[GrantAmann]

Grant Amann – Here’s my “Strong Towns” review of the plan:

My comments are in 4 parts.
1.  SMART Goals and Metrics
2. We Don’t Know the Barriers
3. Utilizing Every Tool Available to Government
4. Missing Metrics
____________________________________________________________

1 – Smart Goals and Metrics

A professor once told me, “Your data is only as good as your metric.” Metrics should clarify barriers and give a sense to the priority that solutions are needed.

Metrics should include a measurable unit (e.g., per year, city, acre).
Example: “Percentage of vacant/second homes per year.”

Goals should be S.M.A.R.T. (Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, Time-Bound) and address the actual problem.
Example of a weaker goal: “Partnering across sectors to use public land for housing.”
This misses the core issue—Utah’s growth being hindered. Why do we want housing?

Better goal:
“By [date], evaluate the feasibility of selling public land to private developers by comparing its land value per acre to nearby city-owned land, projecting long-term maintenance costs, and assessing whether housing investment would generate greater long-term value than retaining the land, after 100 year maintenance costs.”
____________________________________________________________

2 – We Don’t Know the Barriers to Homeownership

In phase 2, we will look at which barriers have the highest impact on the problem. Before defining metrics, we must first ask the right questions. I believe this is missing from this report. Including these questions will clarify the metrics needed to identify and address barriers, which is essential in Phase 1. Key questions include:

• Is housing expensive to build?
• Is financing difficult?
• Does income keep up with housing prices?
• Where is it most financially responsible to build?
• What’s preventing growth?
• What stops people from becoming homeowners?
• What leads to eviction—the last step before homelessness?

Without these metrics, the report concludes that housing is cheap to build, but expensive to purchase – which I don’t think is true.

Although we are sure we need more housing, “lack of housing,” cannot accurately describe why housing isn’t getting built, or why ownership rates are declining.

The overarching problem is that there are barriers causing a lack of affordable housing, which stunts Utah’s growth and decreases quality of life. We are looking for the barriers to attainable housing ownership.

Simply proposing a plan to encourage building will not fix all the barriers in the way of itself, such as community pushback, let alone the bigger problem at hand, “attainability.” (Without education campaigns, for example, it’s likely every new development will be met with tremendous pushback from residents and be stalled for years.)
____________________________________________________________

3 – Utilizing Every Tool Available to Government

I have developed a list of things a government can do:

1. Provide: Healthcare, social services, welfare, etc.
2. Preserve: Environment, recreation, parks, air quality, clean/garbage, etc.
3. Promote: Economic Development, cultural development, growth
4. Educate: Education, Public awareness, human development, etc.
5. Develop: Infrastructure, transportation, public utilities, etc.
6. Govern: Regulate, interpret law, elected officials, police, etc.

The tactics menu should be divided by what the Government can do. The plan currently only really talks about 2 options (5 & 6). Here are examples of the others:

1. Provide: government owned land or social housing. Public developers could enjoy lower property taxes, zoning exemption, and no need to require a large return. Affordable units would need to be subsidized by market rate apartments.
2. Preserve: existing natural lands. I echo Andy’s comment, preservation is not only good for the environment, but good for the budget. Also-preserve existing affordable housing.
3. Promote: Incentivize supply of housing builders. Encourage competition in the housing market and encourage competition of the housing sector.
4. Education campaign – here at the local level, we receive tremendous pushback on enabling multi-family units to be built in existing multi-family districts. An education campaign would help the public understand that more housing does not mean their property values will go down.
5. Develop: already discussed.
6. Govern: already discussed.

____________________________________________________________

4 – Missing Goals and Metrics

Main Missing Metrics:

• Land Value Per Acre – This is the most crucial metric for sustainable growth. This is crucial when discussing non-productive land. This metric reveals that the more reliant on automobiles a city is, the less financially productive it tends to be. Urban3 and Strong Towns have great examples. This should be prioritized over other metrics.
• Income-to-Home Price Ratio Over Time – If housing is unaffordable, wage growth may need to be part of the solution.
• Units Within 1 Mile of Schools – Can families find housing near existing schools
• Housing Costs Per Year/City – Example: Price of Concrete Per State. Utah has some of the highest concrete costs in the nation—why? Could material costs be reduced?  Concrete is just one example. Is lumber expensive in Utah?
• Percentage of Homes Bought by First Timers Per Year – Are we prioritizing homes for new buyers or just those who already own property?
• Non-Productive Private Land Acreage – Can we sustain existing infrastructure? Are we maximizing existing private land before developing public land?

Additional Metrics:

• Utility Maintenance Costs Per Mile  – Shows where infill is cheaper than sprawl but excludes maintenance costs.
• Rent vs. Ownership Rate Per Year – Ownership should be a goal.
• New Contractor Business Licenses Per Year – Does Utah foster new developers or just established ones? Is there a labor shortage in the housing sector?
• New Condo Units (%) Per Year – Why are condos so expensive? How do regulations affect costs?
• Commute Times & Roadway Congestion Per City – Heavy congestion near job centers may indicate a need for closer housing.
• Number of Planning Staff vs. Permit Speed – Does staffing affect approval timelines?
• Water Usage Per Resident Per County
• Months to Secure Construction Financing Over Time – Long delays suggest difficulties in accessing capital.
• Foreclosure/Default Rates on Development Loans (%) Per Year – Higher rates suggest financial struggles in completing projects.
• Utilization Rate of Tax Credits & Grants for Development Per Year– Are developers leveraging available financial support?
  ________________________________________________________

Overall, there’s some great layout and content here. The guiding principles are solid. But it is crucial to get this document pointed in the right direction, and right now it is very narrowly headed in a direction of 1 solution — Build housing. There are some really cool metrics, but without the overarching direction, they will be ignored.

Final Proposal: Change the name to “Utah Attainable Housing Strategic Plan.”

Thank you for listening and for all your hard work! This is a tremendous undertaking and it’s a great beginning.

• This reply was modified 2 weeks, 4 days ago by GrantAmann.

[Author]

Posts