Affordable Housing

As a professional planner, I am concerned with many issues surrounding land use, development, and housing. This morning I heard a program on NPR (The Diane Rehm Show, for those who might be interested) where the current status of housing in the United States was discussed. While the economy appears to be on the mend, and the housing market has stabilized significantly since 2007-2009, there remain real and persistent concerns with access to adequate, affordable housing.

Part of the problem is regional in nature. "Affordable" means different things in different places. What the government usually uses to determine what is "affordable" relates to the average cost of housing compared to average income. The percentage typically used is 33%, or 1/3, of one's income is to be utilized for housing costs. So if you earned (take home) $3000 per month, the threshold for afford of what you could feasibly pay is $1000. Anything more than that is considered not affordable. Regionally, the expense of living where the jobs are does not keep pace with what the costs of living tend to be. You could live in the sticks, for example, but there are no jobs there.

Part of the problem continues to be a persistence in income inequality. People's wages simply aren't raising at the same rate of people's housing costs, or even with the way the economy has expanded. As the disparity in income continues, those people who can afford a home is decreasing.

Further exacerbating the problem is the influx of investment capital, which drives an overall increase of housing values, but does not lead necessarily to occupancy. House-flipping was a significant contributor to the housing bubble in the first place, because artificially inflated housing costs are not only unsustainable, but they have a chilling effect on those who might otherwise be able to get into a place that is affordable. Additionally, the real issues of gentrification and inflated taxes make it difficult for folks to get into a home.

Rents are not cheap. Buying a home can be an insurmountable task. And for those on limited incomes, the challenges are real and persistent.

What to do?

Income disparity needs to be addressed. If we had wages commensurate with regional standards the benefits would be immediate and dramatic, which would help people buy homes, which would help stabilize the market further.

Rent controls could also be looked at to ensure that folks have access to decent, affordable housing.

And incentives could be made for banks to fund smaller, more affordable places rather than the large, expensive homes to well-heeled buyers.

Just my $0.02 for a Thursday morning.

The Dance

So I've recently been reminded of how interesting the profession of planning can be. We are currently engaged in a fascinating exchange of ideas and desires. I have been referring it to the dance - the balance between the rights of property owners to develop, and the (sometimes conflicting) rights of others to enjoy their current way of life. The developers and the please-don't-develop-ers. It is intricate, fraught with intrigue and positioning, and deceptively fun.

Fun, you say? Well, yes. I really like it. A coworker pointed out that I seem to thrive on "drama". And it's probably true. I enjoy a healthy, robust debate. It's what attracted me to the profession, and I am grateful for the chance to be a part of it, humbled that I can spend a part of my professional life dedicated to making the dance proceed in the best way possible.

I love it when passions are aroused on both sides of a particular issue or project. I love it when people are engaged and responsive. I love it when things are a little bit (not too much, of course) contentious - because that's what gets people to respond. And it's awesome.

Enter the Sage Grouse.



This lovely animal is a male sage grouse. They live in various areas of the west, feeding off of the sage brush that is as associated with the west as the tumbleweed and the lonely cowboy. They are skittish little things, though, and they do not like having their breeding grounds disturbed. As a result of recent growth and development throughout the west, the bird has seen dramatic declines in population, and is running the risk of extinction if appropriate steps are not taken.

In our County, we have had a proposal for the first (of many) steps towards a potential development. There is an active breeding ground (called a lek) on the property that may one day be developed. It is private property, and there is currently no regulatory requirement for preservation of leks on private property. The way the thing is set up is through a series of incentives that will help create conservation easements on private property. But this is not a requirement. It's a big carrot. The question is - is it a big enough carrot?

If the birds do get listed as threatened or endangered, the Federal government will have oversight over the disposition of development in protected areas. This is a big stick, and while not in place, could have a very strong chilling effect on development in the west - not just for housing and property development, but for mineral extraction, utility easements, etc.

On a County level, everyone (and this includes the property owners) is interested in seeing the sage grouse stay happy and healthy. We all like the birds, and we all want to preserve the best habitat for them. The County is also concerned about many other aspects of the potential development, including access to water, roads and other infrastructure, etc. And the local citizens are concerned about impact of a development on their property and lifestyle. All of which are very, very important.

So it's a balancing act. The desires of the property owners to develop on one side, the desires of the environmentalists and others on the other side.

We're having a public hearing tonight to discuss it. It should be very interesting.