The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About010907 Workforce HousingWorkforce Housing – Executive Summary Report of the Planning Commission to City Council January, 2007 1 Review of History and Proposed Process •April, 2004 –Council member Wilson asks City Manager to begin addressing the issue •May, 2004 –Partner Group formed •Sept 27, 2005, Council Resolution •May, 2006, Planning Commission subcommittee appointed •Dec, 2006, Planning Commission approves subcommittee report •This is a briefing on the report approved by the Planning Commission 2 Review of History and Proposed Process •No action is requested today •If Council would like to continue considering the report, staff suggests a public comment opportunity; and then an indication from Council that the City Manager and City Attorney should prepare the detailed program requirements and ordinances for your consideration. 3 Review of History and Proposed Process •If done this way, we would plan to have these ready in late spring. •On a parallel track, legislation is being introduced in the General Assembly to authorize the program. •Considering the above, July 1 would be the earliest effective date for a program, if desired. 4 How it Was Produced •This report was developed by the Planning Commission’s subcommittee on WFH, chaired by Ron Ripley, co- chaired by Joe Strange. Committee membership included major developers, Empower Hampton Roads, representatives of the VBEA and the CCO, among others. 5 Committee Membership Staff Leadership Bob Scott Ron Ripley, Planning Karen Lasley Commission Member, William Macali Chairman Andrew Friedman Joe Strange, Planning Sharon Prescott Commission Member, Co- Chairman Mary Nottingham Rosemary Wilson, City Council Member, Council Liaison MembersDan Brockwell Phil ShucetJohn Olivieri Hank BoydIva Nash Steve LawsonFrank McKinney Tim McCarthyDan Baxter Mary Kay HoroszewskiChandler Scarborough Sharon ShoffFrank Spadea 6 Who Supports It? •We believe that our recommendations are supported by all members of the committee. This was a key goal of our process and we believe we have achieved it. 7 What Is It? •Our report recommends adopting a philosophy, annual goals, a process and a program –it recommends a way to think about and to guide future development so that it includes workforce housing as an integral part of the development that will occur. 8 Who Will it Serve? •WFH is a middle-income housing program that would generally serve people in the middle 1/3of income ranges in Virginia rd Beach –between $36,000 and $72,000 household income. New families, college graduates, people seeking to buy their first home; and people looking for moderately- priced quality housing should all be able to take advantage of the opportunities this program creates 9 Workforce Housing Will Serve Middle Income Households Household Income Distribution, 2005 180,000 160,000 Household Income = # of Households140,000above $72,000 56,660 120,000 100,000 Household Income = 80,000 $36,000 to $72,000 64,559 (WFH) 60,000 40,000 Household Income = $0 40,134 20,000 to $36,000 0 1 10 What Kind of Housing will be Created? The proposal would create: for-sale and for-rent housing of all types ? priced significantly below marketprices ? created as a portion of market rate ? development meets all quality and design criteria; ? is substantially equivalent to and ? indistinguishable from the market rate housing that it is integrated with. 11 Mixed-income housing –Fairfax County 12 Workforce Housing –Aurora, Ill. 13 Mixed-Income Housing -Norfolk 14 Why Should We Do This? •To address the growing gap between income and housing costs for first time home buyers, as well as the shortage of housing being built in the WFH price range; and to have new development that is mixed income. 15 % Change inHousing Costvs. Household Income, 2000-2007 120% 100% 80% Average Assessment 60% Household Income 40% 20% 0% 20002001200220052007 16 Where Will it Be Created? •In the strategic growth areas not impacted by the AICUZ policies; and in other appropriate areas of the city as determined by council –for instance, declining shopping centers and some sites on major roads 17 Comprehensive Plan 2003 How Do We Achieve It? –Four Major Steps : 1) By adopting a vision of the strategic growth areas of higher density, quality development that includes both mixed- use development and mixed income residential development; 2) By adopting a philosophy that workforce housing is desired as part of new development and that we will use any available tools to achieve it. 19 How Do We Achieve It? –Four Major Steps : 3)By adopting annual goals for the production of WFH and measuring and reporting on those goals. 4) By implementing the recommended voluntary tools, as well as by enhancing the current development review process to include the WFH program and its tools, criteria and design into the review of proposed residential development. 20 Overall Summary of the Proposal •It provides voluntary incentives for the production of workforce housing as a part of future residential development in the strategic growth areas and other appropriate areas. •It is a middle income housing program that can also create opportunities for lower income households. •It provides new lower cost housing opportunities without direct city subsidy •It provides true incentives for developers without creating windfalls 21 Overall Summary of the Proposal •It creates mixed income development that has the strength of diversity and helps to achieve housing for all income groups •It creates assets for the city that can be used for future housing •It preserves relative affordability in the future in a market-based approach while allowing WFH owners almost all the benefits of homeownership 22 Overall Summary of the Proposal •It will notrequire the expenditure of public funds to create new WFH units – in fact it will generate net assetsfor the city. •It includes recommendations for the preservation and enhancement of existing housing and neighborhoods. 23 Housing Preservation Recommendations •Continue and enhance neighborhood revitalization projects with citizen involvement •Maintain/expand code enforcement as needed •Develop a pattern book for neighborhoods •Develop a plan book for our “first neighborhoods” •Provide design assistance for anyone doing renovation –establish a “design center” •Provide tax abatements for investment consistent with our guidelines 24 Overall Summary of the Proposal •Recommends the creation of an ongoing citizen advisory committeeto help design the initial program, monitor and report on its successes, and recommend the annual adjustments needed for the program so that it can continue to work as markets and economics change. 25 What it’s NOT! •It is not a government subsidy program •It is not a windfall or giveaway for developers or buyers •It does not involve placing price controls on housing •It is not mandatory •It does not propose to change the nature or character of existing low-density neighborhoods •It does not depend on either the developer or other buyers to subsidize WFH buyers 26 Thank you! Council questions and comments 27