Bethlehem, in particular, has lamented its dearth of housing for working people. City officials, however, have played their part in creating this crisis. They've raised taxes for three out of the last five years. The only thing that stopped them from doing so over the past two years was an influx of federal funds to fight COVID. This in turn resulted in runaway inflation. Northampton County's tax bill is the lowest among most municipalities. It was even reduced two years ago. That helps reduce the cost of housing. It is building 50 homes for workforce housing on 11 acres in Forks Tp. I have a suggestion for doing more.
Northampton County maintains something called "the repository." It's a judicial limbo for properties unsold after a tax sale. Northampton County has nearly 50 of these tracts right now. In most cases, little can be done with them. The lots are too small. But this is precisely where underutilized tiny homes come into play.
I believe the county, in conjunction with the Lehigh Valley Planning Commission, could help municipalities create zoning overlay districts for tiny homes. Changes to building codes should be advocated as well.
Instead of ruining existing farmland, tiny homes on small lots in already dense areas would add to the tax base, provide homes that people can actually afford and give them access to most of wht is needed with a five-minute walk.
20 comments:
Wasn't there some kind of review (study) done about these properties many years ago and these properties deemed unfit for any use? That is why no one buys them at sheriff's sale. They were deemed useless pieces of property that no one wanted to own because they had to pay taxes on them, so they let the County take them over and saved themselves the tax money. They were small strips of "right of ways", water run off properties that were designated flood plains,
simply strips of land that were basically useless. It would be interesting to see if these properties were ever rezoned or some kind of updated study done to see how these properties might return to the tax base.
LVPC help municipalities create overlay districts for small houses? Wow, that's an ambitious idea. I hope you mean Allentown? Any municipality that participates in a high quality regional school system will see immediate political consequences to letting the masses of low and moderate income residents fill up their schools by living in small houses. Personally, I'm all for it, but in my opinion, it would only work politically in Allentown.
Maybe the first thing the county should do is fix its own house. Maybe try paying its employees a fair wage. That would lead by example. Typical northampton County, let me take the splinter out of your eye when I have a log in mine.
Its sad when employees that have been with the county for over a decade and still need a second job to survive. Not for extra things but to just survive. Think about that. I know they don't care.
"Wasn't there some kind of review (study) done about these properties many years ago and these properties deemed unfit for any use? That is why no one buys them at sheriff's sale. They were deemed useless pieces of property that no one wanted to own because they had to pay taxes on them," - There has been no such study. The problem with most of the properties is their size or uncertainties about ownership. I believe that at least half of these would be perfect for tiny homes.
Any municipality that participates in a high quality regional school system will see immediate political consequences to letting the masses of low and moderate income residents fill up their schools by living in small houses."
Most municipalities have one or two tracts like this. Urban communities have a few more. This will not result in a deluge of people moving into the burbs. And in urban centers, where more can be built, the tiny homes will be a boon top struggling school districts without the headache of a lot of children. Most tiny homes are for one or two people.
A few points:
1) "Workforce Housing" is the new euphemism for "Affordable Housing", which was the new euphemism for "Low-Income Housing". It doesn't matter what you call it, they are the same thing.
2) Building "tiny homes on small lots in already dense areas" has already been tried and has failed. Go to many of the interior blocks in downtown Allentown, and you'll find garages and carriage houses that were converted into apartments and subdivided into their own properties.
The inevitable result: Problems with noise, litter, transiency, parking, overcrowded schools, etc., etc., etc.
The reality is that no matter how nice these tiny homes look when built, they are not homes where people will stay for long periods of time. People will want to move on to live in larger homes with more space and larger yards. This means that those homes will be used hard, and not kept as well as someone who is in it for the long term.
3) I don't know about Forks Township, but "already dense areas" like Allentown, Bethlehem, or Easton don't need more low-income/affordable/workforce housing. They already shoulder an unsustainable portion of that population, and the problems it causes (above) drive those with better incomes away. If anything, local municipalities should look for ways to draw and retain higher-income residents, and develop policies designed to make that happen.
All this proposal really does is create a government-funded pocket of poverty that will make things worse.
Tax increases resulted in inflation? That's an interesting perspective....
That's not what I said. I said that the infusion of federal funds during COVID resulted in runaway inflation. It did not cause it alone, but was one of several factors.
Bernie O'Hare (9:46) said: "This will not result in a deluge of people moving into the burbs. And in urban centers, where more can be built, the tiny homes will be a boon to struggling school districts without the headache of a lot of children. Most tiny homes are for one or two people."
I believe this is what was said in post-War Allentown when they started making the same mistake. By the time they realized the damage, it was too late.
That said, it would be nice to put numbers to what you're proposing. Even if all of the 50 properties you said are currently in the "repository" could be converted to tiny homes, what would be the additional property/EIT/Other taxes gained by the school districts, and by which districts (since the properties are presumably spread across multiple districts throughout the entire county)?
My suspicion is that it won't be as big of a "boon" as you believe, and the potential downside will far outweigh any potential benefit.
Still, I think that kind of detailed analysis is extremely helpful but far too frequently left undone when looking at most proposals, not just this one.
