The URL can be used to link to this page

Item R1 s R.1 y;+ ' "tr, BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS County of Monroe , Mayor Michelle Coldiron,District 2 n{sJ ` °' Mayor Pro Tem David Rice,District 4 -Ile Florida.Keys �� Craig Cates,District 1 Eddie Martinez,District 3 w Mike Forster,District 5 County Commission Meeting February 17, 2021 Agenda Item Number: R.1 Agenda Item Summary #6748 BULK ITEM: No DEPARTMENT: Planning/Environmental Resources TIME APPROXIMATE: STAFF CONTACT: Emily Schemper(305) 289-2500 1:30PM AGENDA ITEM WORDING: A public hearing to consider an ordinance by the Monroe County Board of County Commissioners adopting amendments to the Monroe County Land Development Code to amend Section 101-1 affordable housing definitions by creating a definition for area median income, workforce and workforce housing; amend Chapter 139-1 to clarify the affordable and employee housing administration, to incorporate nonresidential and transient inclusionary requirements by providing regulations regarding the provision of affordable housing for the development and redevelopment of nonresidential and transient uses; modifying the linkage provisions; amending and/or adding for consistency purpose related provisions; providing for severability; providing for repeal of conflicting provisions; providing for transmittal to the State Land Planning Agency and the Secretary of State; providing for amendment to and incorporation in the Monroe County Land Development Code; providing for an effective date. ITEM BACKGROUND: On April 13, 2016, the BOCC adopted the 2030 Comprehensive Plan which includes Policy 601.1.13 in the Housing Element stating: "Monroe County shall maintain land development regulations on inclusionary housing and shall evaluate expanding the inclusionary housing requirements to include or address nonresidential and transient development and redevelopment based on specific data and analysis." Current County regulations provide for an inclusionary housing requirement for residential developments that result in the development or redevelopment of three (3) or more dwelling units or ten (10) or more mobile homes to develop or redevelop at least 30 percent of the units as affordable housing units to implement Goal 601 of the Monroe County Comprehensive Plan and to ensure that the need for affordable housing is not exacerbated by new residential development and the redevelopment of existing affordable housing stock. In summary, the residential inclusionary housing requirement include residential developments that result in the development or redevelopment of 3 or more dwelling units or 10 or more mobile homes must develop or redevelop at least 30% of the units as affordable housing units (originally adopted in 2003 and amended several times). As an alternative to building affordable units, the LDC allows the following alternatives: Packet Pg. 2638 R.1 • purchase and deed-restrict existing market rate units (in lieu of building new units) • contribute a fee in-lieu for the affordable housing requirement & transfer to the county ownership the associated ROGO-exemptions for which the in-lieu fee option is used o in-lieu fee is based on the current maximum sales price for a one-bedroom affordable unit(currently $305,250) • donate to the county one IS or URM lot for each unit affordable housing required & transfer to the county ownership the associated ROGO-exemptions for any affordable unit required • satisfy the affordable housing requirements by linkage of projects (a covenant is placed on two or more projects linked, stating how the requirements for affordable housing are met for each project). The County does not currently have an inclusionary housing requirement for the development or redevelopment of nonresidential uses (office, retail, hotels, etc.). To develop and adopt inclusionary housing requirements for the nonresidential sector to build workforce housing, the County contracted with Clarion Associates and RRC Associates to complete the data and analysis necessary to establish the workforce need generation and a rational nexus of need generation and affordable mitigation needs. This data was completed and presented on November 14, 2017, to the BOCC (2016 Monroe County Employer Survey Results by RRC Associates and 2017 Affordable Workforce Housing Support Study for Non-residential Development by Clarion Associates). Staff is proposing amendments to incorporate nonresidential and transient inclusionary requirements based on the data provided by the studies listed above. The Monroe County Planning & Environmental Resources is proposing text amendments to the Monroe County Land Development Code to amend Section 101-1 affordable housing definitions by creating a definition for area median income, workforce and workforce housing; amend Chapter 139-1 to clarify the affordable and employee housing administration, to incorporate nonresidential and transient inclusionary requirements by providing regulations regarding the provision of affordable housing for the development and redevelopment of nonresidential and transient uses; modifying the linkage provisions; amending and/or adding for consistency purpose related provisions. For the nonresidential and transient inclusionary requirements, in summary, staff is recommending: • Establishing the purpose and intent for the nonresidential inclusionary requirements, • Establishing the applicability (isee requiring workforce housing be provided for all new development and expansions in an ai-nount proportionate to the need for affordable workforce housingthat the nonresidential and transient rases create). • Establishing that the nonresidential inclusionary housing requirements be satisfied with Wor~/fbr~ce Dousing, Wor~kfbr~ce Housing means dwelling Units for those who derive at least 70% of`their income as members of`the `orkforce in Monroe County and who meet the affordable housing income categories of tie Monroe County Code, • Establishing a 50% n itigcrlion requirement for projects triggering the nonresidential inclusionary housing requirements, • Creating a process for certain circumstances for an applicant to conduct an independent calculation to determine if there is an increase in the total demand for employees and workforce housing. This calculation would be reviewed by the Board of County Commissioners at a public meeting to determine if there is a mutually agreeable approach to the calculation prior to the application proceeding to the Development Review Committee for reviews Packet Pg. 2639 R.1 • Establishing an exemption and waiver process, including in the event of` a declared State of` I..,ocal Emergency, the I OC°C° may adopt a resolution recognizing that the strict application of` the nonresidential inclnsionary requirements would not enhance nor protect the health., safety and welfare of`the cornmunitve • Establishing the compliance requirements Gees the number of`workf`(.)rce housing Units or in-lieu f`ee needed per square foot of` new development or redevelopment (expanded or converted square footage) for each category of`non-residential land use), Y- Total f-C«usina _C«t al.Ln-j - u. r0%�1iti-91 ion xamples f uurts st G»«�i ��r� t e Units In=lieal fees Comma°a°e°A Retail 5x(}(}(} SF 1.04 $1 G 8(95 (Retaif stcrrc.s sttlac.rrn trl��.ts., S11CJp Jl11 .0 E 111E C5..CE Sl iLIC 11115..E lC.:. (}(}(}(}'L,I,Ct CtCt 72 I(}(}(n}.} SF 61 20.li00 SF 4.1 `�667 220 Officea 1.7 $19 23 (�rcfessicm ind non 7ress ni }(( 5 offic e bu1 I c itl 5 tL, (}(}(}(}'7(}4 '78 4<} I(}(}(}(} 5F 3.52 '392 4-0 20,C}(.0 SF 7. 4 `7 4 920 • Establishing that projects shall mitigate the deanand f`(.)r workf`(.)rce housing created by the proposed development or redevelopment by one or a con7hincilion of` the methods identified below: 0 The construction Qf Wor~lcftrRce housing dWelling units on the site of` the development project, The workf`(.)rce housing dwelling Units shall meet the County`s affordable housing restrictions as specified in Section 139-1(b) and (c), f`t>r a period not less than 99 years; 0 The construction Qf'Wor~kftrRce housing dWelling 1117its ctff-.s to of`the development project but within a 15 mile radius of` the nonresidential development/ redevelopment, The workf`(.)rce housing dwelling Units shall meet the County`s affordable housing restrictions as specified in Section 139-1(b) and (c), f`t>r a period not less than 99 years; 0 The deed-restriction (tf' existing dWelling units within a 15 mile radius of` the nonresidential developinent,%redevelopinente The workft>rce housing dwelling units rneet the Countv`s affordable housing restrictions as specified in Section 139-1(b) and (c), f`t>r a period not less than 99 years; 0 The cdoncrlion of 1cin d to the Col nql', upon the acceptance of` the I OCC° of` a proposed parcel or parcels, may satisfy the requirements of`this subsection by donating one (l) fS or URM zoned platted lot for each workforce housing Unit required but not provided through actual construction or in-lieu fees (or a Tier III parcel or parcels of`land zoned other than fS or URM as long as the donated parcel(s) have the appropriate density available to support the development of`the required number of`workft>rce units), and/or 0 The pu�,,,177ent (tf' a ,f e in-lien f`(.)r the inclusionary housing requirement f`(.)r all or a percentage of`the workft>rce housing units required, The in-lieu fee shall be paid prior to issuance of`a building permit f`t>r the nonresidential development or redevelopment, All in- lieu fees shall be deposited into the affordable housing trust fund and spent solely f`t>r the purposes allowed for that fund, • Establishing an irrclrr,siorrur~Y' requirement reduction ol)t on Which decr ea,es the 177itigalion Packet Pg. 2640 R.1 rRequirRcjrnent to 40% for an applicant with an inclusionary requirement of five (5) or more units, which builds all the required workforce units as low-inco ne and very low-inco ne cutler on site or within 5 miles of the nonresidential or transient development project. The Planning Commission, unanimously, recommended approval of the proposed amendment. PREVIOUS RELEVANT BOCC ACTION: In 2003, the BOCC adopted Ordinance No. 030-2003 to establish inclusionary housing requirements (amending Section 9.5-266(b)) for projects consisting of three or more new market rate units to develop at least 30% of the residential units beyond the first two units as affordable. This amendment did not apply to the redevelopment of existing units. In 2006, the BOCC adopted Ordinance No. 017-2006 revising the inclusionary housing requirements to include: 1) market rate residential development or redevelopment of three or more dwelling units shall be required to develop or redevelop at least 30% of the residential units as affordable housing, and 2) the removal, replacement or conversion of 10 or more mobile homes shall be required to develop or redevelop at least 30% of the residential units as affordable housing. In 2008, the BOCC adopted Ordinance No. 011-2008 revising the inclusionary housing requirements to allow an alternative compliance to the inclusionary housing requirements by allowing the developers to deed restrict existing dwelling units as affordable housing in lieu of constructing new affordable units. On August 17, 2016, the BOCC approved a contract with RRC Associates to (1) conduct a data- based survey of employers located in the unincorporated and incorporated parts of Monroe County to verify the employment patterns and the building floor area used for nonresidential development, and to (2) prepare the prototypical workforce/affordable housing unit(s), including size ranges, building materials and costs of construction, to be utilized by the County for the adoption of inclusionary housing requirements to address nonresidential and transient development. On August 17, 2016, the BOCC approved a contract with Clarion Associates to prepare a Support Study providing the technical support (data & methodology to determine need) for a workforce/ affordable housing mitigation program for nonresidential development and redevelopment (expansions and remodels), to be utilized by the County for the adoption of inclusionary housing requirements to address nonresidential and transient development. On November 14, 2017, a presentation was provided by RRC Associates summarizing the results of the survey of employers located in Monroe County to document employment patterns and the building floor area used for nonresidential development and a presentation was provided by Clarion Associates providing the findings of the Affordable Workforce Housing Support Study for Nonresidential Development which provides the technical support (data & methodology to determine need) for a workforce/affordable housing mitigation program for nonresidential development to be utilized by the County for the adoption of inclusionary housing requirements to address nonresidential and transient development. On February 21, 2018, the BOCC directed staff to process amendments on the application of Packet Pg. 2641 R.1 potential inclusionary requirement for nonresidential and transient development, as follows: 1. Develop a nonresidential inclusionary requirement? Yes. 2. Should the inclusionary requirement apply to new development? Yes. 3. Should the inclusionary requirement apply to the repair or development of the same use with no expansion/enlargement?No. 4. Should the inclusionary requirement apply to the repair or redevelopment of the same use that is expanded/enlarged? Yes. S. Should the inclusionary requirement apply to the repair or redevelopment with a new use with no expansion/enlargement? Yes. 6. Should the inclusionary requirement apply to the repair or redevelopment with a new use that is expanded/enlarged? Yes. 7. Should the inclusionary requirement apply to the demo/redevelopment or substantial improvement of the same use with no expansion/enlargement?No. 8. Should the inclusionary requirement apply to the demo/redevelopment or substantial improvement of the same use that is expanded/enlarged? Yes. 9. Should the inclusionary requirement apply to the demo/redevelopment or substantial improvement with a new use with no expansion/enlargement? Yes. 10. Should the inclusionary requirement apply to the demo/redevelopment or substantial improvement with a new use that is expanded/enlarged? Yes. On February 21, 2018, the BOCC directed staff to draft a resolution that would temporarily waive the inclusionary housing requirements of LDC Section 139-1(b) on an emergency basis for existing residential dwelling units that were substantially damaged or destroyed as a result of Hurricane Irma. On March 21, 2018, the BOCC adopted Resolution 113-2018 temporarily waiving the inclusionary housing requirements of Section 139-1(b) of the Monroe County Land Development Code on an emergency basis until March 21, 2020 for like repair, redevelopment or replacement; or for units coming into compliance with building, flood, and land development codes, of existing residential dwelling units that were damaged or destroyed as a result of Hurricane Irma. CONTRACT/AGREEMENT CHANGES: n/a STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval. DOCUMENTATION: 2019-097_ORDINANCE_LDC_Ch_139 nonresidential inclusionary BOCC 2019-097_BOCC_Staff Report nonresidential inclusionary Exhibit 1_2017 Affordable Workforce Housing Support Study for Nonresidential Development Exhibit 2_Monroe County 2016 Employer Survey Report Exhibit 3_RentalMarketStudy_2019_Shimberg Exhibit 4—Monroe County AHAC July 22_2016_Reso 01-2016 FINANCIAL IMPACT: Packet Pg. 2642 R.1 Effective Date: Expiration Date: Total Dollar Value of Contract: Total Cost to County: Current Year Portion: Budgeted: Source of Funds: CPI: Indirect Costs: Estimated Ongoing Costs Not Included in above dollar amounts: Revenue Producing: If yes, amount: Grant: County Match: Insurance Required: N/A Additional Details: n/a REVIEWED BY: Emily Schemper Completed 01/27/2021 10:28 PM Assistant County Administrator Christine Hurley Completed O1/28/2021 1:22 PM Peter Morris Completed 02/02/2021 4:35 AM Purchasing Completed 02/02/2021 8:08 AM Budget and Finance Completed 02/02/2021 10:34 AM Maria Slavik Completed 02/02/2021 10:53 AM Liz Yongue Completed 02/02/2021 11:31 AM Board of County Commissioners Pending 02/17/2021 9:00 AM Packet Pg. 2643 R.1.a 1 2 1 , tstiti"n i �1. 3 � cV 5 6 MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA 7 MONROE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 8 9 ORDINANCE NO. -2021 10 — 11 AN ORDINANCE BY THE MONROE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY 12 COMMISSIONERS ADOPTING AMENDMENTS TO THE MONROE COUNTY 13 LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE TO AMEND SECTION 101-1 AFFORDABLE 14 HOUSING DEFINITIONS BY CREATING A DEFINITION FOR AREA MEDIAN 15 INCOME, WORKFORCE AND WORKFORCE HOUSING; AMEND CHAPTER 16 139-1 TO CLARIFY THE AFFORDABLE AND EMPLOYEE HOUSING 17 ADMINISTRATION, TO INCORPORATE NONRESIDENTIAL AND 18 TRANSIENT INCLUSIONARY REQUIREMENTS BY PROVIDING 19 REGULATIONS REGARDING THE PROVISION OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING ca 20 FOR THE DEVELOPMENT AND REDEVELOPMENT OF NONRESIDENTIAL 21 AND TRANSIENT USES; MODIFYING THE LINKAGE PROVISIONS; i 22 AMENDING AND/OR ADDING FOR CONSISTENCY PURPOSE RELATED 23 PROVISIONS; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR REPEAL 24 OF CONFLICTING PROVISIONS; PROVIDING FOR TRANSMITTAL TO THE 25 STATE LAND PLANNING AGENCY AND THE SECRETARY OF STATE; 26 PROVIDING FOR AMENDMENT TO AND INCORPORATION IN THE 27 MONROE COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE; PROVIDING FOR AN 28 EFFECTIVE DATE. 29 30 31 WHEREAS,Monroe County policies and regulations adopted in the Monroe County Comprehensive 0 32 Plan and Land Development Code are to maintain public health, safety, and welfare of the citizens of the 33 Florida Keys and to strengthen our local government capability to manage land use and development; and 34 35 WHEREAS, on May 21, 2008, the Monroe County Board of County Commissioners adopted i 36 Ordinance 014-2008, which amended the Monroe County Code to re-establish the Affordable Housing 37 Advisory Committee,including its assigned duties; and -i 38 39 WHEREAS, on June 10, 2015, the Board of County Commissioners adopted Ordinance 014-2015 Z 40 amending Section 2-700 of the Monroe County Code to establish the 14 members of the Affordable 41 Housing Advisory Committee and directed staff to amend Resolution 139-2015 to add one additional duty 42 to the committee; and 43 r� 44 WHEREAS, on October 16, 2015, the Affordable Housing Advisory Committee adopted Resolution 9 45 01-2015,providing recommendations on the first three tasks assigned to the committee for the development 46 of a workforce housing development plan; and N 47 48 WHEREAS, on January 22, 2016, the Affordable Housing Advisory Committee adopted Resolution E 49 03-2015, recommending that the Board of County Commissioners support and fund a nexus study as the 50 first step in considering the expansion of the County residential inclusionary housing program to cover e( Ordinance No. -2021 Page 1 of 30 File 2019-097 Packet Pg. 2644 R.1.a I transient and commercial development in the County; and _ 2 3 WHEREAS, on July 22, 2016, the Affordable Housing Advisory Committee adopted Resolution 0 1- 4 2016,providing 33 recommendations to the Board of County Commissioners on the issues included in their 5 charge, including that the BOCC support and fund a nexus study as the first step in the expansion of the m 6 current County residential inclusionary housing program to cover transient and commercial development - 7 in the County; and 8 W 9 WHEREAS, on August 17, 2016, staff presented the Affordable Housing Advisory Committee's 10 adopted Resolution 01-2016 (33 recommendations)to the BOCC and the Board of County Commissioners 11 approved contracts for studies to support an inclusionary housing requirement to cover transient and 12 commercial development as well as requested staff to schedule a special meeting to discuss the remaining 13 recommendations; and 14 15 WHEREAS,on August 17, 2016,the Board of County Commissioners approved a contract with RRC 16 Associates to (1) conduct a data-based survey of employers located in the unincorporated and incorporated 17 parts of Monroe County to verify the employment patterns and the building floor area used for 18 nonresidential development, and to (2) prepare the prototypical workforce/affordable housing unit(s), 0 19 including size ranges, building materials and costs of construction, to be utilized by the County for the z 20 adoption of inclusionary housing requirements to address nonresidential and transient development; and 21 22 WHEREAS, on August 17, 2016, the Board of County Commissioners approved a contract with M 1 23 Clarion Associates to prepare a Support Study providing the technical support (data & methodology to 24 determine need) for a workforce/ affordable housing mitigation program for nonresidential development 0 25 and redevelopment(expansions and remodels),to be utilized by the County for the adoption of inclusionary W 26 housing requirements to address nonresidential and transient development; and 27 28 WHEREAS,on a special meeting on December 6,2016,the Board of County Commissioners reviewed 29 and discussed the 33 recommendations provided by the Affordable Housing Advisory Committee and 30 directed staff to research certain items, implement certain items and process amendments to the land 31 development code; and 32 c 33 WHEREAS, on November 14, 2017 BOCC meeting, presentations regarding the data to create an 34 inclusionary housing requirement for nonresidential and transient development were provided, as follows: 35 • Presentation by RRC Associates summarizing the results of the survey of employers located in 36 Monroe County to document employment patterns and the building floor area used for nonresidential 37 development; 38 • Presentation by Clarion Associates providing the findings of the Affordable Workforce Housing i 39 Support Study for Nonresidential Development which provides the technical support (data & 40 methodology to determine need) for a workforce/affordable housing mitigation program for z 41 nonresidential development to be utilized by the County for the adoption of inclusionary housing et 42 requirements to address nonresidential and transient development; and 43 44 WHEREAS, on February 21, 2018, the Board of County Commissioners reviewed and discussed r. 45 amending the Monroe County Land Development Code to create an inclusionary housing requirement to 46 address nonresidential and transient development, and directed staff to develop a nonresidential 47 inclusionary requirement; and N 48 49 WHEREAS, Monroe County strives to ensure that affordable housing opportunities are available 50 throughout the entire community and to maintain a balanced and sustainable local economy and the 51 provision of critical services; and e( Ordinance No. -2021 Page 2 of 30 File 2019-097 Packet Pg. 2645 R.1.a 1 2 WHEREAS, Monroe County strives to increase the supply of workforce, employee and affordable 3 housing that is available and affordable to very-low, low, median and moderate income persons; and 4 5 WHEREAS, amending the Land Development Code will enable the County to better provide a range `44 m 6 of housing opportunities for those who work in Monroe County and who provide the community with 7 services but may be unable to pay market rents or market housing prices in the community; and 8 W 9 WHEREAS, amending the Land Development Code will enable the County to address the affordable 10 workforce housing needs generated by the construction of nonresidential development,and the employment 11 that occurs at nonresidential development after the construction or expansion is completed; and 12 13 WHEREAS, amending the Land Development Code will enable the County to ensure that affordable 14 workforce housing is provided to the local workforce by employee generating development proportionate 15 with the need for affordable workforce housing it creates; and 16 17 WHEREAS, creating a nonresidential inclusionary requirement will implement and further Policy 18 601.1.13 which states Monroe County shall maintain land development regulations on inclusionary housing 0 19 and shall evaluate expanding the inclusionary housing requirements to include or address nonresidential z 20 and transient development and redevelopment based on specific data and analysis; and 21 22 WHEREAS, Section 125.01055, F.S., provides that, "Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a ca1 23 county may adopt and maintain in effect any law, ordinance,rule, or other measure that is adopted for the 24 purpose of increasing the supply of affordable housing using land use mechanisms such as inclusionary 25 housing ordinances;"and 26 WHEREAS, Section 125.0103(7), F.S., provides that, "Notwithstanding any other provisions of this 27 section,municipalities,counties,or other entities of local government may adopt and maintain in effect any 28 law, ordinance, rule, or other measure which is adopted for the purposes of increasing the supply of 29 affordable housing using land use mechanisms such as inclusionary housing ordinances;" and 30 31 WHEREAS, Section 163.3202(3), F.S., provides that, "This section shall be construed to encourage c 32 the use of innovative land development regulations which include provisions such as transfer of 33 development rights, incentive and inclusionary zoning, planned-unit development, impact fees, and 34 performance zoning;"and i 35 WHEREAS, Section 420.502(4),F.S., states, "There also exists a serious shortage of decent, safe, and 36 sanitary housing in the state available to persons and families of low,moderate, and middle income,which 37 impairs the economic value of larger areas, characterized by depreciated value, impaired investments, U 38 reduced capacity to pay taxes, and lack of new development to meet the needs of area residents, and which 39 is a menace to the health, safety, morals, and welfare of the citizens of the state;"and z 40 WHEREAS, Section 420.502(5),F.S., states, "It is necessary to create inducements and opportunities i 41 for private and public investment in such activities in this state with appropriate planning, land use, and a) 42 construction policies necessary for the public welfare;"and 43 44 WHEREAS, the Monroe County Board of County Commissioners is authorized by Section `•V 45 125.01(1)(h), F.S., to establish, coordinate and enforce zoning and such business regulations as are W 46 necessary for the protection of the public; and. E 47 Ordinance No. -2021 Page 3 of 30 File 2019-097 Packet Pg. 2646 R.1.a I WHEREAS, the 2019 Rental Market Study by Shimberg Center for Housing Studies - Statewide, 2 120,701 renters at 60.01-80 percent of AMI are cost burdened. Only six counties have 40 percent or more 3 of renters cost burdened at this income level: Miami-Dade and Monroe(62 percent of renters in the income CD 4 category), St. Lucie (44 percent), Broward(43%), Seminole (42 percent), and Martin(40 percent). 5 N m 6 WHEREAS, the 2019 Rental Market Study by Shimberg Center for Housing Studies - At the 80.01- - 7 120 percent of AMI income level, a total of 60,762 renter households are cost burdened. These households 8 are even more geographically concentrated. In Miami-Dade and Monroe County, thirty percent of renters W 9 at 80.0-120 percent of AMI are cost burdened. No other county has a percentage higher than 15 percent, 10 and estimates are not statistically significant for most medium and small counties. 11 W 12 WHEREAS, on February 25, 2020, the Monroe County Development Review Committee (DRC) 13 reviewed the proposed amendment; and 14 WHEREAS,on June 24,2020 the Monroe County Planning Commission held a public hearing for the 15 purpose of considering the proposed amendment and provided for public comment; and y 16 17 WHEREAS, the Monroe County Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. P16-20 0 18 recommending approval for the proposed amendment; and z 19 CJ 20 WHEREAS,the Monroe County Board of County Commissioners have expressed the goal of ensuring 21 that affordable housing opportunities are available throughout the entire community and to maintain a 1 22 balanced and sustainable local economy; and 23 24 WHEREAS,at a regularly scheduled meeting held on October 21,2020,the Monroe County Board of 25 County Commissioners held a public hearing, considered the staff report,and provided for public comment U 26 and public participation in accordance with the requirements of state law and the procedures adopted for '— 27 public participation in the planning process; and 28 m 29 WHEREAS,based upon the documentation submitted and information provided in the accompanying 30 staff report,the Monroe County Board of County Commissioners makes the following Conclusions of Law: ' 31 c 32 1. The proposed amendment is consistent with the Goals, Objectives and Policies of the Monroe 33 County Year 2030 Comprehensive Plan; and i 34 2. The proposed amendment is consistent with the Principles for Guiding Development for the 35 Florida Keys Area of Critical State Concern, Sec. 380.0552(7), F.S.; and U� 36 3. The proposed amendment is consistent with Part II of Chapter 163, Florida Statute; and _i 37 4. The proposed amendment is necessary due to new issues and the need for additional detail or 38 comprehensiveness, as required by Section 102-158 of the Monroe County Code. 39 et z 40 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY 41 COMMISSIONERS OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA: 0i 42 43 Section 1. Recitals and Legislative Intent. The foregoing recitals are true and correct and are 44 hereby incorporated as if fully stated herein. 45 46 Section 2. The Monroe County Land Development Code is hereby amended as follows: a 47 Ordinance No. -2021 Page 4 of 30 File 2019-097 Packet Pg. 2647 R.1.a Proposed Amendment: deletions are stfi ke *h-,, additions are shown in underlined); and -� the shifting of existing text is shown in double underline (new location) and (former location). 1 m 2 Section 101-1 Definitions. - 3 The following words, terms and phrases, when used in this chapter, shall have the meanings 4 ascribed to them in this section, except where the context clearly indicates a different meaning: 5 6 Affordable housing. 7 (1)Affordable housing means residential dwelling units that meet the following requirements: 8 a. Meet all applicable requirements of the United States Department of Housing and Urban 9 Development minimum property standards as to room sizes, fixtures, landscaping and 10 building materials, when not in conflict with applicable laws of the county; and 11 b. A dwelling unit whose monthly rent, not including utilities, does not exceed 30 percent 12 of that amount which represents either 50 percent (very low income) or 80 percent (low 13 income)or 100 percent(median income) or 120 percent(moderate income) of the monthly 0 14 median adjusted household income for the county. z 15 (2)Affordable housing owner occupied, low income, means a dwelling unit occupied only by c, 16 a household whose total household income does not exceed 80 percent of the median monthly 17 household income for the county. Ca i 18 (3)Affordable housing owner occupied, median income, means a dwelling unit occupied only 19 by a household whose total household income does not exceed 100 percent of the median 2 20 monthly household income for the county. 21 (4) Affordable housing owner occupied, moderate income, means a dwelling unit occupied 22 only by a household whose total household income does not exceed 160 percent of the median 23 monthly household income for the county. 24 (5)Affordable housing owner occupied, very low income, means a dwelling unit occupied only 25 by a household whose total household income does not exceed 50 percent of the median 26 monthly household income for the county. 0 27 (6)Affordable housing trust fund means a trust fund established and maintained by the county 28 for the purpose of preserving existing and promoting creation of new affordable and employee 29 housing. Funds collected for and deposited in the trust fund shall be used exclusively for 30 purposes of creating,preserving or maintaining affordable and employee housing in the Florida 31 Keys. � 32 (7) Affordable rental housing, low income, means a dwelling unit whose monthly rent, not 33 including utilities, does not exceed 30 percent of the amount that represents up to 80 percent z 34 of the monthly median adjusted household income for the county. z 35 (8)Affordable rental housing, median income, means a dwelling unit whose monthly rent, not 36 including utilities, does not exceed 30 percent of the amount that represents up to 100 percent 0i 37 of the monthly adjusted median household income for the county. 38 (9)Affordable rental housing, moderate income, means a dwelling unit whose monthly rent, 39 not including utilities, does not exceed 30 percent of the amount that represents up to 120 40 percent of the monthly median adjusted household income for the county. 41 (10)Affordable rental housing, very low income, means a rental dwelling unit whose monthly 42 rent, not including utilities, does not exceed 30 percent of the amount that represents up to 50 43 percent of the monthly median adjusted household income for the county. Ordinance No. -2021 Page 5 of 30 File 2019-097 Packet Pg. 2648 R.1.a I (11)Area median income means the annual median household income published for the county 2 on an annual basis by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (see (16) 3 Median income definition). 4 (12-�)Employee housing means an attached or detached dwelling unit that is intended to serve 5 as affordable, permanent housing for working households, which derive at least 70 percent of 2 6 their household income from gainful employment in the county and meet the requirements for 7 affordable housing as defined in this section and as per section 139-1. 8 (13-2)Employer-owned rental housing means an attached or detached dwelling unit owned by , 9 a firm, business, educational institution, non-governmental or governmental agency, 10 corporation or other entity that is intended to serve as affordable, permanent housing for its 11 employees. This category of employee housing shall be located on the same parcel of land as 2 12 the nonresidential use. 13 (14-3) Inclusionary housing means the resulting affordable and/or employee housing and/or 14 workforce housing created or preserved with the development and/or redevelopment of a 15 parcel where provisions of approved development agreements or orders implement and 16 promote affordable and/or employee housing and/or workforce housing goals, objectives and 17 policies contained in the plan by requiring set-asides for affordable and/or employee housing z 18 and/or workforce housing units. U 19 (15) Maximum sales price, owner occupied affordable housing unit, means a price not U 20 exceeding 3.75 times the annual median household income for the county for a one bedroom cai 21 or efficiency unit_ 4.25 times the annual median household income for the county for a two L' 22 bedroom unit, and 4.75 times the annual median household income for the county for a three 23 or more bedroom unit. 24 (164) Median income, rental rates and qualifying incomes table, means eligibility 25 requirements compiled each year by the Pplanning Ddepartment based upon the area annual 26 median a*ntial household income published for the county on an annual basis by the U.S. 27 Department of Housing and Urban Development and similar information for median and 28 moderate income levels from the Florida Housing Finance Corporation. Affordable housing 29 eligibility requirements for each household will be based upon median annual household 30 income adjusted by household€ate size, as set forth by the U.S. Department of Housing and 31 Urban Development and the Florida Housing Finance Corporation. The county shall rely upon 32 this information to determine maximum rental rates and maximum household incomes eligible 33 for affordable housing rental or purchase. 34 (17-5) Monthly median household income means the median annual household income for the 35 county divided by 12. LUi 36 (186) Deed restriction, affordable housing means a recorded restriction on a residential to 37 dwelling unit for a period of 99 years restricting occupancy and/or purchase to households that 38 meet the requirements of the income categories listed above. Z 39 (19) Workforce means individuals or families who are _aig nfully employed sUplying goods 0 40 and/or services to Monroe County residents or visitors. 41 (20) Workforce Housing means dwelling units for those who derive at least 70% of their 42 income as members of the Workforce in Monroe County and who meet the affordable housing 43 income categories of the Monroe County Code. Workforce housing shall be interchangeable N 44 with the terms detached or attached dwellings, employee housing or commercial apartments 45 included in the land use districts and shall be a permitted use in all land use districts where E 46 detached dwelling, attached dwellings, employee housing or commercial apartments are Ordinance No. -2021 Page 6 of 30 File 2019-097 Packet Pg. 2649 R.1.a I included as a current permitted use. An applicant choosing to develop workforce housing is 2 subject to the requirements of Chapter 139 and all other requirements included in the land 3 development code, including but not limited to, density,parking, bufferyards, access, etc. 4 5 6 j 7 8 9 10 * * * * * - 11 12 Chapter 139 AFFORDABLE AND EMPLOYEE HOUSING 13 Sec. 139-1. Affordable and Employee Housing; Administration. 14 (a) Purpose. 15 (1) The Board of County Commissioners has determined that the public health, safety and c 16 general welfare of the community warrants the implementation of affordable and 17 employee housings provisions for the followings purposes: 18 a. To implement the goals,als, policies and objectives of the Monroe County 2030 ca 1 19 Comprehensive Plan and increase the supply of housing affordable to targeted 20 income groups within the community; and 21 b. To provide housing opportunities for lower income groups in order to meet the 22 existing and anticipated housing needs of such persons and to maintain a socio- 23 economic mix in the community; and 24 C. To address market demands that show that the workforce in the County continues 25 to require moderately priced housing units, particularly those whose earnings 26 range from 50 percent to 120 percent of the County's median income,the target 27 income groups; and 28 d. To reduce the out-migration of the people employed in the County and their 29 families which has placed increasing stress in maintaining a viable workforce; 30 and 31 d. To stimulate the private sector production of affordable housing and encourage 32 the widespread distribution of affordable housing opportunities throughout all 33 portions of the community, including within new and expanding developments, 34 and U 35 e. To provide for a range of housing opportunities for those who live and work in 36 Monroe County and who provide the community with essential services, 37 especially in the public health and safety sectors of the economy. W 38 r. 39 ' 40 (b) Generally. 41 (1) Notwithstanding the density limitations in Section 130-157, the owner of a parcel of C44 42 land shall be entitled to: a� 43 a. Develop affordable and employee housing as defined in Section 101-1, on parcels 44 of land classified as follows: Ordinance No. -2021 Page 7 of 30 File 2019-097 Packet Pg. 2650 R.1.a 1 1. Urban Residential (UR) at an intensity up to a maximum net residential 2 density of 25 dwelling units per acre,and en par-eels of la*' elassified as 3 2. Mixed Use (MU) at an intensity up to a maximum net residential density of 4 18 dwelling units per acre, and, 5 3. Suburban Commercial (SC) at an intensity up to a maximum net residential 6 density of 18 dwelling units per acre. 7 8 9 10 — 2 11 12 b.�Develop market rate housing, as defined in Section 101-1, as part of an affordable 13 or employee housing project in accordance with subsection(ba)(8)of this section 14 provided that on parcels of land classified as Urban Residential (UR), the 15 maximum net residential density shall not be greater than 18 dwelling units per 16 acre. 17 (2) The maximum net residential density allowed per district and by this section shall not c 18 require Transferable Development Rights (TDR) for affordable and employee housing 19 and market rate housing developed in accordance with subsection (ba)(8) of this 20 section. M 1 21 (3) Market rate housing developed in accordance with subsection (ba)(8) below shall be 22 eligible to receive points pursuant to Section 138-28(ba)(6). 23 (4) The requirements of this Land Development Code for the provision of impact fees shall 24 be waived for affordable and employee housing and any market rate housing developed 25 in accordance with subsection (ba)(8) of this section. 