Affordable housing ideas get nay/yea
BY PRU SOWERS
KONK LIFE STAFF WRITER
Key West City Commissioners took one step forward and one step back on the issue of affordable housing Jan. 21 when they rejected a proposed workforce housing development at Poinciana Plaza but approved moving ahead with increasing height and density limits for similar developments in town.
Commissioner Teri Johnston had proposed directing City Manager Jim Scholl to work with the Key West Housing Authority to see if there is enough land available at Poinciana Plaza to build a 30-unit building for affordable and workforce housing. Housing Authority Executive Director Manuel Castillo confirmed to commissioners at their meeting that there is enough room on the site – which has also been designated as the location for a new assisted living senior citizen housing facility – for another building. But the measure failed by a 2-4 vote because three of the commissioners wanted Johnston to amend her resolution to include at least three other potential locations for affordable housing. When she did not agree to the amendment, so as not to “water down” the proposal, Commissioners Tony Yaniz, Billy Wardlow and Clayton Lopez joined Commissioner Mark Rossi in rejecting the idea.
Johnston was clearly frustrated at the vote.
“This is indicative of us. We can’t even move forward with 30 units of affordable housing on this dais,” she complained.
But Wardlow and Yaniz wanted to designate the former Easter Seals building on College Road as a site for affordable housing. Lopez wanted to include a portion of the planned Truman Waterfront Park for similar housing, as well. Johnston pointed out that a recent white paper report by the city planning department estimated that the city needs an estimated 3,000 units of affordable housing to retain its workforce, which is having difficulty staying in Key West because of soaring housing costs.
“This is one location of a number we are going to have to approve. Could we please just move forward with 30 units,” she implored her colleagues right before the vote.
But the next proposal won a unanimous vote, directing the city manager to investigate and present options to commissioners to increase affordable and workforce housing units by changing current law restricting building height and the number of units that can be built on a parcel. Commissioner Rossi said that the area of 14th Street and Northside Drive in his district would be a prime location for buildings higher than the current allowable 30 feet. And Yaniz repeated his mantra of, “If we can’t go out, we have to go up.”
“We’re not talking about the historic district. No one is talking about 20 stories. We’re talking six stories, five stories,” he said. “This is a broad shot. What’s out there? What can we do? We have to look at all the facets of it.”
“We’ve got to move forward. There are certain areas in the community that can take additional height,” Johnston said.
But Mark Songer, of the local environmental group Last Stand, urged commissioners to utilize all resources available before making permanent changes in height and density ordinances. He recommended including local bar and restaurant owners in the debate, since it is their workers who need the affordable housing. He also asked commissioners to create new tax or other incentives to encourage builders to develop workforce housing projects. Commissioner Wardlow agreed, saying there were multiple municipal buildings, such as the police station, that could create housing units above the workspace.
[livemarket market_name="KONK Life LiveMarket" limit=3 category=“” show_signup=0 show_more=0]
The funny (odd, not humorous) thing is, these are the same yo-yo’s who okay-ed removing the “affordable housing” at the corner of United and White in order to allow the NOAA station’s insertion into our community.
Oh yeah, and they’re the same bunch of whiz kids who thought that cutting out a huge chunk of the Stadium mobile home park was a good idea.
Now, they are the champions of affordable housing, sort of.
Shouldn’t there be “responsible” government? And, if so, then shouldn’t they be responsible to the community? Perhaps an oversight committee wouldn’t be such a bad idea, at least one with teeth?
Something to consider.
A great deal of affordable, public, and senior housing does in fact exist in the city. I was skeptical about whether the housing on Roosevelt, the old “Fairgrounds,” would ever get built, but after 7 years it finally did.
Maybe we can learn from our successes. How did those happen?
Having served on numerous affordable housing committees I can assure you that the solutions are at our fingertips. The only missing link is political will. Now after doing nothing for so long some of our commissioners are trying to get something started, at least in the process.. some have decided that it is wise to do everything possible at one time…..JEEEZZ come on you guys! You have to eat the elephant one bight at a time! Every time you turn down an affordable project you have helped increase the dire need and costs to the community. Get a grip and get ‘er done!!
Why isn’t housing “affordable” for “workers”?
Could it be the cost of GOVERNMENT is to high? The employers have to pay so much in TAXES, Fees, etc. to be able to pay their workers a livable wage? Someone needs to reduce the number of people on the city payroll… thereby reducing the number of vehicles for these people …. ETC. example: Parking Department. even if this department is needed, put them on their feet. They only have 4 square miles that they “patrol”.
How can more affordable housing be created?
What about taking down the “slums” scattered all over the city? (the old Military Housing) You can get 4 or 5 times as many people in the same space with 3 or 4 story apartments! The new buildings could all be paid for by selling one of the “prime” properties?