Roundtable 3: Workforce Housing

Brainstorming Ideas

·        What others doing

·        Dev. Capacity in-house and with nonprofit partners

·        Inclusionary zoning pros and cons (tool require new dev. To provide % deed restricted housing)

·        Framework for linking transportation and housing...many people like

·        What is a reasonable place to start and engage the development community?

·        Do we give away land for it… is it fair to community?

·        Public-Private partnership  (RFP or RFQ?)

·        Any ideas to have the market provide anything for us?

·        Residential parking areas

 

Issue 1 discussed in depth: Framework for linking transportation and housing

·        Disconnect between political commitment and reality and nimbys (Not in my backyard)

·        Just modified affordable housing regs and mitigation rules (Jackson, WY)

o   6-7 months public engagement

o   Assumption when adopted, we could move to implementation… problem is elected officials

·        Transportation demand model attached to resort destrict – the resorts had to adhere to removing vehicles from roads; consideration of how to attached these demand models to more rural areas

·        Funding for buses = difficult

·        Distance to work can be an equity issue – poor people commute further costs money; quality of life and can ultimately keep people poor

·        Some communities huge ‘greenies’ – make placement of housing = relate to carbon, wildlife roadkill

·        Zermott—if a guest then you only have a cog-train option

·        Beavercreek – only allows residents to drive; guests take a bus

·        If have to pay more to mitigate for employees, will effect business

o   Will cost push out Mom/Pop? Is that already happening b/c cost so high

o   How address increase in service for existing services (more massage therapists)? How accommodate

·        One challenge is that housing exactations could be shot down politically as it was in Idaho

·        

Issue 2 discussed in depth: Inclusionary zoning pros and cons

·        Linking jobs to housing = one tool.  Inclusionary housing is zoning that requires both (Boulder for awhile had this and it pushed commercial growth over housing.  Now a huge fee on commercial for affordable housing = no commercial growth …)

·        One trial= workforce housing (ketchum) with no parking.  Hmm, will it work?  Three of those are deed restricted

·        Is anyone tying funding for housing to funding for transportation?  Jackson tried but it was shot down (b/c general population didn’t think that the elected officials could be responsible with open-ended check; governance around bus system not well-regarded—low confidence in management; and the housing authority had been dissolved/reconfigured…)

o   Should have made clear 40% transport; 40% housing and 20% cons.

·        Affordable housing = must think location, location, location, location

·        In Vancouver, gas tax supports transportation