26 (5) Notwithstanding the provisions of this article, when calculating density, any existing 27 lawfully established or proposed affordable or employee housing on a parcel and the 28 floor area thereof shall be excluded from the calculation of the total gross nonresidential 29 floor area development that may be lawfully established or permitted on the parcel, 30 provided,however,that the total residential density allowed on the site shall not exceed 31 the maximum net density for affordable and employee housing. 32 (6) In order for the owner of a parcel of land to be entitled to the incentives for affordable 33 or employee housing outlined in this section and Chapter 138, Articles II and III, the 34 owner must ensure that: 35 a. The use of the affordable housing dwelling unit is restricted to households that 36 meet the adjt ste g-e annual income limits for- ,nedia ineeme as defined in c, 37 Section 101-1; 38 b. Except as provided for under the special provisions for employer-owned rental z 39 housing as set forth under subsection (ba)(6)k of this section, if the affordable 40 housing dwelling unit is designed for employee housing, the use of the dwelling 0 41 is restricted to households that derive at least 70 percent of their household 42 income from gainful employment in the county and meet the adjt ste gr 43 annual income limits fer media* i*eem e as defined in Section 101-1s- � 44 C. The use of the affordable or employee dwelling unit is deed restricted for the 99 45 year period specified in Section 101-1s- 46 d. Tourist housing use or vacation rental use of affordable or employee housing units Ordinance No. -2021 Page 8 of 30 File 2019-097 Packet Pg. 2651 R.1.a I is prohibited;_. 2 e. The parcel of land proposed for development of affordable or employee housing 3 shall only be located within a tier III designated area. 4 Notwithstanding the foregoing, and notwithstanding Section 138-24(a)(5) 5 affordable housing ROGO allocations may be awarded to properties within any 2 6 tier,provided all of the following criteria is met: 7 -al. The property contains an existing market rate dwelling unit that meets the 8 criteria in LDC Section 138-22(a) and is determined to be exempt from , 9 ROGO; 10 42. The proposed replacement affordable dwelling unit meets current Florida 11 Building Code and is not a mobile home; 12 e3. The proposed replacement dwelling unit shall be deed restricted for a period 13 of at least 99 years as affordable housing pursuant to the standards of the 14 Land Development Code; u 15 44. The proposed site plan for the replacement affordable dwelling unit does 16 not propose any additional clearing of habitat; and 17 e5. The structure is not proposed to be within a V-zone on the county's flood z 18 insurance rating map. U 19 f. At the time of sale of an owner-occupied affordable unit, the total income of U 20 households eligible to purchase the unit shall not exceed the income limits within 0i 21 the deed restriction for the unit and not exceed 16-0 percent of the area median 22 hetise income for the county- However- a 11 Nit , 44-4 4 -A el—ass 4 ,-,a h'o � c 23 24 25 _ 26 g. During occupancy of any affordable housing rental unit,not otherwise limited by 27 state or federal statute or rule concerning household income, a household's annual 28 income may increase to an amount not to exceed 140 percent of the area median 29 hettse income for the county. If the income of the lessee exceeds this amount, 30 the tenant's occupancy shall terminate at the end of the existing lease term. The 31 maximum lease for any term shall be one (1) year or 12 months 32 ems; 33 h. Affordable housing projects shall be no greater than 20 units unless approved by 34 resolution of the c-County Planning Commission. The Planning Commission's 35 decision may be appealed to the BOCC using the procedures described in Section 36 102-185, with the BOCC serving as the appellate body for the purpose of this t� 37 section only; 38 i. When establishing a rental and sales amount, the county shall base the amounts z 39 upon the area median income published for the County on an annual basis by the 40 U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and compiled for 0 41 household size and the income limit of the unit. 42 ire-table el This section shall not be used to establish the maximum 43 number of individuals who actually live in the unit. This table shall be used in 44 ieti ,r w4h the development of the maximum rental rates and qualifyin 45 incomes table compiled by the Planning Department according to the definitions E 46 in Section 101-1e � Ordinance No. -2021 Page 9 of 30 File 2019-097 Packet Pg. 2652 R.1.a Size of Unit Assumed Household Minimum Oeeupnney Fnmily Size Efficiency (no separate bedroom) 1 One bedroom 2 Two bedroom 3 -2 Three bedroom 4 -3 ca Four or more bedroom 1 5 1 1 per-bedf ,,,,, 1 j. Except for tenants of employer-owned rental housing, as set forth in subsection 2 (ha a)(6)k. of this section, the income of eligible households shall be determined 3 by counting only the first and highest paid 40 hours of employment per week of 4 each unrelated adult. For a household containing adults related by marriage or a 5 domestic partnership registered with the county, only the highest 60 hours of the 6 combined employment hours shall be counted, which shall be considered to be 7 75 percent of the ,,djtiste gr annual income. The income of dependents 8 regardless of age shall not be counted in calculating a household's income; and 9 k. In the special case of employer-owned rental housing, as defined in Section 101- z 10 1, employees shall be eligible as tenants of the affordable rental housing, if the U 11 income of each individual tenant, as determined following the requirements in 12 subsection (ba)(6J. of this section, is not more than the 80 percent(low income) °°i 13 of the area median income adjtisted gross ineeme for h etise lds within the ' 14 county. The tenants of this employer-owned rental housing 15 hetisii+g shall be required to derive at least 70 percent of their income from within 16 the county. The maximum occupancy of employer-owned rental housing for 17 employees shall be no more than two f2Itenants per bedroom; with a maximum 18 of three LD bedrooms per unit. The total monthly lease charged tenants for each 19 dwelling unit shall not exceed 30 percent of the area median adjt1sted gross anntial 20 income for hettsehel s wit :r the county, divided by 12. a 21 (7) Commercial apartment dwelling units, as defined in Section 101-1, shall only be 0 22 eligible for the incentives outlined in this section if they meet the requirements of 23 subsection (ba)(6) of this section for employee housing. 24 (8) If an affordable or employee housing project or an eligible commercial apartment 25 designated for employee housing contains at least five(55) dwelling units, a maximum 26 of 20 percent of these units may be developed as market rate housing dwelling units. 27 The owner of a parcel of land must develop the market rate housing dwelling units as LU 28 an integral part of an affordable or employee housing project. In order for the market z 29 rate housing dwelling units to be eligible for incentives outlined in this section, the z 30 owner must ensure that: c� 31 a. The use of the market rate housing dwelling unit is restricted for a period of at 32 least 30 years to households that derive at least 70 percent of their household 33 income from gainful employment in the county; and 34 b. Tourist housing use and vacation rental use of the market rate dwelling unit is 35 prohibited. `�44 36 37 Administration and compliance. 38 (1) Before any building hermit maybe issued for any structure,portion or phase of a project Ordinance No. -2021 Page 10 of 30 File 2019-097 Packet Pg. 2653 R.1.a I subject to this section, a restrictive covenant shall be approved by the ^ to*t(''.,,,,mot.. 2 ^,a mist 4eF Planning Director and County Attorney and recorded in the eOffice of 3 the-eClerk of the c-County to ensure compliance with the provision of this section 4 running in favor of the c-County and enforceable by the c-County and, if applicable, a 5 participating municipality. The following requirements shall apply to these restrictive 6 covenants: 7 a. The covenants for any affordable or employee housing units shall be effective for 8 a period of at least 99 years. , 9 b. The covenants shall not commence running until a certificate of occupancy has 10 been issued by the building official for the dwelling unit or dwelling units to 2 11 which the covenant or covenants apply. 12 C. For existing dwelling units that are deed-restricted as affordable or employee 13 housing units, the covenants shall commence running upon recordation in the 14 Official Records of Monroe County. u 15 (2) Restrictive covenants for housing subject to the provisions of this section shall be filed 16 that require compliance with the following: 17 a. Restricting affordable housing dwelling units to households meeting the income z 18 requirements of subsection (ba)(6)a. of this section: 19 b. Restricting employee housing dwelling units to households meeting the income 20 and employment requirements of subsection (b-a)(6)b. of this section: Ca 1 21 C. Restricting market rate housing dwelling units to households meeting the LN 22 employment requirements of subsection (b-aA8)a. of this section: and 23 d. Prohibiting tourist housing use or vacation rental use of any housing developed 24 or deed-restricted under the provisions of this section. 25 (3) The eligibility of a potential owner-occupier or renter of an affordable_ employee or 26 market rate housing dwelling unit, developed q N&�which is an employee or 27 affordable housing project/unit_ shall be determined by the Planning Department upon 28 submittal of an affidavit of qualification to the Planning Department. The form of the 29 affidavit shall be in a form prescribed by the Planning Department. This eligibility shall 30 be determined by the Planning Department as follows: 31 a. At the time the potential owner either applies for affordable housing ROGO 32 allocation, or applies to purchase a unit that used affordable housing ROGO 33 allocation or applies to purchase a deed-restricted dwelling unit, or 34 b. At the time the potential renter applies to occupy a residential unit that used an 35 affordable ROGO allocation or is deed-restricted. 36 (4) Except as provided in subsection (c€)(5) of this section, the property owner of each 37 affordable employee or market rate housing dwelling unit_ ,a velepe ��which 38 is an affordable or employee housing project/unit, shall be required to annually submit 39 an affidavit of qualification to the Planning Department verifying that the applicable 40 employment and income requirements of subsection(c€)(2) of this section are met. The 41 annual affidavit of qualification shall be in a form prescribed by the Planning Director 42 and shall be filed by the propeM owner annually by May I" � 43 44 (5) The owner-occupant of an affordable, employee, or market rate housing dwelling unit 45 ,a velei3e f which is an affordable or employee housing project/unit_ who has E 46 received a homestead exemption as provided for under the state statutes, is not required Ordinance No. -2021 Page 11 of 30 File 2019-097 Packet Pg. 2654 R.1.a I to submit an annual affidavit of qualification as required above in subsection (cf)(4) of 2 this section if that owner-occupant was qualified previously by the Planning 3 Department. Prior to any change in ownership (including_ but not limited to: sale_ 4 assignment, devise, or otherwise), the owner-occupant shall be required to provide 5 documentation to the Planning Department in a form prescribed by the Planning 6 Director proving that the potential occupying household is eligible to occupy that unit 7 prior to a change in ownership of the property. 8 (6) Failure to submit the required annual verification as required in subsection (c 41 of 9 this section or failure to provide documentation prior to change in ownership required 10 in subsection (cf)(5) of this section shall constitute a violation of the restrictive ° 11 covenant_ the conditions of the certificate of occupancy and this Land Development 12 Code. 13 (7) The restrictive covenants for affordable and employee housing required under this 14 section shall be approved by the ^ ta*t Geufl*., ^, aims*, &F Planning Director and u 15 County Attorney prior to the recording of the covenant and issuance of any building 16 e 17 (8) Upon written agreement between the Planning Director and an eligible governmental c 18 or nongovernmental entity, the Planning Director may authorize that entity to 19 administer the eligibility and compliance requirements for the Planning and 20 Environmental Resources Department under subsections (cf�)(3). (cf4)(4). and (cfh(5) 0i 21 ftr of this section. Under such an agreement_ the eligible entity is authorized to LN 22 qualify a potential owner-occupier or renter of affordable, employee, or market rate C 23 housing developed as part of an employee or affordable housing project_ and annually. 24 verify the employment and/or income eligibility of tenants pursuant to subsection 25 cf4)(2) of this section. The entity shall still be required to provide the Planning and 26 Environmental Resources Department. by May ft 1st of each year, a written 27 certification verifying that tenants of each affordable;employee; or market rate housing 28 units meets the applicable employment and income requirements of subsection (cf31(21 � 29 of this section. The following governmental and nongovernmental entities shall be 30 eligible for this delegation of authority: 31 a. The county housing authority_ not-for-profit community development 32 organizations,pursuant to subsection (iel of this section. and other public entities 33 established to provide affordable housing_ i 34 b. Private developers or other nongovernmental organizations participating in a 35 federal/state housing financial assistance or tax credit program or recejvjng some 36 form of direct financial assistance from the County: or 37 C. Nongovernmental organizations approved by the BOCC as affordable housing 38 providers. z 39 (9) Should an entity fail to satisfactorily fulfill the terms and conditions of the written 40 agreement executed pursuant to subsection (cf))(6) and (8) of this section. the 41 Planning Director shall provide written notice to the subject entity to show cause why 42 the agreement should not be terminated within 30 days. If the entity fails to respond 43 or is unable to demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Planning Director that it is 44 meeting the terms and conditions of its agreement, the agreement may be terminated a� 45 by the Planning Director within 30 days of the written notice. E Ordinance No. -2021 Page 12 of 30 File 2019-097 Packet Pg. 2655 R.1.a I d) Interlocal affordable rate of growth allocation agreements. 2 The BOCC may authorize interlocal agreements between the County and the cities of 3 Marathon, and Key West, and Islamorada, Village of Islands for the puwose of sharing 4 residential rate of growth affordable housing allocations. The interlocal agreements may be 5 based upon a specific project proposal within one or more jurisdictions or may be for a 6 specific allocation of units on an annual basis, from the county to a municipality or from a 7 munici ali to the counjV. The interlocal agreements may also accept and/or transfer 8 allocations pursuant to the 2012 Hurricane Evacuation Clearance Time Memorandum of , 9 Understanding. All allocations made available to a jurisdiction must meet the applicable 10 affordable housing requirements of the receiving jurisdiction's land development regulations .2 11 and affordable housing ordinances. 12 Lej(b)Residential Inclusionary#Housing fRequirements. 13 (1) Purpose and intent. The purpose of this subsection (eb), consistent with Goal 601 of 14 the Comprehensive Plan, is to ensure that the need for affordable housing is not 15 exacerbated by new residential development and redevelopment of existing affordable 16 housing stock. The intent of this subsection is to protect the existing affordable housing z 17 stock, to permit owners of mobile homes and mobile home spaces to continue 18 established mobile home uses consistent with current building and safety standards and 19 regulations and to ensure that, as residential development, redevelopment and mobile ca 1 20 home conversions occur, Comprehensive Plan policies regarding affordable housing L 21 are implemented. 22 (2) Applicability. Except as provided in subsection (e4)(3) of this section, the residential 23 inclusionary housing requirements set forth below shall apply. Determinations 24 regarding the applicability of this subsection shall be made by the Planning Director. 25 The applicant shall provide the necessary information to determine compliance with 26 the residential inclusionary housing requirements on the forms prescribed by the 27 Planning Director. For purposes of calculating the number of affordable units required 28 by this subsection, density bonuses shall not be counted and only fractional 29 requirements equal to or greater than 0.5 shall be rounded up to the nearest whole 30 number. 31 a. Residential developments, other than mobile home or mobile home spaces 32 covered by subsection (e4)(2)b. of this section, that result in the development or 33 redevelopment of three for more dwelling units on a parcel or contiguous 34 parcels shall be required to develop or redevelop at least 30 percent of the 35 residential units as affordable housing units. Residential development or z 36 redevelopment of three �jhunits on a parcel or contiguous parcels shall require < 37 that one (adeveloped or redeveloped unit be an affordable housing unit. For the z 38 purpose of this section, and notwithstanding subsection (e4)(2)b. of this section, W 39 any dwelling unit exceeding the number of lawfully established dwelling units on 40 site, which are created by either a THE or ROGO allocation award, shall be 41 considered developed units. 42 b. The removal and replacement with other types of dwelling units of ten 10 or 43 more mobile homes that are located on a parcel or contiguous parcels and/or the 44 conversion of mobile home spaces located on a parcel or contiguous parcels into E 45 a use other than mobile homes shall be required to include in the development or Ordinance No. -2021 Page 13 of 30 File 2019-097 Packet Pg. 2656 R.1.a I redevelopment a number of affordable housing units equal to at least 30 percent 2 of the number of existing units being removed and replaced or converted from 3 mobile home use or, in the event the new use is nonresidential, to develop 4 affordable housing units at least equal in number to 30 percent of the number of 5 mobile homes or mobile home spaces being converted to other than mobile home 6 use. Removal and replacement or conversion to a different use of ten LLO mobile 7 homes or mobile home spaces on a parcel or contiguous parcels shall require that 8 three�Lunits be replaced or converted to deed-restricted affordable housing. , 9 C. In calculating the number of affordable housing units required for a particular 10 project, or phase of a project, all dwelling units proposed for development or .2 11 redevelopment or mobile homes or mobile home spaces to be converted from 12 mobile home use sinee the off etive,a e f�he or-dina*ee fFefn whieh phis see r 13 is de d shall be counted. In phased projects, the affordable housing 14 requirements shall be proportionally allocated among the phases. If a subsequent 15 development or redevelopment is proposed following a prior development 16 approved on the same property as it existed as of the effective date of the 17 ordinance (ORD 030-2003, 017-2006, 011-2008 & 006-2016) from which this z 18 section is derived, which prior development did not meet the compliance 19 thresholds set forth in subsection (e4)(2)a. or (&)(2)b. of this section, the 20 requirements of subsection (e4)(2)a. or (e4)(2)b. of this section shall be met as 0i 21 part of the subsequent development for all units proposed for development or 22 redevelopmentafter-�he off etive,a e f�he or-dina*ee f of whieh this seeti r i c 23 derived. 24 (3) Exemptions and waivers. 25 a. The following uses shall be exempt from the inclusionary housing requirements 26 set forth in subsection (e4)(2)a. of this section: affordable housing, employee 27 housing, nursing homes, or assisted care living facilities. 28 b. The BOCC may reduce, adjust, or waive the requirements set forth in this 29 subsection (eh) where, based on specific findings of fact, the BOCC d 30 concludes,with respect to any developer or property owner, that: 31 1. Strict application of the requirements would produce a result inconsistent 32 with the Comprehensive Plan or the purpose and intent of this subsection; 33 2. Due to the nature of the proposed residential development, the development 34 furthers Comprehensive Plan policies and the purpose and intent of this 35 subsection through means other than strict compliance with the requirements LUi 36 set forth herein; U 37 3. The developer or property owner demonstrates an absence of any reasonable 38 relationship between the impact of the proposed residential development and z 39 requirements of this subsection (eh); eF 40 4. The strict application with the requirements set forth herein would h� 41 improperly deprive or deny the developer or property owner of constitutional 42 or statutory rights; or- 43 5. In the event of a declared State of Local Emergency, _the BOCC adopts athe BOCC adopts a 44 resolution recognizing that the strict application of the nonresidential 45 inclusionary requirements would not enhance nor protect the health, safety E 46 and welfare of the community. Ordinance No. -2021 Page 14 of 30 File 2019-097 Packet Pg. 2657 R.1.a I C. Any developer or property owner who believes that he/she may be eligible for 2 relief from the strict application of this section may petition the BOCC for relief 3 under this subsection (e4)(3) of this section. Any petitioner for relief hereunder 4 shall provide evidentiary and legal justification for any reduction, adjustment or 5 waiver of any requirements under this section. 6 (4) Alternate compliance. 7 a. Deed-restriction of existing dwelling units. Compliance with this subsection may 8 be achieved through the deed-restriction of existing dwelling units requiring that , 9 the affected units remain subject to the county's affordable housing restrictions for 10 a period not less than the period prescribed in subsection(5)(c)3.,below, according 11 to administrative procedures established by the county. 12 The following example is set forth to illustrate potential application options: 13 Example: Owner/developer has 100 development rights 14 Option 1: Owner/developer may build up to 70 market rate units and shall 15 build 30 affordable units (using conventional compliance method.) The z 16 owner's 100 development rights yield a ratio of 70 market rate units and 30 17 affordable units. 18 Option 2: Owner/developer may build up to 70 market rate units and shall i 19 purchase and deed-restrict 30 existing market rate units (in lieu of building 20 30 new affordable units.) The owner's 100 development rights again yield a 21 ratio of 70 market rate units to 30 affordable units. 22 Option 3: Owner/developer may build up to 100 new market rates. If the 23 developer wishes to use all 100 development rights for market rate 24 development, his/her inclusionary compliance requirement to purchase and 25 deed-restrict existing market rate units increases, and in this case for 26 example, calculates to 43 total affordable units. (The owner's 100 27 development rights yield a ratio of 100 market rate units to 43 affordable 28 units, which is equivalent to the ratio of 70 market rates units to 30 29 affordables units: 100/43 =70/30.) 30 b. In-lieu fees. The developer of a project subject to the requirements of this 31 subsection (eh) may contribute a fee in-lieu of the inclusionary housing 32 requirements for all or a percentage of the affordable housing units required by 33 subsection (e4)(2). The developer shall pay per unit in-lieu fees, the current 34 maximum sales price for a one-bedroom affordable unit as established under 35 Section 139 ml(a) 101-1. All in-lieu fees shall be deposited into the affordable < 36 housing trust fund and spent solely for the purposes allowed for that fund. The z 37 developer, along with any corresponding in-lieu fees, shall transfer to the county W 38 ownership the associated ROGO allocations or ROGO-exempt development NJ 39 rights for any affordable unit(s) required by this section for which the in-lieu fee 40 option is used to construct the affordable unit(s). In order to utilize the in-lieu fee 41 alternate compliance option,the developer must contribute the fee with associated 42 ROGO allocations or exemptions. If ROGO allocations or exemptions are not 43 available, the developer may not utilize this option. E 44 C. Land donation.Upon the acceptance of the BOCC of a proposed onsite or offsite Ordinance No. -2021 Page 15 of 30 File 2019-097 Packet Pg. 2658 R.1.a I parcel (or parcels), a developer may satisfy the requirements of this subsection by 2 donating to the county, or other agency or not-for-profit organization approved 3 by the BOCC mod, one CIS or URM platted lot for each inclusionary unit 4 required but not provided through actual construction or in-lieu fees (or a parcel 5 or parcels of land zoned other than IS or URM as long as the donated parcel(s) 6 will support the development of an appropriate number of affordable inclusionary 7 units). Lots or other parcels so provided shall not be subject to environmental or 8 other constraints that would prohibit immediate construction of affordable , 9 housing units. The developer, along with any corresponding donated parcel(s), 10 shall transfer to the county ownership the associated ROGO allocations or 11 ROGO-exempt development rights for any affordable unit(s)required under this 12 section. In order to utilize the land donation alternate compliance option, the 13 developer must donate the land with associated ROGO allocations or exemptions. 14 If ROGO allocations or exemptions are not available, the developer may not 15 utilize this option. 16 (5) Applicable standards. 17 a. Incentives. All incentives and bonuses provided by the land development and z 18 other regulations for the construction of affordable housing shall be available to 19 builders of affordable housing provided pursuant to this subsection (eh) 20 including, but not limited to, density and floor area ratio bonuses, residential 0i 21 ROGO allocation set asides and points, and impact fee waivers. 22 b. Developer€irresponsibility. 23 24 25 26 27 28MAN 29 30 i 31 32 33 Ui 34 35 i 36 U 37 38 39 l.-2- If the applicant elects to pursue alternative compliance as set forth in 40 subsection (e4)(4) of this section, the deed-restriction of existing dwelling h� 41 units shall be recorded prior to the issuance of a building permit for any 42 market rate unit, and/or any in-lieu fees must be paid or parcels donated, 43 including the transfer to the county ownership the associated ROGO 44 allocations or ROGO-exempt development rights,prior to the issuance of a 45 building permit for any market rate unit. E 46 2. If a developer does not elect to meet the requirements of subsection (e4)(2) Ordinance No. -2021 Page 16 of 30 File 2019-097 Packet Pg. 2659 R.1.a I of this section through alternative compliance as set forth in subsection 2 e4l(4) of this section, or obtain approval for an adjustment to. a partial 3 exemption from or a waiver of strict compliance pursuant to subsection 4 e4)(3)of this section,the developer must post a bond equivalent to 200 49 5 percent of the in-lieu fees that otherwise would have been required through 6 the in-lieu alternate compliance option prior to the issuance of a building 7 permit for any market rate units. The county shall retain any bond money or 8 guaranties in escrow until the affordable housing is completed, or for a 9 period of three (3) years_ whichever comes first. Upon the issuance of 10 certificates of occupancy for the affordable housing units, the county shall 2 11 release to the developer any bonds or guaranties relating to the portion of 2 12 the inclusionary housing requirement satisfied. If the developer has not 13 satisfied the requirements of this section by completing the required 14 affordable housing units within three (3) years, all or the corresponding u 15 portion of the bond funds shall be forfeited to the affordable housing trust 16 fund. 17 C. Standards. Affordable housing provided pursuant to subsection (e4)(2) of this c 18 section shall comply with the standards set forth in subsections (b) and (c) and 19 below_ A-pplications for development projects subject to these requirements 20 and developers and property owners shall provide to the county information and CaI 21 necessary legal assurances to demonstrate current and continued compliance with 22 these provisions, consistent with the applicable enforcement mechanisms set 23 forth in subsection (c) of this section 24 Vie. The county may institute any appropriate legal action necessary to ensure 25 compliance with this subsection. _ 26 1. Affordable housing units required pursuant to subsection(e4)(2)of this section 27 are restricted to sales prices and annual rental amounts for households that 28 shall not exceed the ,,djtiste gr-e annual income limits for,,,ede- to ineeme 29 owner-occupied or rental housing, as defined in Section 101-1; 30 2 n able be soldor- r-ented only to per-sons whose total �I 31 32 fo-w,e o,- to ;neeme o s ,aef4re it ceeti r 101 i• I 33 t�l t� t i .a f .,.a f 99 1, olds th t t th 34 zH�i�--irrE�-rEt2crrvr-f�32fivcr-vrTr�ccrr,Tt6�rvzrs213vra�-zrrcrczirccc-crrc 35 _ 36 24. Affordable housing units provided pursuant to subsection (e4)(2) of this t� 37 section may be provided on-site, off-site or through linkage with another off- 38 site project as provided in subsection (gs) of this section; z 39 40 �I 41 36. Each affordable unit provided pursuant to subsection (e4)(2) of this section 42 shall contain a minimum of 350400 square feet of habitable floor area a*d�he 43 44 inn e foot• 45 46 millizntim Of feet of habitable lour area;, ar"'r'aa-'a"r-Hng vE Ordinance No. -2021 Page 17 of 30 File 2019-097 Packet Pg. 2660 R.1.a 2 stattt-te or- mle eeneeri eh leld ineeme, a lessee hetisehold's , CD 3 _ 4 5 2 6 end ofihe e*iscing lease-tef1. The maiiifntimT as tefm sh"lall be cirec j 7 8 8. When detefmining eligibility er-iter-ia, �he eeti� shall asstime family size 9 10 shall t be „sed to establish the be- f indi ,;,a,,,,ls „1, 11 12 regiH ei ei3iser-e4ed byy he definition.,f"a ff-e-.a.,l,1 i�in Seetion 1 T- 13 14 9. The ineeme of eligible b etiseholds shall be deter-mined by eetmting only �h � 15 v, 16 a „1t For- ., b etisehol a a„lts r-el4ed by fnafFiageor- ., .a.,mestic � 17 c 19 20 regardless of age shall t be .a lettl�,�ing ., h 1. ld' im�rvc-v�e6Tkntccc-i-Pr^cirr "cnvrccT-iacv^rrre-, M 1 21 ftffd 22 44-9. The county will not issue certificates of occupancy for market rate units 23 associated with development or redevelopment projects subject to the 24 provisions of this subsection (eh) unless and until the developed affordable 25 housing units have an approved and recorded deed restriction, and certificates 26 of occupancy have been issued for required affordable housing units—let 27 28 (6) Monitoring and review. 29 The requirements of this subsection (e4) shall be monitored to ensure effective and 30 equitable application. Every two years following the effective date of the ordinance 31 from which this section is derived, the BOCC may request the pPlanning dDirector 32 s provide to the BOCC a report describing the impact of this subsection on the 33 provision of affordable housing and other market or socioeconomic conditions 34 influencing or being influenced by these requirements. Issues such as affordability 35 thresholds, inclusionary requirements, and the impacts of these provisions on the 36 affordable housing inventory and housing needs in the county shall be addressed, in t� 37 addition to other matters deemed relevant by the Planning Ddirector. 38 z 39 (f) Nonresidential Inclusionary housing requirements. 40 (1) Purpose. Consistent with Goal 601 of the Comprehensive Plan, the purpose of this h� 41 subsection (f) is to ensure that the need for affordable housing is not exacerbated by 42 nonresidential and transient development, as follows: 43 a. Promote the health, safety and general welfare of the citizens of the County 44 through the implementation of the goals, objectives and policies of the 2030 45 Monroe County Comprehensive Plan, and E Ordinance No. -2021 Page 18 of 30 File 2019-097 Packet Pg. 2661 R.1.a I b. To ensure that affordable housing opportunities are available throughout the 2 entire community and to maintain a balanced and sustainable local economy and 3 the provision of essential services, and 4 C. To increase the supply of housing affordable to targeted income groups within 5 the community; and 6 d. To provide a range of housing opportunities for those who work in Monroe 7 County but may be unable to pay market rents or market housing prices in the 8 community; and , 9 e. To increase the percentage of the workforce living_ locally ocally and to provide housing 10 opportunities for lower income groups in order to meet the existing and .2 11 anticipated housing needs of such persons and to maintain a socio-economic mix 12 in the community; and 13 f. To address the affordable workforce housing_ needs eeds generated by the construction 14 and expansion of nonresidential/transient development, and the employment that 15 occurs at the nonresidential/transient development after the construction or 16 expansion is completed, and 17 g. To ensure that affordable workforce housing is provided to the local workforce z 18 by the employee generating development proportionate with the demand for 19 affordable workforce housing the development creates, and 20 h. To address market demands that show that the workforce in the County continues Cai 21 to require moderately priced housing units, particularly those whose earnings L 22 range from 50 percent up to 120 percent of the County's median income(the target 23 income groups); and 24 i. To stimulate the private sector production of affordable workforce housing and 25 encourage the widespread distribution of affordable workforce housing 26 opportunities throughout all portions of the community, including within new and 27 expanding developments. 28 29 (2) Intent. Nonresidential and transient use development or redevelopment generates a 30 direct impact on housing for the workforce. The intent of this section is to ensure that 31 there is an affordable suply of housing for the local workforce. This will be 32 accomplished by requiring workforce housing be provided for all new development 33 and redevelopment in an amount proportionate to the need for affordable workforce 34 housing that the nonresidential and transient use development or redevelopment 35 creates. The intent of this subsection is to permit nonresidential and transient use LUi 36 owners to continue to establish uses consistent with the current building and safety u 37 standards and to ensure that as development and redevelopment occurs, comprehensive 38 plan policies regarding affordable housing are implemented. The technical support and z 39 analysis upon which the nonresidential inclusionary housing requirements are w 40 established are based upon the `Affordable Workforce HousinZ Support Stud for Non- 41 Residential Development,' prepared by Clarion Associates, LLC, prepared in June 42 2017. 43 CN 44 (3) Applicability. Except as provided in subsection (4) of this section, the nonresidential 45 inclusionary housing requirements set forth below shall apply. This will be E 46 accomplished by requiring workforce housinZ be provided for all new development and Ordinance No. -2021 Page 19 of 30 File 2019-097 Packet Pg. 2662 R.1.a I expansions in an amount proportionate to the need for affordable workforce housing 2 that the nonresidential and transient uses create. Expansion as used in this section 3 means extending a use or structure to occupy a greater amount of floor area or square 4 footage beyond that which it occupied. Determinations regarding the Uplicabifity of 5 this subsection shall be made by the Planning Director. The applicant shall provide the 6 necessary information to determine compliance with the nonresidential inclusionary 7 housing requirements on the forms prescribed by the Planning Director. For purposes 8 of calculating the number of affordable workforce housing units required by this 9 subsection, density bonuses shall not be counted, and only fractional requirements 10 equal to or greater than 0.5 shall be rounded up to the nearest whole number. 11 a. New Development. Each new development project not exempted by subsection (4), 12 shall mitigate 50% of the workforce housing demand created by the proposed 13 development by one or a combination of the methods identified in subsection (5). 14 b. Redevelopment With An Expansion. Each redevelopment project not exempted by 15 subsection (4), shall mitigate 50% of the workforce housing demand created by 16 the proposed redevelopment by one or a combination of the methods identified in 17 subsection (5). The workforce housing required for nonresidential development z 18 when an existing use is expanded shall be calculated based on the incremental 19 increase is size of the existing _use (net additional square footage). 20 c. Redevelopment With A ChaLge In Use Increasing HousiLg Demand. Each 0i 21 redevelopment project with a change of use increasing housing demand, not 22 exempted by subsection (4), shall mitigate 50% of the workforce housing demand 23 created by the proposed redevelopment by one or a combination of the methods 24 identified in subsection (5). The workforce housing required for nonresidential 25 development when a new use replaces an existing use and increasing housing 26 demand (for example from an industrial use to an office use) shall be calculated 27 based on the square footage proposed for conversion and/or based on the 28 incremental increase in size of the new uses (if any). 29 d. Unspecif ed Use. If a proposed development project does not fall within one of the 30 specific use categories in the table within subsection (5), then the Planning 31 Director shall determine whether the use is comparable to a use category listed and 32 assign a category or may allow the applicant to conduct an independent calculation 33 to determine the appropriate affordable workforce housing inclusionary 34 requirement. If the applicant chooses to propose an independent calculation, the 35 following applies: LU 36 1. An independent calculation shall require a public meeting with the Board of u 37 County Commissioners to determine if there is a mutually agreeable approach 38 to the calculation prior to the application proceeding to the Development z 39 Review Committee for review. The review of the independent calculation will 40 not be scheduled as a public hearing, but as a public meeting during which h� 41 the BOCC may offer their input and direction and the public may have input 42 on the proposed methodology and calculation. 43 2. The applicant shall use _generally accepted principles and methods and 44 verifiable local information and data, and other appropriate materials to 45 suport the employee generation data and housing demand calculated. E Ordinance No. -2021 Page 20 of 30 File 2019-097 Packet Pg. 2663 R.1.a 1 3. The BOCC may agree or disagree with the independent calculation for 2 mitigation based on generally recognized principles and methodologies of 3 impact analysis and the accuracy of the data, information, and assumptions 4 used to prepare the independent calculation. 5 4. Each development project subject to an independent calculation and not 6 exempted by subsection (4), shall mitigate 50% of the demand for workforce 7 housing created by the development. 8 , 9 (4) Exemptions and waivers. 10 a. The following uses shall be exempt from the nonresidential inclusionary housing ° 11 requirements set forth in subsections (f)(3) and(5) of this section: 12 1. Affordable housing developments, and 13 2. Residential developments, and 14 3. Nursing homes, assisted care living facilities, and retirement homes, and u 15 4. Mobile home and manufactured home parks and subdivisions, and 16 5. Public facilities and public buildings and uses limited to parks, public 17 infrastructure and utilities, and wireless communication facilities, and c z 18 6. Airport uses, and 19 7. Agricultural uses, and 20 8. The redevelopment,remodeling,repair or cumulative expansion of a lawfully Ca 21 established nonresidential use that does not increase the area of the L"i 22 nonresidential use by more than 1,000 square feet of gross floor area and the 23 use is not changed to a different use category. 