My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2026-03-30-cds-study-session-supporting-documents
>
Meetings
>
2026
>
03. March
>
2026-03-30 2:30 PM - CDS Study Session
>
2026-03-30-cds-study-session-supporting-documents
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/4/2026 5:24:07 PM
Creation date
5/4/2026 3:19:56 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meeting
Date
3/30/2026
Meeting title
CDS Study Session
Location
BoCC Auditorium
Address
205 West 5th Room 109 - Ellensburg
Meeting type
Special
Meeting document type
Supporting documentation
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
87
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Comment#013 <br /> MAM <br /> 3. Limits of Regulatory Capacity Alone <br /> The Housing Element appropriately identifies the need to monitor housing conditions and <br /> coordinate with municipalities. However,the element could more clearly recognize that <br /> expanding regulatory capacity alone will not resolve the affordability gap. <br /> In many planning discussions,there is an assumption that modest density increases or zoning <br /> incentives will meaningfully improve housing affordability. In practice,the economics of <br /> housing development in rural markets make this unlikely. With construction costs and <br /> financing costs both elevated,the marginal revenue gained from a small increase in allowable <br /> units rarely closes the capital gap that defines affordable housing projects. In rural contexts, <br /> this challenge is compounded by smaller project scales and relatively high per-unit <br /> infrastructure costs.Additional housing capacity provided by encouraging infill is therefore <br /> necessary, but it is unlikely to be sufficient on its own. <br /> 4. Local Housing Funding Tools <br /> The Comprehensive Plan could more explicitly recognize the role that local housing funding <br /> mechanisms may need to play. Kittitas County already administers a housing grant program, <br /> which is a positive step, but the program currently operates at a very small scale relative to <br /> the size of the problem.As a result, most affordable housing projects in the county solely rely <br /> on competitive state and federal funding sources such as the Housing Trust Fund or Low- <br /> Income Housing Tax Credits. <br /> These programs are valuable but highly competitive, and rural jurisdictions often face <br /> disadvantages competing for them due to smaller project sizes and a limited number of <br /> experienced affordable housing developers operating locally.Several projects in the county <br /> have already been delayed or cancelled following unsuccessful Housing Trust Fund <br /> applications. <br /> The Comprehensive Plan could direct the County to explore options for expanding its own <br /> housing funding capacity.Washington law provides several tools that could be considered, <br /> including: <br /> - The affordable housing sales tax authorized under RCW 82.14.530,which I believe the <br /> County previously passed on but should be revisited in the new political context of the <br /> expanding housing crisis. <br /> - The use of Real Estate Excise Tax revenues for housing capital investments under RCW <br /> 82.46.035 and RCW 82.46.037 <br /> Ellensburg has used the sales tax funding to great effect, and the county could evaluate <br /> whether similar approaches might support housing development in communities that do not <br /> have municipal housing programs. <br /> 509-968-5201 www.mapd.co 421 N Pearl St,Ste 100,Ellensburg,WA 98926 3 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.