Two of the biggest issues I often hear about in the Buena Vista and Chaffee County communities are that of the need for “smart growth” and affordable housing. Unfortunately, it seems to me that the two are rarely part of the same conversation and often times seem to be considered two issues isolated from each other. There is a perception, likely correct, that the more thoughtfully designed a community becomes, the more desirable it becomes and therefore the more valued and expensive it becomes, thus pricing lower income families out of the picture. Without making considerations for affordable housing while simultaneously seeking to demonstrate smart growth values, lower income families will inevitably be priced out of our community.

By many measures the population of our community will grow significantly over the coming decade and there is not much that can be done to prevent it. With this in mind, we must consider how we can thoughtfully guide this growth. According to wikipedia:

“Smart growth is an urban planning and transportation theory that concentrates growth in the center of a city to avoid urban sprawl; and advocates compact, transit-oriented, walkable, bicycle-friendly land use, including neighborhood schools, streets that work for everyone, mixed-use development with a range of housing choices.

Smart growth values long-range, regional considerations of sustainability over a short-term focus. Its goals are to achieve a unique sense of community and place; expand the range of transportation, employment, and housing choices; equitably distribute the costs and benefits of development; preserve and enhance natural and cultural resources; and promote public health.”

By its nature, smart growth also embraces values of efficient design and is more commonly starting to include ideas of green building in its approach as well.

The wikipedia entry for affordable housing reads,

“In the United States and Canada, a commonly accepted guideline for housing affordability is a housing cost that does not exceed 30% of a household’s gross income…. When the monthly carrying costs of a home exceed 30–35% of household income, then the housing is considered unaffordable for that household.”

A recent post on NewWest.net by architect Kent Means states, “The average national prices of natural gas and heating oil have risen by 150 percent in the past ten years (US Energy Information Administration). The average national median income has risen by only 12 precent in those same ten years and peaked in 1999 (Americans for Balanced Energy Choices, based on the US Census). If the trends for energy and income continue at the same rate as the last ten years, we may see the energy for homes taking 18 percent of the average family income.”

Considering all of these ideas together, one realizes that energy efficient living and affordable housing can no longer be mutually exclusive concepts.

In a 2001 article posted on the National Housing Institute website, Danielle Arigoni writes that conflicts in the past have suggested “that smart growth and affordable housing advocates are necessarily on opposing sides of an “either/or” debate – either plan future growth consciously or create more affordable housing. It’s a false choice, though. At their core, smart growth and affordable housing are not only compatible, but complementary, and the two movements are starting to find shared policy agendas and ways to work together.”

At this point, the most visible examples of smart growth type developments in our part of the valley are of the higher end sort and certainly would support the belief that these developments are exclusive of affordable housing. I greatly appreciate these developments for what they are adding to the community, but I also feel very strongly that we must start to apply these concepts to lower cost housing. The challenge I think though is defining where these two concepts meet in the middle.

I believe that through intentional, thoughtful design, there can be some good examples of how affordable housing and smart growth practices overlap. To start with, new homes can be built to be much more efficient which in turn will help to lower the ongoing monthly cost of energy bills. If you are concerned about the cost to build rising due to using more efficient materials, consider building smaller homes. (Do we really need all of that stuff?) Another overlap is that if affordable housing were to be built closer to urban centers, residents would not have to get in their cars and drive so far which would help reduce the need to have multiple cars (thus saving on fuel, insurance, and car maintenance). A good side benefit to this is that people would be out walking and biking more, getting exercise without even having to think about it – something we could all use a little more of.

Ultimately though, I don’t think it is just a matter of manipulating the built environment, but more significantly it is a matter of changing some of the ways we do things as a society. Some of the solutions to both the smart growth and the affordable housing issues will require a full blown shift in how we all choose to live our lives. The less stuff you buy, the less money you spend to buy it, the less space in your house you need to pay for to build to house it, and the less area you have to pay for on a constant basis to heat and cool. In addition to what people can do as individuals, we as communities must do a better job of looking at the big picture and acting on longer term vision.

I want the people who live here to be people who love this place, regardless of their income – senior citizens, school teachers, high net worth individuals, ranchers, retired surgeons, low income workers and young families alike. With that in mind, we must consider two important ideas. First, we have to make it so that the people who love this place can stay in this place – no matter who they are and how much money they have. This is where the affordable housing comes in. Secondly, we as a community must make decisions that will allow this place to continue to be one worth loving – especially in the wake of the oncoming population growth. The mountains will always be there, but the more vulnerable parts of our environment such as the watershed and river, the fertile soils, and the built environments, are all at risk of pollution, erosion, and careless development. This is where smart growth comes in.

Clearly these are both HUGE issues that require much thought, time, and education. It is reasonable to me that in many cases they have been approached as isolated concerns but I now believe it is time to consider them as interrelated. Choosing to build “green” is no longer a luxury of the middle and upper class. With oil prices quickly reaching new heights and even the possibility that global warming and limited fossil fuel sources could be a reality, it makes sense for everyone to try to live more conscientiously. It is up to individuals, government policy, and creative entrepreneurs to help achieve the coming together of these two ideas and make their blending a reality. I feel that it is time for our community to grapple with and come to understand the overlapping needs of these two issues and to create lasting solutions.