24 b. The BOCC may reduce, adjust, or waive the requirements set forth in this 25 subsection(f),based on specific findings of fact,where the BOCC concludes,with 26 respect to any applicant, that: 27 1. Strict application of the requirements would produce a result inconsistent 28 with the Comprehensive Plan or the purpose and intent of this subsection, 29 2. Due to the nature of the proposed nonresidential development, the 30 development furthers Comprehensive Plan policies and the purpose and 31 intent of this subsection through means other than strict compliance with the 32 requirements set forth herein, 33 3. The applicant demonstrates an absence of any reasonable relationship 34 between the impact of the proposed nonresidential development and 35 requirements of this subsection 36 4. The strict application with the requirements set forth herein would 37 improperly deprive or deny the applicant of constitutional or statutory rights, 38 or z 39 5. In the event of a declared State of Local Emergency, the BOCC adopts a 40 resolution recognizing that the strict application of the nonresidential h1 41 inclusionary requirements would not enhance nor protect the health, safety 42 and welfare of the community. 43 Any applicant who believes that he/she may be eligible for relief from the strict 44 application of this section may petition the BOCC for relief under this subsection 45 (f)(4). Any petitioner for relief hereunder shall provide evidentiary and legal E 46 justification for any reduction, adjustment or waiver of any requirements under 47 this section. The petitioner shall use generally nerally accepted principles and methods Ordinance No. -2021 Page 21 of 30 File 2019-097 Packet Pg. 2664 R.1.a 1 and verifiable local information and data, and other appropriate materials to 2 support the requested relief. 3 4 (5) Compliance Requirements. Nonresidential development or redevelopment protects 5 shall provide affordable workforce inclusionary housing as provided in subsection (3) 6 of the workforce housing demand created by the new or expanded development or 7 redevelopment in accordance with the standards in the table below. 8 a. The table indicates the number of workforce housing units or in-lieu fee needed , 9 for every square foot (and per 1,000sf) of new development or redevelopment 10 (expanded or converted square footage) for each category of non-residential land 11 use. 12 TOTAL NEED CREATED BY NONRESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT (for construction and post-construction emplo ey es). Total Housing Total Total In-Lieu Total In-Lieu Need per Housing Fee per 1,000sf Fee per sf Land Use Category m 1,000sf Need per sf (mone fee (monetary fee c (units/1000sfl units/s /1000s /ss z Commercial Retail U (Retail stores,supermarkets,shopping 0.416 0.000416 $66,722 $66.72 centers,restaurants,etc.) i Office (Professional and non-professional office 0.704 0.000704 $78,492 $78.49 buildings_etc. Industrial (Light manufacturing,lumber yards_ 0.226 0.000226 $24,397 $24.39 warehousing,storage facilities,etc.) Institutional (Religious facilities,private schools, 0.337 0.000337 $36,284 $36.28 colleges,daycares,etc.) 0 Tourist/recreational (Theatres,auditoriums,nightclubs,tourist 0.614 0.000614 $104,691 $104.69 r9 attractions,etc.) i Hotel&Motel 0.295 0.000295 $49,947 $49.94 i (Transient uses) U Governmental (Governmental office buildings,public 0.427 0.000427 $38,285 $38.28 schools,etc.) e( Other (Utility, gas,and electric uses,minim,and 0.644 0.000644 $99,838 $99.83 sewage disposal facilities 13 Data for the mitigation requirement is from the Affordable Workforce Housing Support Stud,�for Non- -- 14 Residential Development,'prepared by Clarion Associates,LLC,for Monroe County in June 2017. 15CD 16 b. The inclusionary housing unit requirement (or required number of workforce Cv 17 housing dwelling units) for the nonresidential development or redevelopment 18 shall be calculated by multiplyingthe per square foot requirement for the 'the per square foot requirement for the E 19 appropriate type of land use category by the proposed square footage of the 20 nonresidential development and/or the incremental increase in size of the Ordinance No. -2021 Page 22 of 30 File 2019-097 Packet Pg. 2665 R.1.a I nonresidential use (net additional square footage) and applyin the he appropriate 2 mitigation standard. 3 C. The inclusionary in-lieu fee requirement(or required amount of monetary fee)for 4 the nonresidential development or redevelopment shall be calculated by 5 multiplying _the per square foot requirement for the appropriate We of land use per square foot requirement for the ppropriate tyke of land use � 6 category by the proposed square footage of the nonresidential development 7 and/or the incremental increase in size of the nonresidential use (net additional W 8 square footage)and aplying the apropriate mitigation standard. , 9 d. Expansions to nonresidential and transient uses shall be tracked for cumulative 10 changes and compliance with subsection (f). In phased projects, the inclusionary 11 requirements shall be proportionally allocated among _the phases. If a subsequent phases. If a subsequent 12 development or redevelopment is proposed following a prior development 13 approved on the same property, after the effective date of this ordinance, the 14 requirements in this section shall be met as part of the subsequent development 15 or redevelopment. 16 e. The following table provides EXAMPLE calculations of the nonresidential 17 inclusionary requirements: z 18 Total Total In- 100%Mitigation 50%Mitigation 30%Mitigation U Housing Lieu Fee Need per ep r sf In-lieu In-lieu of (monetaryUnits In-lieu fees Units fees Units fees units/s fee/s 0 Commercial Retail 5,000 SF 2.08 $333,610 1.04 $166 805 0.62 $100,083.0 :5 (Retail stores, 10,000 SF 4.16 $667,220 2.08 $333 610 1.25 $200,166 supermarkets, 0.000416 $66.72 shopping centers, 20,000 SF 8.32 $1,334,440 4.16 $667,220 2.50 $400,332 restaurants etc. Office 5,000 SF 3.52 $392,460 1.76 $196 230 1.06 $117,738 (Professional and 10,000 SF 7.04 $784,920 3.52 $392 460 2.11 $235,476 non-professional 0.000704 $78.49 office buildin s etc. 20,000 SF 14.09 $1,569,840 7.04 $784920 4.23 $470,952 0 I Industrial 5,000 SF 1.13 $121,985 0.56 $60,993 0.34 $36,596 (Light manufacturing, r lumberer 0.000226 $24.39 10,000 SF 2.26 $243,970 1.13 $121985 0.68 $73,191 warehousing,storage UI 20,000 SF 4.51 $487,940 2.26 $243970 1.35 $146,382 facilities etc. � Institutional 5,000 SF 1.69 $181,420 0.84 $90 710 0.51 $54,426 - I (Religious facilities, 10,000 SF 3.37 $362,840 1.69 $181420 1.01 $108,852 private schools, 0.000337 $36.28 colleges,da,cares, 20,000 SF 6.74 $725,680 3.37 $362,840 2.02 $217,704 < etc. Z Tourist/recreational 5,000 SF 3.07 $523,455 1.54 $261 728 0.92 $157,037 Theatres 10,000 SF 6.14 $1,0 66,910 3.07 $523 455 1.84 $314,073 auditoriums, 0.000614 $104.69 nightclubs,tourist 20,000 SF 12.28 $2,093,820 6.14 $1,046,910 3.69 $628,146 , attractions,etc.) r„ Hotel&Motel 5,000 SF 1.58 $249,735 0.79 $124 868 0.47 $74,921 (Transient uses) 0.000295 $49.94 10,0 00 SF 3.15 $499,470 1.58 1 $249 735 0.95 $149,841 d- 20,000 SF 6.31 $998,940 3.15 $499 470 1.89 $299,682 Governmental 5,0 00 SF 2.14 $191,425 107 $95 713 0.64 $57,428 0.000427 $38.28 . 10,0 00 SF 4.28 $382,850 2.14 $191425 1.28 $114,855 Ordinance No. -2021 Page 23 of 30 File 2019-097 Packet Pg. 2666 R.1.a (Governmental office buildings,public 20,000 SF 8.55 $765,700 4.28 $382,850 2.57 $229,710 ea schools etc. CD Other 5,000 SF 3.22 $499,190 1.61 $249 595 0.97 $149,757CD (Utility,gas,and 10,000 SF 6.44 $998,380 3.22 $499190 1.93 $299.514 Cy electric uses,mining, 0.000644 $99.83 and sewage disposal 20,000 SF 12.88 $1,996,760 6.44 $998,380 3.86 $599,028 facilities 1 W 2 f. All nonresidential uses not exempted by subsection(4) shall mitigate the demand 3 for workforce housing created by the proposed development or redevelopment by 4 one or a combination of the methods identified below. 5 1. The construction of workforce housing dwelling units on the site of the 6 development project. The workforce housing dwelling units shall meet the 7 County's affordable housing restrictions as specified in Section 139-1(b) and 8 (c), for a period not less than 99 years, 9 2. The construction of workforce housing dwelling units off-site of the 10 development project but within a 15 mile radius of the nonresidential 11 development/ redevelopment. The workforce housing dwelling units shall z 12 meet the County's affordable housing restrictions as specified in Section 139- 13 1(b) and (c), for a period not less than 99 years, 14 3. The deed-restriction of existing dwelling units within a 15 mile radius of the I 15 nonresidential development/redevelopment. The workforce housing dwelling 16 units meet the County's affordable housing restrictions as specified in Section c 17 139-1(b) and (c), for a period not less than 99 years, 18 4. The donation of land to the County, upon the acceptance of the BOCC of a 19 proposed parcel or parcels,may satisfy the requirements of this subsection by 20 donating _one(1)IS or URM zoned platted lot for each workforce housing _unit 21 required but not provided through actual construction or in-lieu fees (or a Tier 22 III parcel or parcels of land zoned other than IS or URM as long as the donated 2 23 parcel(s) have the apropriate density available to suport the development 0 24 of the required number of workforce units), and/or 25 5. The payment of a fee in-lieu for the inclusionary housing requirement for all 26 or a percentage of the workforce housing units required. The in-lieu fee shall 27 be paid prior to issuance of a building permit for the nonresidential 28 development or redevelopment. All in-lieu fees shall be deposited into the 29 affordable housing trust fund and spent solely for the purposes allowed for LU 30 that fund. z 31 e. If the workforce housing requirement results in less than one (1) affordable z 32 dwelling unit,then the applicant may choose to build one(1) affordable dwelling 33 unit or pay the fee in-lieu amount. ®i 34 35 (6) Applicable Standards. 36 a. Incentives. All incentives and bonuses provided by the land development and 37 other regulations for the construction of affordable housing shall be available to 38 builders of workforce housing provided pursuant to this subsection (f) including, 39 but not limited to, density and floor area ratio bonuses, residential ROGO 40 allocation set asides and points, and impact fee waivers. Ordinance No. -2021 Page 24 of 30 File 2019-097 Packet Pg. 2667 R.1.a I b. Standards. Workforce housing provided pursuant to subsection (f) shall comply 2 with the standards set forth in subsections (b) and(c) and below. Applications for a) 3 development projects subject to these inclusionary requirements and applicants 4 shall provide to the County information and necessary legal assurances to CN 5 demonstrate current and continued compliance with these provisions, consistent 6 with the applicable enforcement mechanisms set forth in Section 139-1(c). The 7 County may institute any appropriate legal action necessary to ensure compliance 8 with this subsection. , 9 1. Workforce housing units required pursuant to this subsection are restricted 10 to either units for the owner of the nonresidential use that meets the sales ° 11 price and annual income limits for owner-occupied housing, as defined in 12 Section 101-1 or rental units that meet the rental amounts and annual income 13 limits for rental housing, as defined in Section 101-1, 14 2. Workforce housing units provided pursuant to subsection (f) may be 15 provided on-site, off-site as provided in subsection (f)(5),or through linkage 16 with another off-site project as provided in subsection (g) of this section, 17 3. Each workforce unit provided pursuant to this subsection shall contain a z 18 minimum of 350 square feet of habitable floor area, u 19 4. The County will not issue certificates of occupancy for the nonresidential u 20 and transient development or redevelopment projects subject to the 0i 21 provisions of this subsection (f)unless and until: (1)the required number of 22 inclusionary affordable workforce housing units have an approved and 23 recorded deed restriction, and certificates of occupancy have been issued for 24 the workforce housing units, and/or (2) the required number of existing 25 dwelling units must have an approved and recorded deed-restriction, and/or 26 (3)the donation of parcels to the County is completed. 27 5. Prior to the issuance of a building permit for the nonresidential and transient 28 development or redevelopment projects, any in-lieu fees must be paid. 29 30 (7) Monitoring and review. i 31 The requirements of this subsection (f) shall be monitored to ensure effective and 32 equitable application. Every two years, following the effective date of the ordinance 33 from which this section is derived, the BOCC may request the Planning Director 34 provide to the BOCC a report describing the impact of this subsection on the provision 35 of affordable workforce housing and other market or socioeconomic conditionsLU 36 influencing or being influenced by these requirements. Issues such as affordability 37 thresholds, inclusionary requirements, and the impacts of these provisions on the 38 affordable housing inventory and housing needs in the county shall be addressed, in 39 addition to other matters deemed relevant by the director. 40 41 ' 42 (8) Inclusionary Requirement Reduction for Very low and Low Income Units. 43 Certain types of workforce housing are relatively more desirable in satisffing the 44 affordable housing needs of the workforce. To address the market demands that show 45 that the workforce in the County continues to require lower priced rental housing- units.nits, E 46 particularly those whose earnings are up to or below 80 percent of the County's median Ordinance No. -2021 Page 25 of 30 File 2019-097 Packet Pg. 2668 R.1.a I income, an applicant with an inclusionary requirement of five (5) or more units, which 2 builds all the required affordable units as low-income and very low-income either on 3 site or within 5 miles of the nonresidential or transient development project, shall have 4 a reduced inclusionary housing requirement of 40%. The workforce housing units shall N 5 meet the County's affordable housing rental restrictions as specified in Section 139- 6 1(b) and (c), for a period not less than 99 years. An applicant may not propose the 7 payment of a fee in-lieu for any portion of the inclusionary housing requirement. 8 , 9 (ge) Linkage of projects. 10 (1) Two or more development (residential and/or nonresidential projects that are required 11 to provide affordable housing may be linked to allow the affordable housing requirement 12 of one development project to be built at the site of another project, so long as the 13 affordable housing requirement of the latter development is fulfilled as well and the 14 projects are within a 15 mile radius of the nonresidential development/ redevelopment. 15 The affordable units must be built either before or simultaneously 16 with the projects , 4h etA, or-w4h fewer-tha the ro rod ff-e-,a ble t Nits Sequencing � 17 of construction of the affordable component of linked projects may be the subject of the c 18 pPlanning department or the pPlanning eCommission's approval of a project. 19 In addition, if a developer builds more than the required number of affordable units at a 20 development site,this development project may be linked with a subsequent development Cai 21 project to allow compliance with the subsequent development's affordable unit L 22 requirement provided: the developer may not utilize affordable units previously built C 23 with County financial investment, other than building permit fee waivers and impact fee 24 waivers, the projects are within a 15 mile radius of the nonresidential development/ 25 redevelopment, and the affordable units proposed to satisfy the inclusionary housing 26 requirement may not have received certificates of occupancy three (3) years prior to the 27 project approval for the development triggering the inclusionary housing requirement. 28 Additionally, if the affordable units are proposed to satisfy nonresidential inclusionary 29 requirements, the units are restricted to either workforce housing units for the owner of 30 the nonresidential use that meets the sales price and annual income limits for owner- 31 occupied housing,as defined in Section 101-1 or rental workforce housing units that meet 32 the rental amounts and annual income limits for rental housing, as defined in Section 33 101-1. The linkage must be identified shied by the developer to the pPlanning 34 c-Commission at the time of the subsequent development's conditional use approval 35 (3) Fi*aIly-,-aAll linkages under this subsection may occur between sites within the county LUi 36 and in the cities of Key West, Marathon and Islamorada, subject to an interlocal U 37 agreement,where appropriate_ The linkage must occur within 15 miles of each 38 project and within the same geographic planning area i.e. lower middle and upper keys. z B 39 All linkages must be approved via a covenant running in favor of the sCounty, and if the 40 linkage project lies within a city, also in favor of that city. The covenant shall be placed 41 upon two or more projects linked, stating how the requirements for affordable housing 42 are met for each project. The covenant shall be approved by the BOCC and, if applicable, 43 the participating municipality. 44 (4) Projects with existing affordable units that have existing approvals, approved prior to the 45 effective date of this ordinance, which allow linkage of the affordable housing units to E Ordinance No. -2021 Page 26 of 30 File 2019-097 Packet Pg. 2669 R.1.a I satisfy inclusionary requirements shall not be subject to the provisions subsection(g)and 2 shall follow the provisions of the existing, aproved development order(s). 3 (hd)Affordable housing trust fund. N 4 The affordable housing trust fund(referred to as the "trust fund") is established. The trust fund 2 5 shall be maintained with funds earmarked for the purposes of furthering affordable housing 6 initiatives in municipalities and unincorporated areas of the county. Monies deposited into the 7 trust fund shall not be commingled with general operating funds of the county. The trust fund , 8 shall be used only for the following: 9 (1) Financial aid to developers as project grants for affordable/workforce housing 10 construction; 11 (2) Financial aid to homebuyers as mortgage assistance, including,but not limited to, loans 12 or grants for down payment assistance; 13 (3) Financial incentives for the conversion of units to affordable residential units; 14 (4) Direct investment in or leveraging housing affordability through site acquisition, 15 housing development and housing conservation; or 16 (5) Other affordable housing purposes as may be established by resolution of the BOCC, z 17 which shall act as trustees for the fund. The BOCC may enter into agreements or make 18 grants relating to the use of trust funds with or to the county housing authority or other 19 local government land or housing departments or agencies, a qualified community ca 1 20 housing development organization or nonprofit or for-profit developer of affordable or L 21 employee housing, or a municipality within the county. 22 Cie) Community housing development organization. 23 The BOCC may establish a nonprofit community housing development organization(CHDO), 24 pursuant to federal regulations governing such organizations, to serve as developer of 25 affordable housing units on county-owned property, including or located in the municipalities 26 of the county, upon interlocal agreement. In such event, the county may delegate to the 27 community housing development organization all or partial administration of the affordable 28 housing trust fund. 29 30 [moved to subsection (c)] 31 32 33 i 34 35 36 37 38 39 r 40 41 42 43 44 ttnits to h9tts@hOlds m 45 46 Ordinance No. -2021 Page 27 of 30 File 2019-097 Packet Pg. 2670 R.1.a 1and of stibs@ ; 2 3 4 5 m 6 7 8 W 9 10 11 12 13 14 R' 15 16 rr_a i i n nnn all a: 17 18 19 20 U 21 22 i 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 y 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 Lj 38 39 40 wt 41 42 43 44 is ft"thwig 45 46 T- 47 @gthis shaii stiii N 48 49 m 50 51 Ordinance No. -2021 Page 28 of 30 File 2019-097 Packet Pg. 2671 R.1.a 1 2 3 4 ; 5 m 6 7 cJ 8 W 9 10 12 13 1412 15 16 17 [moved to subsection (d)] 18 19 20 U 21 22 Mad@i 23 24 25 26 Section 3. Severability. If any section, paragraph, subdivision, clause, sentence or 27 provision of this ordinance shall be adjudged by any court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, 28 such judgment shall not affect, impair, invalidate, or nullify the remainder of this ordinance, but 29 the effect thereof shall be confined to the section, paragraph, subdivision, clause, sentence, or 30 provision immediately involved in the controversy in which such judgment or decree shall be 31 rendered. 0 32 i 33 Section 4. Construction and Interpretation. This ordinance and its interpretation and 34 application shall be liberally construed and enforced in favor of the Monroe County Board of 35 County Commissioners to effectuate its public purpose(s) and policy(ies) of Monroe County, 36 Florida. The construction and application of this Ordinance shall further be deferred in favor of 37 the Monroe County Board of County Commissioners and such interpretation and application shall 38 be entitled to great weight in adversarial administrative proceedings, at trial, in bankruptcy t� 39 proceeding(s), and on appeal. 40 z 41 Section 5. Conflicting Provisions. All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict with 42 this ordinance are hereby repealed to the extent of said conflict. h� 43 44 Section 6. Transmittal. This ordinance shall be transmitted to the Florida State Land 45 Planning Agency as required by F.S. 380.05 (11) and F.S. 380.0552(9). C44 46 47 Section 7. Filing. This ordinance shall be filed in the Office of the Secretary of the State 48 of Florida but shall not become effective pursuant to Section 9 until a final order is issued according Ordinance No. -2021 Page 29 of 30 File 2019-097 Packet Pg. 2672 R.1.a I to F.S. 380.05(6) by the Florida State Land Planning Agency or Administration Commission 2 approving the ordinance, and if the final order is challenged, until the challenge to the order is 3 resolved pursuant to F.S. Chapter 120. 4 5 Section 8. Inclusion in the Monroe County Code. The provisions of this Ordinance shall 6 be included and incorporated in the Code of Ordinances of the County of Monroe, Florida, as an 7 addition to amendment thereto, and shall be appropriately renumbered to conform to the uniform 8 marking system of the Code. , 9 10 Section 9. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall become effective as provided by law and 11 stated above. 12 13 PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Monroe County, Florida, 76 14 at a regular meeting held on the 17th day of February, 2021. 15 16 Mayor Michelle Coldiron 17 Mayor Pro Tem David Rice z 18 Commissioner Craig Cates 19 Commissioner Eddie Martinez 20 Commissioner Mike Forster caI 21 L• 22 23 24 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 25 OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA � 26 27 BY m 28 MAYOR MICHELLE COLDIRON a� 29 30 (SEAL) 0I 31 MONnOE CO_ ArronNEY � 32 ATTEST: KEVIN MADOK, CLERK "PP TO FORM �I 33 _ I 34 AS DEPUTY CLERK PETER MORRI ASSISTANT COUNTY ATTORNEY 35 Date: 2/2/21 u of CJ h I r N Ordinance No. -2021 Page 30 of 30 File 2019-097 Packet Pg. 2673 1 ttY MENEM MEMORANDUM MONROE COUNTY PLANNING&ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES DEPARTMENT We strive to be caring,professional and fair To: Monroe County Board of County Commissioners Through: Emily Schemper, AICP, CFM, Senior Director of Planning & Environmental Resources 0 From: Mayte Santamaria, Senior Planning Policy Advisor Cheryl Cioffari, AICP, Assistant Director of Planning Date: January 25, 2021 Subject: An ordinance by the Monroe County Board of County Commissioners adopting a amendments to the Monroe County Land Development Code to amend Section 101-1 r- affordable housing definitions by creating a definition for area median income, workforce z and workforce housing; amend Chapter 139-1 to clarify the affordable and employee housing administration, to incorporate nonresidential and transient inclusionary o requirements by providing regulations regarding the provision of affordable housing for the T development and redevelopment of nonresidential and transient uses;modifying the linkage W provisions; amending and/or adding for consistency purpose related provisions. (File 2019 , - 097) 0 Meeting: February 17, 2021 I. REQUEST The Monroe County Planning & Environmental Resources is proposing text amendments to the 2 Monroe County Land Development Code to amend Section 101-1 affordable housing definitions 0 by creating a definition for area median income, workforce and workforce housing; amend Chapter r-I 139-1 to clarify the affordable and employee housing administration, to incorporate nonresidential and transient inclusionary requirements by providing regulations regarding the provision of W affordable housing for the development and redevelopment of nonresidential and transient uses; modifying the linkage provisions; amending and/or adding for consistency purpose related v)i c, provisions. � II. BACKGROUND INFORMATION Section 125.01055,F. S., states: "Affordable housing.—Notwithstanding any other provision of law a county may adopt and maintain in effect any law, ordinance, rule, or other measure that is adopted for the purpose of increasing the supply of affordable housing using land use mechanisms such as inclusionary housing ordinances." On April 13, 2016,the BOCC adopted the 2030 Comprehensive Plan which includes Policy 601.1.13 BOCC SR Page 1 of 33 File No. 2019-097 Packet Pg. 2674 R.1.b in the Housing Element which states, "Monroe County shall maintain land development regulations on inclusionary housing and shall evaluate expanding the inclusionary housing requirements to include or address nonresidential and transient development and redevelopment based on specific data and analysis." The Monroe County Land Development Code defines Inclusionary Housing as "the resulting affordable and/or employee housing created or preserved with the development and/or redevelopment of a parcel where provisions of approved development agreements or orders implement and promote affordable and/or employee housing goals, objectives and policies contained in the plan by requiring set-asides for affordable and/or employee housing units." Current County regulations provide for an inclusionary housing requirement for residential 2 developments that result in the development or redevelopment of three (3) or more dwelling units or 2 ten (10) or more mobile homes to develop or redevelop at least 30 percent of the units as affordable 9 housing units to implement Goal 601 of the Monroe County Comprehensive Plan and to ensure that ru the need for affordable housing is not exacerbated by new residential development and the redevelopment of existing affordable housing stock. a� The County does not currently have an inclusionary housing requirement for the development or c redevelopment of nonresidential uses (office, retail, hotels, etc). To develop and adopt inclusionary housing requirements for the nonresidential sector to build workforce housing,the County contracted r_ with Clarion Associates and RRC Associates to complete the data and analysis necessary to establish .2 the workforce need generation and a rational nexus of need generation and affordable mitigation needs. This data was completed and presented on November 14, 2017, to the BOCC (2016 Monroe L County Employer Survey Results by RRC Associates and 2017 Affordable Workforce Housing L Support Study for Non-residential Development by Clarion Associates). Staff is proposing amendments to incorporate nonresidential and transient inclusionary requirements based on the data provided by the studies listed above. Staff also reviewed other studies and data, including but not limited to: • 2019 Rental Market Study by the OF Shimberg Center for Housing Studies, • 2018 ALICE Study by the United Way, • 2018 Inclusionary Zoning Primer by the National Association of Home Builders • 2016 Inclusionary Housing-A Series of Research&Policy Briefs by the Center for Housing Policyi and National Housing Conference, 0 • 2016 Monroe County AHAC Resolution 01-2016, and • 2009 Inclusionary Housing Info Packet by the APA Planning Advisory Service i Previous County Actions regarding Inclusionary Housing: In August 2014, the BOCC approved an agreement with the FCRC Consensus Center, FSU, for i professional services on an Affordable Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment, in order to assess the current workforce/affordable housing situation in the County and propose a process for developing recommendations to increase the supply of affordable housing. Per Section 7-201(c) of the Monroe County Code, "the advisory committee may perform additional a responsibilities related to affordable housing at the request of the BOCC, including creating best management practices for the development of affordable housing in the community." BOCC SR Page 2 of 33 File No. 2019-097 Packet Pg. 2675 R.1.b The BOCC adopted Ordinance 014-2015 amending Section 2-700 of the Monroe County Code to establish the 14 members of the affordable housing advisory committee (AHAC). The BOCC also adopted Resolution 139-2015 and Resolution 189-2015 to add additional duties to the committee to create a workforce housing development plan,including assisting in developing inclusionary housing requirements for the hospitality and commercial sector to build workforce housing. N In January 2015,the AHAC adopted Resolution 03-2015 recommending that the BOCC support the County funding and completing a workforce housing study to support development of inclusionary housing requirements for the hospitality and commercial sector to build workforce housing. In July 2016, the AHAC adopted Resolution 01-2016 providing 33 recommendations to the Board 2 of County Commissioners to facilitate the provision of workforce housing, including that the BOCC 2 support and fund a nexus study as the first step in the expansion of the current County residential 9 inclusionary housing program to cover transient and commercial development in the County. On August 17, 2016, staff presented the Affordable Housing Advisory Committee's adopted 2 Resolution 01-2016 (33 recommendations) to the BOCC and the BOCC approved contracts for 2 studies to support and inclusionary housing requirement to cover transient and commercial z development as well as requested staff to schedule a special meeting to discuss the remaining recommendations. The BOCC approved the contract with RRC Associates to (1) conduct a data- based survey of employers located in the unincorporated and incorporated parts of Monroe County to verify the employment patterns and the building floor area used for nonresidential development, and to (2) prepare the prototypical workforce/affordable housing unit(s), including size ranges, W building materials and costs of construction, to be utilized by the County for the adoption of L inclusionary housing requirements to address nonresidential and transient development. The BOCC r- also approved a contract with Clarion Associates to prepare a Support Study providing the technical support (data & methodology to determine need) for a workforce/ affordable housing mitigation program for nonresidential development and redevelopment, to be utilized by the County for the adoption of inclusionary housing requirements to address nonresidential and transient development. On November 14, 2017 BOCC meeting, presentations regarding the data to create an inclusionary housing requirement for nonresidential and transient development were provided, as follows: • Presentation by RRC Associates summarizing the results of the survey of employers located in Monroe County to document employment patterns and the building floor area used for 0 nonresidential development. • Presentation by Clarion Associates providing the findings of the Affordable Workforce Housing Support Study for Nonresidential Development which provides the technical support (data & methodology to determine need) for a workforce/affordable housing mitigation program for nonresidential development to be utilized by the County for the adoption of inclusionary housing requirements to address nonresidential and transient development. On February 21, 2018, the BOCC directed staff to process amendments on the application of potential inclusionary requirement for nonresidential and transient development, as follows: 1. Develop a nonresidential inclusionary requirement? Yes. 2. Should the inclusionary requirement apply to new development? Yes. 3. Should the inclusionary requirement apply to the repair or development of the same use with no expansion/enlargement?No. BOCC SR Page 3 of 33 File No. 2019-097 Packet Pg. 2676 R.1.b 4. Should the inclusionary requirement apply to the repair or redevelopment of the same use that is expanded/enlarged? Yes. 5. Should the inclusionary requirement apply to the repair or redevelopment with a new use with no expansion/enlargement? Yes. 6. Should the inclusionary requirement apply to the repair or redevelopment with a new use that is expanded/enlarged? Yes. c, 7. Should the inclusionary requirement apply to the demo/redevelopment or substantial improvement of the same use with no expansion/enlargement?No. 8. Should the inclusionary requirement apply to the demo/redevelopment or substantial improvement of the same use that is expanded/enlarged? Yes. 9. Should the inclusionary requirement apply to the demo/redevelopment or substantial improvement with a new use with no expansion/enlargement? Yes. 10. Should the inclusionary requirement apply to the demo/redevelopment or substantial 2 improvement with a new use that is expanded/enlarged? Yes. Public Process: a Community Meeting and Public Participation In accordance with LDC Section 102-159(b)(3), a Community Meeting was held on January 27, Z 2020, in Marathon to provide for public input. One member of the public attended the meeting. The member provided comments related to satisfying the nonresidential inclusionary requirement with o "workforce housing," suggesting the mitigation be satisfied within a 5 mile distance, that the T workforce housing be rental housing only, and the potential of creating a sliding scale to allow the inclusionary percentage to be reduced for each low-income unit within a 3 mile distance. . Development Review Committee and Public Input The Development Review Committee considered the proposed amendment at a regular meeting on February 25, 2020, and received public input. Two members of the public provided comments regarding the mitigation distance being reduced(did not support the 15 mile radius) to reduce traffic and shorten commutes. a Planning Commission and Public Input The Planning Commission considered the proposed amendment at a regular meeting on June 24, 0i 2020, provided for public input and recommended approval of the proposed amendments with two edits to the draft: • Amending the BOCC criteria 45 under the Exemptions and waivers procedure to: o In the event of a declared State of Local Emergency, the BOCC adopts a resolution recognizing that the strict application ofthe nonresidential inclusionary requirements UI would not enhance nor protect the health, safety and welfare of the community. t� • Amending the Compliance Requirements section to address the allowable distance for a®ai mitigation to 15 miles without a transit stop requirement, as follows: o The construction of workforce housinZ dwellinZ units off-site of the development project within=. =14 a 15 mile radius of the nonresidential development/ redevelopment, it th e„e , a t„ nsit st ith iH 0 inn fi-et , 4iH 4SIO H e Of 4 BOCC SR Page 4 of 33 File No. 2019-097 Packet Pg. 2677 R.1.b The workforce housing dwelling units shall meet the County's affordable housing restrictions as specified in Section 139-I L) and Lc), for a period not less than 99 vears; CD o The deed-restriction of existing dwelling units within} a 15 mile radius of the nonresidential development/redevelopment, *Aei-e is ^ MOHN4 N ,ithin ^ 300 cv as The workforce housing dwelling units meet the County's affordable housing restrictions as specified in Section 139-10)and (c), for a period not less than 99 vears; Previous BOCC Action In 2003,the BOCC adopted Ordinance No. 030-2003 to establish inclusionary housing requirements (amending Section 9.5-266(b)) for projects consisting of three or more new market rate units to develop at least 30%of the residential units beyond the first two units as affordable. This amendment 2 did not apply to the redevelopment of existing units. c z In 2006,the BOCC adopted Ordinance No. 017-2006 revising the inclusionary housing requirements to include: 1)market rate residential development or redevelopment of three or more dwelling units ° shall be required to develop or redevelop at least 30% of the residential units as affordable housing, and 2) the removal, replacement or conversion of 10 or more mobile homes shall be required to L develop or redevelop at least 30% of the residential units as affordable housing. c In 2008,the BOCC adopted Ordinance No. 011-2008 revising the inclusionary housing requirements to allow an alternative compliance to the inclusionary housing requirements by allowing the developers to deed restrict existing dwelling units as affordable housing in lieu of constructing new affordable units. On August 17, 2016, the BOCC approved a contract with RRC Associates to (1) conduct a data- based survey of employers located in the unincorporated and incorporated parts of Monroe County to verify the employment patterns and the building floor area used for nonresidential development, i and to (2) prepare the prototypical workforce/affordable housing unit(s), including size ranges, 0 building materials and costs of construction, to be utilized by the County for the adoption of inclusionary housing requirements to address nonresidential and transient development. ; On August 17, 2016, the BOCC approved a contract with Clarion Associates to prepare a Support Study providing the technical support (data & methodology to determine need) for a workforce/ affordable housing mitigation program for nonresidential development and redevelopment (expansions and remodels), to be utilized by the County for the adoption of inclusionary housing a) requirements to address nonresidential and transient development. N On November 14, 2017, a presentation was provided by RRC Associates summarizing the results of the survey of employers located in Monroe County to document employment patterns and the 0) building floor area used for nonresidential development and a presentation was provided by Clarion Associates providing the findings of the Affordable Workforce Housing Support Study for BOCC SR Page 5 of 33 File No. 2019-097 Packet Pg. 2678 R.1.b Nonresidential Development which provides the technical support (data & methodology to determine need) for a workforce/affordable housing mitigation program for nonresidential development to be utilized by the County for the adoption of inclusionary housing requirements to address nonresidential and transient development. On February 21, 2018, the BOCC directed staff to process amendments on the application of potential inclusionary requirement for nonresidential and transient development, as follows: 1. Develop a nonresidential inclusionary requirement? Yes. 2. Should the inclusionary requirement apply to new development? Yes. 3. Should the inclusionary requirement apply to the repair or development of the same use with , no expansion/enlargement?No. 4. Should the inclusionary requirement apply to the repair or redevelopment of the same use that 2 is expanded/enlarged? Yes. S. Should the inclusionary requirement apply to the repair or redevelopment with a new use with 2 no expansion/enlargement? Yes. 6. Should the inclusionary requirement apply to the repair or redevelopment with a new use that 0 is expanded/enlarged? Yes. 7. Should the inclusionary requirement apply to the demo/redevelopment or substantial 2 improvement of the same use with no expansion/enlargement?No. z 8. Should the inclusionary requirement apply to the demo/redevelopment or substantial improvement of the same use that is expanded/enlarged? Yes. r- 9. Should the inclusionary requirement apply to the demo/redevelopment or substantial .2 improvement with a new use with no expansion/enlargement? Yes. 10. Should the inclusionary requirement apply to the demo/redevelopment or substantial L improvement with a new use that is expanded/enlarged? Yes. c On February 21, 2018, the BOCC directed staff to draft a resolution that would temporarily waive the inclusionary housing requirements of LDC Section 139-1(b) on an emergency basis for existing residential dwelling units that were substantially damaged or destroyed as a result of Hurricane Irma. On March 21, 2018, the BOCC adopted Resolution 113-2018 temporarily waiving the inclusionary :2 housing requirements of Section 139-1(b) of the Monroe County Land Development Code on an 2 emergency basis until March 21, 2020 for like repair, redevelopment or replacement; or for units 0 coming into compliance with building, flood, and land development codes, of existing residentialI dwelling units that were damaged or destroyed as a result of Hurricane Irma. 0 III. PROPOSED LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE TEXT AMENDMENTS The proposed text is shown as follows: additions are in underlined, deletions are sue. �I [Red= new text t.Anderlined &strikethro,.A 'n of existing text.BIu.c= moved existing text.] h I Section 101-1 Definitions. The following words, terms and phrases, when used in this chapter, shall have the meanings ascribed to them in this section, except where the context clearly indicates a different meaning: C44 Affordable housing. (1)Affordable housing means residential dwelling units that meet the following requirements: BOCC SR Page 6 of 33 File No. 2019-097 Packet Pg. 2679 R.1.b a. Meet all applicable requirements of the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development minimum property standards as to room sizes, fixtures, landscaping and building materials, when not in conflict with applicable laws of the county; and b. A dwelling unit whose monthly rent, not including utilities, does not exceed 30 percent of that amount which represents either 50 percent (very low income) or 80 percent (low income) or 100 percent (median income) or 120 percent (moderate income) of the monthly median adjusted household income for the county. (2) Affordable housing owner occupied, low income, means a dwelling unit occupied only by a household whose total household income does not exceed 80 percent of the median monthly household income for the county. (3) Affordable housing owner occupied, median income, means a dwelling unit occupied only by a household whose total household income does not exceed 100 percent of the median monthly 2 household income for the county. (4)Affordable housing owner occupied, moderate income, means a dwelling unit occupied only by a 9 household whose total household income does not exceed 160 percent of the median monthly ru household income for the county. (5) Affordable housing owner occupied, very low income, means a dwelling unit occupied only by a household whose total household income does not exceed 50 percent of the median monthly household 2 income for the county. c (6)Affordable housing trust fund means a trust fund established and maintained by the county for the purpose of preserving existing and promoting creation of new affordable and employee housing. Funds collected for and deposited in the trust fund shall be used exclusively for purposes of creating, preserving or maintaining affordable and employee housing in the Florida Keys. (7)Affordable rental housing, low income, means a dwelling unit whose monthly rent, not including utilities, does not exceed 30 percent of the amount that represents up to 80 percent of the monthly L median adjusted household income for the county. (8)Affordable rental housing, median income, means a dwelling unit whose monthly rent,not including utilities, does not exceed 30 percent of the amount that represents up to 100 percent of the monthly adjusted median household income for the county. (9) Affordable rental housing, moderate income, means a dwelling unit whose monthly rent, not including utilities, does not exceed 30 percent of the amount that represents up to 120 percent of the monthly median adjusted household income for the county. (10)Affordable rental housing, very low income, means a rental dwelling unit whose monthly rent,not including utilities, does not exceed 30 percent of the amount that represents up to 50 percent of the monthly median adjusted household income for the county. 