Agenda - 08-25-2008- c2 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

~~ Personally, I support the emphasis on compact mixed-use developmems not only because it's a good conservation strategy, but because this is the best strategy for significantly increasing the supply of housing affordable to working and middle class households. To put it another way, if the plan's implementation does not result in an increased supply of less expensive land - on a per lot basis -- for residential development than currently available, then the comprehensive plan update will have little or no impact on reducing the shortage of workforce housing in the county. This points to the main flaw with the plan's housing element. It almost exclusively focuses on issues related to affordable and special needs housing; albeit an area of concern which I fully support. However, the housing element should also address the systemic problems which cause the county's housing market to skew towazds upper-income housing and recommend actions for bringing the market into a more equitable balance. Finally, I encourage the commissioners to ask themselves if they've heard from as many stakeholders as they feel is appropriate far a policy document of this significance before voting on the plan later this summer. I believe the compressed time schedule put a strain on the planning and advisory boards & diminished the opportunity -especially during Phase II -for widespread and continuous community input. As such, I encowage the commissioners to immediately solicit the written comments of each lead advisory board so that their comments can be utilized by the planning board as they continue to refine the plan this summer. Indeed, one or more joint advisory board meetings at this stage would be useful in assessing community support for the proposal, as well. as gathering constructive recommendations for final improvements. May 19, 2008 Public Hearing Comments, Allan Rosen, page 2