Lets hypothetically use South Whitehall Township as an example. In recent history, the residents of this Township recoiled in horror at market rate suburban housing proposed by Kay Builders, reacted angrily to the construction of upscale high end apartments near Broadway & Cetronia Road and quickly elected an anti-development slate to Board of Commissioners. If you think a municipality like this one in the Parkland School District no less is going to work with LVPC to allow more dense "little house" type zoning you're pretty idealistic. I fully agree with Anon 9:51 this idea shouldn't even be proposed in Allentown, a City that already has far more than its regional share of affordable housing. Maybe this idea is best at a small scale in an extremely rural community.
Macroeconomics 101 Chapter 3 informs that the only thing that causes inflation is money supply. Bernie had it right. Agree or disagree with policy, but a system can't print and spend $4 trillion without causing inflation. That's supply and demand and elasticity, which is Chapter 2. The spenders' explanation is that we'll grow out of that debt. This used to be referred to as trickle-down or voodoo economics because the debt is never going to be paid.
Also, those houses are really tiny. We're turning Japanese. I think we're turning Japanese. I really think so.
Your suggestion is too smart Bernie. It is common sense. Therefore, they will never allow it!
I’ll weigh in quickly as someone who has witnessed these proposals upfront - it’s one thing for the LVPC to wave a magic wand and say ‘tiny houses’ and ‘overlay district’, but living in a community and getting involved in planning shows this as being a tall order. All the other items that go along with homes - water, sewer, electrical, and gas - they don’t just appear. They have to be distributed somehow, and many municipalities don’t allow or, more accurately, don’t want to deal with having easements and right of ways through existing and new properties for this. What if your sewer line for your tiny home has to travel through another property, or because of gravity has to travel through multiple other properties, and breaks? Does your neighbor two houses away enjoy dealing with the mess, and with repairs taking place in their yards? And what about cars? These proposals always assume that public transportation serves all of these homes, but in a society where every occupant wants a car, how do you deal with even half of the occupants getting cars because that’s how they get to work? Especially when parking is already at a premium in many of these neighborhoods? Are we supposed to knock down other dwellings (at public expense) to build parking garages to accommodate this? Again, these concepts may have their place, but too often LVPC latches onto an idea like this, but the realities makes them infeasible. Must be nice to not live in the real world.
Okay Bernie, you win. "there was no study done". I feel certain some kind of "report" was given as to these properties not being bought at "sheriff or tax sales" common sense sez if these properties are worth developing, then someone would have purchased them for next to nothing market value. Please list some of these properties so as to prove your point. They are mainly useless parcels of no use to anyone. The municipaities won't even buy them to utilize as parks.
12:05, What you "feel" and reality are two different things. You want me to list some of these properties. I linked to the repository list, and all you need do is click on it. As I said, most of the tracts are too small or have title problems. It's true that some could be converted into small marks which could increase green space. That is an option I failed to consider. I'm thinking more on the lines of having tiny home development, but I like the small park suggestion. These can really male an area a little more attractive.
Oh, stop whining and get work, and stop trying to gouge the poor taxpayers, many of whom are on a fixed income. Get off your duff and find another job if you want more pay.
The small park green space initiatives utilizing these micro lots are topics currently under discussion by the volunteer open space committee in Forks Township as part of planning smart growth. Linked to easements on large warehouses and other developments they provide opportunities to enjoy outdoors and lessen need for car travel to access activities.
Do you know why billionaires don’t go on social platforms and defend themselves against being called greedy, anti-poor leeches of society? Because you have people in comment section like yours that do the defending for them.
Housing is a human right. There shouldn’t be a “pay-wall” in front of something that you can literally die from if you don’t have.
Instead of deconstructing Bernie’s idea for housing, you should instead be promoting the idea of housing for EVERYONE, and dealing with these particular so-called problems with it as they arise. Nonetheless, it should be everyone’s priority to build affordable housing for ALL people in your community, instead of focusing how these “transients” will negatively affect your privileged livelihoods.
Give us all a break and start instead deconstructing your individualistic outlook on community.
"Oh, stop whining and get work, and stop trying to gouge the poor taxpayers, many of whom are on a fixed income. Get off your duff and find another job if you want more pay."
I by no means am suggesting that any county dollars be invested in building tiny homes. What I am suggesting is appropriate changes to zoning laws to make it feasible for the private sector. I received some comments stating tiny homes would not work. I'd disagree. This would provide affordable housing for empty nesters, singles and couples who are just starting.
The county has already done this with Glendon Hotel, although it used GPA $ to do so. There was a public purpose there bc the existing building was too close to the road and dilapidated.
The county can pursue affordable housing or partner with municipalities to establish small parks on some of these tracts.
Not all are suitable.
"Oh, stop whining and get work, and stop trying to gouge the poor taxpayers, many of whom are on a fixed income. Get off your duff and find another job if you want more pay."
Stop. By no means are we suggesting that we tax the working class or citizens on fixed budgets. We need to restructure how taxes are utilized by putting it into social programs that actually help the poor and middle class. We can cut cut the military budget by HALF and still have the most powerful armed forces in the world, instead of funneling contracts into billionaires pockets.
Y’all need to quit the mindset of of advocating for the rich, and switch to advocating for the people around you.
Better solution is for Norfolk Southern to add several empty box cars to their trains and invite the homeless to hop on board, hobo-style. Throw some hay in there for bedding and a barrel of fresh water. Donate some harmonicas for evening entertainment. Riders could open the door to relieve themselves, fertilizing open fields along the way. "Boxcar Willies" would enjoy touring our great nation for free. They would be like the passengers on the series "Snowpiercer", always on the move and never getting off. Problem solved!
Post a Comment