In regard to housing crisis, one size cannot fit all

How to solve what is truly a housing (supply and price) crisis? I dread what I can imagine. I have nervously envisioned re-introduction of the “company town,” or even conversion of open space outside the city, toward “productive” subdivisions. And there goes more prime farmland. I can’t speak for others, but I know I can’t eat my house. There can be a number of possible solutions, which I discuss in a subsequent column. For now it’s enough to say one size cannot fit all.

Density and sprawl are posed as opposites. One method aimed at reducing sprawl, applied a few decades ago by Portland (Oregon), instituted an urban growth boundary. Sprawl ceased, but land prices soared. As a planner, I understand the intent. But this kind of measure has the same kind of effect as rent control: The supply valve closes. How do prices behave then? And what happens when the inevitable bust later comes to answer an unfettered “boom?”

For residents sensing development pressure a better feeling might be created by the “feel” of a satisfying, less-dense environment. It’s possible, if we recognize that density is not only useful but now vital if we are to gain a balance between housing and jobs. Design gains importance. Many elements can play a role, such as reducing side and rear setbacks, limiting off-street parking, seeking stepped-back upper floors.

Doesn’t zoning at least help limit imbalanced development? Zoning’s original purpose, as fashioned in the northeastern part of the USA during the early 20th century, was to separate less wholesome uses from those more so. Today zoning offers a reasonably easy way to evaluate investment. The difficulties arise after the closing, when the check has been delivered. Then what’s known in the planning profession as the “drawbridge phenomenon” gains hold, whereby one’s grip on that “piece of paradise” means everything can stop — “I’m here now, so stay away.” Change is difficult, but community is as community does.

Longmont has its unique problems and constraints — e.g., a short planning history, too-narrow streets that don’t go through, and a “leakage rate” of around 25%, or one-fourth of the labor force living here and working out of town.

I’ve met an obviously competent service employee working more than one job here and living in a small RV. Does this sit well with neighbors who prize a peaceful, clean urban streetscape that broadcasts safety and a less chaotic existence? Locals react to new homebuilding proposals at even elevated price points, and their tactics have become increasingly informed by apparently learning the language of policy and planning. Only one RV at any curb might ruin someone’s day.

A homebuyer, particularly a first-time buyer, might “drive until qualifying (for a mortgage).” Firestone to Longmont may not seem too burdensome a commute. But how far will people be traveling next year to work here? Sterling? There is already an “exodus” from Denver attributed to the price of housing, rented or owned. Destinations reported suggest we have now reached a new mantra: fly until you qualify. I have long been aware of commuters approaching Denver from Greeley, Colorado Springs, even Cheyenne. I also have heard about commuting into Washington, D.C., from the state of West Virginia. The popular Colorado Front Range including Longmont has apparently joined the less-than-laudable list of places related to extreme labor sheds. Now THE question: For whom do/should we intend or wish Longmont to exist? From where do we hope to gain firefighters, police officers, teachers, nurses? We face a conundrum similar to the mountain ski towns into which day workers commute more than 60 miles each way, along which journey astronomically expensive child care is often engaged. One dead battery or flat tire, and job loss becomes much more likely. Even Denver has seen as many as 12 persons jammed into a single residence, in hopes of alleviating housing stress. Is this Longmont’s future?

A decade ago city leaders touted the idea of “primary” jobs — those contributing to the practice and expression of cycles of capital. They produce to sell beyond Longmont while sourcing inputs within. If we continue as we are, Longmont won’t need a museum expansion. The city might become one.

Greg Iwan practiced as an institutional real estate market analyst and staff economist for a $21 billion corporation, and as a state-licensed commercial real estate appraiser, all following seven years as a natural resources land agent. He holds a master’s degree in urban and regional planning.