Other ideas for Housing Diversity

@Tom Murley Thank you for this (and your other) very detailed comments, including specific suggestions. The committee is discussing all of these in some way, perhaps with the exception of the complete removal of politics. Unfortunately state law requires certain things to remain in the purview of elected officials with a means of citizen petition. One thing I wanted to address is the concept of inclusionary zoning (requiring some level of affordability with market rate development). Cape already requires this, but in a limited basis and right now ONLY for for-sale homes (not rentals) and only in the residential zones. That said, expansion of that concept is certainly on the table. Again, thank you, and like all comments we're taking this all to heart as we develop specific policy recommendations to expand housing diversity.

In my view there are 6 elements to making affordable housing work: (1) sufficient land, (2) a zoning/building approval process that has a high likelihood of a successful outcome, (3) regulation, (4) combination of low building costs and finance costs (including subsidies), (5) increased density (which lowers cost) and (6) removing politics as to size and location.

Applying these to Cape;

Land- Cape has limited land availability and what is available and privately owned has a higher value to developers and owners as high end housing. So Town land could be critical. This could involve some radical thinking. For example incorporate Town Hall, Community Center, police and fire in one complex either on School Property or the landfill freeing up town center land for more dense town center housing.

Zoning/Building approval. The recent experiences with the Szanton proposal, Lumbery and conditions with the Cape Integrated building show a long and uncertain process. We need to streamline the process, limit referenda ability to overturn and limit conditions to make positive outcomes more likely. I cant understand why any developer would even try after the last round.

Regulation-Many communities require developers if high end housing to do a percentage of low income housing to get permits. We could do the same.

Building cost and finance. Standardization is key to lower costs. In Europe and elsewhere there are more factory built and modular housing options that coat less rather than doing another Starboard village. On finance the town has a lower borrowing rate than the private sector, so it begs the question of whether the town should own, finance and manage.

Density. We have limited land and higher density is cheaper. The town center proposal wanted to lift the max heigh from 35 to 46 ft for higher density which in the grand scheme of things is nothing but people went ballistic. The town landfill proposal looks like another Starboard village which does not have enough density. Others on this thread have opposed apartments because it may not be what people want. I was infrastructure investment for years and people often asked me what we wanted in investment. I joked that my wife and I were looking for a house and what we wanted was Versailles, we wanted it a 20 minute walk from our office and we wanted to pay $500,000. If anything about the current housing market tells us it is that people are will to pay top dollar for even the most modest CE neighborhoods. I think there will be an appetite for more dense housing.

Removing politics. Perhaps like is done in some states with independent redistricting commissions or nationally with the military base closing commissions, the Town could take politics out by delegating authority to an independent siting a design commission of local citizens and local experts who are not politicians and so the council does not have to debate.

so in the end it is not what else can CE do, but how can it get these 6 factors in line to have the greatest chance of success

Appreciate the response.

And, I respect that you have a different view.

The development in OOB is commendable. However, when I researched the development. I found it was the same developer whose project was subject to the referendum in Cape. Recall the developer cancelled rather than try to move forward in such an unsettled environment. Would a new effort fare any better?

Tim KirnerSent from my iPad

@Thomas Kirner Thanks for this comment and for your ongoing participation in the conversation. Part of the survey is trying to get an understanding of community sentiment around just this - local taxpayer willingness to provide subsidies versus other incentives. Virtually all affordable housing creation in Maine is NOT done with local subsidies - most is completed with non-economic incentives or the use of federal, state, and private funding. A good recent example is a mixed-income development in Old Orchard Beach, which used no local subsidy. This is a good example of the way most new different style of housing has been and is being created in our state, in this case specifically targeting seniors who did not have safe and affordable rental options in town. Properties like this not only don't cost local taxpayers anything, they serve local residents and help reduce taxes by increasing the tax base and increasing state funding for education. As to the support of housing diversity for the sake of enabling the less wealthy among our town to live here, we certainly appreciate and respect that opinion and again thank you for participating in the conversation. https://www.mainehousing.org/news/news-detail/2023/05/04/milliken-heights-celebrates-grand-opening

I have been thinking about this for a couple of days. I am not sure, other than massive subsidies, there is anything Cape can do that would make housing affordable. The reasons are first, Cape residents have a very high income. So they mostly can afford higher cost housing. Next Cape has a very high cost of living rating. From a google search:

The cost of living in Cape Elizabeth, Maine is the highest in the United States andthe highest in Maine, while median household income ( https://www.census.gov/data.html ) in Cape Elizabeth is $127,363which is the highest in the United States and the highest in Maine.

I think the problem is any subsidies from the town might result in increased taxes which make the town less affordable and drives out families on the financial edge.

I don’t support housing diversity for its own sake. I think market forces, which continue to make Cape a more expensive place to live simply are not going away.

Tim KirnerSent from my iPad

@Donna Lamberth Thanks for this comment and for also being involved in the various other threads here on Loomio. One thing the committee has heard (and which is also a recommendation of the Housing Diversity Study) is the need to be open to partnering with organizations such as Habitat and with experts in the creation of housing, some of whom are also private firms risking their capital in development. Appreciate the suggestion that some level of flexibility is important.

Consider supporting an organization like habitat for humanity (full disclosure; I’m a board member) or a for profit developer who has an interest in building a development in our town. We have to be willing to make it a “win” for the organization or developer & not waste their time if we are unwilling to make concessions that make the project feasible.