Lack of affordable/sustainable housing

[Thomas Jensen]

Thank you for taking a moment to read this, and thank you for trying to address this issue.

I'm asking the League and it's members to consider solutions that will maintain and character and quality of life that has made Corvallis the City we chose to live in.

Accepting the State's mandates ensure the loss of character and quality of life, and the homogenization of all communities.

Please note, the words "affordable" and "sustainable" are used to bolster supporting arguments while detracting from the reality of the issue.

HUD determines affordability.  In Corvallis, rates for affordability are falsely and grossly inflated by not counting the incomes of OSU students.

State legislation and the accompanying local Land Development Code changes only make benefit and opportunity for developers.  These benefits aren't offered to individuals and families hoping to make their home purchase "affordable".  The funding comes from the taxpayers; the taxpayers will cover the shortfalls from tax abatement and Service Development Fee waiver, and the production costs are no lower.  This actually makes everyone else's housing less tenable, as every cent towards other fees, taxes, and special projects is less money held by and available to the individual.

Developers will build to be profitable, and that is necessary to continue as a person or business. And as evidenced in the Saturday Gazette-Times lead article, "In Need of More Housing", attempts to legislate development do nothing for communities beyond undermining local controls, character, and quality of life. Beyond the sheer number shortfalls, statements mention the State's unrealistic desires.

It claims boosting housing supply makes it more affordable, though cost of housing and income of resident is what actually determines affordability.  The article talks about people buying housing, yet State maneuvers don't promote home ownership.  It claims development creates local jobs, yet the gross majority of the development employs parties beyond Corvallis.  The article references Lincoln County, and in similar circumstance, Corvallis development involves homes unaffordable to the majority, and the transition to or demolition of the lowest cost/most accessible housing to construct more, less accessible rental housing.

The state disallowed single-residence zoning, resulting in existing single-home neighborhoods to become mixed-housing, while these zonings already exist.  The State abhors "heat-islands", yet now allows 100% lot coverage.  The State creates an Urban Growth Boundary, yet will annex land beyond boundary is developer can show it is more affordable to develop.  It removes parking standards to reduce carbon impact of vehicles, thinking people won't bring cars.  Yet, development where parking was to be far exceeds vehicle carbon, and the vehicles still come.

Thank you for your patience, and please take into consideration my ideas when you question and challenge the movements of our City Staff, Committee, Council, and Task Force groups.  tj