|
|
|
|
Housing issues raised – again |
|
|
Thursday, 12 March 2009 |
By Mike Gervais
Register Staff
Three residents, two members of the Board of Supervisors and a county staffer answered the call for input on Inyo’s housing situation last week.
The Inyo County Planning Department is required to update it General Plan Housing Element by this August and hoped to get the public involved in the process by hosting two public comment meetings.
Senior Planner Josh Hart hoped to discuss population and housing trends, rental and purchasing prices and ultimately a new set of goals for the housing element.
Despite the low turnouts, five people in Bishop on Thursday and five people in Lone Pine on Wednesday, Hart spent more than an hour answering questions and writing down ideas for the new element.
According to Hart, the population of Inyo County has grown approximately 1.3 percent since the 2000 census. He also said the county issued only 30 building permits since 2007, but that there are about “200 units in the pipelines.”
One resident in attendance commented that those “pipelines” are very long and narrow, and it could take up to five years before any construction on those units begins.
The bulk of Thursday’s discussion revolved around finding, obtaining and developing county or privately-owned land to meet the needs of families with low and moderate incomes.
“Professionals are leaving the area because prices are too high,” one resident said. “I think affordable housing is clearly an issue.”
Another resident pointed out that Inyo County own several acres of land throughout the county that it should actively try to sell or trade into public hands.
“There are 40 acres in Big Pine, five acres in Bishop; you would be amazed at how much property Inyo County owns,” he said.
According to Second District Supervisor Susan Cash, the county does intend “to have an appraisal of all county-owned property, and get a recommendation from the financial commission on disposal” of those properties.
“I think there is support for that,” Cash said.
The supervisor added that an appraisal will cost approximately $85,000-$100,000, and “as soon as we get that appraisal, we need to move before it gets stale.”
“Just four or five, or eight or 10 pieces of property are key,” one resident said, urging Cash to get the ball moving on the appraisals and possible sales of those properties.
Cash said that the county is in a fiscally challenging time and identifying the money to have the appraisals done will be difficult. She also said there is the added problem that, other than a couple acres here or there in developed communities, much of the county-owned property is “not something anyone wants to own.” She said many of the county’s parcels are located in remote regions of the county.
“As a general principal, the county doesn’t want a loss in its net private property,” First District Supervisor Linda Arcularius said. “If we can trade, even if there is a net loss (in property) for the county, let’s trade.”
Arcularius said she is all for the county moving its stores of public property into private hands, but also added that nobody wants the property the county owns.
“I think government land should go into private hands at any time,” Arcularius said. “I don’t think government should have any more land than it has use for.”
Two residents at the meeting said that there are parcels in Bishop (near Jack in the Box) and in Big Pine (where the old Care Center was) that are prime lots for developers.
Moving the discussion forward, one of the residents participating in the meeting pointed out that even if lots were available for development, there is too little land available to make a significant dent in the housing problem.
To solve that problem, the resident said, the county can look at changing some of its zoning ordinances, allowing for smaller lot sizes, denser development and more leeway on height restrictions, allowing for more renters or property owners per parcel that is available.
Hart said the county has plans to look at those issues when it begins its zoning and General Plan update later this year.
“Part of this should include reduced government constraints, streamlining the permit process, allowing property owners to do more with their property and ultimately reduce the processing time,” said the community member.
Completing those requests will be a long-term goal that would include several county departments, the Board of Supervisors and community involvement from residents.
In the short term, one resident said the county can look at its vacation homes.
Currently Inyo County has no ordinance allowing second homeowners to rent their property out as short-term vacation rentals.
The resident said the county could look at a permit process that would allow second homeowners to rent out rooms, allowing the county to capitalize on bed taxes.
The problem with that approach, Cash said, would be transient traffic coming and going from local neighborhoods, possibly causing problems with residents.
With the information gathered last week, Hart said he hopes to have a draft of the new housing element available for public review within the next couple weeks. The Planning Commission is scheduled to review the draft on March 25 and the Board of Supervisors should take up the matter some time in April.
|
|
Last Updated ( Saturday, 25 April 2009 )
|
|
|
|
