Laserfiche WebLink
as it relates to affordable housing. These questions were explored in small group exercises wherebythe 6.The housing stock is vertical limiting the ability of residents to age in place. <br /> <br />stakeholders were divided into two equal groups.7.There has been discussion regarding accessory dwelling units in the community. Forty-six percent <br />(46%) of all city parcels are currently zoned R-2 (Single and Two-Family) Residential District. There <br />Small Group Discussion: Defining LaƉĻǞƚƚķ͸ƭ CǒƷǒƩĻ vǒĻƭƷźƚƓ tƩƚƒƦƷƭ are more parcels zoned to allow two-dwelling units than any other type of parcel in the city. Of <br />the 8,339 parcels zoned R-2 District, just 2,545 currently have a two-dwelling unit structure. This <br />leaves nearly 6,000properties that are zoned for two units and only have one. <br />8.Amendment to the zoning code allowing for the primary lot coverage to be 35% as opposed to <br />the current regulations which cap primary structure lot area coverage at 25%, leaving, on a typical <br />lot, an additional 10% of otherwźƭĻ ĬǒźƌķğĬƌĻ ƌğƓķ Ǟŷźĭŷ ΑĻǝĻƓ Ʒŷough it may adhere to all other <br />ǩƚƓźƓŭ ƩĻƨǒźƩĻƒĻƓƷƭ Αźƭ ǒƓǒƭğĬƌĻ͵ <br />9.State preemptions on home rule authority for cities limits the ability of the City to provide rent <br />control and stabilization. <br />10.Landlords need to be educated about voucher programs. <br />11.Code enforcement is key to ensuring safe, clean, accessible, and quality housing. <br />12.Advocacy is key to changes at the federal, state, and county levels to unlock tools and resources <br />that can support affordable housing. <br />13.Current market supply and demand model is a major challenge. Find opportunitiesto increase <br />supply and therefore reduce demand and prices. <br />Workshop: Planning Through Scenarios <br />Scenario planning allows stakeholders to consider future uncertainties through the exploration of multiple <br />Following the small group discussions, a full group discussion was facilitatedfrom which the following <br />possibilities. Contrast this with traditional planning that is focused onasingular future. The City of <br />vision statements and key factors impacting the vision were offered. <br />Lakewoodusually employs traditional planning techniques when considering park, streetscape, <br />redevelopment, and other similar projects focusedimplementing a defined future. <br />Vision Statements <br />Exploratory Scenario Planning VS Traditional Planning <br />1.We are a community of income and social diversity. <br />2.We have affordable housing opportunities for families, teachers, nurses, and safety forces. <br />3.Our housing is safe, clean, of quality, and accessible. <br />Ѝ͵hǒƩ ƌğƓķƌƚƩķƭ ğƩĻ ğĭĭƚǒƓƷğĬƌĻ ğƓķ źƓŅƚƩƒĻķ ΑǞĻƌĭƚƒźƓŭ ƚŅ ǝƚǒĭŷĻƩƭ ğƓķ ƚƷŷĻƩ ƦƩƚŭƩğƒƭ͵ <br />5.We have non-profit and for-profit developers furthering affordable housing opportunities. <br />6.Ideally, affordable housing includes ownership and rental units and we recognize ownership <br />may be more challenging. <br />7.We will carry forward this vision in a manner that maintains our character and neighborhood <br />fabric that defines Lakewood. <br />Key Factors Impacting the Vision <br />1.Local government can only do so much. Public-private partnerships between the City and non- <br />profit housing organizations can lead this effortand the City can remove zoning barriers to <br />affordable housing. <br />2.New developments areoccurring whereby new affordable housing units are being created. <br />3.Lakewood is walkable with access to transit making access to services easier than other areas. <br />4.Achieving climate resiliency and sustainability often competes with housing affordability. <br />Managing affordabilityand maintaining equity will be a challenge. <br />Ў͵\[ğƉĻǞƚƚķ͸ƭ ŷƚǒƭźƓŭ ƭƷƚĭƉ źƭƚŅ ğƓ ğŭĻ ǞŷĻƩĻ ƌĻğķ ƦğźƓƷ źƭ ƦƩĻǝğƌĻƓƷ͵ !ĬğƷĻƒĻƓƷ źƭ źƒƦĻƩğƷźǝĻ <br />andexpensive. <br />1314 <br />Following the prompts provided above, the following are the summarized results of the Stakeholder <br />discussion of each scenario. <br />Stakeholders were asked to contemplate four predetermined scenarios and determine the <br />opportunities and challenges that each scenario presented in achieving the desired future. The <br />Summarized Stakeholder Scenario Responses <br />four scenarios examined futures with low housing affordability versus high housing affordability <br />and with high economic growth versus low/ decliningeconomic growth. <br />Planning Scenarios <br />Responses can be categorized into robust and contingent. Robust responses are those that work well <br />across multiple scenarios and can be utilized as a part of a plan under most future circumstances or <br />scenarios. These responses are preparation and proactive action that should take place although the <br />future cannot be predicted. <br />It is important to note that Stakeholders expressed concerns about the title of Scenario B: Bottom Falling <br />Out (2008 Slavic Village), specifically the parenthetical text. While the housing crisis that brought on the <br />Contingent responses are those that are put in place under certain circumstances where there is a large <br />Great Recession impacted the Slavic Village neighboƩŷƚƚķͲ {ƷğƉĻŷƚƌķĻƩƭ ƓƚƷĻķ ƷŷğƷ ƷŷĻ ͻƩĻķƌźƓźƓŭͼƚŅ ƷŷĻ <br />amount of uncertainty or unknowns in the situation -they are plans tailored for specific futures. <br />neighborhood had detrimentaleffects on the neighborhood that exacerbated the housing crisis. For the <br />purposes of the scenario planning exercise, the focus of this particular scenario was the oversupply of <br />Robust Responses <br />cheaphousing in low growth/declining economic conditions. <br />1.Infrastructure. City is built to support higher density and more people. <br />Stakeholders discussed potential impactsand strategiesrelated to affordable housing in each scenario. <br />Specificcommentary was provided on: <br />2.ContinuouslyEvaluateAffordable Housing Programs.Traditional federally funded housing <br />programs could be jeopardized by higher community income levels.Rethink the existing <br />1.Attitudes (social barriers, ex: what beliefs that are currently held that could keep us from <br />affordable housing tools in the toolbox. <br />succeeding?) <br />2.Systems (institutional barriers, ex: policies, programs, funding, etc.) <br />3.Educate. Educate landlords on housing assistance programs. Homebuyer education must be <br />3.People (who may stand in the way?, ex: who needs to be convinced?) <br />required for homebuyers. <br />4.Trends (what quantitative/qualitative data would need to shift or be stabilized?) <br />5.Strategies that may help prepare, avoid, achieve, and mitigate. <br />4.Support, Maintain, and Enhance Local Regulations & Enforcement. Remove regulatory barriers <br />and incentivize affordable housing. Ensure regulations protect the quality and character of <br />Lakewood. Code enforcement must be robust to ensure safe, quality housing. <br />1516 <br /> <br />