0 r77c,,kal, im,'oln ii—wans the anflUai miedian 11OLIs bold incomie.lMblislie i for tine Car�O are are W anflUai basis by the LJ,S, DeMartmie t cif IOL[Sing and Lh-ban Qc .�.fc LI /11110/LL ¢° (12-1) Employee housing means an attached or detached dwelling unit that is intended to serve as affordable, permanent housing for working households, which derive at least 70 percent of their household income from gainful employment in the county and meet the requirements for affordable CO housing as defined in this section and as per section 139-1. (1 32)Employer-owned rental housing means an attached or detached dwelling unit owned by a firm, business, educational institution, non-governmental or governmental agency, corporation or other entity that is intended to serve as affordable, permanent housing for its employees. This category of employee housing shall be located on the same parcel of land as the nonresidential use. (1 4)Inclusionary housing means the resulting affordable and/or employee housing and/or Nyork f orce I l[Sirt created or preserved with the development and/or redevelopment of a parcel where provisions e( BOCC SR Page 7 of 33 File No. 2019-097 Packet Pg. 2680 R.1.b of approved development agreements or orders implement and promote affordable and/or employee housing and/or workforce 11dns4n goals, objectives and policies contained in the plan by requiring set- asides for affordable and/or employee housing and dr workforce JIOL[Sitlu units. 151 Il�lu�rr��trr�� sulc>s ��rrccj rtitira�jr rtcctrt�t�jcdcr�f(t�cduhl�j l�ct7rsrr�g 7rr�r� means ct price nt�t e�ceedrn� 3 7 tunes the annual median hous.ehold.lnc,or e..f`or.:the.,,coun� or a one bcclroo t>r efficicnc � 4. �.25 � ....... ...... ...... tunes the annual ine ian household income for the county for a two be roon Unit and 4.75 tunes the c, annual median household incone.for the.c.�unt f`Or athree or more bedroon unit. � _....................................................................................:..:............................................................................................................................................................................................:.................... (164) Median income, rental rates and qualifying incomes table, means eligibility requirements compiled each year by the L)flanning j2 epartment based upon the area anneal median 4 household income published for the county on an annual basis by the U.S. Department of Housing and , Urban Development and similar information for median and moderate income levels from the Florida Housing Finance Corporation. Affordable housing eligibility requirements for each household will be 2 based upon median annual household income adjusted by 11dnsebold f 14y size, as set forth by the 2 U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and the Florida Housing Finance Corporation. 9 The county shall rely upon this information to determine maximum rental rates and maximum ru household incomes eligible for affordable housing rental or purchase. (1= ,) Monthly median household income means the median annual household income for the county divided by 12. 2 r- (1 8 )Deed restriction, affordable housing means a recorded restriction on a residential dwelling unit e for a period of 99 years restricting occupancy and/or purchase to households that meet the requirements of the income categories listed above. 1 f l 11_�'r�r;tif�r r, > n earsndi ideals dr f`an dies tad arc airf`clll e.n€ f ed sr,d.� r __, „=adds and;dr, .2 services to l/ldnrde COL1t1tV residents or :visitors. � 201i i11or,ti dcri-ve at least "'0% oftbeir incon-i . as nienibers oftbe. Workforce in l/lonroe COLItity and ;ybo n e.t the affordable iI r[siM� incon-ie cater=.dries of the lylonroe. COMO Code, Workforce 110r[SiM� shall be intercbam eable w itli the tern-is detached 'r attacbed dw llin s en ldyee. t dr sir ., dr con n ercial anartn tints it cic ded in the land Use districts and stall lie. a fern fitted case. ire all lard rise districts yhere de.tacbed dw e.11im attacbed dw e.11im„ s, en-i -lol e.e. ur- JIOL[SiM� or cdniniercial a)artr Tents are irlclUded as a cUrrer t erg fitted Use, An applicant t cl ddsir _. to do .e.ldlr ydrl�:f`dree t dr sin ., is sr l ject to the recicliren€tints of` banter 139 and all otbe lUiren€tints irlclUded in the land de clop tint cdc , ir�clL[dirlla but not lilylited to densit ..—.�arl�ir� access. etc, 0 _ _ • CJ Chapter 139 AFFORDABLE AND EMPLOYEE HOUSING i Sec. 139-1. Affordable and Employee Housing; Administration. N (a) URose. (l 1 tie I lord df` 'dc r ty do€n€issidr ers teas deterrr fined that tt e l r l lic t�ealtt , saff.ty and =ener�al � ;ye.lfare of tbe. con€n€rInitf Warrants the inilrle.nientation of` aff`ordal�le. ar�d en ldv tie. 11dusirr_, � PML,isiOtis for tt e f`dllds n _, rt, BOCC SR Page 8 of 33 File No. 2019-097 Packet Pg. 2681 R.1.b a, fay i� i lc.� c.r =. al �l c lick. ar cl i,j � . c f` l c l l r t` �. OL1tIt " 'OI `c l c.r i .c, filar ar cl it ct`c a c. i c. a lV cif` 11OLISitia affordable to targeted iticgite =,rOaI S�N. itilit tail colyll€UtlitY aticl b. irzo . r -v id IIOL[SiM_, O.P.110TILMIties for lower iticoiite L=,OU s iti order to iiteet the exi to iitairitairi a o io-ecotioi tic iitix iti the coil€i€airlitf , aticl C. fao address iitatket deiitatids that Ali w that the workforce iti the COL1tItV c°Orltitfties to C44 those wliose eartiim s rare=e froiit 50 ca l c.r` c r atl 1 l c r` c.r c f` i c a r €c char it c ilte the tare et iticoi tc L= OU)s; and cl, o redUce the OLIO Illigratiori cif` the M Ic eiyi..l f ed iti the COLItity and fi eff faiitiiies wliicli 1-tas placed iricreasitig tress iti iitairitairiitig z -viz ,ic workforce- arid cl. i 0 tillIaIlat the .i ri'vate sect0l` .l t`cc UCtiOtl c the icic i t`c.acl cli ii � i r c f`af`f`c r`clai lc i � it _. c I-tUrlitic s tiIT_OLI i`OL1t all 011i0tis 0f` 11 . c 01€11€cIrlitV, itICILICIiM=W itliiri ric w aricl c x,grg�jg cic-v elc e, 0 i)rc-vid for a tarp re ofi-��r� _. �,��`�caiities for those wlio li-ve arid work iti l/foriroe critial se -vices, es c�ia. iti the aIi)lic � 1-tealt1i aticl safety sectors oftlie e otioi€v. ,. y ibI Generally. c (1) Notwithstanding the density limitations in Section 130-157, the owner of a parcel of land shall be entitled to: a. Develop affordable and employee housing as defined in Section 101-1, on parcels of land .2 classified as follows: 1. Urban Residential (UR) at an intensity up to a maximum net residential density of 25 dwelling units per acres 2. Mixed Use (MU) at an intensity up to a maximum net residential density of 18 dwelling units per acre, aa - . UbLl`bati `oiitiiter`�ial (SC) at ati iritcti�itf a iitaxIIIILHII tiet residetitial detisity cif` IS d ellitW UtIM,ier acre _ b,-e Develop market rate housing, as defined in Section 101-1, as part of an affordable or 0 0. employee housing project in accordance with subsection O )(8) of this section, provided that on parcels of land classified as Urban Residential (UR), the maximum net residential ; density shall not be greater than 18 dwelling units per acre. (2) The maximum net residential density allowed per district and by this section shall not require Transferable Development Rights (TDR) for affordable and employee housing and market rate housing developed in accordance with subsection O )(8) of this section. (3) Market rate housing developed in accordance with subsection O )(8)below shall be eligible to a) receive points pursuant to Section 138-28O )(6). (4) The requirements of this Land Development Code for the provision of impact fees shall be waived for affordable and employee housing and any market rate housing developed in accordance with subsection O )(8) of this section. (5) Notwithstanding the provisions of this article, when calculating density, any existing lawfully established or proposed affordable or employee housing on a parcel and the floor area thereof �t BOCC SR Page 9 of 33 File No. 2019-097 Packet Pg. 2682 R.1.b shall be excluded from the calculation of the total gross nonresidential floor area development that may be lawfully established or peni-6tted on the parcel, provided, however, that the total residential density allowed on the site shall not exceed the maximum net density for affordable and employee housing. (6) In order for the owner of a parcel of land to be entitled to the incentives for affordable or employee housing outlined in this section and Chapter 138, Articles II and III, the owner must N ensure that: a) a. The use of the affordable housing dwelling unit is restricted to households that meet the annual income limits defined in Section 101-1; b. Except as provided for under the special provisions for employer-owned rental housing as set forth under subsection O )(6)k of this section, if the affordable housing dwelling unit M is designed for employee housing, the use of the dwelling is restricted to households that 2 derive at least 70 percent of their household income from gainful employment in the 2 county and meet the -dj+i,-t "+b�- annual income limits f&i—+wtW+i-gem -as defined in 9 Section 101-1-. c. The use of the affordable or employee dwelling unit is deed restricted for the pp year � period specified in Section 101-1 . d. Tourist housing use or vacation rental use of affordable or employee housing units is 2 prohibited;-. c z e. The parcel of land proposed for development of affordable or employee housing shall only be located within a tier III designated area. Notwithstanding the foregoing, and notwithstanding Section 138-24(a)(5), affordable ° housing ROGO allocations may be awarded to properties within any tier, provided all of the following criteria is met: #1. The property contains an existing market rate dwelling unit that meets the criteria in L LDC Section 138-22(a) and is determined to be exempt from ROGO; h2. The proposed replacement affordable dwelling unit meets current Florida Building Code and is not a mobile home; e3. The proposed replacement dwelling unit shall be deed restricted for a period of at least 99 years as affordable housing pursuant to the standards of the Land Development Code; d4. The proposed site plan for the replacement affordable dwelling unit does not propose any additional clearing of habitat; and e5. The structure is not proposed to be within a V-zone on the county's flood insurance rating map. 0 f. At the time of sale of an owner-occupied affordable unit, the total income of households eligible to purchase the Utlit shall not exceed the iris oii iia€its w iffi41 the deed restriction � for the Utlit atid riot exceed 1620 percent of the area median income for the county . to-a- kk 1+ "t.i.Fe4a .. .. 1''i=ca=r4 •.��i � -:c�• ,�.; :,rs ."r:- `• - t_...' - -c�•- ,••r... �, •�s•."•C}r��t• i �.. l g. During occupancy of any affordable housing rental unit, not otherwise limited by state or federal statute or rule concerning household income, a household's annual income may increase to an amount not to exceed 140 percent of the area median 4tsi14 income for the county. If the income of the lessee exceeds this amount, the tenant's occupancy shall terminate at the end of the existing lease term. The maximum lease for any term shall be aria, i" i .ar or 12 BOCC SR Page 10 of 33 File No. 2019-097 Packet Pg. 2683 R.1.b h. Affordable housing projects shall be no greater than 20 units unless approved by resolution of the c- `ounty Planning Commission. The Planning Commission's decision may be appealed to the BOCC using the procedures described in Section 102-185, with the BOCC serving as the appellate body for the purpose of this section only; When establishing a rental and sales amount the county shall as � ar rt i r s the area ii—iediati iricaaic. OUblislied for tLi `ourit ari ati atifMal basis by tie L]. , 1'e armi tit � c f`1 c r it r=,atid ]rf r De-el � .r r i!� iied f`0r-i1OLIseboid size acid tic iticoiii iil lit N of`the rirlit � ��r ��r�� i�� r ' °�r i -�� . �s �iCa -This section shall not be used to establish the maximum number of individuals who actually live in the unit. This table shall be used in the sic el tmwtit accordim� to the defitiitiotis iti Sectioti 101- Size of Unit Assumed Household 1 Size Efficiency (no separate bedroom) 1 One bedroom 2 y Two bedroom 3 2 Three bedroom 4 c Four or more bedroom 5 r c W C j. Except for tenants of employer-owned rental housing, as set forth in subsection Oa a)(6)k. .2 of this section, the income of eligible households shall be determined by counting only the first and highest paid 40 hours of employment per week of each unrelated adult. For a household containing adults related by marriage or a domestic partnership registered with the county, only the highest 60 hours of the combined employment hours shall be counted 0 which shall be considered to be 75 percent of the antral income. The income of dependents regardless of age shall not be counted in calculating a household's income; and k. In the special case of employer-owned rental housing, as defined in Section 101-1 employees shall be eligible as tenants of the affordable rental housing, if the income of :2 each iri i-vi Ual tenant, as determined following the requirements in subsection Oa)(6)j. 2 of this section, is not more than the 80 percent (Lgw iric iof the area median income 0 l a c1- f a for the county. The tenants of this c.i ip c� c.r- i c ti d rental 110r[Sitrr O r a 1 ems+ ti4 shall be required to derive at least 70 percent of their income from within the county. The maximum occupancy of employer- owned rental housing for employees shall be no more than two Qjenants per bedroom; with a maximum of three L bedrooms per unit. The total monthly lease charged tenants v)i for each dwelling unit shall not exceed 30 percent of the area median income for county, divided by 12. (7) Commercial apartment dwelling units, as defined in Section 101-1, shall only be eligible for the i incentives outlined in this section if they meet the requirements of subsection Oa)(6) of this section for employee housing. (8) If an affordable or employee housing project or an eligible commercial apartment designated N for employee housing contains at least five dwelling units, a maximum of 20 percent of these units may be developed as market rate housing dwelling units. The owner of a parcel of E land must develop the market rate housing dwelling units as an integral part of an affordable or U BOCC SR Page 11 of 33 File No. 2019-097 Packet Pg. 2684 R.1.b employee housing project. In order for the market rate housing dwelling units to be eligible for incentives outlined in this section, the owner must ensure that: a. The use of the market rate housing dwelling unit is restricted for a period of at least 30 years to households that derive at least 70 percent of their household income from gainful employment in the county; and b. Tourist housing use and vacation rental use of the market rate dwelling unit is prohibited. N c. Administration_and.._c------------ ��r��: l) l ef`t>re env brrilclrn crrni:t.in iy be issLrecl f`t r env strriectLrre i trrtrtrn-or tress trf`d rtr ect s�lb cc:.t to ttrrs section a restrictive covenant shall be atrrroved by the �� '� t ....... .... .... .. ... ....... fllannimr Director and C ounty Attt rnev and recorded in the e0ffice.of the eC lerk..of.the.e tun � to ensure cornpliance with the prdvrsron of this section runninu in favor of the t>Lrn and 2 enf'orcea le b. the e µt�LlnIt and ---if`-a_ .lic.able i�arti-cl � �nL�nlcl�ality. The following r ply to these restrictive covenants- � a. The.coven, n,ts f(>r any affordable or em l vee housing units shall be effective for aSeri-a be The.covenants shall not cornrnenc. rrrnnins_T until...a..c�ertifi-cate..of`..occu anc,v leas been N ..... ....... issuedbv thebrrildin hich the covenant 2 ..._... c.>..r.._coven.ants...a ly,. c .............................................................................................. e. l:or existim� dwelliM, Urlits that are deed-restricted as affordable, or en-i loye.e. Ior[SiM .�. writs„ tlre. eo.errarrts shall eor€n€sires r� r r it rl or recordation in the Official Records of` Monroe. CoMIN, — (2) ReQstrictive--covenants-,for housing rib eca �t�.al�e....�rc>visic>ns of this sec�tic>n shall be filed that � ...... reclLrire ctrnpllance tl..l:.t.3.. f .l...l. win o . ae Restrretrn.g affordable.. housina dwelling units...:tt>....households....rnee:tina the inc(�rne LN reclLlrrernents of subsection 1)Ek)( ).a. of this section- ......... .. be Res�trrctrn ern of ) ee housin& dwelling-units..:to households rne.elinIg the income and ernployrnent reclLlrrernents trf SLrbsectitrn Ilr .b of t1�.ls section - ..... ... . .. .... ........... ce Restr'ctin(y market et rate trt>il,ing dwelling Emits to households rneetina the etn lt> nt reclLlrrernents of subsection (l)rrr). }ae of this section and:.... . de EIDIIJ.bit.J.D. tt Llri,t lit Llsi_ Lrse ter vacatio n rental Lrse t f`an 1�t Lrsin tleveltrPecl or deed- restricted under �t1re t�rovisions of this section. (3) 1 tr- elr >i tv rf a )trtentlal own er--c2cc Llpler or renter t>f an affordable,.lee pk.1 ee or�narl�et rate 0 housing dwelling> Lrnrt d e �.�s �� ,�bicb is an ern lt>vee or affordable ht>rrsrn, �i _....... ..... .... .....in' pri>lec.t irnr � shall be ceterrnined by the I'lanninr trnn:t-ilc>n sLrbrni ttal of`an affidavit of` 0 clLfctlrfrc turn ttr t1�e I'lctnnlnR f)ep rtrnent 11� ftrrrn trf t1�e ctffl ctvit s1�a11 ...............................................in frm rescribe W by-_the E'lnnln- aitrnent.. 1 trrs.eli=iy strap be cleterrninecl by the 1'lannrn = 1)e.artcnent as follows:-:.: a. �t the trine the. c.ter tial owner either aLplies for affordablehousinL ROGO allocation or apples � p ttr Lrrch�€se a unit that used affordable housing R(3CiO allocation�o�ap, Irc.s�o Murclrase a deed-restricted CIN� Ilia r.Unity..or b. At the tirne the that used an affordable CD 3� 3alloc allocation or i� deed .. � Ex cen.t.r€s prt>vrded In sLrbsect------ df this section the property owner of each affordably N . . ernpk.j ee or rnarket rate trousing dwellin> nnl:t Betel r fs rlrielr rs an afftrrclable trr erntic>ve horrsrnrt>lec_t�crnrt shall be reclrrrredtt>annLrally srrbrnrt an affidavit of csrralrfication ...... ........ ........ . affidavit .... . ... tt.>.:the E'lannin. D. artrnent verrf` in >ttrat ttre a��1-ic.�l�l-c er �ltryrnent and inc orne rec�Lllrer of subsection of clualification shall be in a ..... e( BOCC SR Page 12 of 33 File No. 2019-097 Packet Pg. 2685 f'orl,n,, antftiallv bv LN\/La v I +-1 1-1-,ea-A 0." Le-of MHI-1447 (5) Die owner-oc dwelling unit .................. ...................C f an ................................................................................. a homestead exelnotion as provided for under the state statutes. uired to submit an 9 .................................................................=.=n=n .........................................................W=n=n=n=n=n=n a) annual affidavit cifsection if that T- ownerowner-oc,cu artment, Pri(ir �L ............................ ................... -o wners.hj (includinu but not limited to: sale. assium-nent devise. or ottigl—g) the ............==............................... occ to the Planning Den artment in a f(.)ri-n I�g� r o...v...i.n� that ........to O,CCLIj;j=LIiTt=u=nI r o a a., Te in ownershi of` ro gj� .............................. ==p �.i=ni �ni-gli........ ........................................................... ........ ...... ........ ... ...................................... (6) Failure to subj-nU,the r,e uired annual verification ofthis section .2 ......................... or fai I ure to (.)vi(,,Ie (locurneirtatio i .r o a uired in subsectio C. -5 ................................................... .......... ..................................................... ...... .......... ............... of this section shall constitute a violation of' the restrictive covenant the conditions of' the ............................................ ............. c-erti-fi-c-a (7) The restrictive covenants for affordable and.,ernp- be roved by me kd+ffmj-4, fllannim? Director and Coon ttorne ........... ............... .........� jh� of'anybuild' )erm i t� ........................................III .. ............. .................................... irector and an eliarible arovernmental or 0 z nownuovernmentalentity the Planninu Director may >rrae that-----------------------------------ty ........................e and coi I T- I Q ��.uirernents for the Plannimy and Environmental Resources ..................................................................... Dep rtment under subsections fS� (J) __arid kK4 ). ,,jd(5.), jt&(LdL� of' this sect can U n. nder ......... ...... .T) s.u...c..b......�na......n....n�n� lif' a .......o...............t.......e...........n.................t.....i........a........l....................o.........w............n. er-oc > .............. f'f'( hou a .)rdable sI'n or iect, and annualIV verif' the ernI ................................................................... tenantstit 0-------------quired t 2............. ............................................................................. 0 d]e..b.,EJAR,aingy and Environmental Resour-pQ F)-1A,rIj,-,nQ, nt, by klay-aummwniit cif written certification verifvi. .....theft tenants cif of fordable ej-np 10 or market rate housin(T x.�..... yee,........ . .... .. ........................................... ........................................................................................................ LiflitS I-neetS the ajjc.gjhj.c crltrvment and incarne re i.............n...............................f.........uh.s..e.c U.-an--( rej en ts o 's section. The . .. f'ollowin"o.-..v.e.....r....n.....i...n......e.n.. tal and non mummen mt (r(m . . . WWILa�mu .. ..... ms— a, The count7vIiousi anent oruanizations. ............ 0 afTordable,hOusIn b. Private deveIQ2��,Lujicip federal," 0 in a ,state le ................................................................. .................. .............................. .................................................................................................................. housin receiving some f(.)ri-n of direct .................................wb............................................................................................. financial assistance froi-n,,tlie,,Coun,,t .................................................................................................................................................... C, NonLyovernmental orszc i roved b 1, 3 ALIMI LVp.................................. y yj fire ------------able---------I-- U) (9) ns of'the written aureerne-t ................ ....... .......... executed,,, 0 the aureernent should not be CO terminated within 30 days demonstrate to the. .. ....... . ....... .............................wb= ............................... satisfaction of the Planni �y Director that it is meetina the terms and conditions OT'ITQ ..................................................................................................................... ... ................................................................................. aureei-nent the agreement i-nav be terminated by the, Planninu Director within 30 days of'the written nt>tic e E BOCCSR Page 13 of 33 File No. 2019-097 Packet Pg. 2686 -1.13 e B 0civics of`Margi-lin, and ................. gists and lslarntraclas 'illc€ c tf` lslancls f`tr the aLrr case trf` slrarrn= residential rate tf` >rtw:t1� affordabl e,ji ousin L I.....w.J.111i n on.Q or,rn ore dictions or i be for a specific, allocation ofunits on an annual j............. ......................................... basis frorn the to a munid alitv or froi a rnLrnrcr alitv to the county.. lie interlocal aLueen-ients n-iav also accept and/or transfer allocations lrrWSUant to the 2012 FILITTIcane E-vaUia Clearance in-ie N/len-iorandUn-i of' Understanding, All allocations made available must ..........................r...n......e...e.....t.. t...h.....e..,,,,=j....i.cabl.e......a.f...f....o......r....d....a.b......l...e..........h......o.....u......s....i...n.. nts of' the isdiction's I = development regulations and affordable housing ordinances. ......................... 1tl(b4 Residena fial Inclusionary h�Housing fLlequirements. (1) Purpose and intent. The purpose of this subsection (�4), consistent with Goal 601 of the .2 Comprehensive Plan, is to ensure that the need for affordable housing is not exacerbated by .2 new residential development and redevelopment of existing affordable housing stock. The intent of this subsection is to protect the existing affordable housing stock, to permit owners of mobile homes and mobile home spaces to continue established mobile home uses consistent with current building and safety standards and regulations and to ensure that, as residential development, redevelopment and mobile home conversions occur, Comprehensive Plan 0 z policies regarding affordable housing are implemented. (2) Applicability. Except as provided in subsection (�4)(3) of this section, the residential inclusionary housing requirements set forth below shall apply. Determinations regarding the .T) applicability of this subsection shall be made by the Planning Director. 'Hie applicant > . _Ulicant shall tli the residential itICILISionary L IIOL i-ients on the fornis the Planning Director. For purposes of LN —I—ISULLITIe-CIL11relyleflis—Of"Ile 101-11-Is calculating the number of affordable units required by this subsection, density bonuses shall not .2 be counted and only fractional requirements equal to or greater than 0.5 shall be rounded up to the nearest whole number. a. Residential developments, other than mobile home or mobile home spaces covered by 76 subsection (�4)(2)b. of this section, that result in the development or redevelopment of three f or more dwelling units on a parcel or contiguous parcels shall be required to develop or redevelop at least 30 percent of the residential units as affordable housing units. Residential development or redevelopment of three f units on a parcel or contiguous 0 parcels shall require that one LLdeveloped or redeveloped unit be an affordable housing unit. For the purpose of this section, and notwithstanding subsection (�4)(2)b. of this 0 section, any dwelling unit exceeding the number of lawfully established dwelling units on 0) site, which are created by either a THE or ROGO allocation award, shall be considered developed units. U) b. The removal and replacement with other types of dwelling units of ten LLO,Lor more mobile homes that are located on a parcel or contiguous parcels and/or the conversion of mobile 0 home spaces located on a parcel or contiguous parcels into a use other than mobile homes shall be required to include in the development or redevelopment a number of affordable housing units equal to at least 30 percent of the number of existing units being removed and replaced or converted from mobile home use or, in the event the new use is nonresidential, to develop affordable housing units at least equal in number to 30 percent of the number of mobile homes or mobile home spaces being converted to other than mobile home use. Removal and replacement or conversion to a different use of ten E 0, BOCCSR Page 14 of 33 File No. 2019-097 Packet Pg. 2687 R.1.b mobile homes or mobile home spaces on a parcel or contiguous parcels shall require that three units be replaced or converted to deed-restricted affordable housing. C. In calculating the number of affordable housing units required for a particular project, or phase of a project, all dwelling units proposed for development or redevelopment or mobile homes or mobile home spaces to be converted from mobile home use si a ee-die shall be counted. In phased projects, the affordable housing requirements shall be proportionally allocated among the phases. If a subsequent development or redevelopment is proposed following a prior development approved on the same property as it existed as of the effective date of the ordinance 6 from which this section is derived, which prior development did not meet the compliance thresholds set forth in subsection (�4)(2)a. or ( 4)(2)b. of this section, the requirements of subsection 2 �4 2 a. or � 2 b. of this section shall be met as art of the subsequent development 2 ( )( ) ( )( ) p q p for all units proposed for development or redevelopment- e=tle .ee �e - e (3) Exemptions and waivers. a. The following uses shall be exempt from the inclusionary housing requirements set forth in subsection (�4)(2)a. of this section: affordable housing, employee housing, nursing homes, or assisted care living facilities. c z b. The BOCC may reduce, adjust, or waive the requirements set forth in this subsection (�4) where, based on specific findings of fact,the BOCC be +d concludes, with respect to any developer or property owner, that: ° I. Strict application of the requirements would produce a result inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan or the purpose and intent of this subsection; 2. Due to the nature of the proposed residential development, the development furthers Comprehensive Plan policies and the purpose and intent of this subsection through means other than strict compliance with the requirements set forth herein; 3. The developer or property owner demonstrates an absence of any reasonable relationship between the impact of the proposed residential development and requirements of this subsection (�4); 4. The strict application with the requirements set forth herein would improperly deprive or deny the developer or property owner of constitutional or statutory rights- 01'- 5, Iri the. e-v e.rit cif`a declared Brae, of`Local Emier ieticy, the. BOCC ado",is a resOlUtiorl i OUld tiot etibatice, tior i-ote.ct tiie lieaitIi. afet acid ; elf`�ii-e of`tlie CO1€1€Lirlitf . C. Any developer or property owner who believes that he/be may be eligible for relief from the strict application of this section may petition the BOCC for relief under this subsection (�4)(3) of this section. Any petitioner for relief hereunder shall provide evidentiary and legal justification for any reduction, adjustment or waiver of any requirements under this section. i (4) Alternate compliance. a. Deed-restric bona ail" existing thvvellino llln4s. Compliance with this subsection may be achieved through the deed-restriction of existing dwelling units requiring that the affected units remain subject to the county's affordable housing restrictions for a period not less than the period prescribed in subsection (5)(c)3., below, according to administrative procedures established by the county. BOCC SR Page 15 of 33 File No. 2019-097 Packet Pg. 2688 R.1.b The following example is set forth to illustrate potential application options: Example: Owner/developer has 100 development rights • Option 1: Owner/developer may build up to 70 market rate units and shall build 30 affordable units (using conventional compliance method.) The owner's 100 development rights yield a ratio of 70 market rate units and 30 affordable units. • Option 2: Owner/developer may build up to 70 market rate units and shall purchase a, and deed-restrict 30 existing market rate units (in lieu of building 30 new affordable units.)The owner's 100 development rights again yield a ratio of 70 market rate units to 30 affordable units. • Option 3: Owner/developer may build up to 100 new market rates. If the developer wishes to use all 100 development rights for market rate development, his,Iler 2 inclusionary compliance requirement to purchase and deed-restrict existing market 2 rate units increases, and in this case for example, calculates to 43 total affordable 2 units. (The owner's 100 development rights yield a ratio of 100 market rate units to 6 43 affordable units, which is equivalent to the ratio of 70 market rate. Urtits to 30 affordable Uflits: 100/43 =70/30.) b. In-lieu fees. The developer of a project subject to the requirements of this subsection may contribute a fee in-lieu of the inclusionary housing requirements for all or a z percentage of the affordable housing units required by subsection (��4)(2). The developer shall pay per unit in-lieu fees, the current maximum sales price for a one-bedroom affordable unit as established under Section 1- i 10 i-1. All in-lieu fees shall be .2 deposited into the affordable housing trust fund and spent solely for the purposes allowed .5 for that fund. The developer, along with any corresponding in-lieu fees, shall transfer to the county ownership- -the associated ROGO allocations or ROGO-exempt development L rights for any affordable unit(s)required by this section for which the in-lieu fee option is used to COtIStRICt the affordable raw(s,'. In order to Utilize the ire-HeU fee alternate � l liar is r, l c Ic. c lc .r r c r ril rite the fee witli associated ROGO allocations or exeiii Lions, If` ROGO allocations or exeii€ ttons are, not available, the c. Land donation. Upon the acceptance of the BOCC of a proposed onsite or offsite parcel (or parcels), a developer may satisfy the requirements of this subsection by donating to the county, or other agency or not-for-profit organization approved by the BQCC b-e-a+d, one CIS orURM ILIatted lot for each itICI USionary unit required but not provided through actual construction or in-lieu fees (or a parcel or parcels of land zoned other than IS or 0 URM as long as the donated parcel(s) will support the development of an appropriate number of affordable 41 IL[Sionary units). Lots or other parcels so provided shall not be subject to environmental or other constraints that would prohibit immediate construction of affordable housing units. The developer, along with any corresponding donated arcel s shall transfer to the county ownershi of the associated ROGO allocations or U p O� tY p_. :.� ROGO-exempt development rights for any affordable unit(s)required under this section. In order to Utilize the land donation alternate coii Iiar��. ��., ��. q .cW r 1 Ir[St donate the land witli associated ROGO allocations or exeii-mtions, If' ROGO allocatiotis car e Xely,laic r are, r t a.ailable the d r10t Utilize (5) Applicable standards. a. Incentives. All incentives and bonuses provided by the land development and other regulations for the construction of affordable housing shall be available to builders of affordable housing provided pursuant to this subsection(��4) including,but not limited to, �t BOCC SR Page 16 of 33 File No. 2019-097 Packet Pg. 2689 R.1.b density and floor area ratio bonuses, residential ROGO allocation set asides and points, and impact fee waivers. b. Developer ifi- i- l-responsibility. - . "."."'. "�'�$'.'" _. 'i�-'"""x�.��k--� "" "mom -'1 7..,_t,..�..,�.rrx vcrz-rc�—e`.t.. ..:w '�e-i-i"" i�s c.•. F 6� 1_1. If the applicant elects to pursue alternative compliance as set forth in subsection e (c.4)(4) of this section, the deed-restriction cif` existing dw lliM� UtJtS sball be recorded prior to the issuance, cif`a b ildin. ��n€it f`c r ar�� n at"l�.et �"atc, r�r�it"; arid;��" rr- any in-lieu fees must be paid or parcels donated_ including the transf er to the c.c linty .2 c nersbip the associated ROGO allocations or ROGO-exc nipt do v e.lc nlnerit ri:, its, � prior to the issuance of a building permit for any market rate unit. 2e 1f a"dcY.e.1. cr dues ncit"elect tt� inset file r ciLllre. ents""t f`"sLl ""cct"t>n"" ) 2) t�f.:tl s sec.tic�n thrc�Li h alternative ct»noliance as set forth in subsec�tic�n ��} � t>f this � ®" """)" 8 section or obtainpa al,fof a a" " f d��istinent tt>-a partial e�einptit>n f�t»n t>r a waiver � t>f`""strict""cc�inliace""p:Ls� �€ ttc� s�bsectic�n ( ("3} df`"thissectic� tireevelt»er " r.nsl pt>st bt>nd echiiv lent at> �E 1 fir percen:.....t>f the in lied fees that otherwise would have been rechfired �thro lg!' the 1� lle�� al�terna�te"ct» �lianceo �t rrc�r"":to � "" " " " " " " the 1.53rlane""tf`" " Lllldl.n errlt ft�r aarl�et rate Lnits. T1�e ctLn shall retain any"" on money ter oLua anues"in escrow the affordable""1�t�Lls1"nmm�""1"s— Mete or for a perit�d t�f three (�;� eels.""-wl�icl�everchines""-first""-[J�t�n the""i"ssuance "of' certificates"of' occupancy ft>r the"affordable ht>��sln�"units�"t1re"county shall release. to thdvl"t ifh inclusion," e " � housing"requires ent"satisfied. lf the"develn er has"not satisfied the re u rer entsof' W thisscction by completin ": e" danred affordable housinUL units withi"n year s,""all car thecc�rres""t> ""p"ortion cif the "funds"shall be �to the """" " """""""" """"""" """""""""" """"" """ """""""" """" """"" afft�rclable 1it>Llsin. ti�I.st"f Ltncl""" c. Standards. Affordable housing provided pursuant to subsection (�4)(2) of this section shall comply with the standards set forth in sUbsections ( f and (c` and below, -d CO i Arapplications for development projects subject to these requirements and developers and a) property owners shall provide to the county information and necessary legal assurances to demonstrate current and continued compliance with these provisions, consistent with the applicable enforcement mechanisms set forth in subsection (� of this section;El" The county may institute any appropriate legal action necessary to ensure compliance with this subsection. BOCC SR Page 17 of 33 File No. 2019-097 Packet Pg. 2690 R.1.b 1. Affordable housing units required pursuant to subsection (2b)(2) of this section are restricted to sales prices and annual rental amounts for households that shall not exceed the income limits for f-e. te-4 e--� owner-occupied or rental housing, as defined in Section 101-1; - e4ati,,mtJ W 24. Affordable housing units provided pursuant to subsection (24)(2) of this section may M be provided on-site, off-site or through linkage with another off-site project as 2 provided in subsection ( e) of this section; 554c3 ' x 3tksf $ f354- .... f3tkks fc § 4kks , . Each affordable unit provided pursuant to subsection (+)(2) of this section shall contain a minimum of 35( 4 square feet of habitable floor area a.l. 4he crag y —I - � o � -,.