Council candidates answer housing questions (Part 4 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 7 and 8)

7. Do you think there are specific reasons why Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) are underutilized as long-term affordable rental housing? If so, please list them and tell us what, if any, changes you propose.

Kari McVeigh: Current regulations require ADUs to be within 100 feet of the main house. This location requirement plays into whether an owner wants to interact with tenants on a full-time basis. To help incentivize owners to provide a permanently affordable ADUs, the county could amend the regulations which require the same septic system and driveway to be used, delete the 100-foot location requirement, delete the lottery system and quotas. However, this would need to be coupled with a significant enforcement capability to ensure ongoing compliance.

Carolyn O’Day: The fact that an ADU must be built within 100 feet of the main home, that there is a lottery in place for permits and that an applicant for a separate guest house must have at least a five-acre property are a problem. Many who have built guest houses have no intention of using them for anything but their guests! Let’s loosen guest house rules, while keeping the prohibition against using them for vacation rentals.

Rick Hughes: I think that Accessory Dwelling Units need to be used more in the future for adding affordable rental housing. As mentioned above, ADU requirements need to be modified to allow more to be built. I think ADUs should be allowed on parcels over two acres (maybe even smaller parcels), be on separate wells, more than 100 feet from the principal residence and allow separate driveways, in exchange for never being a short term rental and if rented will be deed required to be permanently affordable.

I think ADUs have not been used as much as possible due to the requirement to obtain a building permit for one outside the UGA’s. On average it has been between 8-12 allowed a year. Also, not only are these units over $300 sq ft, which makes them expensive to build, but people do not want to have non-family members within 100 feet of their house.

Justin Paulsen: One of the biggest reasons that ADUs are not utilized is that they are simply not allowed in most zoning designations within our county. I believe that if we were to create careful and strategic opportunities within the code for their development, they would become a greater contributor to our housing stock. A secondary reason for resistance is the cost, complexity and regulations surrounding them when they are acceptable under the code.

As indicated above, I believe that San Juan County has the opportunity to make advances on this effort and I believe that through use of other innovative measures (pre-approved plans, streamlined permitting, permit fee incentives…) ADU’s could become a viable piece of working on the affordable housing puzzle.

8. There is currently a cap on the number of vacation rental permits allowed for each island. Do you support reducing, maintaining, or increasing the number of vacation rentals allowed? Depending on your answer, please explain if you think there is a linkage between a lack of affordable housing and vacation rentals and how your proposed changes would help boost affordable housing options.

McVeigh: I am in favor of maintaining the cap. I believe there is definitely a link between the lack of all housing — affordable or otherwise — available to rent or own and the number of vacation rentals on our islands. Currently owners decide how permitted vacation rentals and ADUs are used. They can choose to rent them out as short-term vacation rentals, as seasonal rentals or as year-round, long-term rentals, or not at all! Since vacation rentals take homes off the
rental housing inventory and add to our deficit housing situation, I believe the County should look at ways to incentivize owners to choose offering them as year-round, long-term and permanently affordable rentals. This, too, should be coupled with a significant enforcement capability to ensure that vacation rentals are legal and are in compliance with all the requirements.

O’Day: There is currently a cap on vacation rental permits in the county (337 San Juan, 2112 Orcas, 135 Lopez. I do not believe we should issue any more at this time. We have plenty of options for tourists to stay in. That said, I also do not believe we should be taking permits away. Many of these homes are large and/or waterfront and the rent would be outside of the affordable range so cancelling those permits would not substantially change the housing situation. Loosening the regs to allow construction or placement of small guest houses (with a prohibition against short term rentals) is the way to go.

Hughes: I think what is currently passed is a good place for this point in time and do not feel that anything should change until the review period is up. I think there will always be situations where access to affordable rental housing could be taken away due to a vacation rental. When I was in office i pulled every vacation rental permit and applied to assessed value for permit parcel and at that point in time, 85% of the permits were attached to parcels that were valued at more than $600,000, which could lead to a conclusion that rents for those properties may exceed what is affordable.

Paulsen: I believe that the current caps on Vacation Rentals should be maintained. I do not believe that at this point it would be legally possible to reduce the number of permits below the current allocated numbers, but I do believe that at some point in the future, Council should examine all relevant data and determine if the VR caps should be reduced through attrition. Unfortunately, a majority of the homes currently in use as vacation rentals are not likely to be re-converted to affordable housing, so I do not see changes in the current regulations resulting in a measurable increase in available housing units at the affordability levels most required by our community. Allowing the current regulations a period of time in place prior to analysis will help to yield data on if further modifications are necessary.