Ron Henrickson, Director of the San Juan County Development and Planning Department, put the newly-drafted law amending the housing element of the County Comp Plan this way: “The numbers aren’t right; we’re talking about tend estimates and projections.
“But the point is the population is aging and is likely to continue to age; housing prices are rising and are likely to continue to rise; and wages are staying flat. The housing problem is simply going to get worse and worse.”
Henrickson’s remarks followed the presentation by CDPD Senior Planner Colin Maycock on March 24, when he outlined the ordinance to amend the County Comprehensive Plan to the Council.
Maycock reviewed the legal requirements of the ordinance: to inventory and analyze existing and projected housing needs; to identify land for housing and to make adjustments for all segments of the community.
He next described the “mechanics” of the Needs Assessment completed in the Housing Element of the Comp Plan. While stating upfront that his “presumptions can be debated,” Maycock presented the following numbers:
- By 2025, there will be a 6,413 population increase, total population resulting in 22,513.
- With an average household size of 2.16 people, 2,169 additional housing units will be needed
- While currently there are more housing units than needed, the issue now is affordability, with county wages 30 percent lower than elsewhere in the state, and with housing the most expensive, and least affordable, state-wide.
- The population of those 45 years old and above is 58 percent for the county vs. an average of 36 percent statewide.
- With the assumption of half the people over 50 retiring in the next 16 years, Maycock determined that 1,095 housing units would be lost by 2025.
- In 2025, the working population of the county is estimated to be 7,000-plus, but the number of jobs is estimated to be 11,250 in the county, leaving 3,343 jobs without people to do them.
- He concluded that, by 2025, 4,563 housing units will be needed.
Maycock reviewed the process of developing the goals and policies of the Housing Element of the Comp Plan through a series of public meetings and Planning Commission review.
Henrickson then joined Maycock in answering council questions, before the hearing was opened up for public comment. Henrickson said that 15 years ago, county workers could buy a house based on their salaries; but when county workers retire, “the new person won’t be able to purchase housing at the old salaries.”
Questions from the Council included reference to rental housing as affordable housing, and the conclusion that additional dwelling units (ADUs) on most properties is “not a viable concept,” according to Henrickson, given that the GMHB reduced growth of such units to 12-17 per year.
Councilmember Fralick asked if the county can increase the amount of housing provided by non-profits, and Maycock responded that 320 such units had been built to date, and “it’s conceivable there could be another 320 in the next 20 years.”
Councilmember Knapp inquired about county-owned land available for leasing, and Maycock said it was his understanding that “the majority of the land owned by the county was set aside for Public Works.”
So, within 15 years, the county islands will be faced with choices, Henrickson said, such as workers commuting daily from the mainland by ferry; of the county finding the “mechanics” to increase affordable housing. Unless some of these or other choices are made, the county will not have sufficient affordable housing for a balanced demographic profile, Henrickson concluded.
But, he said to the Council, “This [document plan} should respect your feelings, your positions.”
Council Chair Rich Peterson reminded the meeting that the Council has a “3 touch policy” regarding matters that come before it, and described Tuesday’s hearing as “the first touch.”
Peterson said that, for the council to decide upon the plan, with its “complex recommendations and tables…. feels ambitious for the severity of what we need to accomplish.”
Council member Gene Knapp remarked that Peterson was not alone in his concerns.
Henrickson reminded the Council that the hearing can be extended to next Tuesday, but that they were under the constraints of the Growth Management Act to complete the process by the end of March. Beyond that they may ask the Growth Management Hearings Board (GMHB) for a 30-day extension, he said.
County Administrator Peter Rose reviewed the process of amending the Comprehensive Plan, saying that, since the beginning of 2008, “public participation in this plan has been oozing up through the levels of government.”
Though his metaphor was met with laughter, Rose continued, “In essence, this takes a process to develop it into the product that comes before you.” Rose suggested the Council may want to schedule a special meeting.”
Council member Bob Myhr from Lopez and Shaw Islands, said, “This is a policy long in formation but you’re correct in that the policy document is new. We have a fiduciary responsibility to think thoroughly about it.”
Various individuals spoke in support of and in opposition to the draft ordinance during public testimony, and the council ran out of time to deliberate. Public testimony can still be heard at the continuation of the hearing on March 31 at 10:20 a.m. in Council chambers.
In the meantime, Jon Cain, Deputy Prosecuting Attorney, will request an extension from the GMHB, and a work session between the council and county staff is scheduled for April 7 at 2 p.m. Although no public comment is taken at the work session, the public is welcome to attend and observe the session.
A further public hearing is scheduled for April 14. Council Clerk Ann Larson said that although the Council “could make a decision before [April 14], considering the complexity of the issues before them, they could well use the full amount of time.”
Public comments may be sent via email to all County Council members through Larson at annl@sanjuanco.com.