•eye-if9ii-e -i - = > 0 44 444. The county will not issue certificates of occupancy for market rate units associated with development or redevelopment projects subject to the provisions of this subsection (�4) unless and until the de-velol)ed affordable IIOLIS41 UtlitS is-ve as -�Vp -mcl recorded ee restrictiot�—atict certificates of occupancy have been issued for required affordable housing units- f a `f -i _ t (6) Monitoring and review. N The requirements of this subsection (�h) shall be monitored to ensure effective and equitable application. Every two years following the effective date of the ordinance from which this 0) section is derived, the BOC ii-iav reqijes the pi)lanning iLDirector�I+a4 provide to the BOCC U a report describing the impact of this subsection on the provision of affordable housing and �t BOCC SR Page 18 of 33 File No. 2019-097 Packet Pg. 2691 R.1.b other market or socioeconomic conditions influencing or being influenced by these requirements. Issues such as affordability thresholds, inclusionary requirements, and the impacts of these provisions on the affordable housing inventory and housing needs in the county shall be addressed, in addition to other matters deemed relevant by the Planning Director. i° n sii nil n l si a sin n enis, c.r sa tc. l a l c roc c.cl f`c afl`c clal lc i a r L= is not exacerbated by nonresidential and transient cic .elo,sm c�, as follows: a. 1 rontote the lac altli. safetv and u neral welfare cif the citizens cif the COLMt.Y t1ii-OL101 the Isolicies cif` the 2030 Monroe COLMtV o-1Y,M -1etIS k c 11larV arIcl b, o enSLIre that affordable 11OLISiflU c 12P-01 LIflities are available t1`1-OL101OLIt the entire cc €�€ar i l ar cl €air air a l alar cc.cl ar cl s�s air able local c.conont1 and the ,lItc1 isiori cif` essential se -vices, and c°, I o increase the SLIP Of' 1LISir _, affclalle to fat =,c .cl irccnte L=, asilir1 . cl. -o r v ide a ram e cif`IOLISIM� Op 01-tUtlities for those w 1io work in Monroe COLMt.Y 1�Lit M al be Unable to pay ntarket rents or market 110aIsiflU) ices in the co cl c .. Irz increase 1 .r a,=, . f` 1 workforce l r _, locally and .icl , 11 LISitig .�. c,l a t� r i ic.s f`c l c. it c on-te Lgj, Li s in order to meet the existing and antic°i atecl I OL Sirs _. needs Of`SLIC]i ersons and to maintain a socio—economic ntix in the CO11_H11LMitl ; and - f`, fao address the affordable workforce 11OaIsiflU needs generated by the COtIStRICtion and � tiotii-esidetitial ti-a isietit cic .elolment af'tc r tli CO1`1St1_LIctiO1`1 or ex Q1 lslc.�c.cl; ar�cl L_,. I o enSLIre that affordable workforce 110a[siM� is ,laro-vided to the local workforce by tl�c. ith the d ntand too at`f`ordablc workforce 110L[siM the deco .lor)ntent creates; an li, fao address ntarket demands that slit w that the workforce in the COLMtV COtItiflUes to rec a t e c c1c. a c 11 .l ticc.cl l c a sir ., a r i s. ,l at ica latl l c sc wbosc c arnim s range front 50 � lie steer inc°onte ('T'OL )s', and i. 0 stir-Rilate the rivate sectorl,. rodLICtiO1`1 of'affordable workforce 11OLISitIg and encOL[ aL=e � l c icic s c acl clis �it a is r c f` af`f`c clal lc c l�:f` c 11OaISiflU 09-1201-tUrlities t1`11-cats=.11OaIt all arld ex,anclim= d -velo meets, i 0 ,1 1 t n a is r tc.sicic r ial ar cl gar sic.r Esc, cic .c.lc ls� c.r ccic .c.lc � .n =,c aerates a direct w i�€lsac r l ash f`c l c c l�:f` c. lac it c.r c f this section is to enSLIre that dices is are affordable sL.P.PIV c�HIOL[siM� forth to al �.�orkf`orce, leis �:�ill be acco lislied by IeCILI �iMU OT-kforc 11OLIsingy l)c. etc vided for qaIlLInew d v c l 11t nt ang reclevel wnt in are ant LMt Ui 1 ,lsazti r a c. l c r c.c cl f`c af`f`c clal lc c l�:f` c lIOL[SiM� that the nonresidential and transient Use cle-elc�ls��eat or rccte,., lc meat creates, lice intent cif` this SUbse tion is to sc��pit i nonr sidential and transient Use owners to cOtItiflUe to c stablisl1 Uses consistent w itli the CLIT- eat CD bUilcling and safety standards and to enSLIre that as cic .el� n eat and redex,elQpntent OCCL contlLcl c.r i .c, lar _ erred, lie teclinic°al srI alt arlcl ar al sis r r l ic1 tl r r rc.sicic r tial it clr sic r ar 11OaIsing reCl Lit rent ents are establislied are based he—, f br� .,lah/c 1lor"k orr,'c f'1r�=,.�fttc Sell �t)(MI S/11 I'll,Lt' ,. l)r" .x wll_ m 222017, BOCC SR Page 19 of 33 File No. 2019-097 Packet Pg. 2692 R.1.b l re rl l l a Isrg.irlc.cl ire sr l sc.ctior ( of` this section the nonresidential itICILIsionary hoUS14W reCLiffen-ients sit forth below sh v, his will be accon-i)lisiie b rgfrgrtior atc. tlrc r c.ccl f`or af`f`orrlal lc grl�:f`orcc 1IOL[SiM� that the nonresidential and transient Uses create, Expansion as Used in this section n arcs e xtc ndinu a Use 01' StRiCtUre to occur)v a Lueater an-wUtlt of floor area or SC-Dare footage beyond that which it gccUfried, Determinations reuarding the applicability Of` this SUbsection hall be miad , fey the Planninu Director, -he � ?.�.l licar t shall irlc, tlrc r c.cc ssat it f`or� anon to d tc rn€ine con- liana with the nonresidential irIclrIsionary 11OUSitlU reaUiren-cents on the f`orn-is M ��v the Plannirl Director l or p rir ores ofcalCL[lating the n 110L[SiM, UtHtS reClUffed by this SUbsection density bgrIrlses.,.shall not be COUnted and on1v fractional requiEgm- .rats c.c,r!gl to or ueater than 0,5 shall be I-OUn c L1 to the nearest whole twit-llber. .2 a. .Ve w 1) v c 1o1)1r2c rEt. Each new rlc .c to n rat .12mlc.ct not c xc n etc cl by SUbsection (4 , shall miitiL ate. 50% of'the workforce 11OUsing r en-iand created by the rg osc d de, l� �� one or a con-ibination of`thc mi thods identified in SUbsection (5" l . f,Ieve r nnelrI IIW < rr l,:e' rcrrEs o/,,, Each red elg.,� c.r _.lrroiect riot exen "tc.cl_l f SUbsection (fit shall n-6ti ate 50% of` the workforce 11OUSing den-iand created by the 1rro osc cl rc cic .c,lo c.r i f or e. or a coy€l it atior gf`tlrc. miethods identified in SUbsection ( lrc orl�.f`orcc lgrsr _, r .cl�ir .cl f`g rgrrc sirl rial rlc .Ig � .r 1 .r are cis �r _, rs . c s c frar rlc.cl shall lac calcr latc.cl l asc.cl gr tlrc. it crc.� c ntal increase is size of`thc c xkti M Use net additional sclr�arc. f`ovta c. c. r f lc r /r� rrrrr rt 1Vitpli , (''�crrt4yc A, 1'Schic"re cr. M-Y I-Yoil.vrrr y Each red velg r ,ject with a change Of'Use increasing 11oUsitlU den-nand not exen-i ted by SUbsection shall miitiL ate. 50% of` the workforce 11OUSing den-iand created by the. ,rg.. rccle c lg,s� cr t gr c. or a coy l it at�or of`tlrc. cthods identified in SUbsection (5), -hc. LN w orkf`orce housing re.jUired for nonresidential ential rle c to -i rat when a roc r Use re l-1 are exktiM_,Use and increasing 11oUsing d n-ignic (for exam plc,f`ro�i are industrial Use to are of`f`ice Use shall be calcUlated based on the sgUare footage "ro osed for corgi ersion and or based on the incren-rental increase in size of`t rc n ;� Use. (if`ar�� _ rl. 1 'rE. r:r rf1 'r..; 1 '. r>, If`a .'rofrosc.cl rlc c,lo g.r lrrgic.ct rloc.s It l` ll within one of'the s c cif`�� Use categories in the table within SUbsection (5 then the. Planning Director shall d tc nnine whether thc. r�sc. is cg�� arable. to a Use catego�y listed and assign a catc roiyo� � a� allow � .. tlrc. afr rlicar t to cor rl�ct are it rlclsc r rlc.r t calc�labor to detc rn-iin the. a irroo sriate af`f`ordablc. workf`orce 110r[siM� itICILIsioriary reMliren-ie t, If` the ap licant chooses to ro irrlc. c rrlc.rt calcrlatior, tlrc. f`ollg ira, lic.s. 1. �-n ind lien last calcUlation shall reClUire a IMblic n Ming, with the Board of` 'OLMtf a) one€-iissioners to d tennine if` there is a 11IrItUally agreeable approach to tjrc. calcrlation nor totlrca� lication rgc��chrutothe, lac elo ii-ietitR ,-ic; 'oi�iiilittee for rev ic w, rzlrc re-view w of`thc.ir�rlc cnrlcrat calcUlation will not be sclrc.&[Ulc.cl as a Ublic � c, hcarim, bUt as a .l�Liblic nw time dLIJM Which the BQCC miaf offer their irl Lit an direction and the pj!hlic� ha-ve MIsUt grl the srglsosed mi tho v and calCUlation, Cai lrc a licar t shall r =,c.r c ralll seer, tc cl rir cil les and s is thods and -verifiable local irif`onnation and data and other a.ppro riatc � ate vials to sr� grt tlrc c.�� to c.c. L=eneration data and 11oUsing den-iand calcUlated, 3. 1-he BQ ��a��,=,re ordisa,=.ree;pith the inrlc.IsrridentcalcUlation forn-litigation based on L=,en rally rcco,,nized r !j les and miethodologies of ily, � accUracv of`the data, informiatigr, 11nd assril€lstior s r sc.cl tg lrrc. arc, tlrc it rlc. c r rlc.r t calcUlation, BOCC SR Page 20 of 33 File No. 2019-097 Packet Pg. 2693 R.1.b . Each developm-c r clel)endent cal CUlation and aigt exen tee by SUbsec!Lton L4, shall n-6tigate. 50% of'the den-iand for workforce 10L[SiM� created by the deg c loan-i nt, a, e f`OIIO�:ViM� , Uses hall b exen-i t ffon—i the nonresidential ai lac��ir�rz of`this section: 44 1. Af `ordable 110L[SiM� d v e to orients; an Residential develoOn-ients, and LIT 4, Mobile lion-ie and n-inUfaCtU egi hon �. �tl�:� �t�cl ��l�cl� :i sic r��; �tid 5, PUblic facilities and Liblic bUilclings and Uses lip sited to �tl�:�.. ��l�lic infi-aStRICtUre and Utilities and wireless C011-111-ILMication f icilities- and 6, Air Agricy l c ral Uses- and lie red -velo mient, ren-iodeling re Kilati-ve ex anion cif` a la fUlIV established nonresidential ntial Use that does not increase the area of'the nonresidential Use by n-iore than 1.000 SC—Uarc feet cif` Luoss floor area and the Use is not chamed to a 2 ,.0 b. lie OCC n-my redUce, z IList, or wai-ve the reCl siren-cents et forth irl this �LIbs—ecti�r, If f.. based on ) cif`ic f`indinus of` fact where the I BCC cOUlLIcl'S with r s ect to ativ ?.MIic t. that. 1. tri t a j)lication of` the teguirm-i nts NvOLIld nrodUce a reSLIlt inconsistent with the > is SU bsection' DUe to the rant , of' the pmposed nonresidential cl . .Ic, m .r the cl .Ic, fit LN f`r ttl c.t lttc l r i . . Flat olicies and the .Lirltose and intent of`this SU bsecti thl-OL1,€ 1 ��ans other than evict con fiance with thereC1Ui��c��ents et forth he rem,— v', l r, a t licar t cic.� c t t atc. ate al t.t ct, c f` ar l tc.asonablc t .lationslik. between the u i�€ act c f` tl tc .tl t t tc icl .t tial clr . .l l �ient and reC1 Uiten-ients cif` this SUbse Lion If'. 'Hie strict att lication with the reguiren-cents et forth here'n W OUld in-i rgperlv clr t r. t cle r tl .�. licat t f`cc t titt ti t al t tatUtOT-V 1-1=1tS— 01- 5, In the c-vent of`a declared State, of` Local En-mgency„ tl�c, rccoLmizim thatthe strictap lication ofthe nonresidential inClLISiOn ients i t �lcl roc t c.r l at ct, t t ttt c tc.ct tl c l c.altl , gaff t at d ;t elf'are of`the c01€1€LMit . c r �.l sic r 1 c lac lip..c 1 lac- l c lac .li ble for r lief`f`ron-i the strict a.pplication � of`this section n-my on the BOCC for relicf`Underthis SUb��c�i�r� W—MiCIrler f`or relief` hcrc.Utder Tall ro-vide e-videntiary and 1eLml iUStif`ication for an redUCti0rl, aEi—d tr .t t c t � . . c f` ar tc cl�ite�€ .t t r r cl .t tl i c.cti r . lac, l t.tition Tall Use � c, if`iablc local inf`ormiation and data, and c tl .t tint . atc.tial � tl , t clr c. t cl relief', i enter_ tc ic.ct l all .icl , af`f`c tclallc c tl�:f`c tct itcltitatf 1 � ir _, c.il .cl ire �1 .cic r 1 c f` 1 . cv w orkf`orct 11OLISing den-iand created by the new or c Uanded d �.elo 11-lent or red -.e10--------- in accordance with the standards its the table below, � BOCC SR Page 21 of 33 File No. 2019-097 Packet Pg. 2694 R.1.b a. lie table indicates the flUnlber of`w clrkf`orc 10L[Sitle=LirlitS or ire-lieu fee needed for c-v ery chit , f`oo ( r cl 1„i f` of` roc cIc .c.lo I ent or red , e1oL)ment _c xpAnA9 gi con-verted smLare footage', for each category oftion-residential land Use, TOTAL SEED CREATED ' NONRESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT ENT („lore callsmidiorl d1ld nosi-corlsio:ci orl c....I—c ses„). CD CD cv Io€a1 Ioc.sillsl Towl ToialIII-Llici. ToialIII- et CCt:I CI` IJOUSiMl cc . CI` l.E'('(?Si � Cr`Si 7arld Use t aleaor� Ca 1,('('(?Si Need CI`Si (Iltorlewr fee, (I110ne ry fee, Cornmerci I Retail � („Reed mor"CS. sulo rIlu;irkc(S. Sllo.�. III ll" 0,416 (),O o 16 S66,7 `66.7' 0 CCMers, reSWULm aMs, CLC.i U) i"Pice u („`roFessiorlal and non-iorotessiorlal office ().7()4 ()j)()(,'7()4 S78.,492 S 7y1 r 9 Inr ustrii] i 71".,IIS IlumlC.iaCiC.I`Illl?.. IC.II b r varils.. 0.226 (1,0o(1,2"26 `74,397 ti'r;39 U7 1,yarellOLISill�,!, moraue iaCIl111CS.e1c.) � InstitutionalZ i il'?1oC.S iacih1 iCS.. Ork ale Schools 0037 (),Oo03 l7 7 Colleges (LaNCares, C(C.' r Tourist/recreational A (ThCdWCS. aC.Clliori Lill IS, lll!IINCIC-bsS Offisi Qk14 (),Ooo614 S104,691 S104M > Hotel CC..) _ Hr tel & Motel ffrallSiClli UScS) Goo r'1"nmr'l tal q q., i,cso Cllial o `icc sc IlciillW.:s,p_bIic_ -,: 7 ()Ooo `7 ?.. ? ?. Schools.. CiC..i Other F+ ii nilk.. I..aS, d1ld CICCWiC USCS,lllillIII l,. d1ld (1,r,44 (?c}oo6 4 `99,,8l8 S99�83 diS 2Sal iacilicie" Data for tarc Iniril'alio fi-o lr o1v 11J,fi I(Jable li oskfit s^uv Housing `,`a fiw Xon-Rcsirlcillial � Icllzroc ouniv in,Iunc 201 rv" 0 I b, lice itICILISiclnary 110L[Sirl Unit tc.cfUirenLient_(or tcc- iii-ed flUn-lber of` workforce 11OUSing clwellitle= UtlitS" for the nonresidential cic-ve IcIfm-lent or r cle-elcIfm-lent shall be c alCUl��.cl � on residential de-vc to n-le t and/or the incr I lcntal increase in size of`the nonresidential ntial Use (net additional CIUare footau,c) and .11r _. lic1cic I ii =. irrcltcl. c. —he itICILISionar ire-lieu fee reel siren-lent (or reClUirecl an-w tlt cif` n-lonetary fee" for the ca r or tc icic.r ial cic .clo I c.r or r cle clofm-1 rat Tall be calCUlatc. YJEna,. t11e peIr cf�iatc, f`oo tc.cf�iitcl€c.r f`o l c. .�. tec .,tia c_ c of` land Use category b. the M ��.c� CD cl�iatc, f`oo =,c, of` l c, roc r tc. icic r ial cIc .c.Ic f I c.r a CD nd or the incren-lenia' increasc in size of' the nonresidential Use (net additional C-Uare footage) and applying the a.p.m n-litivation standard, cl. Ex ansions to nonresidential and transietIt Uses Tall be tracked f`01- CUMILilati-ve chaise=es � BOCC SR Page 22 of 33 File No. 2019-097 Packet Pg. 2695 R.1.b . plc c tic rl 11 llc c.cl r c r =. c. es, If` a SU bsecjLent d pm� l .cl ..cic � crl i c cclf`cllc girl =, lic cl . .Ic, � .r1 1 c.clorlthesan-i . l�c�. r-LV..2 after the of ecti-ve date of`this ordinance the rec this section Tall be n-iet .fit, e, lie f`ciiiciwim� table ro-v ides EXAMPLE caiCUiations ofthe nonresidential ifI iL[Sicinai 1 LCIL11rements. 2 1'claI I olal 1a.- o o;) ` 1(,6' `,llllwall-1� _3( � %1�Ildwa�, t .� `U�111')i11t;n � \11- l ,k®s' W In-ficu 111 IiCLI 4 La tis'i I,tii 111-Iieu tl'^CS Lust IJYiil� �� „ 0 Commercial G�ewil. °.f OO`b1.:. 7 8 S1111.610 1 M44 1%10�O 8lIl:'i f.',6? lil f;f',.f',ii2.f.', 'fry It'.t' o `41 1 16 � 66")?>t' 2,08 333 Ga 10 1,7c 2('4'.166 o f OO11.6 S66, 72 2('.('('€' `b1.:' ri..2 `°)1.:):)-1.1 (' 44,. .6 1, 667 2.2.0 2°fO 100311 f8 12Il`Il'tce 4.MO4)S1 c7 )2.1C>(' 1 7� � °b6 23IlIl 6 1 a' Olrot,l le nal and I o,(' o `41 ,t'=1 1.`)2t' 3 ,2 3°� R aIlIl 2 1 1 » 17 til -7 11 11. 511t ,la I 2t'.t'('t' S1 1 (',') 1 sC>`).,40 7,04 7 8 4.921Il l 7 1)1, Industrial °.MOO`41 112 `°)12 L.)8 0,S6 �ui61.°�� o 1 �>2C>.96 (I tdil111)1Yitlfa lutlnul { -/ } y-y_ y y y�) -/ } S }-})77 6 7 '}t I.o,�) o S1..' 7 26 )`)2-1..�, i o 1..13 $12.F.._.985 0 6 J �`)�i.I)I. Iwnh,E.Y v ar�Iss. t,t.00226 )_1,..) � ;t4YT'Eiit tl lm, ld Y i)we O 1)l`tl t"",d l 2t?.t' o `41 1,°I 187.`)10 2.26 S2443.971Il f c 1)1 16.s82 N 0) IlflR°4U:IlU.➢flaIlfsfl al 5000 S1 1 6)) 15181A'Io 0,84 S1)0 7 10 t'°I. �)41JJ26 ., (Rc'1iL6Ows raci llics> I o,t' o `41 I ?'" 5)162.;4 o L69 S181.420 I'm 1 1)1 o 8.8s2 l,li l(t. iit,c;I,, 117 116,28 2f?.f' o `b1 6."1 `i 724.68o 3.37 S362.8440 7 2 S2 1 " ,"{?<l i3141.1 .® Faa➢R 5000`41 1,o"? c7 .1R4 1 ;2 S261�728 o,92 I1i't1Gr'C'`>, Io,t'(o S1 6 1.1 Lo-16.910 11Il7 S,,523.44,5,5 I ;1 11 lM"?1 cl lY 1'it lzl'>. o t 0001-1 S 1(',1,61) Yil=u1114`Iuhs.lY;ulvsl 2(?.oOo `41 12,28 2.091 420 6.14 $1.0446.910 2 6`) 628.1-16 Ilraaf Il& Nloul °.('('('S1 Lc8 ?1`).'," 0,7°9 S 44 Sb4� 1'," )',,71.`)?1 � t't?(?029)) `)1`)`)1 1o,oOo `41 ?.I° 1`)1).1"t' ,S S2441J.73., o`)4 1`).,-11 2o,oOo `b1 6,11 `°)`)')910 3, ., S4499.4471Il 189 299.682 Governmental ..t,(,(, S1 _ 1 1 S 1`)L 1_5 1.617 S95.713 t,61 ((JOL111111lc'111i1Offii`t' „ 1 128 82.�, 2. 44 S1°91442.; 128 1)1I X. l � 1;t111111)i" .�lll;Il: 7 l ){{)�) { y w� g 7 "a »� ,4`Iit)t I,.(.'4.4'. ��.,�,t,i, �`°,i..' 1 °q )"6s. �,t, `R'. E9 .R.;}ES .EY.3P.P :)--)., 1.0 f Other �.t OO`41 I.11111 ll I o,oOo S1 6j-1 `>`)'), o 3.22S499.190 1 `) clecInc a a`§.Ininlii'u. 41 t OOO1-1 `°)`)')82 )il"i l ��'�ll7r'�1t,,1��;; .1 2t.'.oOo `b1.:. 17 x8 1.996.760 6.444 `99 .3 1Il :1_S6 1`ac.illlt-1 I h f`. All nonresidential Uses not exell1 1� . SUl section 1 ,, Tall n-iitigate the den-iand for ;;orkf`c rce 110L[SiM created by the Ml)os cl cic�.=c lc n-i rlt or lc cic� elc,�� .r�� c rl�, c� a CD CD CN con-ibination of`thc n-iet ods identified below, I. lie COf1St1-c1CtiOf1 cif`;v orkf`c rce 11OUSing dwelliflL= UflitS on the site of`the dc-v eIc,�� Me ;v orkf`c rce 11OUSing dwellirlL= UflitS hall nwet the OL1fltf `s affordable BOCC SR Page 23 of 33 File No. 2019-097 Packet Pg. 2696 R.1.b hOLISitW restrictions as specified in Section 19- IM �r�� ., TOO� )eJod not less than 99 vear lie COt1St1_cIctiOt1 cif` workforce 11OLISing dw liitW UtlitS off-site cif` the cl velol"gym l c i .ct l i t itl it 1 ilc. clip c f`tl c roc r tc icl .ritial de-.c Io n is rat,' red -v elO mient, Me workforce rc 11OLISing l c llir _, UtlitS shall � . . 1 'c L r f`f`ordable hOLI�iri(=. tcticticr .cif`icclir .cticr 1 )_1(lircl .i.. fora.lrriccl not less tli )�)l .rt , lie deed-restriction of' existinu 1 llir _, Sri ��ci �� ° � cif` the � nonresidential ntial cic,,elo ii-ietit,t-ecle .c lo ii-ietit. 1 lie workforce 11OLISing dw c lliM Utlits nwet the OLIt1tVs affordable hOLISitW re strict!tkg s as . e if`ied in Section 19-1 and f0r 11r tic cl roc t Ic tl r �)) c rt .�. 4, f lie donation cif`land to th �.. Li tlIiS SUbs ction by donatir LC_12t . I S o r I]I N 1 z2n.gcl latted Iot for each workforce 11OL SitlU Utlit reOLiired bLIt r1�� rc .iclecl thl-OLIgh actual COt1St1_cIctiOr1 01-ire-H Ll fees LO r a -ie III �t��1 �� .l�atce1s c fIancl zo other than IS or URN/1 as Iom as the donated Data l(s) hav c th � 2mr� riate density , a.ailable to SLI.P. ort the cic v elo n-i nt cif` the reClUirc cl flUniber cif` workforce Wilts IF � and/01, 5, l�r. �� €�.r�t c f` � f`c�, ire-lic.�� f`c r tl��, ir�cl��ic r�atf lac��ir�„= rr.c-Uir n-ient for all or a The in -lic.LI fee sha11 1�"maicl ri c to i SUance cif`a bUilcling. e unit for the nonresidential cic ve to n-ie rat or re de All ire-H rl fees Tall be deposited into the affordable 110L[SiM, t1_LISt fUtIcl and s,)�.r�t 2C_11eil fc r t11e -Ir allc c.cl f`c r that f`c r cl. .2 e, If'the workforce 11OLISing reClUtr ment reSLIltS in less than one (1 ,affordable clw elliM� Wilt, > tl .r tl . a licar t €aI cl c v , t i c ilcl c r (l i af`f`c rdabIc clw el 1*1 tl L, Utlit 01 the fee ir - lieU are€OLIt1t. c A )pficable Standards, a. Incentives, All incenti .es and bOtILlses ,l�r�.icic.cl 1�� the land deg c loon-i rat and other ��.Dilations for theCOtIStRICtiOn of` af`f`ordable hOLISitW shall b a�ailable to bUilcers of` _ tensity and floor area ratio bOtILlses.. residential ROGO allocation set asides and pints, a! cl_ilyl b, Standards, Workforce IIOL[Sitl r.nEr icic.cl LIT-S pant to SU bsection (f,i �� itl� tl��. standards act forth itl SUbsections (b mcl cl and below, A.p.lrlications for cle-elc l��ct,j No—Vide No-Vide to the t cic� r t� t , c�t .r t and COtItir��ed w cc 1 1iar c itl tl�c r.l rc :i sic rr ,,cc r i t .r t itl tl e a kcal lc c r f`c rc € tit c.cl ar i n et forth in Section 1 9-1(ci. Hie 'c�intf �€aI ir��titr�t�, ar�� .�."r�,l�riatc IeLml acti�r� nece ssary try c nSLI�c compliance with this ��bsection, w c) I. Workforce 110L[SitlU UtlitS rc cfUir cl this SUbsection are restricted to e* u UtlitS for the owner cif`the nonresidential Use that nwets the Talc 5 rice and antmal cai incon-i lip fits for c; ner_OccLI iecl 11OLISing, as defined in Section 101-I or rental UtlitS that nw t the rental are€OLInts and antMal incon-i . liniits for rental 11OLISing, as cic fined in Section 101-I- c44 Workforce 11OLISiM=, Wilts p1c icic.cl l��tSU�r�t t� ��i��.cti�r� (f` �� i�� iclecl on- site, off'-site as -o-v ided in SUbs ctiOtl (f .l;01_thl-OL101 linkage with another off'-site w BOCC SR Page 24 of 33 File No. 2019-097 Packet Pg. 2697 R.1.b Eacli ;r orl:force Utlit p1gLiA&RIT-SUat it to this SUbsectioti sli a I I cc s t it €iris€ €r� Of' sC�tiat-e, feet of`l ia l)ital)le, fIoor avert; 7rzl e, f c t r t ill r tissue, certificates c f` c ccr aric foi the r r twirler tial ar cl traiisietit deg.elo wait or redev elc . �€er _l rc ects sr l jest tl r. si r s c f` tl is SUbsectic r (f", t r less ar cl trail: 1 ale reclr irecl r rii€leer cif` 41clt[sioriar affordable workforce 110L[SiM� UtlitS lia-ve ati aplWAII,cd aril recorded Seed rest-ictioti, aril certificates cif` occri aricy liave, been issUed for the workforce JIOL[SiM� Writs, arid, 'I' � its 1 IL[St liar e ati a.p1 recorded deed-re.stl ictiori 1, the, rloriatioti of` l)arcels to the. COLMtV is 5, Prior to the, issUatice, of` a l)uildirigg penyiit for flie ricritesidcritial arid trarisierit � rlt x e.lolni rent o recic elc €er t� rc recta. argil iti-HeU fees 11Ir[st be aicl. (7) Monitoring and review, 7-lie rec tl1is SUbsecti t (fl shall be ii€oriitored to etiSUre e.f`fccti,e, and e.crUitable chi,,,e date of` the orditiatice froii-i w bicli tlii S E section is d ri�.=ed the. B(.)C' " �� reclr�est tl�e l�lat�t�ir�€., l�ire.ct�r arc .icle. �� tl�e (�f" ' a re ort descrlbim� the iii-coact cif tlii s SUbsectiori on the Mac-v i door of affordable workforce 110L[SiM aril other i€arke.t or socioecotioiiiic cotiditiotis it1fiUeticitia or beltig irfffUeticed by these c r .crire�€etas. Issres srcl af`f` rclalilitl tlresl Olds. 41clr[sioriarl; reClUireii exits. acid tile. i� facts f`tl ese l rc .rarer t tl e. f`f` l l lc 1 � r L=iri.c titory aril JIOL[SiM� fieeds iri the COLMtv shall be addressed, iri addition to other hatters rleeiiied rc levarit by the, director. - N ( ) 1 frelusio fa x Ile uireme ft Reduction for Very leer and Low Infic me Units. Certain t v ii—ior desirable iri Kati sfyitia, the affordable LN 110L[SiM� tiee s of the workforce, 7rzo address the ii-iarket deli-iatids that sliow that the workforce iri the COLMtV COtItirlUes to reC Uire. l ;r er priced recital JIOL[SiM� UtlitS..��ttic��l�tl� tl�� ]Ios . eartiimr s are, U to or below 80 l)e.rcerit of`the. COMO s ii€ediari iricoiiw ati a.p.l�licarit w itli ati 41clt[sioriar reclr ire €ea t c f`f` e ( c r €ire gr its„ r l�icl l r ilds all the reClUired affordable,Utlits as low-iricciiw and -very low-iticoii either on site or witbiri `°, 111iles of'the riotiresideritial 01' tra isierit de-v e.l � er t t,je. t shall lia-ve, a reduced 41clr[sioriary 1i HT-e i ietit of`40%. 7rzlie workforce 110L[SiM� Utlits sliall ii-wet the 'OLMWs affordable 110L[SiM� rental restrictiotis as � l ecif`ied its hectic r l �)-1(1 and ( _, f` r err d riot less tliati 99 years. Ati plicarit iiiav riot r .l c se, aleMayiiwtit of'of'a fe.e, its-lies f`c r a oilloti fil e, it clr sic c ar 1 L it _, c JL[ire iiietit. i 0 ( e) Linkage of projects. (1 Two or more development(residential arid,or rioriresi eritial�projects that are required to provide affordable housing may be linked to allow the affordable housing requirement of one development project to be built at the site of another project, so long as the affordable housing requirement of the latter development is fulfilled as well and tle �ects areitlrin 1 rule radiUS oftlie tiotiresideritial dg elcr 1 lent' rede�.elc, � et . The o trft tl affordable units must be built either before or simultaneously with the projects liar tl� � le-r ,,.il-aloe=ri . Sequencing of construction of the affordable component of linked projects may be the subject of the pillanning department or the p'llanning e 'ommission's approval of a project. L2,� In addition, if a developer builds more than the required number of affordable units at a development site,this development project may be linked with a subsequent development project to allow compliance with the subsequent development's affordable unit requirement pre sided: the �t BOCC SR Page 25 of 33 File No. 2019-097 Packet Pg. 2698 R.1.b de-veloper iiiaV tIOt Utilize affordable !IIIII__ LTreIOUslv built W itll 'OL[tltV f`itiatic°ial it -vc g-1--f—. offs .r fliati bL1ilclitig e n€it fee w ai-v erg and ii� �c� ff� �ii.e s; t1i�. to,tects are w itliiri a 15 i pile r clip of'the roc r rc icic.r i l cic..c lc 11-1 c tg, r cic-.el � .r ,; and the sati l`; the itICIL[Siotia y lioL[Sirl„= teMlireii€ietit i igy tiot lia-ve rccel-ved certificates cif` OCCLI t1i rc.c.J3 years pIjg !c I1I . tc,jc. c-val for the de-elc rirw the itI iL[Siotiary IIOL[SiY rc. f�irc�€c tit. �-'dditiotiall if` 1 f`f`c rcl f lc. S r i arc. c c ed to ati sfy tiotiresidetitial itICI List tiary rc clLiirc ii-ietits the Lirlits are restricted to c iflic r workforce IIOLIS41L_ UtJtS for the ow tier C44 oftlic tiotiresidetitial Use that ii-wets the ales Once and atifl al iriccii€c limits for c tier-OCCLI.,ic.cl IIOL[Siti-r as cic f`itied iri Sectioti 1 01-1 or retital workforce 11OLISiflU UtJtS that ii-wet the retitai ar iOLItits and atifl al iric°cii€c, limits for recital iIOL[Sitig, as cic f`itied iri Section 10 i-1, The linkage must be i etitif e i 4-k-d by the developer to the piIlanning �e ommission at the time of the M subsequent development's conditional use approval. 311_ lyaAll linkages under this subsection may occur between sites within the county and in the 2 cities of Key West, Marathon and Islamorada, subject to an interlocal agreement, where 9 appropriate_, 1 .. rzl . linkage must occur within 15 ii-ides cif` eadi project and w itlliri the ru same geographic planning area, i.e., lower middle and upper keys. All linkages must be approved via a covenant running in favor of the e 'ounty, and if the linkage project lies within a city, also in favor of that city. The covenant shall be placed upon two or more projects linked, stating how the requirements for affordable housing are met for each project. The covenant shall be approved z by the BOCC and, if applicable, the participating municipality. date, oftliis orclitiatice, wliicli allow litikaL=e, oftlie affordable,iIOLIS41LL UtJtS to satisfy itI iL[Siotiary .2 rL. lrire €e.rt lallroctfc rf,je. t tic. c . icr of e. tier .r arcl lallf`cllc the arc isiotis 5 cif the c xi time, a.p. r -v ed cic-v elc Qd)Affordable housing trust fund. The affordable housing trust fund(referred to as the "trust fund") is established. The trust fund shall be maintained with funds earmarked for the purposes of furthering affordable housing initiatives in municipalities and unincorporated areas of the county. Monies deposited into the trust fund shall not be commingled with general operating funds of the county. The trust fund shall be used only for the following: (1) Financial aid to developers as project grants for affordable/workforce housing construction; (2) Financial aid to homebuyers as mortgage assistance, including, but not limited to, loans or grants for down payment assistance; (3) Financial incentives for the conversion of units to affordable residential units; 0 (4) Direct investment in or leveraging housing affordability through site acquisition, housing development and housing conservation; or ; (5) Other affordable housing purposes as may be established by resolution of the BOCC, which shall act as trustees for the fund. The BOCC may enter into agreements or make grants relating to the use of trust funds with or to the county housing authority or other local government land or housing departments or agencies, a qualified community housing development organization or nonprofit or for-profit developer of affordable or employee housing, or a municipality within the county. cv Cie) Community housing development organization. The BOCC may establish a nonprofit community housing development organization(CHDO),pursuant to federal regulations governing such organizations, to serve as developer of affordable housing units on county-owned property, including or located in the municipalities of the county, upon interlocal e( BOCC SR Page 26 of 33 File No. 2019-097 Packet Pg. 2699 R.1.b agreement.In such event,the county may delegate to the community housing development organization all or partial administration of the affordable housing trust fund. [moved to subsection (c)] -�k...G�...�•.t-a�-�c .>. .e_.-- -�`.. �`.�_.._Y_ .:tea,- ..�=aa�ae.: ._.�:r�...°aI -�.-. .£:.ttn�.�. .:,-� Y ��,YI Y^,<;. � ". 0 O - �r�€ .fr7 �''` i--�.� -e. -�". .�., � n .. <Y,,,.._ ,,..•. E. G`,:,a....a�` .�.. t,.F �, .a ,Tg f>F�`_f> „E:E-��, 0. - :� ro �•'� 7• � .. -tip 4' �:7 I 7> sv.sus re --• BOCC SR Page 27 of 33 File No. 2019-097 Packet Pg. 2700 R.1.b�� 4� r z� 7 ply'/, 4.J 'CC��'zV"6-GT"CT3" YStJYS�=rz-p'F W. gyaa y � 2 ere.-r ram••rro-rr+.. ex<^-�:,. [moved to subsection (cl)] r 0 IV. CONSISTENCY WITH THE MONROE COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE 0. The proposed amendment is consistent with one or more of the required provisions of LDC Section 102- 158(d)(7)(b): U) i 1. Changed projections (e.g., regarding public service needs) from those on which the text or U boundary was based; N/A 2. Changed assumptions (e.g., regarding demographic trends); N N/A 3. Data errors, including errors in mapping, vegetative types and natural features described in volume 1 of the plan; �t BOCC SR Page 28 of 33 File No. 2019-097 Packet Pg. 2701 R.1.b N/A 4. New issues; r�. The 2017 Affordable Workforce Housing Support Study for Non-residential Development by Clarion Associates, identified the need nonresidential development creates for affordable housing in the County. The study evaluates the linkage between (1) employment generated by the construction of non-residential development, and (2) the employment that occurs at non- residential development after the construction is completed (post-construction activities). The analysis demonstrates there is a need created by nonresidential development for affordable , housing, and the study quantifies the need both in terms of affordable housing units (or a fraction thereof) and monetary housing assistance that could address the need for affordable housing. 2 The proposed amendments to incorporate nonresidential and transient inclusionary requirements, implement the study support data and the BOCC direction to develop nonresidential inclusionary requirements pursuant to Policy 601.1.13. 5. Recognition of a need for additional detail or comprehensiveness; or 2 0 To address Policy 601.1.13 and BOCC direction provided on February 21, 2018, amendments to the Monroe County Land Development Code are necessary to provide the detailed codes that are consistent with and implement the comprehensive plan, to specifically address the affordable .2 housing needs generated by the construction of nonresidential development, and the employment '5 that occurs at nonresidential development after the construction or expansion is completed. 6. Data updates; N/A In no event shall an amendment be approved which will result in an adverse community change to the planning area in which the proposed development is located or to any area in accordance with a livable communikeys master plan pursuant to findings of the board of county commissioners. 0 The proposed text amendment is not anticipated to result in an adverse community change. 0 0. V. CONSISTENCY WITH THE MONROE COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, THE PRINCIPLES FOR GUIDING DEVELOPMENT,AND FLORIDA STATUTES. A. The proposed amendment is consistent with the Goals, Objectives and Policies of the Monroe County 2030 Comprehensive Plan. Specifically,it furthers: i Goal 101: Monroe County shall manage future growth to enhance the quality of life, ensure the safety of County residents and visitors, and protect valuable natural resources. N Objective 101.4: Monroe County shall regulate nonresidential development to maintain a balance of land uses to serve the needs of the future population of Monroe County. E BOCC SR Page 29 of 33 File No. 2019-097 Packet Pg. 2702 R.1.b Goal 601: Monroe County shall adopt programs and policies to facilitate access by residents to adequate and affordable housing that is safe, decent, and structurally sound, and that meets the needs of the population based on type, tenure characteristics, unit size and individual preferences. Objective 601.1: Monroe County shall implement the following defined policies to reduce estimated affordable housing need for households in the very low, low, median and moderate N income classifications. a, Policy 601.1.8: Monroe County shall allocate at least 20% of the annual ROGO allocation, or as may be established by the State of Florida, pursuant to Administration Commission Rules, to , affordable housing units, as specified in Policy 101.3.3. Affordable housing eligible for this M separate allocation must meet the criteria established in the Land Development Code. 2 Policy 601.1.9: Monroe County shall maintain land development regulations which may include density bonuses, impact fee waiver programs, and other possible regulations to encourage ru affordable housing. Policy 601.1.13: Monroe County shall maintain land development regulations on inclusionary 2 housing and shall evaluate expanding the inclusionary housing requirements to include or address z nonresidential and transient development and redevelopment based on specific data and analysis. Objective 601.2: Monroe County shall adopt programs and policies to encourage housing of .2 various types, sizes and price ranges to meet the demands of current and future residents Objective 601.3: Monroe County shall continue implementation efforts to eliminate substandard LN housing and to preserve, conserve and enhance the existing housing stock, including historic r_ structures and sites. Policy 601.1.13: Monroe County shall maintain land development regulations on inclusionary housing and shall evaluate expanding the inclusionary housing requirements to include or address nonresidential and transient development and redevelopment based on specific data and analysis. B. The amendment is consistent with the Principles for Guiding Development for the Florida Keys Area, Section 380.0552(7), Florida Statutes. 0 For the purposes of reviewing consistency of the adopted plan or any amendments to that plan with 0) the principles for guiding development and any amendments to the principles, the principles shall 4-- be construed as a whole and no specific provision shall be construed or applied in isolation from the other provisions. U (a) Strengthening local government capabilities for managing land use and development so that local government is U able to achieve these objectives without continuing the area of critical state concern designation. pp (b) Protecting shoreline and benthic resources,including mangroves, coral reef formations, seagrass beds,wetlands, fish and wildlife,and their habitat. (c) Protecting upland resources,tropical biological communities,freshwater wetlands,native tropical vegetation(for �+ example,hardwood hammocks and pinelands),dune ridges and beaches,wildlife,and their habitat. N (d) Ensuring the maximum well-being of the Florida Keys and its citizens through sound economic development. �. (e) Limiting the adverse impacts of development on the quality of water throughout the Florida Keys. (f) Enhancing natural scenic resources,promoting the aesthetic benefits of the natural environment,and ensuring that E development is compatible with the unique historic character of the Florida Keys. (g) Protecting the historical heritage of the Florida Keys. BOCC SR Page 30 of 33 File No. 2019-097 Packet Pg. 2703 R.1.b (h) Protecting the value, efficiency, cost-effectiveness, and amortized life of existing and proposed major public investments,including: 1. The Florida Keys Aqueduct and water supply facilities; 2. Sewage collection,treatment,and disposal facilities; 3. Solid waste treatment,collection,and disposal facilities; 4. Key West Naval Air Station and other military facilities; 5. Transportation facilities; N 6. Federal parks,wildlife refuges,and marine sanctuaries; ; 7. State parks,recreation facilities,aquatic preserves,and other publicly owned properties; U 8. City electric service and the Florida Keys Electric Co-op; and 9. Other utilities,as appropriate. , (i) Protecting and improving water quality by providing for the construction,operation,maintenance,and replacement of stormwater management facilities; central sewage collection; treatment and disposal facilities; and the installation and proper operation and maintenance of onsite sewage treatment and disposal systems. (j) Ensuring the improvement of nearshore water quality by requiring the construction and operation of wastewater management facilities that meet the requirements of ss. 381.0065(4)(1) and 403.086(10), as applicable, and by 2 directing growth to areas served by central wastewater treatment facilities through permit allocation systems. (k) Limiting the adverse impacts of public investments on the environmental resources of the Florida Keys. (1) Making available adequate affordable housing for all sectors of the population of the Florida Keys. (m) Providing adequate alternatives for the protection of public safety and welfare in the event of a natural or manmade r_ disaster and for a postdisaster reconstruction plan. Z (n) Protecting the public health, safety, and welfare of the citizens of the Florida Keys and maintaining the Florida Keys as a unique Florida resource. 0 Pursuant to Section 380.0552(7)Florida Statutes,the proposed amendment is not inconsistent with the Principles for Guiding Development as a whole and is not inconsistent with any Principle. W C. The proposed amendment is consistent with the Part II of Chapter 163,Florida Statute(F.S.). r_ Specifically, the amendment furthers: 163.3161(4),F.S. —It is the intent of this act that local governments have the ability to preserve and enhance present advantages; encourage the most appropriate use of land, water, and resources, consistent with the public interest; overcome present handicaps; and deal effectively with future problems that may result from the use and development of land within their jurisdictions. Through the process of comprehensive planning, it is intended that units of local government r_ can preserve, promote, protect, and improve the public health, safety, comfort, good order, appearance, convenience, law enforcement and fire prevention, and general welfare; facilitate 0. the adequate and efficient provision of transportation, water, sewerage, schools, parks, recreational facilities, housing, and other requirements and services; and conserve, develop, utilize, and protect natural resources within their jurisdictions. U i 163.3161(6), F.S. —It is the intent of this act that adopted comprehensive plans shall have the legal U status set out in this act and that no public or private development shall be permitted except in aai conformity with comprehensive plans, or elements or portions thereof,prepared and adopted in conformity with this act. 163.3177(1),F.S.—The comprehensive plan shall provide the principles, guidelines, standards, and strategies for the orderly and balanced future economic, social, physical, environmental, and 0) fiscal development of the area that reflects community commitments to implement the plan and its elements. These principles and strategies shall guide future decisions in a consistent manner BOCC SR Page 31 of 33 File No. 2019-097 Packet Pg. 2704 R.1.b and shall contain programs and activities to ensure comprehensive plans are implemented. The sections of the comprehensive plan containing the principles and strategies, generally provided as goals, objectives, and policies, shall describe how the local government's programs, activities, and land development regulations will be initiated, modified, or continued to implement the comprehensive plan in a consistent manner. It is not the intent of this part to require the inclusion of implementing regulations in the comprehensive plan but rather to require identification of those programs, activities, and land development regulations that will be part of the strategy for implementing the comprehensive plan and the principles that describe how the programs, activities, and land development regulations will be carried out. The plan shall establish meaningful and predictable standards for the use and development of land and , provide meaningful guidelines for the content of more detailed land development and use regulations. .