Supes put housing on suspension
Housing mitigation requirements have long been controversial. They’re perceived as needed to justify the additional workforce that will be brought in for jobs, but many developers rail against them, saying they make it harder to get loans and only add to a project’s cost, especially burdensome in a recessed economy. On Tuesday, Mono County’s Board of Supervisors took up an ordinance that would temporarily suspend the Mono County Code’s Housing Mitigation Requirements for up to two years.
As presented the suspension wouldn’t apply to projects that have already been approved and have yet to satisfy pre-negotiated housing mitigation requirements. Further, if a developer has met mitigation requirements [i.e. built a structure or paid in-lieu fees], those would also stand.
Supervisor Tim Hansen supported that position. “Projects with agreements in place should be held to those deals, but I’m open to extending the suspension to new projects,” he said. The suspension would exempt anything new projects can build within the next two years, but doesn’t exempt any mitigation obligations that would kick in after the suspension is lifted.
Supervisor Larry Johnston doesn’t consider the suspension a form of stimulus. “It doesn’t stimulate anything,” he stated. “[Housing mitigation] holds big developers accountable for providing adequate workforce housing to the community.” He dismissed the idea as just “another giveaway,” adding that the current Housing Ordinance was adopted through a public process, and so too should any sort of suspension. “We have not given appropriate notice to interested groups concerned with housing, such as Mammoth Lakes Housing. We owe it to those groups to be heard before suspending it.”
Discussion included the definition of “second units” added to homes, which are also known as “granny units,” and potentially limiting the size of second units both for ease of financing and scaling back potential density increases. With several developments located in District 2, Board Chair Hap Hazard reminded fellow Board members he had reservations about the Housing Ordinance from the get-go.
“The projects in my district are in rural areas, with no services, no schools, no childcare, no infrastructure to support workforce living. If we kick the door open on this, I’d be in favor of getting rid of the ordinance altogether,” he indicated.
Developer John Hooper, who’s built more than 200 affordable housing units countywide, said he finds the 2-year suspension “appropriate.” Hooper said housing mitigation affects his Rock Creek Ranch Project, financially, potentially mandating that 5 of his 11 homes have a second unit, at an additional cost of $50,000-60,000 per unit. Hooper is one developer whose affordable housing aspect has yet to be finalized.
In terms of the gap between how much affordable housing already exists in the marketplace and who can afford to live in it, Supervisor Vikki Bauer suggested that most of the waiting list is made up of rental units that are already below market rates. “Mono County can’t drive the market of affordable units down to where it should be, and we’re not going to be able to change that,” Bauer said. “Government has no business being in the housing market.”
“Affordable housing has warped the natural market,” Supervisor Byng Hunt posited. “Employers should look at housing, people should look at their own needs. Let the market do its own thing. [Government] shouldn’t be stepping in and upsetting things.”
The Board passed the ordinance 4-1, with Johnston dissenting. The suspension takes effect in July. The Board plans to revisit the suspension sometime prior to its expiration, and can either repeal it in one year, or extend it another two years, at its discretion.
