get discussed or understood.  Always think of apartments. Needs by someone in 20s maybe apartment fine; townhouses/duplexes = option for families

o    

 

 

Varied definitions and defns can stop community will (employee housing could make communities think that employers should provide e.g. subsidizing the bigger employer)

Affordable housing mid level and/or looser regs.  

Employee housing- lose job, lose house