HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-13-19 Public Comment - J. DiMarco-2 - Affordable Housing Action PlanFrom:jerrydimarco@mail.com
To:Agenda
Subject:comments on Affordable Housing Action Plan - 2
Date:Wednesday, November 13, 2019 2:35:37 PM
The Planning Department, development fees and the codes that regulate development are often
cited as contributors to the affordable housing problem. However, the Planning Departmenthas never been fully funded and staffed. They will have to be if we are to be successful in this
effort. We need their input, and they need to be able to handle the workload we are about todump in their laps. They must have enough staff to bring the approval time down to a
reasonable level. So part of this effort should be to get the Dept fully funded and staffed sothey can do their job efficiently. Some of the frustration expressed by the development
community would be addressed as well.
Forcing the Planning Department to take shortcuts is asking for trouble. Likewise, modifying
or eliminating codes that protect us from known hazards and problems with development andcity living, can cause a host of problems. We don't want to be shortcutting the process to save
some money and time up front, only to saddle ourselves with "unforeseen" costly headachesdown the road. For this reason I urge you to be sure you know the reason a given code was
enacted before removing or modifying it.
Regarding fees, perhaps they could be made progressive and applied only to housing above
80% AMI. If this is not possible, then hopefully lower fees or fee deferrals for units below80% AMI could be implemented.
Given that there is a shortage of homebuilders nationwide, what plans are there to address thatproblem? Could there be partnerships with the high school, community college and university
that utilizes college students in the construction trades, and internships for high schoolstudents.
Apparently there is also a shortage of land next to town that can be developed. It is desirableto direct all development into or next to towns to minimize our footprint. There must also be a
sufficient supply of developable land around town to keep prices down. Is it possible to havea land exchange program that allows landowners next to town who don't want to sell, to
exchange their land for a parcel further away from town whose owner wants to sell? Anothermethod might be to give an offer to the landowner, then find another owner further out who
wants to sell some land and put them in touch. The landowner could then move their house tothe new parcel or build a new house. To make this effort successful, it should be preceeded by
an educational campaign to establish a new course for development that does not add to oururban sprawl, but instead directs all new development into and adjacent to the city. So all land
adjacent to town is in the pool of developable land, and is where all new development willoccur in coming years. Therefore, if affected landowners do not want neighbors, they should
begin making arrangements to move further out. This is the way it has to be if we are tominimize our footprint and move toward a sustainable society.
The role of the historic preservation program in our affordability crisis cannot be denied. The$300,000+ empty lot in the NCOD that sold last year is proof. Some of the most expensive
residential property in town is in that district. The fact that regulations protecting the NCODwere “strengthened” right before this effort on affordability, is suspicious at the very least.
There is no need to preserve 3200 structures. The individual historic districts are more thansufficient. Part of this affordability effort should be to look at the effect the NCOD,
downtown plan, and any other district plans have on affordability. Any that are found to becontributing to the affordability problem should be reexamined and their effect on
affordability reduced.
Our goal should be to be a city without a housing affordability problem. Citizens should be
able to live where they work and work where they live. Comparing ourselves to cities with thesame problem is only a way to make us look better than we are. We will know we have been
successful when the bridge categories (pg 3) are different and the AMI is much lower,reflecting what our actual populace would have been if there was no affordability problem.
Thank you for your consideration of these issues.
Jerry DiMarco
Bozeman