� 163.3194,F.S.—(1)(a)After a comprehensive plan,or element or portion thereof,has been adopted in conformity with this act, all development undertaken by, and all actions taken in regard to development orders by, governmental agencies in regard to land covered by such plan or element shall be consistent with such plan or element as adopted. (b) All land development regulations enacted or amended shall be consistent with the adopted comprehensive plan, or element or portion thereof, and any land development regulations z existing at the time of adoption which are not consistent with the adopted comprehensive plan, or element or portion thereof, shall be amended so as to be consistent. If a local government C allows an existing land development regulation which is inconsistent with the most recently .2 adopted comprehensive plan, or element or portion thereof, to remain in effect, the local government shall adopt a schedule for bringing the land development regulation into conformity with the provisions of the most recently adopted comprehensive plan, or element L or portion thereof. During the interim period when the provisions of the most recently adopted comprehensive plan, or element or portion thereof, and the land development regulations are inconsistent, the provisions of the most recently adopted comprehensive plan, or element or portion thereof, shall govern any action taken in regard to an application for a development order. 163.3201, F.S. — Relationship of comprehensive plan to exercise of land development regulatory authority. It is the intent of this act that adopted comprehensive plans or elements thereof shall be implemented, in part, by the adoption and enforcement of appropriate local regulations on the development of lands and waters within an area. It is the intent of this act that the adoption 0 and enforcement by a governing body of regulations for the development of land or the adoption and enforcement by a governing body of a land development code for an area shall be based on, be related to, and be a means of implementation for an adopted comprehensive plan as required by this act. 163.3202, F.S. —Land development regulations.— COi (1)Within 1 year after submission of its comprehensive plan or revised comprehensive plan for review pursuant to s. 163.3191, each county and each municipality shall adopt or amend and enforce land development regulations that are consistent with and implement their adopted comprehensive plan. (3) This section shall be construed to encourage the use of innovative land development regulations which include provisions such as transfer of development rights, incentive and inclusionary zoning, planned-unit development, impact fees, and performance zoning. These e( BOCC SR Page 32 of 33 File No. 2019-097 Packet Pg. 2705 R.1.b and all other such regulations shall be combined and compiled into a single land development code for the jurisdiction. A general zoning code shall not be required if a local government's adopted land development regulations meet the requirements of this section. VI. PROCESS N Land Development Code Amendments may be proposed by the Board of County Commissioners, the Planning Commission,the Director of Planning,private application, or the owner or other person having a contractual interest in property to be affected by a proposed amendment. The Director of W Planning shall review and process applications as they are received and pass them onto the M Development Review Committee and the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission shall hold at least one public hearing. The Planning Commission shall review the application, the reports and recommendations of the Department of Planning & Environmental Resources and the Development Review Committee and the testimony given at the public hearing. The Planning Commission shall submit its recommendations and findings to the Board of County Commissioners (BOCC). The BOCC holds a public hearing to consider the adoption of the proposed amendment, and considers the staff report,staff recommendation,Planning c Commission recommendation and the testimony given at the public hearing. The BOCC may adopt the proposed amendment based on one or more of the factors established in LDC Section 102- 158(d)(7). .2 T VII. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the proposed amendment. VIII.EXHIBITS 1. 2017 Affordable Workforce Housing Support Study for Non-Residential Development,prepared by Clarion Associates, LLC 2. Monroe County 2016 Employer Survey Summary of Results,prepared by RRC Associates, LLC 3. 2019 Rental Market Study by Shimberg Center for Housing Studies 0 4. 2016 Monroe County AHAC Resolution 01-2016i 0 i i cv U BOCC SR Page 33 of 33 File No. 2019-097 Packet Pg. 2706 R.1.c F , tiF t �fr I y� ,4 pp r� {�k , 1 i � a^ �i q� V q�q qV W q� V q AFFONDABLE Wu&-tRKFu&v%RCE MUUSING Oft Oft bUPPu&v%RT bTUD%T" FOR NOM-RESIDENTIAL DEV"FELU'PMENT C44 W PREPARED BY �a14.. Packet Pg. 2707 R.1.c 11c,) rc,)e CC,UI T,V `,�,lq.'1.,,'yl( stu",J' fc,)i Nk)r J1,J'eY t l,1 Dev lc.) tYY'ere U J TABLE OF CONTENTS I. OVERVIEW AND EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 A. Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 1 1. Background..................................................................................................................................................1 2. Purpose of Affordable Workforce Housing Support Study for Non-Residential Development...................2 (n B. Problem Description ............................................................................................................ 3 1. Housing Sales Prices and Housing Affordability: Comparison of Median Single Family Sales Prices and HouseholdIncome................................................................................................................................................3 m 0. C. Need for Affordable Workforce Housing Created by Non-Residential Development ........ 5 II. PROBLEM DESCRIPTION 7 A. Housing Sales Prices and Housing Affordability .................................................................. 7 1. Comparison of Median Single Family and Condominium Sales Prices and Household Income...................7 2. Assessing Housing Affordability 9 B. Growth in Wages ............................................................................................................... 11 C. Supply of Affordable Housing............................................................................................ 15 III. NEED FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING CREATED BY NON-RESIDENTIAL 0 0. DEVELOPMENT 16 A. Background ........................................................................................................................ 16 B. Demand for Workforce Housing Units .............................................................................. 16 1. Need for Affordable Workforce Housing for Construction Employees......................................................16 0 2. Need for Affordable Workforce Housing for Post-Construction Employees.............................................18 0 3. Summary of Needs for Affordable Workforce Housing Created by Non-Residential Development.........31 4. Assistance to Address Affordable Workforce Housing Need.....................................................................34 Appendix A: Calculating the Affordability Threshold....................................... A-1 Appendix B: Economic Growth in Monroe County (2007-2016)....................... B-1 N Appendix C: Employment By Household and Income By Industry ................... C-1 Appendix D: Workforce Housing Prototype Cost Estimates............................. D-1 X LU Packet Pg. 2708 R.1.c �lY7l`r()e CC,UY fV `,�,lq.'1.,,'yl( stu",Jl J I\k)r • 1,J'er t l,1 Dev k.) tYY'ere II II t y AND I \ I �� U III, �,a YkY;{P I�(,,,,I'§YkY.f�III I�s,,,,��#�l�l{f ,��4��I\)I�s,�s�' I�s,,,,r��i�E�f.,�l`�� , III�kk:{��I�s,,, i1Yz1�l` Ink��tt'��II k��tt'��,'^��4�I'"�§lY`� B c k 3 ro n)d There is a workforce housing affordability problem in Monroe County. The reason at the most basic level is that wages have remained static over the past decade, while housing prices have recovered and appear to be increasing annually since the downturn after the Great Recession. The Monroe County Comprehensive Plan, the State of the County yearly report, and the work and findings of the Affordable Housing Advisory Committee, all recognize the problem. The plan establishes the planning principle (i.e., o goal) of ensuring affordable housing is available for the workforce. More specifically: Goal 601 in the Monroe County Year 2030 Comprehensive Plan states: E 0. Monroe County shall adopt programs and policies to facilitate access by residents to W adequate and affordable housing that is safe, decent, and structurally sound, and > that meets the needs of the population based on type, tenure characteristics, unit 76 size and individual preference. Policy 601.1.13 states: Monroe County shall maintain land development regulations on inclusionary housing and shall evaluate expanding the inclusionary housing requirements to include or o address nonresidential and transient development and redevelopment based on specific data and analysis. State of the County 2015/16, a report prepared for the Monroe County Board of County ¢' Commissioners, emphasizes the housing affordability problem, and identifies some of the reasons for the problem. ....the quadruple impact of high land values, land limited by geographic and environmental features, housing supply limited by the controlled Rate of Growth Ordinance, and a tourism economy with a prevalence of lower paying service-sector employment. State of the County 2015116, at page 14. 2 0 4- A study conducted by the United Way of Florida, Asset Limited, Income Constrained, le Employed:Study of Financial Hardship (ALICE November 2014) indicates that nearly half of Monroe County households, including many above the federal poverty line, still struggle to afford basic expenses, including housing.ALICE, at page 173. 0 The County's Affordable Housing Advisory Committee, including a Board of County Commissioners approved stakeholder assessment effort conducted by the Consensus Center at Florida State University, in April 2015 concluded housing affordability had become a crisis in the County: This stakeholder assessment report confirms that there is wide agreement that Monroe County is facing a significant and growing workforce housing crisis with shortages for both affordable rental and ownership units. There is also agreement that no single strategy will solve the workforce housing crisis in Monroe County. Instead the challenge ahead is to craft a balanced package of Packet Pg. 2709 R.1.c �1�71`f�7e CC,UY fV `,�,lq.'1.,,'yl( stu",Jl J I\k)r J1,J'eY t l,1 Dev k.) tYY'ere U targeted options that have been refined through discussion and debate and that can serve as a consensus framework for addressing and implementing solutions. The Monroe County Board of County Commissioners agreed. In November 2015, they 0 adopted Resolution No. 393-2015, deeming housing affordability not only a problem, but a "crisis." The housing affordability issue is one that encompasses the full Monroe County market, 76 including incorporated and unincorporated areas. People move and hire without necessarily considering municipal lines. The County is both the smallest geographic unit for which relevant economic data is consistently available and the appropriate unit for measuring the housing market. The nature of this Study is that it will provide guidance for County government for the policies it enacts and the actions it chooses to take, z particularly where it has more direct land use control in the unincorporated parts of the county, but the analysis diagnosing the issue is countywide unless otherwise indicated. 2 2" ��.� �;�'as=` '� A°, ' 'b a �,� �or1k (or � '�s �OD�.f �. �;,�ti�'��:` L((,,�T�'� for (U D eve �o rir)i e D t This Affordable Workforce Housing Support Study for Non-Residential Development ("the Study') is prepared to provide the technical support and necessary analysis so the County can take action to address the workforce housing affordability problem by v, implementing the comprehensive plan goal of expanding the inclusionary requirements within the unincorporated county to non-residential development. The Study supports o this goal by determining the need non-residential development creates for affordable workforce housing in the County. Such analyses establish the appropriate basis for the County to then ask the non-residential development creating the need to mitigate their impacts on a proportionate and fair basis. 0 Initially, the Study identifies the affordable workforce housing problem in Monroe County. It then provides the technical documentation and analyses needed to establish whether and the extent to which non-residential development creates a need for CD affordable workforce housing. This is done by evaluating the linkage between (1) employment generated by the construction of non-residential development, and (2) the employment that occurs at non-residential development after the construction is completed (post-construction activities). Because the analysis demonstrates there is a 0 need created by non-residential development for affordable workforce housing, the Study quantifies the need both in terms of affordable workforce housing units (or a o fraction thereof) and monetary housing assistance that could address the need for workforce housing. The Study is based on the assumption that an affordable housing unit for households in o the local workforce costs no more than 30 percent of annual household income, regardless of whether a home is rented or owner-occupied. This Study focuses on the costs to develop and purchase an owner-occupied housing unit; however, the 30 i percent household income affordability threshold is applicable to rental properties as _ well. x The Study includes three parts: This Section 1: Overview and Executive Summary, provides a summary of the Study. It also describes the policy direction in the Monroe County Comprehensive Packet Pg. 2710 R.1.c U Plan that directs the County to address the housing affordability problem, and explains how this Study provides the technical support to implement these policies. k7, Section 2: Problem Description, outlines the current workforce housing 0 affordability problem in Monroe County. It shows that while employment in the County has grown over the past decade, wages have remained flat while housing prices have increased since the downturn after the Great Recession, and appear to 12 be increasing on an annual basis. It also demonstrates that housing is not affordable to much of the County's workforce. Section 3: Need for Affordable Workforce Housing Created by Non-Residential Development, assesses the need for affordable housing created by non-residential development (both expansions and new construction). It also outlines the z methodology and calculations that determine the need for affordable workforce housing created by non-residential development. Finally, the section quantifies the need both in terms of affordable workforce housing units (or a fraction thereof) 0. that could be built to address the need, and funding shortages (housing assistance) that could be provided to address the need. 1 x �"i0 Sill ii g SAOS [Ilrijcc s a.�,OUd �,im( si011 Afif,"rr&,a,hdHh,w of `i & � Like many resort communities, the price of housing in Monroe County over the past nine years has increased since the downturn after the Great Recession, while incomes and wages have remained basically static.The result is a workforce housing affordability problem in the County. Typically, housing affordability is evaluated by comparing the price of housing in a local real estate market to prevailing wage and salary incomes. A national benchmark for evaluating affordability is whether median household incomes are at the level where the household could afford a median priced home. Typically, housing affordability of owner-occupied housing is defined as the owner spending no more than 30 percent of annual household income on annual housing costs. The maximum price of an affordable unit under this definition is calculated as 3.33 times o (333 percent) the annual median household income. (See Appendix A: Calculating the Affordability Threshold, for a detailed explanation of this calculation.) As Table I-1: Comparison of Median Household Incomes, Median Sales Prices, and Housing Affordability, by House Type, Monroe County (2008-2016), demonstrates, the gap between median household incomes and median housing costs in the County is not affordable to households earning the area median income. In 2008, the median sales price of all types of housing units ($430,000)was about two and one-half times the price o affordable to a median household income ($52,443). There were some fluctuations during and after the Great Recession, but by 2016, the median sales price ($485,000) was again over two and one-half times the price that was affordable to a median household income ($62,355). See also Figure I-1: Median Sales Prices and Prices Affordable to Median Family Income, Monroe County(2008-2016). x Packet Pg. 2711 R.1.c 1y1c,) rc,)e CC)UI fV `,I,lq.'1,,v'yl t sit l J'y f{,)l Nkwr J1'J'eY tJ\ I,fev lt'71.tYY'ere U J \ siwi J \ \ s 1 u a�\E \1 � \ \ \ \ \ \ \\ \\� t a \S t t It 3 c \ \ f j i 'A t\.t 2008 $52,443 $490,000 $430,000 $174,635 2.806 2.462 934.35 819.94 m 2009 $49,721 $390,000 $335,000 $165,571 2.355 2.023 784.38 673.76 0. 2010 $50,619 $360,000 $322,000 $168,561 2.136 1.910 711.20 636.12 2011 $51,524 $380,500 $320,000 $171,575 2.218 1.865 738.49 621.07 2012 $53,637 $408,000 $340,000 $178,611 2.284 1.904 760.67 633.89 �- 2013 $50,838 $424,000 $355,000 $169,291 2.505 2.097 834.02 698.30 2014 $59,388 $450,000 $385,000 $197,762 2.275 1.947 757.73 648.28 2015 $61,020 $490,000 $425,000 $203,197 2.411 2.092 803.02 696.49 20162 $62,355 $545,000 $485,000 $207,642 2.625 2.336 874.03 777.80 1"AII Units" includes sales labeled as Single Family,Condominium,Townhouse, Duplex, Half-Duplex, Multi-Units, and Mobile Homes 22016 Median Household Income is preliminary. Final datum is not yet available. Sources:American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates: Median Income for Households,via American Fact Finder, 2017; Multiple Listing Service(MLS)for Monroe County,2008-2016 c $600,000 = W 2 $500,000 $400,000 s I E $300,000 f $200,000 << . $100,000 N 2008 2009 2010 201E 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 1 r __- Single Family ALLAffordability Limit x Sources: American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates: Median Income for Households, via American Fact Finder,2017; Multiple Listing Service,Monroe County,(2008-2016);Table 1-1 J u l e .E,t L P,.,„e Packet Pg. 2712 R.1.c �1�71`f()e CC,UY fV `,�,lq.'1.,,'yl( stu",Jl J I\k)r J1,J'eY t l,1 Dev k.) tYY'ere U It is clear there is a workforce housing affordability problem in Monroe County, to the point that only a few members of the workforce can reasonably afford market-priced housing. 0 The need to provide affordable workforce housing is created by development that demands labor (employees). Because non-residential development creates a demand for labor (employees), the need for affordable workforce housing it creates is determined in this Study. Non-residential development includes governmental, industrial, institutional, office, 0 retail & restaurant, tourist/recreation, hotel/motel, and other development. Non- W residential development creates a need for labor (the workforce) in two ways: (1) employees who construct the building(s), and (2) employees who work at the building after m construction (post construction employees). Construction employees construct the non 0. - residential buildings. All different types of employees work at the buildings after they are complete, depending on the type of business. The analysis shows that wages and salaries earned by a significant portion of Monroe County's workforce that constructs the buildings or works in the businesses and related entities that make up non-residential development are insufficient to allow these employees 22 to obtain market housing at a price they can reasonably afford. After determining the number and type of employees that serve non-residential development (construction and o post-construction), and how many of these employees cannot reasonably afford housing in Monroe County, the Study then identifies the quantity of workforce housing need created by non-residential development. Based on this analysis, Table I-2: Summary of Affordable Workforce Housing Needs and Assistance Created By Non-Residential Development, outlines the workforce housing need 0. 0. generated by different types of non-residential development, both in terms of the need for workforce housing units (or a fraction thereof), and for monetary workforce housing assistance (in lieu fees). 0 2 0 4- 0 0 r. cv i Packet Pg. 2713 R.1.c it 1 fsve CC)iUI"T,V `,�,lq.'s,,,'sl� s'tu",Jl J I\k)r R( J1,J'eY tJ,,)1 {e` ek.)1.tYY'ere U J t+ o 1 S t 1 s d. n i g 1 h $ Governmental 0.020 0.408 0.427 $38,285 Industrial 0.020 0.206 0.226 $24,397 Institutional 0.020 0.317 0.337 $36,284 Office 0.020 0.684 0.704 $78,492 Others 0.020 0.624 0.644 $99,838 Retail&Restaurant 0.020 0.396 0.416 $66,722 Tourist/ Recreation 0.020 0.594 0.614 $204,691 0. Hotel/Motel 0.020 0.276 0.295 $49,947 W See Table III-1: Non-Residential Construction Employment and Housing Need,Monroe County 2See Table III-11: Post Construction Employees Need for Housing,by Land Use Category,Per 1,000 Square Feet, Monroe County _ 3See Table III-13:Total Housing Needs for Workforce Housing Created by Non-Residential Development(Perl=SquareFeet) 4See Table III-15:Assistance Needed for Workforce Housing Need Created by Non-Residential Development(Perl=SquareFeet) s Other"land commonly included unidentified uses.The source data from the State of Florida provides 99 individual categories of property use. Examples of those not meeting another category and also being placed in"Other"include Military,Forests, parks and recreational areas,Airport,marine or bus terminal,and Gas and utility lines. 0 0 Because the workforce housing need generated by non-residential development is based on the size and type of the non-residential development, a formula for the appropriate land use will need to be applied to each non-residential development, individually, based on its size (square footage). A table of requirements is found in III.B.3. Summary of Needs for o Affordable Workforce Housing Created by Non-Residential Development. 0 2 0 4- 0 0 r. cv I x 1ut_e } ,,,e Packet Pg. 2714 R.1.c 1i1c,) rc,)e CC,UI T,V Situ Jly fc,)l Nk)r • 1,J'er 11,1 Dev lc.) tYY'ere U III III,r, IP II'^ 0 B Ill,,,,IE IM D 11,,,,, ,,C IIR III IP T III 0„q\ 0 As stated in Section I. Overview and Executive Summary, housing that is affordable to the workforce is one of the most challenging problems facing Monroe County today. 1 , �, 'O U„- �0�}'OD D�f Q: '8[aE0ll Si ii,,fOs 11,1 a n�))i `v a �°Dd ��,4on (o U00110�snn) `arc. os V'11rij c',s ��0'Y)d � Based on a review of the housing, real estate, and income data for Monroe County it is clear that the price of market rate housing in the County over the past nine years has exceeded what the workforce can reasonably afford — and the problem appears to be z getting worse. Incomes and wages have remained basically static. However, housing prices have increased since the Great Recession of 2007-2009, outstripping the m workforce's ability to purchase them. Table II-1: Comparison of Median Household 0. Income and Median Home Sales Prices, Monroe County (2008-2016), and Figure II-12: Median Household Income and Median Sales Prices, Monroe County (2008-2016), illustrate this phenomenon between 2008 and 2016. rr c r f s. } 14 l ,W 0. i 4, i v { r t s i f � { \fit{(((jjJfjfjf+l{} ({t$ �� t11\� 2008 $52,443 $490,000 934.3 $430,000 819.9 0. 2009 $49,721 $390,000 784.4 $335,000 673.8 2010 $50,619 $360,000 711.2 $322,000 636.1 2011 $51,524 $380,500 738.5 $320,000 621.1 2012 $53,637 $408,000 760.7 $340,000 633.9 2013 $50,838 $424,000 834.0 $355,000 698.3 19 2014 $59,388 $450,000 757.7 $385,000 648.3 2015 $61,020 $490,000 803.0 $425,000 696.5 2016 $62,355 $545,000 874.0 $485,000 777.8 "All Types" includes sales labeled as Single Family,Condominium,Townhouse, Duplex, Half-Duplex, Multi-Units, and Mobile Homes SOURCES: Bureau of the Census,American Community Survey, 1-Year Estimates: Median Income for Households via American Fact Finder, 2017; Multiple Listing Service, Monroe County,2008-2016. r cv r I X Jui"e } .`,,,e Packet Pg. 2715 R.1.c 1)7l`f('e CC)iUI"T,V `,�,lq.'r,,,'yl� stu",J'J Nk)r R( J1'J'eY tJ,,)1 De` ek.)1.tYY'ere U J $600,000 U $500,000 $400,000 $300,000 $200,000 $100,000 $0 I. 0. 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 W W Median Income Single Family MALL Sources:American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates: Median Income for Households,via American Fact Finder,2017;Multiple Listing Service,Monroe County,2008-2016;Table II-1 N 0 In 2008, the median sales price of a single family home ($490,000) was nearly ten times the median household income ($52,443) and nearly three times the affordable housing price for a median household income ($174,675). In 2010, the low point for housing prices in the County since the Great Recession, the median sales price for a single family home was $360,000, still twice the affordable housing price for a median household income ($168,561). From that time forward, the median housing prices have increased, and appear to be on an upward trajectory. Wages and income, however, basically remains static, when adjusted for inflation. In 2016, the median sales price for a single- family home was $545,000, over two and one-half times what a median household income could afford ($207,642). See Table II-2: Housing Affordability, Monroe County o (2008-2016). 0) 2 In addition, while non-single family unit prices have generally been lower than the price of single family homes, they have followed a pattern similar to that of single family homes. Since 2008 the median sales price has substantially exceeded the affordability level for the period. By 2016 the median sales price of all units ($485,000) was over twice the price affordable to the median household income ($207,642). See Table II-2: Housing Affordability, Monroe County (2008-2016). o r. cv I x Packet Pg. 2716 R.1.c iy 1c71'irc,)e CC,UI fV `,�,lq.'1,,,'sl t stu Jly f{,)l Nk)r J1,J'eY tJ,fl I,{ev lc.) tYY'ere U J - i � s 2008 $52,443 $174,635 $490,000 $430,000 9 2009 $49,721 $165,571 $390,000 $335,000 2010 $50,619 $168,561 $360,000 $322,000 2011 $51,524 $171,575 $380,500 $320,000 2012 $53,637 $178,611 $408,000 $340,000 2013 $50,838 $169,291 $424,000 $355,000 2014 $59,388 $197,762 $450,000 $385,000 2015 $61,020 $203,197 $490,000 $425,000 0. 2016 $62,355 $207,642 $545,000 $485,000 "All Units" includes sales labeled as Single Family,Condominium,Townhouse, Duplex, Half-Duplex, Multi- Units,and Mobile Homes Source:American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates: Median Income for Households,via American Fact Finder,2017;Multiple Listing Service, Monroe County,2008-2016 0 As summarized in Section I. Overview and Executive Summary, typically, housing affordability is evaluated by comparing the price of housing for a local real estate market to prevailing wages and salaries incomes. A national benchmark for evaluating affordability is whether median household incomes are at the level where the ¢' household could afford a median priced home. Typically, housing affordability of owner- 0 occupied housing is defined as the owner spending no more than 30 percent of annual household income on annual housing costs. The maximum price of an affordable unit under this definition is calculated as 3.33 times (333 percent) the annual median household income. For an explanation of how the Affordability Threshold Price is calculated, see Appendix A: Calculating the Affordability Threshold. o As Table II-3: Comparison of Median Household Incomes, Median Sales Prices, and 2 Housing Affordability by Home Type, Monroe County (2008- 2016), demonstrates, the price of housing in Monroe County over the past nine years has exceeded what the workforce can reasonably afford, and the gap appears to be increasing as the real estate market has recovered from the Great Recession, while income and wages have remained static. 0 r. cv i x Packet Pg. 2717 R.1.c 1y1 fvte CC)UI fV `,I,lq.'v,,,'tl st u Jly Nkwr { J1,J'eY tJ\ Dev kt.) tYY'ere U 91R J ;` t z, -kr i� q 'NP1,11111" tv�tit 1t \N tt\ 6 li&Jl 0 }h \ I > f � \ i i 6 7 } 1 ( t \ — 1 \ { f r \ - », — :. a r , 2008 $52,443 $490,000 $430,000 $174,635 2.806 2.462 934.35 819.94 2009 $49,721 $390,000 $335,000 $165,571 2.355 2.023 784.38 673.76 m 2010 $50,619 $360,000 $322,000 $168,561 2.136 1.910 711.20 636.12 2011 $51,524 $380,500 $320,000 $171,575 2.218 1.865 738.49 621.07 2012 $53,637 $408,000 $340,000 $178,611 2.284 1.904 760.67 633.89 2013 $50,838 $424,000 $355,000 $169,291 2.505 2.097 834.02 698.30 2014 $59,388 $450,000 $385,000 $197,762 2.275 1.947 757.73 648.28 2015 $61,020 $490,000 $425,000 1 $203,197 1 2.411 1 2.092 1 803.02 696.49 2016 $62,355 $545,000 $485,000 1 $207,642 1 2.625 2.336 874.03 777.80 0 "All Units"includes sales labeled as Single Family,Condominium,Townhouse,Duplex,Half-Duplex,Multi-Units,and Mobile Homes Sources:American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates:Median Income for Households,via American Fact Finder,2017; 0 Multiple Listing Service(MLS)for Monroe County,2008-2016 r_ Figure II-2 : Comparison of Median Sales Prices and Prices Affordable to Median Income, 0 Monroe County, (2008— 2016), graphically illustrates the relationship between median sales prices of single family homes and all homes in Monroe County, and the price of a home that is reasonably affordable to a family with a median household income (333 percent of median household income). 0 m r. cv I x m 0 Packet Pg. 2718 R.1.c JF 1c71'irc,)e CC)UI fV `,�,lq.'1,,,'yl J stu J'y fc,)l Nk)r J1'J'eY tJ,1 Dev lc.) tYY'ere U alb'`' OF `�, \ ��< �n3�F�� lkll ; � » s ��»�"�\�° l \ �I � l $600,000 U) $500,000 U i $400,000 € :� r 4 6 $300,000 J y $200,000 l $100,000 $0 0. 0 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 W 0 Single Family ALLAffordability Limit Sources: American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates: Median Income for Households, via American Fact Finder,2017; Multiple List Service,Monroe County,(2008-2016);Table II-1 y 0 Contrasting income and housing price data assumes that only those residents of Monroe 0 County are bidding for housing. When those that do not reside in Monroe County are willing to bid higher, the market responds to these bids, resulting in a significant market inconsistency. Based on a review of the data, this is happening in Monroe County; many non-residents bid for and purchase Monroe County housing because of the attractiveness and quality of life of the Florida Keys—and they are willing to pay higher prices than residents can afford. There is also a cap on the total number of new units that can be built. The Rate of Growth Ordinance (ROGO) has been used by Monroe County since 1992 to ensure growth in the county does not exceed the ability of residents to evacuate in the case of a hurricane or other natural disaster, according to the scientific models used when the policy was implemented. A limited number of building permits are issued each year which may further limit the market response to the demand for housing. 0 0 As is highlighted in the previous section and Section I. Overview and Executive Summary, wages for the Monroe County workforce have remained static, when adjusted for inflation, 0 while housing costs have increased as the real estate market has recovered from the Great Recession. The data show that even with some employment growth, the Monroe County workforce is finding it increasingly difficult to find housing they can reasonably afford in the I marketplace.This is due in part because a significant portion of employment growth is in the accommodation and food service, and retail trade sectors, the two highest growth sectors. Growth of these sectors of the economy increases the housing affordability problem because of the low wages earned by their employees.This is outlined below in more detail. Packet Pg. 2719 R.1.c 1�71`f()e CC,UY fV `,�,lq.'1,,,'yl s\ 1 Jly Nk)r • 1,J'e tJ\ Dev k.) tYY'ere U Monroe County's local economy can be organized into the general sectors identified in Table II-4: Employment by Industry, Monroe County (2016). The largest industry is Accommodation and Food Services, making up 33.8 percent of local employment, followed by Retail Trade at 15.2 percent. Both of these components are related to the tourism industry. Also see Figure II-3: Employment by Industry, Monroe County(2016). Construction 2,584 6.3 0 Durable Goods Manufacturing 108 0.3 Nondurable Goods Manufacturing 245 0.6 Wholesale Trade 582 1.4 0. 0 Retail Trade 6,179 15.2 Finance and Insurance 712 1.7 Real Estate and Rental and Leasing 1,475 3.6 Educational Services 1,729 4.2 Health Care and Social Assistance 2,524 6.2 Leisure and Hospitality Arts, Entertainment,and Recreation 1,319 3.2 0 Accommodation and Food Services 13,763 33.8 Public Administration 3,016 7.4 Other 6,536 16.0 Total,All Industries 40,772 100 ¢' Note:The most recent data available was appropriate for this table.Data from part of 2016 was used.Numbers will vary from Table III-4 where a full year of data was appropriate and 2015 was used. o Source: FL Dept.of Economic Opportunity, http://www.floridaiobs.org/labor-marl<et- information/data-center/statistical-programs/quarterly-census-of-employment-and-wages o 0 0 t` Accomodation& All Others �,1\ ,'� Food Services 34% \ 34% o Xr Z 11 757\ i�1S sJ \.r r o r t, r Education� Health Const. \�y A�IN�� \1 Retail Trade .� 6% 7% 15% j Source: FL Dept. of Economic Opportunity, http://www.floridajobs.org/labor-market- m information/data-center/statistical-programs/quarterly-census-of-employment-and-wages; See Table II-4 for a further breakdown of the "All Others"category Packet Pg. 2720 R.1.c NA r()e CC,UY fV `,�,lq.'1.�,'yl( stu",J'J Nk)r ( • 1'J'er t l,I Dev k.) tYY'ere U The data show that between 2008 and 2015, while there was some employment growth, wages increased very little in relationship to inflation, in part because the number of employees in the accommodation and food service, and retail trade sectors increased relative to other sectors of the economy. See Table II-5: Growth in Employment and Earnings, Monroe County(2008-2015) m m 0 m 0. 0 0 0 m 0 0 r- 0 0 0 2 0 4- 0 m 0 r. cv m Packet Pg. 2721 }uew Ol n 1 '}u 's a ® jol Apn4S :poddnS BuisnOH3jolMiO I aOII LL L }Iq!gx :}u8wg3B4} N d � a_ m a Ln ko N o) N m 4 � � Ln okn V1 n O O n Ln N ry t a-I lD Ln Ln Ln O kD 0 M r, Ln lb -O \\ e N Ln Ln N O� N V1 O oc o) n O 1 i/T i/T i/T i/T i/T i/T aJ i Q °. c a \ y rn a No m o `� a ko ti Ln o .� m o m N n °' N ri `•n m h L` m L s \ ooi rn Ln N m o o t rnoo 6) m o m Q k o � m a T a l ` AAA _ rn rn m lD N p� ko �t O o = U O ^ Oaj c-I , •ice+ /} L VI m Ln Ln rn o a moo of �n o /1 3 i lo � �D V1 m Oo o o N m r,V1 V1 I� QJ oo rn oo a m a � ko m a a m om Ln aj N rn n o) a o) o O Ln Q a a ti ti a � Lr m r o O o z N k ^ c-I c-I N c-I m > ao ti o N O o) a rn E Ln oon ID o oo o) co lD oo oo kl� N m m I� ko O N Q1 m m Lr N 4 O W of m � N ti orn m 0 o oa m m m oa oa - O rn of N o n rn of of N m N t m r, m O OJ N O Oz (7 Lr lD O \a ( lD V1 t O O m N r, m N m m �t N N Ln t' h i »\ O m o� m m Y Q Lnoo o m m m r o 0 0 o + O m rn rn `n m m t mko N ri r, O O O r, N � OJ m Ol N 'D q of O � j/} j/} j/} j/} jQ j/} Q L t/} \\\' m CL c O bn bn U c a) 'L \\ LnO U J -O Y U C m Q f0 LL Q (1f) fa f0 f0 � N .O .Y N O O U Q K .; to 'Q o fo 6 a ut ut O -O ut -O o -6 C7 C •{�+ f0 C N C 'Y fa o 7 to O 2 -O 'E OCu �1 \,•.. r -O o 00 U ra ra ra ra o U m Q H w • uu � aJ O a H V O U Z LL' LL LL' W = J Q Q LL Z (f) Q1 s R.1.c iy 1c71'irc,)e CC,UI fV `,�,lq.'1,,,'yl situ Jly fc,)l Nk)r J1,J'eY tJ,1 Dev lc.) tYY'ere U J What Table II-5: Growth by Employment and Earnings, Monroe County (2008-2015) shows is that the two industries that generated the most growth in employment, Accommodation and Food Service, and Retail Trade, had the lowest annual earnings.' See also Appendix B: Economic Growth in Monroe County(2007-2016). m c «,,,,..-c�c�i..y ((,h Ii `tit li:.II((h R,t l:.11A!b E (¢i((h LIP-S 0;,G Finally, separating out the number of housing sales annually that are affordable to those with median household incomes further supports the notion there is a lack of affordable o workforce housing in Monroe County. Table II-6: Sales of Housing Affordable to the Workforce, Monroe County (2008-2016), shows that between 2008 and 2016, few sales were affordable to those with a median household income, and in all years the median sale 0. price of housing was between one and one-half and two and one-half times higher than —�, what the workforce could reasonably afford. That figure increased right after the aftermath of the recession occurred—but even then only a small amount of the homes sold (just over 17 percent) were affordable to median income households. As the economy recovered in 2012 and 2013, housing prices began to rise, and the percent of housing available to median income households began to decrease to very low numbers (only 7.36 percent of sales in 2016 were affordable to median income households), again demonstrating the seriousness 0 of the housing affordability problem in the County. 0 �\ 1 a a 2008 $52,443 $174,635 $430,000 246.2 5.69 U) CD 2009 $49,721 $165,571 $335,000 202.3 12.92 2010 $50,619 $168,561 $322,000 191.0 12.71 2011 $51,524 $171,575 $320,000 186.5 17.31 0) 2012 $53,637 $178,611 $340,000 190.4 16.91 le 2013 $50,838 $169,291 $355,000 209.7 12.86 2014 $59,388 $197,762 $385,000 194.7 12.85 2015 $61,020 $203,197 $425,000 209.2 9.70 2016 $62,355 $207,642 $485,000 233.6 7.36 Source: Multiple Listing Service, Monroe County r. Clearly, housing that is affordable to the workforce is a problem in Monroe County. cv i x 'Accommodation and food services added the most employees(5,322). It is also the second lowest ranking sector in terms of annual earnings,$30,033 a year. The lowest wage industry, retail trade,added 586 jobs at average earnings of$28,735. ui Y . , I.r' } :; e I. , Packet Pg. 2723 R.1.c i\1 f()e CC,UI fV `,�,lq.'1,,,'yl situ Jly I\k)r J1,J'eY tJ,1 Dev k.) tYY'ere U III III III,, ql II,,,,,.Ils,,,D III 0 IR NI III'��,3�IR DAB LE II I U`U&II"ql G C R EAT II,,,D BY „ql 0 'q\ IR II,,, III D II,,,, 'q\T IIIA Ill,,, D I V E L RM III'N U The need to provide affordable housing for the workforce is created by development that demands labor (employees). Because non-residential development creates a demand for labor (employees), the need for affordable workforce housing it creates is determined in this Study. As outlined in Part II: Problem Description, non-residential development includes accommodation and food service, retail trade, real estate and rental and leasing, construction, finance and insurance, education, and health care employment among others. o Non-residential development creates a need for labor(the workforce) in two ways: • Employees who construct the building(s); and 0. • Employees who work at the building (post construction employees). _ Construction employees construct the non-residential buildings. Different types of employees (as noted above), work at the buildings after they are completed, depending on 76 the type of business. Because of their wage levels and existing housing prices, the construction, expansion or renovation of non-residential development creates a need for affordable workforce housing. The analysis that demonstrates this need is outlined below. 0 V " „� � IT�t �, A'� � II r ,.�S �( �0`f S 0 1 x Need d for to lkefo cc, �""��r�.�� D�� for CoODstr .