Dear Town Council,
I disagreed with the 2 for 1 bonus scheme when it was first passed, and I think the current proposal falls short as well.
We should focus on the workforce housing deed restriction only. Income based deed restrictions require massive subsidies that are simply a pass through into the pockets of employers allowing them to keep expanding their businesses with low wage jobs. Instead we should allow significant FAR bonuses in the urban commercial core for workforce deed restricted housing only. No additional market housing should be allowed in this bonus plan. The workforce deed restriction should be modified: Limit the size of the units so they aren’t targeting the upper class, remove the parking requirement (let the market decide if they have parking and how much), remove price and rent caps (so they don’t need subsidies). Anyone should be able to own one, but only local workers can live in the unit.
A free market can then function efficiently within the deed restricted local workforce space. Workers can compete financially for the most attractive units, and employers can compete for the best workers by raising wages. Under these parameters the workforce deed restricted housing should pencil and be attractive to developers, and we can avoid unintentionally subsidizing private employers and commercial expansion, and we will focus development in the commercial corridor where there is walkable access to work, shopping and services, and we will decouple housing from parking which will discourage more cars in the valley. When we require parking we guarantee that cars will fill those spaces. Once people have paid for a parking spot they will definitely want to make use of it.
The current bonus proposal encourages commercial growth and more traffic. Better to implement a plan that reduces the need for subsidies and encourages wage growth, rather than one that perpetuates low wage business expansion with a generous helping of rich people condos on the top.
Regards,
Judd Grossman
50 Rancher St., Jackson