This blog,originally founded by Blogger, who is listed in Marquis Who's Who and is a recipient of the Albert Nelson Marquis Lifetime Achievement Award. He holds a theological degree and a doctorate in Counseling Psychology. Taught Psychology for 32 years and is now Professor Emeritus. Is a board-certified psychologist and was awarded the Lifetime Achievement Award in his profession. Ministered as a chaplain, and pastored Baptist and Episcopal churches. Publications cover the integration of psychology and theology. Served in the Army, the Merchant Marines and the Peace Corps.

Tuesday, February 5, 2013

Jeff Templeton Letter re Affordable Housing Task Force

Planning board member Jeff Templeton has written the following letter  re: Affordable Housing Task Force.

"f you didn’t make the quarterly public hearing on Monday night before the Boone Planning Board and Town Council, then you missed an interesting discussion on the future of Multi-family Developments (aka apartments) in the town of Boone.  The Town of Boone Affordable Housing Task Force, represented by Chairman Lynwood Brown and task force member Pam Williamson, presented their vision for Multi-family housing in Boone.  Unfortunately that vision did not include ASU students or the very group the task force was charged to help, those needing affordable housing.   What Mrs. Williamson presented was a text amendment to the town’s development ordinance for ALL new multi-family housing that included provisions targeting the development of student housing and provided nothing to encourage the creation of new affordable housing.  Provisions like; parking limited to a maximum of two spaces per unit, limits on the number of bathrooms per unit, and a restriction on occupancy of no more than two unrelated persons per unit, were clearly designed to prevent the occupancy of ASU students in any future apartment developments in the Boone planning jurisdiction. 
So, who would this benefit if passed? The answer is no one.  Obviously the students would lose out as the new regulations would put a halt to any new student apartments in Boone, thus creating a housing shortage for the anticipated 1000-4000 additional students expected to attend ASU in the coming years. The law of supply & demand would dictate that ASU students would only see rental prices increase in the future as a result.  Those needing affordable housing would lose out.  The teachers, firemen, and hospital workers seeking affordable housing would be no better off as the regulations do nothing to encourage the development of any new affordable housing or the renovation of existing properties for affordable housing.  What about those of us who are tired of the “Mega Apartment Complexes” around town?  Well, you would lose out too.  The shortage of student housing would only increase the demand for single family homes in the neighborhoods in and around Boone.  Additionally, these large complexes would continue to be built outside of Boone, resulting in increased traffic and congestion.
So what is the answer?  Cooperation for one thing.  The Town of Boone could work with developers to provide land for affordable housing projects.  This Public/Private partnership is commonly used to create affordable housing in other communities.  Another common approach would be incentives such as higher density allowances for developments that include affordable housing units.  And thirdly, the Town of Boone could remove some of the barriers to affordable housing projects by waiving the expensive non-refundable deposit for water allocations and application fees for qualified projects.  
The problem of affordable housing is real and the need is great, but so is the need for additional student housing.  The long and the short of it is Boone and ASU are forever destined to coexist in this valley in the mountains.  There is room for all of us, if we can just find ways to work together.

Jeff Templeton
Boone Planning Board Member (ETJ)"


NewGuy said...

Democrat article...

quotes from article:
Members of the task force argued that the market is not providing a balanced array of housing stock for families and professionals such as teachers and policemen."

Yep, you read it right. The market doesn't provide what "central planning" thinks it should so we must now have government intervention. Let "central planning" determine what people need and how it is to be provided. Note also in article that the market apparently encourages builders to put in too many bathrooms in their projects. Central planning will limit the number of bathrooms as well as the size of master bedrooms and the maximum number of parking spaces.

After Central Planner Pam Williamson says...
"Task force Vice Chairwoman Pam Williamson acknowledged it is "probably true" that affordable housing will cost developers more to build ".

"The question is: what's enough (profit)?" Williamson said.

We don't make this stuff up!!!!

I Don't Know What Name to Pick said...

I was there. The woman Williamson? was the one who got every single person there to admit that there is a absolute need for affordable housing. Now she even has Templeton saying it. She read out quotes from just about every conservative and liberal who was elected with them saying it. Then she pretty much said we had to decide whether we were going to do something or not. She put the monkie on our back. She really did. I was there.

Anonymous said...

I wasn't at the hearing, and I agree with much of what Mr. Templeton has said, but frankly I think it's a stretch to assert we need more student housing.

NewGuy said...

I say let the market decide what housing we need. Developers who build student housing that "isn't needed", won't be in business for long. AND, any housing units vacant because we "don't need them" will certainly cause their prices to drop.

guy faulkes said...

NewGuy, the free market will always correct itself if allowed to do so. Your post makes to much sense to be understood by Ms. Williamson and her ilk.

Anonymous said...

But are you really pushing for a 'free market'?

guy faulkes said...


A.Conservative said...

Having several times read through the "Affordable Housing" section of Boone's ordinances and having looked over the task force minutes, I remain completely mystified.

I've seen nothing there that could conceivably make housing more affordable.

Requiring >25% of units to have a garage or carport can ONLY increase the cost. Requiring flat roof space to be 50% 'livable space' can ONLY increase the cost.

If the developer should decide to include garages or 'livable' roofs, he will pay the extra cost and benefit from a higher rent or selling price. (Or lose out if he misjudged the willingness of the market to pay extra for these.) In any event, those choices are better decided by the free market.

Many, many items in the "Affordable Housing" codes increase the cost to develop and build any housing. If it costs more to build, it must cost more to rent or buy.

This is almost as silly as Obamacare being named the AFFORDABLE Care Act.

Both, by the way, are all about control and central planning by power-hungry progressives who believe they know better than we do how to live our lives.

If you know someone who does not believe the free market can do a better job, have them read the 1958 essay "I, Pencil." (Google it.)