�cfljor E Orb Aov (C s � The construction, expansion, or renovation of buildings requires the employment of contractors and construction workers to do the work. The method used to assess the need for affordable workforce housing created by the construction of non-residential development involves the following. Initially, the amount of construction authorized and built in Monroe County from 2012-2015 (measured in square feet) was determined from annual property appraiser records. Records show a total of 1,006,217 square feet of non-residential floor area was built during that period of time. Next, the number of construction employees that were required to build this non-residential development was estimated based on construction employment data (ES-202) that show the construction required 1,537 construction employee years to build the 1,006,217 square feet of non-residential development (this is measured in employee years' worth of o work, and not the number of individual construction workers involved This equates to 655 square feet of non-residential development constructed for each construction employee year (1,006,216/1,537=655). See Table III-1: Non-Residential Construction Employment and Housing Need, Monroe County. r. z There is construction activity in reconstructing or redeveloping non-residential development in Monroe County. The redeveloped or reconstructed properties do not appear as new development in Monroe County property records, but require construction employees. Only construction workers employed in the construction of new non-residential buildings were used to calculate the ratio of construction workers to floor area added. Jui e .i,�l., ,e I.(1, Packet Pg. 2724 R.1.c 1y1c,) rr)e CC,iUI"T,V sup,'s C, l i stu",J' fc,)i Nk)r R( • 1'J'er 11.fl De` elc.)1.tYY'ere ponaming 1 r.. J (4 v r Non-Residential Floor Area Constructed Between 2012-15 1,006,217 Employee Years Worked to Construct Non-Residential Floor Area 1,537 Between 2012-15 Square Feet of Non-Residential Floor Area Constructed per 655 Construction Employee Year of Labor Construction Employees Required to Build 1,000 Square Feet of 1.527 Non-Residential Development Adjusted Construction Employees Required to Build 1,000 Square 0.038 Feet of Non-Residential Development (Over 40 Year Career) 0 0 Employees per Household 1.332 W Construction Employee Housing Needs from Construction of 1,000 0.029 Square Feet of Non-Residential Development(Over 40 year Career and With Other Employees in Household)(By Unit) 0. Percent in Need of Assistance' 69.58 Housing Units Needed per 1,000 SF 0.020 Note This number is the percent in need of assistance for a typical household. For the calculation,see Table III-10 in the Post-Construction Employee section. Sources: Monroe County Property Appraiser, Florida Department of Economic Opportunity (http://www.floridaiobs.org/labor-marl<et-information/data-center/statistical-programs/quarterly- census-ofemployment-and-wades), See also Appendix C 0 It is assumed the average construction employee will work many years over their work life (career). For purposes of this Study, it is estimated that a construction employee works 40 years over their career. Therefore, to ensure the employee need for housing created by constructing a certain amount (square feet) of non-residential development is proportionate, it is also necessary to divide the employee years it takes to construct a square foot of non-residential development by 40 (adjusted employee years). Finally, and to account for the fact that many employees in Monroe County reside in a 0 household that also includes other wage earning employees, the adjusted employee years it takes to build a certain amount of non-residential development is also divided 0 by the number of employed persons in an economically active household in Monroe County(1.332 employees per households) a 0 m s 0Based on the American Community Survey. See Appendix C: Employment By Household and Income by Industry. 4 Finally, and as discussed in more detailed in Section III-B.2(p.21), based on the real estate sales data reviewed (MLS sales between 2008-2016), it is appropriate and reasonable to expect that some market sales each year will r be affordable to some construction worker households; in addition to this small percentage(eight percent)of free market housing units that will be available and affordable to employees in median income households,there will _ also be free market housing units that are affordable to construction employee households whose incomes are substantially above the median (since 50 percent of all construction employee households have incomes higher than the median). In determining the need for affordable workforce housing,this must also be considered.As shown in Table III-9: Percent of Households Above and Below Affordability Level,this phenomena is accounted for and factored into the need determined for each of the land use categories for post construction employee needs for housing. I{li e .i, l.r' } ,, {Y I.i Packet Pg. 2725 R.1.c �1�71`f�7e CC,UY fV `,�,lq.'1.,,'yl( stu",J'J I\k)r • 1'J'er t l,1 Dev k.) tYY'ere U Table III-2: Non-Residential Construction Employment, Monroe County shows the number of construction employee years that would be required to construct various sized non-residential buildings. 0 r � � ai�iA�`t � ��N�� nC.1l. I N'i„'• f r A A 1 , 500 0.764 0.019 0.014 E 750 1.145 0.029 0.022 1,000 1.527 0.038 0.029 1,500 2.291 0.057 0.043 _ 2,000 3.055 0.076 0.057 12 2,500 3.818 0.095 0.072 3,000 4.582 0.115 0.086 y m 3,500 5.345 0.134 0.100 4,000 6.109 0.153 0.115 0 4,500 6.873 0.172 0.129 5,000 7.636 0.191 0.143 0 Based on the number of employees in the average construction employee household in ¢' the County, Tables III-1 and 2 set out the need for construction employee workforce housing, for non-residential land uses (without factoring in the employees who household incomes are sufficiently high to be able to reasonably afford market units - 0 something that is done in Table III-9). Specifically,Table III-1, shows, for example, that it 0 takes 1.527 construction employee worker years to build 1,000 square feet of non- residential development; and that when factoring in the 40 year career of the employee 0 0.038 of an employee year is required. Given there is on average 1.332 employees that live in a construction worker household, the construction of 1,000 square feet of office or retail space creates a need for 0.029 of an affordable workforce housing unit. 0 2,, N(C(( d for to lk�fo cc, �j0�( Sill 0 �f� for EAb A(r'v os The employment impacts of non-residential development, once the building is constructed, comes from the employees that work at the businesses/land uses that 0 occupy the buildings. In determining the need for affordable workforce housing created by non-residential development, post-construction, the following analysis was conducted: i First, all non-residential development was categorized into seven land use categories, as defined by the Florida Department of Revenue codes. Each of the seven land use categories, and the general uses included in the definition of each category are set out below. m 0 Jui e } : ,e IS Packet Pg. 2726 R.1.c iy 1c71'irc,)e CC,UI T,V `,�,lq.'1,,,'yl situ Jly fc,)l I\k)r J1,J'eY tJ,1 Dev lc.) tYY'ere U Retail&Restaurant uses includes stores, department stores, supermarkets, shopping centers, restaurants, financial institutions, repair service shops, service stations, auto sales and repair, parking lots, and wholesale outlets. 0 k7, Office uses includes professional and non-professional office buildings, professional services buildings, and insurance company offices. Industrial uses include light manufacturing, lumber yards, warehousing and76 distribution terminals, equipment and materials storage facilities, and other similar uses. ;Y, Tourist/Recreational uses include theatres, auditoriums, nightclubs, bowling alleys,tourist attractions, camps, race tracks, golf courses, hotels, and motels. o While not a land use as such, hotels and motels are broken out as a sub-category of Tourist/Recreational uses. (>, Institutional uses include churches, private schools, colleges, daycares, privately 0. owned hospitals, homes for the aged, orphanages, clubs, cultural organizations, > and similar uses. f, Governmental uses include military facilities, parks and recreational areas, governmental office buildings, public schools, and other publicly owned facilities. Other uses include utility, gas, and electric uses, mining, and sewage disposal facilities. o Second, the employment and average household earnings in the County was assigned to one of the seven land use categories, by first assigning each industrial sector in which employment and household earnings are categorized to one of the seven land use categories.This is done because the employment and wage data is categorized into the following industrial sectors, which need to be better correlated to land use: Natural Resources and Construction; Manufacturing; Wholesale Trade; Retail Trade; Trade, Transportation and Utilities; Information (e.g., printing, publishing, TV, etc.); Financial Activities; Professional and Business Services; Education and Health Services; Leisure and Hospitality; Other Services (which includes operation and maintenance employees); 0 and Government. 2 The industrial sectors were assigned to the seven land use categories based on the 4- description of employment activities related to land uses and related principles found in the Standard Industrial Classification Manual(published by the US Government Printing o Office); the classic Land Use Information Systems (Clawson and Stewart, by Resources for the Future,1965); Planner's Estimating Guide:Projecting Land-Use and Facility Needs (A. C. Nelson, Chicago: Planners Press, 2004); and Standard Land Use Coding Manual, (Urban Renewal Administration and Bureau of Public Roads, Government Printing Office, 1965). The percentage assignment of employment for each industry to the corresponding land use categories is set out in Table III-3: Percentage Assignment of cvi Industries to Land Use Categories, Monroe County.' 5 It should be noted that some employees, like construction workers, do not work at specific locations. These employees are assigned to the"No Location" category. Packet Pg. 2727 R.1.c 11c71'rc,)e CC,UI T,V `,�,lq.'1.,,'yl( stu",J' fc,)i Nk)r J1'J'eY t l,1 Dev lc.) tYY'ere U J t r � t 0 Natural Resource& 15.0 10.0 15.0 60.0 Construction' 76 Manufacturing 75.0 15.0 10.0 Wholesale TradeZ 70.0 10.0 20.0 Retail Trade3 90.0 10.0 Finance&Insurance 10.0 30.0 50.0 10.0 0 Real Estate,Rental&Leasing 100.0 Trade,Transport&Utilities 15.0 50.0 15.0 10.0 10.0 Information 35.0 35.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 m Educational Services 30.0 30.0 30.0 10.0 Prof.&Business Services 15.0 15.0 60.0 5.0 5.0 > Health Care&Social 30.0 30.0 25.0 15.0 Assistance Leisure&Hospitality 10.0 20.0 70.0 Other Services 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 60.0 Government 90.0 10.0 Notes: 0 ' For historical data,The Florida Department of Economic Opportunity z z Wholesale trade is broken out from the broader category of Trade,Transport& Utilities. See Appendix C: Employment by Household and Income by Industry. 3 Retail Trade is broken out from the broader category of Trade,Transport& Utilities. See Appendix C: Employment by Household and Income by Industry. Third, using the percentage assignments of industry employment to land use categories, the number of employees for each industry was translated into employees for each land use category. See Table III-4: Estimated Industry Employment by Land Use Categories, Monroe County. Average household earnings were then calculated for each land use category by multiplying the number of employees per land use times the 2016 estimated household earnings based upon the industry in which the employee is working6, and then dividing the product by the number of workers estimated for that land use (See Table III-4). 0 0 r. cv x 6 See Appendix C: Employment by Household and Income by Industry. ui } :< e 0 Packet Pg. 2728 R.1.c 11 r()e C(:,Ur fiV `,�,lq.'1.�,'yl( stu",Jl J Nk)r • 1,J'er t l,1 Dev k.) tYY'ere U J 1 & ° � W � ni ,u f.i m�.- 3 t es& 0 431 0 287 431 0 0 1,725 2874 Construction Manufacturing 0 277 0 55 37 0 0 0 369 Wholesale Trade 0 348 0 50 0 99 0 0 497 Retail Trade 0 0 0 0 0 5,337 593 0 5930 Finance&Insurance 0 72 215 358 0 72 0 0 717 Real Estate and Rental and O Leasing 0 0 0 1,411 0 0 0 0 1411 �-- Trade,Transport&Utilities 247 823 0 247 165 165 0 0 1647 Information 0 153 0 153 44 44 0 44 438 CL Educational Services 535 0 535 535 178 0 0 0 1783 2 0) Pro&Bus Services 0 472 472 1,889 0 157 0 157 3147 > 0) Health Care and Social 754 0 754 628 0 377 0 0 2513 76 Assistance Leisure&Hospitality 0 0 0 0 1,600 3,201 11,203 0 16004 C: Other Services 0 0 145 145 145 0 145 871 1451 Government 2,792 0 0 310 0 0 0 0 3102 TOTAL 4,328 2,576 2,121 6,068 2,600 9,452 11,941 2,797 41883 O Note:This tablerequires a full year of data for appropriate analysis.2015 data was used.Totals will vary from tables II-4 and II-5 where L- O representative data from a portion of 2016 was used. Source:Standard Industrial Classification Manual by the U.S.Government Printing Office. Land Use Information Systems by Clawson and Stewart,published by Resources for the Future in 1964. Planner's Estimating Guide:Projecting Land-Use and Facility by A.C.Nelson. r- O CL CL Fourth, the amount of building space (in square feet) provided, on average, for each employee, was determined for each land use category using data obtained from the Monroe County Property Appraiser on the amount of development built (in square feet) within each land use category. The O aggregate square feet of space in the County for each land use category was determined, from 2013- 2016. This data was then compared over time to the number of employees in each land use category pg Y (See Table III-4: Estimated Industry Employment by Land Use Categories, Monroe County) to determine the amount of floor area (in square feet) on average, provided for each employee by each land use O category. This analysis is outlined in Table III-5: Square Feet of Space Provided for Post Construction m Employees by Land Use Category, Monroe County (2013-2016). O r. cv I Packet Pg. 2729 R.1.c 1y1 ftke CC)UI T,V `,�,lq.'k,t,'kl( stu",Jl J I\c)r t J1,J'eY t l,1 Dev kt.) tYY'ere ffiui dil J r, t 4� ( c I 1 c t \ \ \r r k.r , t a r S S S rE ��F`i1(}r�i.:, � �� 'il-„ d t t`'....'4 )�r, �� Y� f�Il� Y ,.- \\\\\ \'\\,t \\\\\\\ \ \\\l\\\ \\t\\\\\ \\1\\�\\\ \\\\\\ \ \' \\ Governmental 1,090 1,024 1,024.000 0.917 0.976 0.917 Industrial 1,049 973 972.714 0.953 1.028 0.953 Institutional 681 630 630.316 1.468 1.587 1.468 Office 323 306 306.325 3.100 3.265 3.100 0 Other 432 371 370.840 2.315 2.697 2.315 z Retail & Restaurant 699 614 613.867 1.431 1.629 1.431 Tourist/Recreational 485 371 370.779 2.062 2.697 2.062 0. Hotel/Motel* 1,046 1,046.000 0.956 0.956 *Hotel/motel is a subset of Tourist/Recreational but is broken out here due to the importance of those activities. > Sources:Monroe County Property Appraiser,Tax Parcels 2012-16, Florida Department of Economic Opportunity,http://www.floridaiobs.orgZlabor-market-information/data-center/statistical-programs/quarterly-census-of- employment-and-wades;Table III-3: Percentage Assignment of Industries to Land Use Categories. Fifth, and based on the previous analyses, the demand for workforce housing units o created by a specific amount of floor area of non-residential development (1,000 square feet)was determined, by land use category.This was done in the following way. Initially, the number of employees per 1,000 square feet of space was determined, by land use category (see Table III-5: Square Feet of Space Provided Per Post Construction Employee by Land Use Category, Monroe County (2013-2016), see "Employees Per 1,000 Square Feet of Floor Area" column). Next, and because data indicates each economically active household in the County includes 1.332 employees, on average, the actual number of affordable housing units needed per 1,000 square feet of non- residential development, by land use category, and per square foot, was determined by dividing the number of employees by 1.332 ("Housing Units Needed...." columns in Table III-6). This analysis is outlined in Table III- 6: Post-Construction Employees and 2 Housing Units Needed Per Square Feet of Non-Residential Development, Monroe County. 0 r. I x Lu Jui e .1,k1.1 } ),, Packet Pg. 2730 R.1.c 1�71`f�se CC)iUI"T,V `,�,lq.'s,,,'sl� s««tu",J'J Nk)r R( J1'J'eY tJ,,)1 {e` ek.)1.tYY'ere U J rr t. f Sri t 1 � r v r �� t f t � i t�h r � �i v a vt Governmental 0.917 1.332 0.688 0.000688 :2 N Industrial 0.953 1.332 0.715 0.000715 Institutional 1.468 1.332 1.102 0.001102 0 Office 3.100 1.332 2.327 0.002327 r_ Other 2.315 1.332 1.738 0.001738 m Retail & Restaurant 1.431 1.332 1.074 0.001074 0. 0) Tourist/Recreational 2.062 1.332 1.548 0.001548 > 0 Hotel/Motel 0.956 1.332 0.718 0.000718 12 Source:Table III-1: Non-Residential Construction Employment and Housing Need,Monroe County;Table III-6: Square Feet of Space for Post Construction Employees by Land Use Category,Monroe County(2013-2016) While housing generally is not affordable to most post-construction employee 0 households, there are some housing units that have sold at prices that are affordable to median income households, and there are some employees earning more than the average or median income that can afford market housing. An analysis of historic residential sales shows that there have been 1,990 sales at affordable prices over the past nine years (from 2008-2016). This equates to an average of 211 housing units sold on an annual basis that are affordable to those with median household incomes. See 0 Table III- 7: Sale of Housing Units at or Below Price Affordable to Median Income Households, Monroe County(2008-2016). 0 0 2 4- m r. cv I m 0 Jui e } i ri Packet Pg. 2731 R.1.c 1�71`fvve CC)UI fV `,I,lq.'v,,,'v1} ytu J'y I\vwr J1'J'e tJ\ },rev k.) tYY'ere U J v4R <"I 5 \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ — ,_ t dal; \ � \< ... �77 • , _� �\,t, \ \��\ \ ME 0 2008 $52,443 $174,635 59 11037 5.69 0 2009 $49,721 $165,571 175 1,354 12.92 2010 $50,619 $168,561 196 1,542 12.71 WE 2011 $51,524 $171,575 297 1,716 17.31 W 2012 $53,637 $178,611 307 1,815 16.91 > 2013 $50,838 $169,291 272 2,115 12.86 2014 $59,388 $197,762 291 2,265 12.85 W 2015 $61,020 $203,197 233 2,402 9.70 2016 $62,355 $207,642 160 2,174 7.36 Totals 1,990 16,420 12.12 0 Source:Multiple Listing Service,Monroe County More specifically, Table III-7 shows the number and percentage of all housing unit sales that are at or below prices that are affordable to those with median household incomes, ¢' as well as all sales. Figure III-1: Percent Affordable Residential Sales, Monroe County 0. (2008-2016), graphically portrays this data. Not surprisingly, the percentage of units sold that are affordable to those with median household incomes was very low at the height of the run-up of housing prices before the Great Recession; trended upward after the Great Recession, but then began to trend downward again as the real estate market recovered. o Looking toward the future, the expectation is that the number of free market housing 2 units available at prices that are affordable to median income households will continue to decline both in number and as a percentage of all sales; however, it is unlikely to go to zero since many of the sales are of existing homes,which will continue to be resold in the future. While it is impossible to know what portion of all future housing sales in the County will be at prices that are affordable to median income households, it is appropriate and reasonable to expect that some sales will be affordable, even though o that percentage will be relatively minor. Over the nine years of sales data evaluated, right before the Great Recession, six percent of all sales were affordable to those with median household incomes; that figure increased to as high as 17 percent after the recession, but in recent years has decreased down to seven percent. Given this historical data, and the general conditions of the real estate economy in the County, this analysis — assumes that eight percent of the future free market housing sales will be affordable to those with median household incomes. Packet Pg. 2732 R.1.c i\1 f()e CC)UI fV `,�,lq.'1,,,'yl sit 1 J'y Nk)r • 1'J'e tJ\ Dev k.) tYY'ere U g\ �.�vy�yy�v��v ��»\ 20.0% 18.0% O 12.0% "w C w..... 6.0% O O 4.0% z 2.0% O 0.0% O 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 0. O O In addition to this small percentage (eight percent) of free market housing units that will be available and affordable to employees in median income households, there will also be free market housing units that are affordable to employee households whose v, incomes are substantial) above the median since 50 percent of all employee Y ( p households have incomes higher than the median). In determining the need for O affordable workforce housing, this must also be considered. Table III-8: Percent of Households Above and Below Affordability Level, applies national household income distribution patterns to Monroe County. The median national household income was $56,515 in 2016.' The Monroe County median household income was $62,355, so the national distribution pattern was shifted upward to be consistent with the Monroe County median. The 2016 median sales price for all dwellings in Monroe County was $485,000. A household would need an income of $163,664 for it to be reasonably affordable. On the other hand, the selling price of non-single-family homes (duplex, triplex, quadraplex, and mobile homes) was $375,000; it would require a household income of$112,613 to be reasonably affordable. Applying national income distribution norms to the situation in Monroe County indicates that 22.42 percent of the households 2 in Monroe County would have household incomes at or above$112,613.8 O O r. CD cv i Source: U.S.Census Bureau,Current Population Survey,2016 Annual Social and Economic Supplement. s Source:U.S.Census Bureau,Current Population Survey,2016 Annual Social and Economic Supplement. O O Jui Packet Pg. 2733 R.1.c fs7e CC)iUI"T,V `,�,lq.'s,,,'\( \tu",J'y l I\s)r s • 1'J'e t1\ Dev ks.) tYY ert U i J r s t , Median Household Income $62,355 Percent Under Median Household Income 50.00 Percent Median to Affordable Limit 27.58 Percent Above Affordable Limit 22.42 m Source:U.S.Census Bureau,Current Population Survey,2016 Annual Social and Economic Supplement. 0 This suggests that 22.42 percent of households should be able to afford market housing in Monroe County.This percentage applies to the typical or median household. It would be expected that some industry groups or land use categories would have a greater ability to afford housing than others. Table III-9: Percent of Post Construction Employee Households Able to Afford Market Housing, by Land Use Category, Monroe County, > shows median household income by land use category, and estimates the expected percentage of employee households in the land use category that would have the income to afford the median price residential unit. s z r 4 c t 0 wvvvyyy�,yyii,lwivyvvvvviiii,v�� U) Typical Household $62,355 22.42 r- Median Household Income by Land Use Category Governmental $67,246 32.80 Industrial $61,755 30.12 Institutional $61,692 30.09 Office $60,304 29.42 Other $46,832 22.84 Retail & Restaurant $44,987 21.94 0 Tourist/Recreational $42,020 20.50 Hotel/Motel $42,020 20.50 Employees with above median household incomes should be able to acquire market housing in the proportions shown above. Additionally, and as discussed earlier, housing sales data show that we should also expect that eight percent of market sales of housing units annually will be at or below prices that are affordable to median income cVi households . Adding these two components together results in the estimated portion of C~ employee households that should be able to acquire market housing in Monroe County. _ Based on this calculation, the percent of employee households needing assistance can be determined. This is summarized in Table III-10: Total Percent of Post Construction Employee Households Needing Assistance, by Land Use Category, Monroe County Jui e .01-7 } ,) y Packet Pg. 2734 R.1.c 1�71`fite CC,UI T,V \up,' PC, l s 1 J'y I\v)r i • 1'J'e tJ\ Dev1i ki.) tYY'ere U 4 ( { 1 l i I \ \ �� G,(,�A ;.i`.'. �;.. Li.� t rrl., x �4, .1 "..a�� a \\��`��`N\ �� \ ��`��\ ��\\��\\�� \fit\ \`��\��I 5 76 W t t a . � t Typical Household $62,355 22.42 8.00 30.42 69.58 Median Household Income by Land Use Governmental $67,246 32.80 8.00 40.80 59.20 z Industrial $61,755 30.12 8.00 38.12 61.88 Institutional $61,692 30.09 8.00 38.09 61.91 Office $60,304 29.42 8.00 37.42 62.58 Other $46,832 22.84 8.00 30.84 69.16 > Retail& _ Restaurant $44,987 21.94 8.00 29.94 70.06 Tourist/ Recreational $42,020 20.50 8.00 28.50 71.50 Hotel/Motel 1 $42,020 1 20.50 8.00 28.50 71.50 0 Table III-11: Post Construction Employees Need for Housing, by Land Use Category, Per 1,000 Square Feet, Monroe County, shows the need for affordable workforce housing units (or a portion thereof) created by 1,000 square feet of the different types of non- residential land use categories, for post construction employees. This is calculated by 0. first identifying the amount of post construction employees per 1,000 square feet, for each land use category (Table III-6), and dividing that by the average number of employees in each household (1.332 employees per household). That number is then multiplied by the percent of employees that are estimated to be in need of housing assistance to determine the employees in need of housing assistance. o 2 0 4- 0 0 r. cv I Packet Pg. 2735 R.1.c 1y1zvl"rr#e CC,U I fV `,�,lq.'r,,,'#1 s't 1 Jly I\t)r # • 1,J'er z 1,1 Dev kt.) tYY'ere OF J r v �t \:. I l r � a � \ Q \ 0 76 n I\ f \ Q Q \ \ \\Q\ x {Ix \ \ v \\ \ Q\\o\ \ \ # W Governmental 0.917 0.688 59.20 0.408 Industrial 0.953 61.88 0.443 0 0.715 W Institutional 1.468 1.102 61.91 0.682 Office 3.100 2.327 62.58 1.457 Other 2.315 1.738 69.16 1.202 Retail & Restaurant 1.431 1.074 70.06 0.753 0) Tourist/Recreational 2.062 1.548 71.50 1.107 Hotel/Motel' 0.956 0.718 71.50 0.513 'Hotel/motel is a subset of Tourist/Recreational but is broken out here due to the importance of those activities. Table III-12: Post Construction Employees Need for Housing, by Land Use Category, For Different Amounts of Non-Residential Development, shows the need for affordable workforce housing units (or a 0 portion thereof) created by different amounts of development for the different types of non-residential land use categories (1,000 square feet, 3,000 square feet, 5,000 square feet, 10,000 square feet, and 20,000 square feet). r_ p,. 777 U) Governmental Percent Needing Affordable Workforce Housing Units Square Feet Housing Units Needed Assistance Needed o 1,000 0.688 59.20 0.408 2 3,000 2.064 59.20 1.223 5,000 3.440 59.20 2.038 0 10,000 6.880 59.20 4.075 m 20,000 13.760 59.20 8.151 Industrial Square Feet Housing Units Needed Percent Needing Affordable Workforce Housing Units < Assistance Needed 1,000 0.332 61.88 0.206 NI 3,000 0.997 61.88 0.617 _ 5,000 1.662 61.88 1.028 10,000 3.324 61.88 2.057 20,000 6.647 61.88 4.113 0 1ur e } # rt Packet Pg. 2736 R.1.c \ U 77777` Institutional 0 Percent Needing Affordable Workforce Housing Units Square Feet Housing Units Needed Assistance Needed 1,000 0.512 61.91 0.317 3,000 1.537 61.91 0.951 5,000 2.561 61.91 1.586 10,000 5.122 61.91 3.171 20,000 10.244 61.91 6.342 Office Percent Needing Affordable Workforce Housing Units Square Feet Housing Units Needed Assistance Needed 0. 1,000 1.094 62.58 0.684 3,000 3.281 62.58 2.053 0) 5,000 5.468 62.58 3.422 10,000 10.935 62.58 6.844 20,000 21.870 62.58 13.687 Other Square Feet Housing Units Needed Percent Needing Affordable Workforce Housing Units o Assistance Needed 1,000 0.902 69.16 0.624 3,000 2.707 69.16 1.872 5,000 4.512 69.16 3.120 10,000 9.023 69.16 6.240 0. 0. 20,000 18.047 69.16 12.480 Retail& Restaurant Percent Needing Affordable Workforce Housing Units Square Feet Housing Units Needed Assistance Needed o 1,000 0.565 70.06 0.396 w 2 3,000 1.695 70.06 1.188 le 5,000 2.825 70.06 1.979 10,000 5.650 70.06 3.958 20,000 13.769 70.06 9.646 Tourist/Recreational 0 Square Feet Housing Units Needed Percent Needing Affordable Workforce Housing Units Assistance Needed r� 1,000 0.831 71.50 0.594 CN 3,000 2.493 71.50 1.783 r 5,000 4.155 71.50 2.971 10,000 8.310 71.50 5.942 20,000 16.620 71.50 11.884 Packet Pg. 2737 R.1.c U 77777 Hotel/Motel Percent Needing Affordable Workforce Housing Units Square Feet Housing Units Needed Assistance Needed 1,000 0.385 71.50 0.276 3,000 1.156 71.50 0.827 5,000 1.927 71.50 1.378 m 10,000 3.853 71.50 2.755 20,000 7.706 71.50 5.510 m 0. 0 0 0 m 0 0 r- 0 CD 0 2 0 4- 0 m 0 ram. cv r I x 0 0 0 Packet Pg. 2738 }uew Ol n 1 '}u 's a ® jol Apn4S :poddnS BuisnOH3jolMiO I aOII LL L }Iq!gx :4u8wq3B44V 0 O V Z , 00 M .--I M u1 00 O O lD Ln(U `� M .-A Ln N M .A Ln Ln N I� 01 N �� ma O Ln Ln O M O N N L1 yr e O O O O O O tD I� O O O (U N s 4 N a (U C { U 0A C 00 I� Ln rn - O 00 O O T M O N M lD Ln Ln N dl 14 'N 3 O O o0 o0 C1 o it o ri ri o 0 o iD r, o 0 0 o 5 z ° (UL U ° LIT 16k ass 00 M -1 dl Ln 00 lD O lD lC M Ln dl N lD dl Ln O N dl c j ;f S O t� t� O u1 u1 C� O O M NS _ rr r ZEl\\ O Co '+- - 00 N O dl N -1 00 lD O L °u i( o oN N o m m o z (U o Ln qA - (U 00 r� u1 m N 00 00 O M Ln dl N dl N Ln Ln N 00 O „ (uO 0 0 al N O tD I� 3 (u C � ° O h A\ _ +� (U ^t+ 4 O ' CO 7 VAA 00 N O dl N -1 00 -1 O M 00 N N -1 Ln 01 N -1 M ' u 2` ` -e O lD I� O u1 Ln O M M e N 6f = L O N S .-00 M -I m N .--I 00 00 O iD lC ° �- M 00 N M lD Ln 00 N O N C' cn i - C (U 4= �x ' cn U \( 00 n Ln al 00 n 00 O O 00 N ' M .--I Ln N 00 .--I Ln N N O N >, a, Cr N j O 01 01 O tD t� C� C� O V) �� ;3 O O O O O O tD Ln O O O O O �e O U 4 p LO 4 r �t 00 m (U �ttS u O U a' E ( s aO+ O ai ' N � O as a LL LL � i (AlN 0 Ln (U =h�F N Q (U 0N o O o o O a� (u o N l' rr u u 6 U z u Z O C C C C � N L +� - O_ ate-+ Q O_ ate-+ O_ ate-+ O_ i OA n U (0 (U [� LnC -O U C C U C C C Mtn t:4 O Ci(G"i� �,� N ate+ U O ate+ U 0 ate+ U ate+ U O N N 1 ( Ln — - V } O V O V i z O C � +5+ N C Ln C v�i C Ln = V1 V1 U O_ F- O U O_ (n U O_ O U s �` R.1.c � 1�71`f,7,' CC,UI T,V `,up.'€.,,'€1 f sst 1 J'y I\,)r , • 1'J'e tJ\ Dev k,.) tYY'ere, U J 1 '\ LN W Governmental 0 Square Feet Housing Units Needed, Housing Units Needed, Affordable Workforce Housing q Construction Post-Construction Units Needed 1,000 0.020 0.408 0.427 76 3,000 0.060 1.223 1.282 5,000 0.100 2.038 2.137 10,000 0.199 4.075 4.275 20,000 0.399 8.151 8.550 Industrial Housing Units Needed, Housing Units Needed, Affordable Workforce Housing Square Feet Construction Post-Construction Units Needed 0. 1,000 0.020 0.206 0.226 3,000 0.060 0.617 0.677 0) 5,000 0.100 1.028 1.128 10,000 0.199 2.057 2.256 20,000 0.399 4.113 4.512 Institutional Square Feet Housing Units Needed, Housing Units Needed, Affordable Workforce Housing o Construction Post-Construction Units Needed 1,000 0.020 0.317 0.337 3,000 0.060 0.951 1.011 5,000 0.100 1.586 1.685 10,000 0.199 3.171 3.370 0. 0. 20,000 0.399 6.342 6.741 Office Housing Units Needed, Housing Units Needed, Affordable Workforce Housing Square Feet Construction Post-Construction Units Needed o 1,000 0.020 0.684 0.704 3,000 0.060 2.053 2.113 5,000 0.100 3.422 3.522 10,000 0.199 6.844 7.043 20,000 0.399 13.687 14.086 Other 0 Square Feet Housing Units Needed, Housing Units Needed, Affordable Workforce Housing Construction Post-Construction Units Needed r� 1,000 0.020 0.644 0.664 I 3,000 0.060 1.932 1.992 r 5,000 0.100 3.220 3.320 10,000 0.199 6.440 6.639 20,000 0.399 12.879 13.278 Jui e .0 } ,e ,_ Packet Pg. 2740 R.1.c U n� 77 V ` 1 { Retail& Restaurant 0 Square Feet Housing Units Needed, Housing Units Needed, Affordable Workforce Housing q Construction Post-Construction Units Needed 1,000 0.020 0.396 0.416 3,000 0.060 1.188 1.247 5,000 0.100 1.979 2.079 10,000 0.199 3.958 4.158 20,000 0.399 7.917 8.316 Tourist/Recreational Housing Units Needed, Housing Units Needed, Affordable Workforce Housing Square Feet Construction Post-Construction Units Needed 0. 1,000 0.020 0.594 0.614 3,000 0.060 1.783 1.842 0) 5,000 0.100 2.971 3.071 10,000 0.199 5.942 6.141 20,000 0.399 11.884 12.283 Hotel/Motel Square Feet Housing Units Needed, Housing Units Needed, Affordable Workforce Housing o Construction Post-Construction Units Needed 1,000 0.020 0.295 0.315 3,000 0.060 0.886 0.946 5,000 0.100 1.477 1.577 10,000 0.199 2.955 3.154 0. 0. 20,000 0.399 5.909 6.308 0 2 0 4- 0 0 ram. r I x 1Lir e } ,,,e f f Packet Pg. 2741 R.1.c i\1 f()e CC,UI T,V `u'j" PC, l� sst 1 J'y I\k)r • 1'J'e tJ\ Dev k.) trrfert U The last step in evaluating the need for affordable workforce housing created by non- residential development, is to determine the amount of assistance needed to make the workforce housing needs created by non-residential development affordable for the employees that construct and serve non-residential development. In determining the assistance needed, it is first necessary to determine the cost of the prototypical housing 76 unit that could reasonably be expected to serve workforce housing needs. This was the subject of the RRC Memorandum provided to Monroe County.The method and basis for determining the type and size of the prototypical housing unit is explained in Appendix D: Workforce Housing Prototype Cost Estimates. It also explains how the costs for construction and land were calculated to arrive at the average cost for the prototypical Z unit --$311,712, or$326.40 per square foot. Once the cost for a prototypical workforce housing unit is determined, the next step is to identify the amount of assistance that an employee household requires to be able to reasonably afford a prototypical unit based on their household income. This requires estimating the assistance needed for construction employees and post construction _ employees. This analyses is summarized in Table III-15: Assistance Needed for Workforce Housing Need Created by Non-Residential Development (Per 1,000 Square Feet). \ r \ \a ITT, \ \ � Household Earnings Construction $53,902 $53,902 $53,902 $53,902 $53,902 $53,902 $53,902 $53,902 0 Post Construction $67,246 $61,755 $61,692 $60,304 $46,832 $44,987 $42,020 $42,020 Weighted Household $66,713 $61,132 $61,279 $60,140 $47,050 $45,417 $42,416 $42,842 0 Income Affordability Limit $222,154 $203,569 $204,060 1 $200,266 $156,676 $151,240 $141,245 $142,665 Cost of Affordable Unit $311,712 $311,712 $311,712 $311,712 $311,712 $311,712 $311,712 $311,712 Shortfall $89,558 $108,143 $107,652 $111,446 $155,036 $160,472 $170,467 $169,047 m Total Housing Need per 1,000 FTZ 0.427 0.226 0.337 0.704 0.644 0.416 0.614 0.295 Shortfall per 1,000 FT $38,285 $24,397 $36,284 $78,492 $99,838 $66,722 $104,691 $49,947 cv r I Initially, the median household income is determined for each land use category, using a weighted average of the incomes for the proportionate number of construction - employees who would have constructed, and post-construction employees that would work at 1,000 square feet of the land use (for the Governmental Land Use Category -- $67,713). Next, and based on the weighted household income, the maximum amount m the household could reasonably afford to spend on housing is determined ($222,154 for 0 Packet Pg. 2742 R.1.c 1y1c,) rc)e CC,UI T,V `u'j" PC, l� stu J'y fc,)l I\k)r • 1'J'er 11,1 Dev lc.) tYY'ere U the Governmental Land Use Category). Next, the difference between the cost of the prototypical workforce housing unit ($311,712) and the maximum housing cost that the employees can reasonably afford ($222,154 for the Governmental Land Use Category) is determined ($89,558). Finally, and because the housing need created by 1,000 square feet of non-residential development does not equal the need for one housing unit, the amount of housing needed by 1,000 square feet of development is multiplied times the needed assistance to make the costs of the housing unit reasonable (0.427 of a housing unit in the Governmental Land Use category).This results in the assistance or in-lieu fee m needed to make the costs of housing unit reasonably affordable ($38,285 in the Governmental land Use category($89,558 x 0.427=$38,285)9. Table III-16: Assistance Needed for Workforce Housing Need Created by Different W Amounts of Non-Residential Development, shows the needed assistance (in-lieu fee) for affordable workforce housing units) created by different amounts of development for m the different types of non-residential land use categories (1,000 square feet, 3,000 0. square feet, 5,000 square feet, 10,000 square feet, and 20,000 square feet). IN 110o Governmental Assistance Needed per 1,000 Square Feet Total In Lieu Fee o Square Feet 1,000 $38,285 $38,285 3,000 $38,285 $114,854 5,000 $38,285 $191,424 10,000 $38,285 $382,847 20,000 $38,285 $765,695 Industrial CD Assistance Needed per 1,000 0 Square Feet Total In Lieu Fee Square Feet 0 1,000 $24,397 $24,397 0 3,000 $24,397 $73,190 5,000 $24,397 $121,984 10,000 $24,397 $243,967 0 20,000 $24,397 $487,935 m Institutional Assistance Needed per 1,000 Square Feet Total In Lieu Fee Square Feet 1,000 $36,284 $36,284 r" 3,000 $36,284 $108,851 N 5,000 $36,284 $181,418 _ 10,000 $36,284 $362,837 20,000 $36,284 $725,673 m 9 Rounding in the reporting accounts for apparent discrepancy in arithmetic. Packet Pg. 2743 R.1.c U r ,I z ll 3 t h Office Assistance Needed per 1,000 Square Feet Total In Lieu Fee Square Feet 1,000 $78,492 $78,492 76 3,000 $78,492 $235,475 5,000 $78,492 $392,459 10,000 $78,492 $784,917 y 20,000 $78,492 $1,569,835 Other z Square Feet Assistance Needed per 1,000 0 Total In Lieu Fee 0)Square Feet 1,000 $99,838 $99,838 3,000 $99,838 $299,513 5,000 $99,838 $499,188 10,000 $99,838 $998,377 20,000 $99,838 $1,996,753 Retail&Restaurant Assistance Needed per 1,000 0 Square Feet Square Feet Total In Lieu Fee z 1,000 $66,722 $66,722 3,000 $66,722 $200,166 0 5,000 $66,722 $333,610 10,000 $66,722 $667,220 0 20,000 $66,722 $1,334,441 0 Tourist/Recreational Assistance Needed per 1,000 Square Feet S uare Feet Total In Lieu Fee q 1,000 $104,691 $104,691 0 0 3,000 $104,691 $314,074 4- le 5,000 $104,691 $523,456 10,000 $104,691 $1,046,912 m 20,000 $104,691 $2,093,824 Hotel/Motel Square Feet Assistance Needed per 1,000 Total In Lieu Fee Square Feet 1,000 $49,947 $49,947 CN 3,000 $49,947 $149,841 5,000 $49,947 $249,735 _ 10,000 $49,947 $499,470 20,000 $49,947 $998,941 m 0 Packet Pg. 2744 R.1.c N1 f()e =CCIUI fV `,�,lq.'1,,,'ylt stu ly Nk)r ( JlJ'eYtJ,l Dev lk'.)tYY'ert U J O O O U O O O O O O O O 0. O O O O O O O O O O r- O CD O O O O 2 O 4- 0 O O h r N r I x O O l I' i:'' } 1% e r Packet Pg. 2745 R.1.c 1y1 f})e =C.C1UI T'v `,up.'} C, l� sSt 1 11y NF)r F • 1'J'e tJ\ Dev kF.) tYY'ere U A II II{\ll,,, 'N ll,,,,��III� ,\�`fi, �f.,�,��`��r,Ills„�f., `)�Ill,,,A III'N G II� �Il,,,, \�Y,III III ��,3�II��II,,,;��A II,,,�III Ill,,,,III ,1�` � II� �II��II,,,,, II� ��3�Ill,,,,Il„t;�� W� a t� 0 The Affordability Threshold Price is defined as annual household costs that are not more than 30% of annual household income. Housing costs include mortgage payments, mortgage insurance, property taxes, and property insurance. In determining what price home a household 76 can afford based upon their spending 30% of annual income on housing, one multiplies annual income by 3.33. Table A-1: Price to Income Ratio for Affordability Threshold Price, shows this relationship.The mathematical equation that demonstrates this relationship follows the table. 