|
||
      |
|
In the past year we have seen many news articles about affordable housing. The Carrboro Board of Aldermen deliberated over payment in lieu instead of on-site housing in the downtown area for Robertson Square. In Chapel Hill, East West Partners offered to double the town's requirement to 30 percent affordable housing for the 54 East development in exchange for higher density. In Hillsborough there have been affordable housing negotiations for the proposed redevelopment of Daniel Boone Village. Elected officials in Hillsborough have expressed concern about the recent trend toward gentrification of the town. None of the three towns in Orange County has an inclusionary zoning ordinance but Chapel Hill created a task force to develop such an ordinance. There are, however, policies which encourage the construction of affordable housing. For example, Chapel Hill has a general policy of encouraging those proposing residential developments of five or more units to provide 15 percent of their units at affordable prices. In addition, if the development is to have 10 or more units, there should be 15 percent affordable housing. There appears to be a consensus among all the local elected officials and many citizens that additional steps need to be taken to increase the pool of affordable housing. This will require an all-encompassing view on affordable housing. We need a comprehensive plan for the entire county in which there are similar requirements in the various jurisdictions. There is no affordable housing strategy for county developments outside the jurisdiction of the towns. Is there a way to have developers who build in the rural areas help increase the capacity of available affordable housing? An existing county goal is to provide affordable housing where there is water and sewer and mass transit. Perhaps developers in the rural areas of the county could be required to make payments in lieu. A comprehensive housing plan could prioritize specific areas in the towns where these monies could be used to build new homes or retrofit existing homes. There are affordable housing reports which ask for surveys of housing needs for county residents. Perhaps this survey would be more useful if it were based upon the salaries for the jobs available in the county. The Economic Development Commission Strategic Plan for 2005-2010 reports that approximately 40 percent of county jobs are filled by residents of other counties. How many of these out- of-county residents would prefer to live in Orange County but can't afford to? Are the housing needs limited to current residents? Comprehensiveness also means that the affordable housing policy should not only focus on those who are at 80 percent or lower of the median income level. If the trend of building new homes which are predominantly in a high price range continues, we will squeeze out more and more individuals who work here. In 2006, the average price of a new home in this county was more than $450,000. Moderately priced homes will be a smaller and smaller percentage of the total available housing pool. Could we develop incentives for housing in the moderate price range? Should a developer who presents a plan for moderate housing be subject to the same affordable housing requirements as a developer presenting a plan for more expensive housing? Affordability of housing does not stop at initial sales price. What about maintenance costs? Most assistance programs focus on helping lower income families with water and energy bills. We need funds to retrofit homes with greater insulation and energy-efficient appliances that will decrease water and energy bills. The North Carolina Weatherization Assistance Program provides assistance for energy conservation materials. However, the focus is on families with incomes below 150 percent of the poverty line. What about households above this limit but below the median income level? The much touted term "mixed use" generally connotes development with residential and non-residential units in close proximity. But we seldom hear talk about dispersion of housing types as new development occurs. A comprehensive housing policy also includes dispersion as an important component. This dispersion needs to be within neighborhoods as well as across the county. At the scale of the entire county, our governmental bodies and housing organizations could work together to identify how and where to disperse housing units. The goal of the dispersion would be to minimize the need to redistrict and transport students to achieve socio-economic balance. Each town has its own policies. A comprehensive housing policy agreed upon by all parties would better serve all sectors of the county. Lastly, a comprehensive affordable housing policy would also include incentives to transform currently low paying jobs into ones with a living wage. The result would be fewer individuals requiring housing assistance. Bernadette Pelissier is a retired social scientist who lives in Orange County and serves on several community boards. Readers can contact her at bpelissier@juno.com or c/o The Chapel Hill Herald, 106 Mallette St., Chapel Hill, NC 27516. Edition: Final
|
|
Bernadette Pelissier © 2008 Home | Bio | Issues | In the News | Articles | Contribute | Contact Us |