Council candidates answer housing questions (Part 3 of 4)

||| FROM GEORGE J ZWEIBEL and SANDY BISHOP |||

Affordable housing is unquestionably one of the most important issues the new SJC Council will face and one that is a concern to most everyone who lives or works in the islands. We have been actively engaged in affordable housing for years, on both the development and policy sides of the issue.

We took it upon ourselves to ask the four candidates running for San Juan County Council positions a series of eight questions about affordable housing.

Housing Questions for Council Candidates (Questions 5 and 6)

5. There is general agreement that San Juan County needs more housing that is affordable to the working population. What are your thoughts on the importance of also creating more affordable housing for non-working full-time island residents who are seniors, disabled, others living on fixed incomes, or currently unhoused?

Justin Paulsen: The feeling of “Housing Security” is as important as the physical structure itself. I believe that as we discuss housing and growth in our county, we MUST assure that those concepts are implemented equitably throughout our community. There are several ways to assure this:

In our work on the Development Code we can build-in incentives for projects which emphasize and target specific populations which we, as a community, have identified as needing specific focus.
Through work with the HAC, Council can direct funds to be designated toward projects which target impact at priority populations.
Consistently looking for partnering opportunities with local organizations and Districts to co-locate housing with adjacent human services providers and projects, leveraging grant and donor funding to meet multiple needs should always be a focal point.

Rick Hughes: I think providing workforce housing is very important, but the county needs to continue to support housing or work with local Land Trusts and affordable housing developers to provide farm worker housing, senior housing, housing for veterans and disabled housing. We will need to create housing for all the is accessible for all people in the community.

Stephanie O’Day: I so strongly believe that this is also a problem that I personally bought a property and placed 5 tiny homes that I rent affordably to individuals 55+. We could use more.

Kari McVeigh: Absolutely yes, all groups should be included in the housing effort. Perhaps senior housing fits into the RRC and/or tiny house scheme? Regulations should be amended to make it easier to construct supportive housing communities for all kinds of folks.

6. The Housing Advisory Committee has recommended minimal Code changes to allow development of small “tiny house communities” in land use designations that allow Rural Residential Clusters (RRCs). Though intended to provide opportunities for affordable housing, RRCs have been greatly underutilized for this purpose. Existing RRC requirements would limit density (no more than two dwelling units per acre, up to 12 in all, and limit the number on each island), and minimize visual impact (site design, improvements, open space, screened parking, retention of trees, etc.). Would you support implementation of this recommendation?

Paulsen: I support this recommendation and generally support recommendations which recognize the greatly diminished impact of smaller scale residential development. It should not be that an 800 square foot home and a 5000 square foot home are considered the same scale of development when it comes to impact on our resources and environment. That is the basis for the RRC provision. Current restrictions on the requirements for use of the RRC provision should be analyzed to see if there are changes that could be beneficial in allowing for more entities to implement it.

Hughes: Yes, I would support the implementation of this recommendation, but would actually consider increasing the density, depending on what land use designation was being considered.

O’Day: The current regulations (18.60.230) already allow this – but with the strict requirement that the homes be rented or sold “affordably”. The problem is that by the time a developer plows through all the red tape, provides all the expert reports for the property (wetlands? Steep slopes? Shoreline? Archeology?) and then has to spar with the county for completion, coupled with the high cost of construction, building an “affordable home” is a misnomer for anyone outside of the nonprofit arena. We need to preserve our open spaces and cluster design the communities to preserve open space as much as possible, but we need more homes. The County needs to loosen the regulations and work with an applicant rather than against an applicant to make this happen. Prefab tiny homes are a great answer.

McVeigh: Absolutely, their size is self-limiting as to how they will be used.