0 0. S t i f s Y J L i - F i } t 1 l 0 \ \\ s S $50,000 $166,650 $166,650 $11,182 $2,024 $2,000 $15,205 30% 3.333 $60,000 $199,980 $199,980 $13,418 $2,300 $2,400 $18,118 30% 3.333 $70,000 $233,310 $233,310 $15,655 $2,576 $2,800 $21,030 30% 3.333 $80,000 $266,640 $266,640 $17,891 $2,852 $3,200 $23,943 30% 3.333 $90,000 $299,970 $299,970 $20,127 $3,129 $3,600 $26,856 30% 3.333 $100,000 $333,300 $333,300 $22,364 $3,405 $4,000 $29,768 30% 3.333 $110,000 $366,630 $366,630 $24,600 $3,681 $4,400 $32,681 30% 3.333 $120,000 $399,960 $399,960 $26,837 $3,957 $4,800 $35,593 30% 3.333 $130,000 $433,290 $433,290 $29,073 $4,233 $5,199 $38,506 30% 3.333 $140,000 $466,620 $466,620 $31,309 $4,510 $5,599 $41,418 30% 3.333 $150,000 $499,950 $499,950 $33,546 $4,786 $5,999 $44,331 30% 3.333 0. $160,000 $533,280 $533,280 $35,782 $5,062 $6,399 $47,244 30% 3.333 $170,000 $566,610 $566,610 $38,019 $5,338 $6,799 $50,156 30% 3.333 $180,000 $599,940 $599,940 $40,255 $5,615 $7,199 $53,069 29% 3.333 $190,000 $633,270 $633,270 $42,491 $5,891 $7,599 $55,981 29% 3.333 $200,000 $666,600 $666,600 $44,728 $6,167 $7,999 $58,894 29% 3.333 0 $210,000 $699,930 $699,930 $46,964 $6,443 $8,399 $61,806 29% 3.333 2 $220,000 $733,260 $733,260 $49,200 $6,719 $8,799 $64,719 29% 3.333 $230,000 $766,590 $766,590 $51,437 $6,996 $9,199 $67,632 29% 3.333 $240,000 $799,920 $799,920 $53,673 $7,272 $9,599 $70,544 29% 3.333 m $250,000 $833,250 $833,250 $55,910 $7,548 $9,999 $73,457 29% 3.333 $260,000 $866,580 $866,580 $58,146 $7,824 $10,399 $76,369 29% 3.333 $270,000 $899,910 $899,910 $60,382 $8,101 1 $10,799 $79,282 29% 3.333 0 $280,000 $933,240 $933,240 $62,619 $8,377 $11,199 $82,194 29% 3.333 $290,000 $966,570 $966,570 $64,855 $8,653 $11,599 $85,107 29% 3.333 $300,000 $999,900 $999,900 $67,092 $8,929 $11,999 $88,020 29% 3.333 CN $310,000 $1,033,230 $1,033,230 $69,328 $9,205 $12,399 $90,932 29% 3.333 $320,000 $1,066,560 $1,066,560 $71,564 $9,482 $12,799 $93,845 29% 3.333 $330,000 $1,099,890 $1,099,890 $73,801 $9,758 $13,199 $96,757 29% 3.333 $340,000 $1,133,220 $1,133,220 $76,037 $10,034 $13,599 $99,670 29% 3.333 $350,000 $1,166,550 $1,166,550 $78,273 $10,310 $13,999 $102,582 29% 3.333 m $360,000 $1,199,880 $1,199,880 $80,510 $10,587 $14,399 $105,495 29% 3.333 Packet Pg. 2746 R.1.c 1y1c,) rc,)e CC,U I fV `al,lq.'t,,,'al i sit l Jly fc,)l Nk)r t • c.1'e tJ\ Dev lc.) trrfert U a a- i \ r\ \ a(aa araaaa a as11 W11 � $370,000 $1,233,210 $1,233,210 $82,746 $10,863 $14,799 $108,407 29% 3.333 $380,000 $1,266,540 $1,266,540 $84,983 $11,139 $15,198 $111,320 29% 3.333 $390,000 $1,299,870 $1,299,870 $87,219 $11,415 $15,598 $114,233 29% 3.333 $400,000 $1,333,200 $1,333,200 $89,455 $11,691 $15,998 $117,145 29% 3.333 $410,000 $1,366,530 $1,366,530 $91,692 $11,968 $16,398 $120,058 29% 3.333 Notes 0 *Includes mortgage insurance W **Based on unincorporated Monroe County property tax rates (ad valorem and non-ad valorem) Assumptions Sources 0. Downpayment of 0% • Mortgage Rates- Bloomberg.com 2 Mortgage Interest Rate of 4.25% • Ad Valorem Tax Rates-Monroe County > Mortgage Insurance Rate of 0.75% Property Appraisers,website Tax Rate http://www.mcpafl.org/pdf/Millage20l6.pdf Ad Valorem of 0.98%of 85%of the Sales Value • Non-Ad Valorem Tax Rate-Examination of a Non-Ad Valorem Median of$642.50 sampling of individual residential properties on Insurance Rate of 1.20%(outside of V Zone) Property Appraisers'website 0 0 The mathematical equations that arrive at this result are as follows: r_ 0 Affordability Threshold Price= Household Income/30% Affordability Threshold Price= Household Income/0.30 Affordability Threshold Price= Household Income* (1/0.30) And (1/.30)=3.33 Then Affordability Threshold Price= Household Income*3.33 2 Or Affordability Threshold Price= Household Income*333% 2- 0 0 ram. cv r I X 1ui e .1,aV1 } ,,,e 'a Packet Pg. 2747 R.1.c 1y1c71"f;)e CC,UI fV `,�,lq.'1,,,'yl situ Jly f{,)l Nk)r J1,J'eY 11,1 Dev lc.) tYY'ere U A IP I „ q D III X « „ \ 0,\ 0 I III f G R 0 W II I III iq I 1q R 0 , C 0« iq ,Y 2«)«P 2«)311, •`�.. During the period 2007-2016, economic growth in the county fluctuated significantly due to the heightened economic boom of the early 2OOOs and the Great Recession that followed. Correspondingly, the difference between 2007 and 2009 employment and wage statistics shows a decrease in employment due to the recession, while growth occurred during the early and mid- 2O1Os. The data in Figure B-1: Employment, Monroe County (2007-2016) show that the growth industry10 in Monroe County is Accommodations and Food Service, or more generally, a part of tourism- related industries. It grew at an annual rate of 5.3 percent per year, as contrasted with 1.9 percent for total employment and 1.2 percent for retail trade. All other industries grew by only o 0.3 percent per year, showing the increasing reliance on tourism. m 0. 0 45,000 40,000 ;4a ad M r4.�� Gi 35,000 »4 awn.,v. f�a.a 0 30,000 0 25,000 20,000 15,000 r_ 4 , 0 10,000 .f 4 ,.»u. ,n u,..un ha, s 5,000 0 0 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 0 —Total Employment 4— Accomodation& Food Service W U 0 u e Retail Trade 0 m 0 ram. cv r I x 0 0 to"Accommodation & Food Service" and "Retail Trade" industries are described using their formal name given by the North American Standard Industrial Classification Manual. U Packet Pg. 2748 R.1.c iy 1c,)j,r )e CC,UY T,V `,�,lq.'1,,,'yl situ Jly fc,)l Nk)r • 1,J'er tJ,1 Dev lc.) tYY'ere U A RP II„„ '\ II,„, III X C: II,,,,,IM P III,,,,OY M II,,,,,"4 BY IH U"US II,,,,,H O III,,,,D A N D III '\l CO M II,,,,; BY III"ql D�` „ ,,.:""Y Households will have different incomes depending in the employment of the individual and the number of employed persons in a household. Table C-1, Employed Persons per Household, Monroe County, shows the number of employed persons in Monroe County economically active households.11 These data show that there are 1.332 employed persons in the average 12 economically active household. These data also show that overall household income will be greater than the income earned by the subject of this Study by the amount of the other employed person in the household. 0 Total Households 28,910 0, Households with Earnings 21,489 2 Households without Earnings 7,421 0) Labor Force 41,991 Employed Persons 38,504 Workers per Household 1.452 Employed Workers per Household 1.332 Sources: U.S.Census Bureau, 2011-2015;American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates; 0 https://www.factf inder.census.gov/faces/tableservicesAsf/pages/productview.xhtmI?pid=ACS_15_5YR_DP 03&prodType=table The average wage in 2016 was $39,294. The "other" income for the average economically active household would be$13,040 ($39,294 * .332). Table C-2: Employment and Household Earnings by Industry, Monroe County (2008-2016) shows individual and housing income by industry for Monroe County in 2016. 0 2 0 4- 0 0 r. cv 11 An economically active household is one with earned income. J u e } ,,,,e ;U. 1 Packet Pg. 2749 R.1.c 1y1c,) rc,)e CC,UI T,V `,�,lq.'f,,,'al i stu J'y f{,)l Nk)r t J1'J'eY 11,1 I,{ev lt'71.tYY'ere U J , c i a f 1 \ a 1 \ i�r \ a� r Total,All Industries 40,772 $36,590 $39,294 $13,040 $52,334 Construction 2,584 $35,789 $40,862 $13,040 $53,902 m Manufacturing 245 $30,909 $32,875 $13,040 $45,915 Wholesale Trade 582 $50,816 $46,131 $13,040 $59,171 Retail Trade 6,179 $28,250 $29,097 $13,040 $42,137 Finance and Insurance 712 $52,098 $64,391 $13,040 $77,431 Real Estate and Rental and Leasing 1,475 $37,886 $38,084 $13,040 $51,124 Educational Services 1,729 $41,984 $45,086 $13,040 $58,126 0. Health Care and Social Assistance 1 2,524 1 $41,523 1 $50,082 1 $13,040 1 $63,122 Leisure and Hospitality w Arts, Entertainment,and Recreation 1,319 $27,638 $32,864 $13,040 $45,904 Accommodation and Food w Services 13,763 $27,068 $30,412 $13,040 $43,452 Public Administration 1 3,016 1 $52,416 1 $58,912 1 $13,040 1 $71,952 Source: FL Dept.of Economic Opportunity, http://www.floridaiobs.orgLI.gbor-marl<et-information data-center/statistical-programs/quarterly-census-of-employment-and-wages *Estimated by increasing 2015 wages by the 2015-16 change in the Consumer Price Index r- 0 0 2 0 4- 0 0 ram. cv r I X Jui e } ,,; Packet Pg. 2750 R.1.c iy 1c71'irc,)e CC,UI T,V `u'j" PC, l( sst 1 J'y fc,)l I\k)r J1'J'eY tJ,1 Dev lc.) tYY'ere U A Rli„( II„, 'N DN D«, W O R RC['O R C II,,,,, IH U"U&II"ql G PROTOTYPE COST W II„,', ;,..III IM AT II„,,, Calculation of a prototypical affordable workforce housing unit was the major subject of the RRC Memorandum within the Support Study process.The memorandum informs this appendix. . N!A'fj Oal A;',N} " 0?,E NaO'(""'YP� AL ll,F0R0A!,,,,,E ' r"�' � fJ One of the most important considerations in determining the need for affordable workforce housing in the County is to define just what is a prototypical affordable workforce housing unit. In other words, what size and type of affordable workforce housing unit will need to be built when need is determined. The prototypical workforce housing unit was determined by compiling the data on existing affordable workforce housing units built within the last decade, for which the County had information on size (square feet), the number of 0. bedrooms, and the costs to build the units. These selected units are reasonably dispersed > throughout the Keys, and consist of nine different developments of varying size totaling 554 units.12 The developments include: 1, A multi-unit land trust development—Middle Keys; � °. A multi-unit modular development —Upper Keys; :v 0 3, Meridian West (Harbor Bay Investments)— Lower Keys; 4, Tradewinds Hammocks Phase 1—Upper Keys; 00 Blue Water—Upper Keys; U) 6,, A multi-unit townhome development—Lower Keys _ , A multi-unit apartment development built in 2016—Middle Keys; 8,, A multi-unit senior living apartment development—Upper Keys; and 9, A multi-unit apartment development under construction in 2017—Middle and Lower � Keys. _ These affordable workforce housing developments include a varying number of bedrooms that serve families of different sizes. Not surprisingly, the majority of the units (56 percent) are two bedrooms. The nine developments are identified In Table D-1: Affordable o Workforce Housing Developments, Monroe County, along with the number of units they include, the size of the units (in square feet), and the number of bedrooms in each unit. 0 r. i x 12 There are 824 existing affordable workforce housing units in the County. Packet Pg. 2751 R.1.c 11 f()e CC,UI T,V `u'j" Pi)l( stu",J'y Nk)r J1'J'eYtl,1 Dev k.) tYY'ert U J C t 1. Multi-Unit Land Trust Apartments 16 1 1,109 1 17,744 °. Multi-Unit Modular Apartments 72 1,120 80,640 0 6 750 4,500 2 1,364 2,728 30 1,364 40,920 3, Meridian West(Harbor Bay Investments) 2 17 600 10,200 68 817 55,556 17 1,034 17,578 4,Tradewinds Hammocks(Phase 1) 11 700 7,700 35 890 31,150 0 20 1,050 21,000 `io Blue Water 2 660 1,320 24 801 19,224 10 1,165(4BR) 11,650 6,, Multi-Unit Townhome Development ) 40 1,150 46,000 49 1,275 62,475 o Multi-Unit Apartment(Built 2016) 0 to 16 710 11,360 2 27 950 25,650 8 1170 9,360 0 8,, Multi-Unit Senior Living Apartment T 28 695 19,460 14 757 10,598 0 0 0 9, Multi-Unit Apartment(Under Construction 2017) r. 6 710 4,260 Ni 22 950 20,900 14 1170 16,380 TOTALS 554 548,353 Source: Monroe County Planning and Environmental Resources Department, and data from individual builder/developers of affordable housing developments. 0 Packet Pg. 2752 R.1.c 11 r()e CC,UI T,V `,�,lq.'1.,,'yl( stu",J'J I\k)r • 1'J'er t l,I Dev k.) tYY'ere U J To determine the average affordable workforce housing unit from this information, the following analysis was conducted. First, the size (in square feet) of the average unit was determined by totaling the area (in square feet) of each of the units identified in Table D-1, and dividing the total area of the units by the total number of units— resulting in an average unit size of 990 square feet. Next, the number of bedrooms for the average unit was 76 determined by adding the total number of bedrooms in these units, and dividing the total number of bedrooms by the total number of units— resulting in an average bedroom size of 2.2 bedrooms for the average unit. See Table D-2: Affordable Workforce Housing Average Unit Size and Number of Bedrooms, Monroe County. Average Size of Workforce Housing Units Total Square Footage Workforce Housing Units Table 1 548,353 Total Number of Workforce Housing Units Table 1 554 Average Size(in square feet) of Workforce Housing Units 990 Sq.Ft. Average Number of Bedrooms Per Workforce Housing Unit Total Number of Bedrooms Workforce Housing Units Table 1 1204 Total Number of Workforce Housing Units Table 1 554 Average Number of Bedrooms Workforce Housing Unit 2.2 Bedrooms per Unit Source:Table D-1:Affordable Workforce Housing Developments. Monroe County 0 Because the prototypical unit should be a complete buildable unit, instead of using the average of 2.2 bedrooms per unit and an average size taken from units with different numbers of bedrooms, we suggest the prototypical unit should be set at 2 bedrooms per unit and calculated specifically from the population of 2 bedroom units identified in Table D- 1 — resulting in a size for the prototypical affordable workforce housing unit of 955 square feet. See Table D-3: Size Prototypical Affordable Workforce Housing Unit, Monroe County. 0 0 r. cv i x Packet Pg. 2753 R.1.c 1y1 f()e CC,U I T,V sup,' PC, l s{ 1 J'y I\k)r J1'J'eY t 1,1 Dev k.) tYY'ere U '�g J f:,a E f us a , ( s 5 1 i Multi-Unit Modular Apartments smaller floorplan 6 750 4,500 larger floorplan 72 1,120 80,640 Meridian West (Harbor Bay Investments) 68 817 55,556 Tradewinds Hammocks (Phase 1) 35 890 31,150 Blue Water 24 801 19,224 Multi-Unit Townhome Development 40 1,150 46,000 0. 0 Multi-Unit Apartment Built 2016 27 950 25,650 0 Multi-Unit Senior Living Apartment 14 1 757 1 10,598 0 Multi-Unit Apartment Under Construction 2017 22 950 20,900 TOTAL 308 294,218 m Average Size of 2 Bedroom Unit(Square Feet) 955 0 Source:Table D-1:Affordable Workforce Housing Developments, Monroe County 0 In sum, and based on a review of the data on existing affordable workforce housing units built within the last decade, for which the County had information on size (square feet), the number of bedrooms, and the costs to build the units, the prototypical affordable workforce housing unit has 2 bedrooms and is 955 square feet in area. See Table D-4: Prototypical 0 Workforce Housing Unit, Monroe County. Number of Bedrooms 2 0 Size of Unit (in square feet) 955 0 SOURCE:Analysis in Tables B-1,B-2 and B-3. 2 0 4- Gr, 2,„(chsfs({;hIi, AAd({;;;h0{0{II(t;h0{{ H&,.81 S0,\G The costs of the prototypical unit are based on the square foot costs of building affordable m workforce housing. The square foot costs are based on six affordable workforce housing developments for which development costs information was available through a survey of 0 local builders/developers. The total costs of these projects are shown in Table D-5: Costs to Construct Affordable Workforce Housing Developments, Monroe County. The total building r� and land cost of the 350 units where data was available was $118,824,593.13 The total square footage of the affordable workforce housing units built in these projects was 376,655 square feet. x uJ 13 This number addresses and includes land costs for one project where the land was provided by a land trust, but the true costs of a unit will include both building and land costs. Jui e `017 } ,,,,e D rr. Packet Pg. 2754 R.1.c NA ftkt' CC)UI fV `,�,lq.'t,,,'tl sit 1 Jly Nk)r t • 1,J'e tJ\ Dev kf.)pYY'ere U J \t= 1, t , . f, r F „ \ fi x.\ » 34 \ t I 0 j S to � I, Multi-Unit (n Land Trust Middle Modular 16 17,744 $3,918,936 $4,175,944 $1,039,528 $5,215,473 $293.93 Apartments Keys Attached Built 20072 Multi-Unit E Modular Upper Modular 0. 110 128,788 $24,461,352 $25,374,846 $5,000,000 $30,374,846 $235.85 Apartments Keys Attached 0) Built 2010 Multi Unit Lower Modular Townhome Keys Attached 89 108,475 $31,105,831 $32,231,782 $8,900,000 $41,131,782 $379.18 Built 2015 Multi-Unit Middle Conventional (n Apartment 51 50,050 $15,265,341 $15,265,341 $2,100,000 $17,365,341 $346.96 Built 20163 Keys Attached 0 Multi-Unit Senior Upper Conventional Living Keys Attached 42 30,058 $7,811,110 $7,811,110 $771,668 $8,582,778 $285.54 Apartment Built 2017' U) Multi-Unit Middle Apartment and Conventional 0. Under 42 41,540 $13,654,373 $13,654,373 $2,500,000 $16,154,373 $388.89 0. Construction Lower Attached 2017 Keys TOTALS 350 376,655 $96,216,943 $98,513,396 20,311,196 �118,824,593 4 $326.40' Source: Data provided by Monroe County affordable housing developers,December 2016 and March 2017. NOTES:'Building costs include the costs of design,engineering,contingencies,site preparation,utilities,and mark-up. 2 4- ZThe Multi-Unit Land Trust Apartments Built 2007 was built in conjunction with a land trust and had no land costs.Land costs this project is included even though the land was provided by a land trust,because land costs are costs that should be included in determining the cost to build affordable workforce housing.Land costs for the project was estimated by taking the land costs of the Multi-Unit Townhome Built 2015 and the Multi-Unit Modular Apartments Built 2010 and dividing the land costs by the total square footage of the other two projects to establish an average land costs per square foot.This was then multiplied by the total square footage of the land trust project. 3These developments were reported with significant communal or office areas.Costs were adjusted to account for the proportion of the project in actual residences. 4 This number addresses and includes land costs for one project where the land was provided by a land trust.See note 2. CV I SThe cost per foot is the result of eliminating the high and the low costs per foot of floor area. r x LU Based on the total costs of building 376,655 square feet of affordable workforce housing at a cost of $118,824,593, the simple average square foot costs of an affordable workforce housing unit is $321.73. Costs range from a low of$235.80 to a high of$388.89. Table D-6 J u l e } ,,,,e D t Packet Pg. 2755 R.1.c 11 r()e CC,UI T,V `,�,lq.'1.,,'yl( stu",J'J I\k)r • 1'J'er t l,1 Dev k.) tYY'ere U shows several different ways to look at costs per foot of floor area. A simple average gives great weight to lower or higher values. A weighted average gives more consideration to larger verses smaller projects. A median is just that, a mid-point between the extremes. The last alternative is to drop the highest and lowest costs and then calculate the average of the remainder. Among the various methods, it is recommended that the last, dropping the highest and the lowest per square foot costs, be used as the typical costs of a workforce housing unit. Note should be taken that costs are all inclusive; it includes land, site preparation, hard buildings costs, soft costs, utility extensions and connections, and a m reasonable return to the builder/developer. 0 E Simple Average $321.73 0. Median $320.45 Weighted Average $315.47 Average, Excluding High and Low Per Square Foot Costs $326.40 Average Square Foot Costs Used $326.40 Based on a per square foot costs of$326.40, the costs to build a prototypical unit of affordable o workforce housing is$311,712. See Table D-7: Costs to Build Prototypical Workforce Housing Unit, Monroe County. ro- Average Cost per Square Foot $326.40 Size of Unit (in square feet) 955 TOTAL COST OF UNIT $311,712 Source:Analysis in Tables D-4,D-5,and D-6 2 0 4- 0 0 r. cv x Packet Pg. 2756 R.1.J r�. •�- tG.�ti '�.� -.m - m .�sn+_ � ,..m ti _ rs '�t',�, � `4`t � •_;: v�.t � t€ _ m � �sn ,. k ' -- ' ,�)',`�;.�sn ,t€'. w — � afn U gg 0 A am S��y .UJtG 0 Co T- CD cv 0 2 C 0 cv LU -C ®- _ • . -� �Il��IDW ASSOCIATES Packet Pg. 2757 R.1.d TABLE OF CONTENTS r�. Introduction ®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®1 Selected Key Findings ®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®® EmploymentMonroe County ®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®® Employment and Employers by Industry 4 ............................................................ Seasonality and Growth of Employment 5 ............................................................ Results ®®® Employer Location 7 Industry Sector 8 Employment by Job Status and Distance from Work......................................... 11 c W Employer Size (number of employees) ............................................................. 13 Employer Space Characteristics........................................................................ 15 c Job Generation Rates....................................................................................... 18 Employer Perceptions of Housing Issues........................................................... 20 Anticipated Future Changes in Employment..................................................... 22 Employer Actions and Opinions Regarding Workforce Housing Assistance........ 23 c Appendix SurveyCover Letter Open-Ended Comments 0 t tl tl � TaUes 2 C 0 " i Packet Pg. 2758 R.1.d MICEMMEMCMENEENEENC= INTRODUCTION The primary purpose of the 2016 Monroe County Employer Survey was to understand local employment patterns and how the availability of affordable housing may affect employers, employees and business o' operations. The survey was also designed to probe the relationships between employment and o' commercial space (employment generation ratios);these employee generation ratios will be more cv completely evaluated for affordable housing mitigation purposes in a later phase of work for Monroe T County. Additionally, the survey also gathered data on a variety of other topics, including expected c, future employment plans, expectations regarding employee retirement, employer opinions and activities regarding local workforce housing, and other issues. METHODOLOGY The survey, fielded in November 2016 and administered by RRC Associates, was mailed to a random sample of 3,000 businesses and other employers (e.g. government agencies, nonprofits, etc.) in Monroe County, utilizing a business list provided by a commercial list vendor. Recipients were able to complete and return the survey via mail, or complete it online via a password-protected website (only one response permitted per business). Employers who operated more than one business in Monroe County were asked to respond for the business located at or nearest to the address where they received the Z survey. The survey was accompanied by a cover letter signed by the Mayor of Monroe County explaining the purpose of the survey and encouraging response. Additionally, Monroe County issued a press release just before the survey was fielded in an effort to build awareness of and participation in the survey. A followup reminder postcard was mailed to the sample of businesses to further encourage response. 2 0 Of the 3,000 surveys mailed, 318 were returned as undeliverable, for a net total of 2,682 surveys 0. presumed delivered. A total of 389 usable responses were received, for a 14.5 percent response rate. The 95 percent confidence interval for a sample of 389 (within a universe of approximately 4600 employers) is+/-4.8 percentage points (larger for subgroups of respondents and questions with smaller sample sizes).' 0 Included in the appendices to this report are the survey form and cover letter, verbatim responses to the survey's open-ended questions, and statistical tables summarizing the survey results. C 0 cv i x 'To illustrate the confidence interval, if a given survey result has a value of 50%,we can be 95 percent confident that the true value(if the opinions of all employers were to be captured)would fall between approximately 45.2% and 54.8%. RRC Associates 1 Packet Pg. 2759 R.1.d MICEMMEMCMENEENEENC= SELECTED KEY FINDINGS Following are selected notable findings from the research: • Monroe County jobs context: By way of background, in 2015, Monroe County had an annual o' average of 40,772 jobs covered by unemployment insurance, with the highest share of jobs in N the accommodations and food services sector(33.8 percent of jobs) and retail trade sector(15.2 percent). Monroe County's employment exhibits moderate seasonality(driven primarily by c, tourism sectors),with peak employment occurring in the winter(typically March) and the lowest employment occurring in summer(typically July and September). Employment grew by 17.9 percent from a recessionary low in 2009 to 2015, and has significantly exceeded pre-recession levels. v, • Selected employer demographics (Employer Survey): o Location: Two-thirds of responding employers were located in the incorporated cities of Monroe County,while one-third were located in the unincorporated county. o Industry: The industr mix of responding em to ers resembled the industr mix of Y p g p Y Y employers covered by unemployment insurance generally, with retail trade and o accommodations/food services encompassing the largest number of employers in both data sets. The cities had a higher concentration of businesses in the bar/restaurant and hotel/lodging sectors than the unincorporated county, while the unincorporated county 0) had a higher share of businesses in the"other services" sector (personal, day care, auto repair, publishing, etc.). o Number of employees: Responding businesses employed an average of 15.7 employees and a median of 6 employees. 0 o Employee job status: In both winter and summer, 95 percent of employees are in year 0. - round positions and 5 percent are in seasonal positions. Additionally, 85-88 percent of workers are full-time employees and 12-15 percent are part-time. o Employee commute distances: Most employees working at employers located in the incorporated cities have commute distances of less than five miles,while most employees working at businesses located in the unincorporated county have commute distances greater than five miles. 0 o Gross floor area: Responding businesses had an average of 3,525 square feet of floor o area and a median of 1,386 square feet. Businesses located in the cities had more space Ni on average (average 4,441 sqft) than businesses in the unincorporated county(average 1,866 sqft). x • Employment generation rates: Employers in Monroe County have a median of 4.0 peak season employees per 1,000 square feet of floor space. Employment generation rates are similar for m employers located in the incorporated portions of Monroe County(median 4.0 employees/ 1000 sqft) and the unincorporated areas of the county(median 3.8 employees/1000 sqft). Employment generation rates vary significantly by industry sector and type(s) of space occupied. RRC Associates 2 Packet Pg. 2760 R.1.d MICEMMEMCMENEENEENC= • Employer perceptions of housing issues: Most responding employers say it is "very difficult" for employees in all job categories to find affordable housing—even upper management. Finding affordable housing was perceived as most difficult for seasonal employees (83 percent of employers perceive it as "very difficult" for these employees),followed by general labor/service (71 percent), retail/service clerks (69 percent), entry level professionals(69 percent), office support staff(63 percent), mid-management (62 percent), and upper management (50 percent). The opinions of respondents located in the incorporated and unincorporated parts of the county T are similar. j • Seriousness of the issue of affordable/employee housing for local residents: Most employers feel that affordable/employee housing is a serious issue, with 29 percent rating it as "the most critical problem in the Monroe County area," and 50 percent rating it as "one of the more N serious problems." Smaller shares responded that it is "a problem, but there are others which also need attention (15 percent), "one of our lesser problems" (2 percent), and "I don't believe it is a problem" (4 percent). m • Level of priority that should be placed on types of housing for employees: On a scale where 1 = low priority, 3 = moderate priority, and 5 = high priority, employers placed the highest priority on rental housing for year-round employees (84 percent responding "5—high priority" o or "4"). Following in priority were entry-level for-sale housing for year-round employees (67 percent"4" or"5"), move-up for-sale housing for year-round employees (41 percent), and rental housing for seasonal employees (32 percent). • What types of workforce housing assistance do you currently provide, and which would you consider providing in the future? Thirty-eight percent of employers said that they currently provide workforce housing assistance of some kind, most commonly assisting employees with 0) housing search (21 percent), followed by purchasing/owning units which are rented to employees (11 percent), providing to housing to employees as part of compensation (8 percent), 0. providing rent subsidies (5 percent), down payment assistance (4 percent), master leasing units that are rented to employees (1 percent), and other assistance (6 percent). C~ cv A somewhat larger 46 percent of employers said they either currently provide workforce housing assistance or would consider providing assistance in the future. The leading type of current or potential assistance are assisting employees with housing search (26 percent), 0) purchasing/owning units that are rented to employees (13 percent), and providing housing as r_ part of compensation (10 percent). o cv i RRC Associates 3 Packet Pg. 2761 R.1.d MICEMMEMCMENEENEENC= MONROE COUNTY EMPLOYMENT Following is an overview of total jobs and businesses in Monroe County,to help set a background context against which the survey results can be interpreted. o' Employment and Employers by Industry The most current available Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages (QCEW) data can be used as an U approximate indicator of the number of businesses and jobs in Monroe County by industry. It should be noted that the QCEW employment series excludes businesses not covered by unemployment insurance and, therefore, generally excludes sole proprietors and selected other types of workers. However, the data is useful for understanding general patterns of employment. In calendar year 2015, there was an v, annual average of 40,772 QCEW jobs in Monroe County, at 4,417 QCEW employers, as illustrated in Table 1 below. Table 1 Monroe County QCEW jobs,establishments,and average jobs per establishment: by industry,2015 NAICS Average Monthly Jobs Establishments Average Jobs Per o Sectorl Industry Number Percent Number Percent Establishment 72 Accommodation and Food Services 13,763 33.8% 584 13.2% 23.6 0. W 44-45 Retail Trade 6,179 15.2% 703 15.9% 8.8 92 Public Administration 3,016 T4% 59 1.3% 51.12.1 23 Construction 2,584 6.3% 531 12.0% 4.9 :5 62 Health Care and Social Assistance 2,524 6.2% 240 5A% 10.5 61 Educational Services 1,729 4.2% 49 1.1% 35.3 56 Administrative and Waste Services 1,660 4.1% 260 5.9% 6.4 0' 53 Real Estate and Rental and Leasing 1,475 3.6% 371 8.4% 4.0 Lu W 81 Other Services, Except Public Administration 1,372 3.4% 369 8.4% 3.7 T' CD 71 Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation 1,319 3.2% 146 3.3% 9.0 54 Professional and Technical Services 1,169 2.9% 474 %7%p 25 48-49 Transportation and Warehousing 1,020 2.5% 170 3.8% 6.0 52 Finance and Insurance 712 1.7% 126 2.9% 5.7 42 Wholesale Trade 582 1.4% ill 2.5% 5.2 22 Utilities 572 1 A% 8 0.2% 71.5 2i 51 Information 435 1.1% 54 1.2% 8.1 N 31-33 Manufacturing 352 0.9% 81 1.8% 4.3 55 Management of Companies and Enterprises 139 0.3% 32 0.7% 4.3 LU 11 Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing and Hunting 138 0.3% 34 0.8% 4.1 21 Mining, Quarrying, and Oil and Gas Extraction 25 0.1% 5 0.1% 5.0 m 99 Unclassified 7 0.0%1 10 0.2% 0.7 10 ITotal, All Industries 1 40,772 100.0%1 4,417 100.0% 9.2 Source: Florida Department of Economic Opportunity-Labor Market Information. RRC Associates 4 Packet Pg. 2762 R.1.d MICEMMEMCMENEENEENC= On a year-round average basis, the largest percentage of QCEW jobs in Monroe County are in the accommodation and food services sector (33.8 percent of jobs), followed by retail trade (15.2 percent), public administration (7.4 percent), construction (6.3 percent), and health care and social assistance (6.2 percent). These five sectors together comprised 68.8 percent of jobs at Monroe County QCEW employers in 2015. The most QCEW business establishments in Monroe County, by contrast, are in retail trade (15.9 percent),followed by accommodation and food services (13.2 percent), construction (12.0 percent), professional/technical services (10.7 percent), and real estate and rental and leasing (8.4 percent), together comprising 60.3 percent of employers. 0 The average number of employees per establishment is approximately 9.2 for Monroe County employers as a whole. Selected industries have much higher averages, including utilities (average 71.5 jobs per establishment), public administration (51.1), educational services (35.3), and accommodation and food services (23.6). m Seasonality and Growth of Employment 0 Monroe County employment exhibits a distinct seasonal pattern,with a notable peak in the winter months (typically highest in March), and a trough in the summer(particularly July and September). As 0 an indicator of these patterns, employment fell by 3.9 percent from March 2015 and July 2015, before rising 7.1 percent between July 2015 and March 2016 (Figure 1). Tourism-influenced sectors such as accommodations and food services and arts/entertainment/recreation are the primary drivers of this seasonal pattern. 2 0) Monroe County has also experienced substantial growth in employment since its recessionary low in 2009. QCEW jobs fell 6.6 percent (-2,759 jobs)from 2003 to 2009, but rose by 17.9 percent (6,181 jobs) 0. from 2009 to 2015, significantly exceeding precession levels (Figure 2). cv 0 CJ 2 C 0 cv x U RRC Associates 5 Packet Pg. 2763 R.1.d Figure 1 Monroe County QCEW employment by month,January 2014-June 2016 44,000 43,000 42,000 cV y 41,000 tJ 40,000 0 W 39,000 u 38,000 37,00© ! 36,000 35,000 t A c` c` > Q Z 0 a r�'a s A c` c` > Q Z 0 a i'a s A c` Month (January 2014-June 2016) .' Source: Florida Department of Economic Opportunity-Labor Market Information(January 2014-March 2016)and U.S. 0 Bureau of Labor Statistics(April-June 2016). Figure 2 Monroe County QCEW employment,2002-2015 annual averages 2 42,000 41,000 40,772 0. +� 40,000 I 39,000 38 804 _ � I Ujj 38,000 37,175 37,350 37 389 _ _ 37,045 0 37,000 36,520 36,040 35,757 U 35,981 Cx 0 36,000 35,288 35,226 y 35,000 � _ 34,591 34,769 ;. d 34,000 NI no 33,000 - d 32,000 31,000 2W2 2W3 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Year Source: Florida Department of Economic Opportunity-Labor Market Information. RRC Associates 6 Packet Pg. 2764 R.1.d RESULTS OF THE 2016 MONROE COUNTY EMPLOYER SURVEY The remainder of this report discusses the results of the 2016 Monroe County Employer Survey. The report examines both the overall survey results and the results for employers located in incorporated vs. o' unincorporated portions of Monroe County. o' cv Employer Location Two-thirds of responding employers (66 percent) were located in the incorporated cities of Monroe County, including Key West (40 percent), Marathon (16 percent), Islamorada (9 percent), and Key Colony Beach (1 percent). The remaining one-third (34 percent) of employers were located in unincorporated portions of Monroe Count including 19 percent in the Upper Keys, 1 percent in the Middle Keys, and 13 percent in the Y, g p pp Y , p Y , Lower Keys. m Figure 3 Physical location of business 0 Unincorporated Within city limits of W Monroe County— Islarnorada,9% Lower Keys,13°!0 _ Within city limits of 0. Unincorporated Key Colony Beach, 1% Monroe County Middle Keys,1% r � U) 0 Unincorporated total Unincorporated 34% Monroe County— Upper Keys,19% Cities total � j, � Within city limits of 0 Key West,40% � 0 0 I Within city limits of Marathon,16% RRC Associates 7 Packet Pg. 2765 R.1.d MICEMMEMCMENEENEENC= Industry Sector Survey respondents were distributed across a broad variety of industry sectors, led by retail trade (16 percent of respondents), bar/restaurant (11 percent), health care/social assistance (10 percent), construction (9 percent), and professional/scientific/technical services (9 percent), with a diverse array of other industries represented as well. cv As shown in Figure 4 to follow,there were some statistically significant differences in the industry mix of c, respondents from incorporated cities as compared to unincorporated Monroe County. As highlighted by asterisks in the graph, relatively high shares of employers in cities were bars/restaurants (14 percent, vs. 6 percent of respondents in the unincorporated county) and hotel/lodging businesses (7 percent vs. 1 percent). Conversely, employers in the "other services (personal, daycare, auto repair, N information/publishing, etc.)" sector comprised a higher share of employers in the unincorporated areas 2 (15 percent) than in the cities (6 percent). The mix of survey respondents by sector generally resembled the mix of all QCEW employers by sector in Monroe County in 2015, as illustrated in Figure 5 to follow. Retail trade, "other" sectors, and —� accommodations and food services were the top three sectors in each data set. This indicates that the survey response was generally representative of all QCEW employers in the county on the basis of o industry sector? 0 2 0 0. cv 0 2 C 0 cv i x z To the extent that there are differences between the survey response and QCEW employers,they could be due to variations in survey response by sector,and/or other factors such as variability in how survey respondents < classified themselves by industry; differences in the types of establishments included in the respective datasets (e.g.self-employed proprietors were included in the survey database but excluded in the QCEW database); and perhaps other factors. RRC Associates 8 Packet Pg. 2766 R.1.d Figure 4 Survey response by industry sector: Overall, and by location in Monroe County Percent of Employers 0% 5% 100/0 15% 20% Retail trade(grocery,sporting goods,etc.) -- 16% 18% h - 13°% Bar/restaurant 14% u W Health care/social assistance(medical,dental, 110% ambulatory,psychiatric,shelters,etc.) 11 0 9% •U� Construction , I} S Q 13/0 4 Professional,scientific,technical services p -- - 11% (legal,accounting,architecture,etc...) R�tt�rnm,�ng ��,asg2,��hwzi��,�e�rt 9% -� Other services(personal,daycare,auto repair, ' 'o Information ublishin N /p g,etc.) 15% 6% 0 Real estate/property management ==OW159M ,,. r- Amusement,arts,entertainment,recreation 6% 0 0. 5% Hotel/lodging IN 7% 1% 3% Finance/banking/insurance 3,9v 5% 4 Government(excluding public schools) 33% K 2% 2% Overall Marina 2% r P 2% 0 Within incorporated cities 2% w Unincorporated Monroe County Transportation/warehousing/utilities 1% 6 2% p W Agriculture/mining/oil&gas I , QJo2% r- 1/o 4 Wholesale trade � , Q 29vc I cv 4 Manufacturing 0% 1 'o X Educational services(schools,training 1 0% programs,etc.) 11 %1 `0 7% Other %Q..,. wmm raaln �fl fl`t 'a'an 4 7% � Source: 2016 Monroe County Employer Survey. Note: Statistically significant differences(at a 95%confidence level)between respondents located in incorporated vs. unincorporated areas of Monroe County are flagged with asterisks. RRC Associates 9 Packet Pg. 2767 R.1.d Figure 5 Survey response by industry,vs.2015 Monroe County QCEW establishments by industry r�. Percent of Employers 0% 5% 100/0 15% 200/o Retail Trade 16% N 16% 15% � Accommodation and Food Services W Health Care and Social Assistance " ' 10% ° 5% Construction N 12% � Professional and Technical Services 9% 't#{aldliNdtWAY \ !WNm'YN'�:rifY uanwuuvxu,�,u�vwuY 11% nre $4 Amusement,arts,entertainment,recreation a) sna......ni 3% � Real estate/property management t i)sl rrrrs9�s�.. nata�ti�n 8% 0 Finance/banking/insurance 3% Z Government(excluding public schools) 3 2% Percent of employer survey Transportation/warehousing/utilities 4% respondents,2016 1% L4Percent of QCEW establishments, Agriculture/mining/oil&gas (, 1% 2015 4 Wholesale trade I 1/0 3% 4 Manufacturing 1/° 2% T- CD Educational services(schools,training 1 0% programs,etc.) LA 1% Other " 16% 6 16% 0 L- Source:2016 Monroe County Employer Survey; Florida Department of Economic Opportunity—Labor Market Information (QCEW data). N I X U RRC Associates 10 Packet Pg. 2768 R.1.d Employment by Job Status and Distance from Work Employers were asked to report their total number of year-round full-time, year-round part-time, seasonal full-time, and seasonal part-time employees, in both the summer season (June—September) o' and winter season (November—April). Following is a summary of the major findings. cv • Full-time/ part-time iob status: Most employees hired by responding employers are full-time workers (32 or more hours per week),while a minority are part-time (under 32 hours/week). c, Specifically, 85 percent of total summer employees at responding employers are full-time, as are 88 percent of total winter employees. The remaining 15—12 percent of employees in each season respectively are part-time employees. 0 • Year-round vs. seasonal iob status: At responding employers, fully 95 percent of employees are year-round employees in both summer and winter,while 5 percent of employees are seasonal in each season. m • Differences in employment status by work location: Employees working in Monroe County's cities as a whole are more likely than those working in the unincorporated county to be year- round full-time (85 percent vs. 73 percent, in summer). Conversely, employees working in the o unincorporated areas are more likely than those working in the cities to be seasonal full-time (9 r_ percent vs. 1 percent, in summer). Figure 6 Share of employment by job status: Summer(June—September) 2 100% h� L, 90% 82% 85%, 8.80% 73 '0 70% o Overall r cv L 600/o 0Within incorporated cities E50% 1 k Unincorporated Monroe County 0 40% 46 0 n r 30% >_ c 0 209° 13% 13% 13% � N a 9% 1000 3% 1% 'o 2 1% 5% Q°Io .� x Year round,full-time Year-round,part-time Seasonal,full-time Seasonal,part-time employees employees employees employees (32+hours/week) (e32 hours/week) (32+hours/week) (e32 hours/week) Source:2016 Monroe County Employer Survey. RRC Associates 11 Packet Pg. 2769 R.1.d Figure 7 Share of employment by job status: Winter(November—April) r�. 100% 90% 85% 88% Ln 78% r 80% Q.700/o N1 Overall E � U i 600/o 0 Within incorporated cities C1 c 500/. i A Unincorporated Monroe County 40% 30% Q i 20% ` 0 13% . a 10% 9% 7% 100/© , ,- 3% 2% 2% 2% 2% iB 0% e w� Year-round,full-time Year-round,part-time Seasonal,full-time Seasonal,part-time employees employees employees employees (32+hours/week) (e32 hours/week) (32+hours/week) (e32 hours/week) Source:2016 Monroe County Employer Survey. 0 • To the best of your knowledge, where do your employees live, relative to the location of your business? Overall, employers indicated that half(50 percent) of their employees live within 4.9 road miles or less of work,while 19 percent live within 5.0-9.9 miles, 14 percent live 10.0- 19.9 miles, and 17 percent live 20 or more miles from work. In many cases, long commutes can be associated with difficulties of employees in finding affordable housing. Employers located in the incorporated cities collectively indicated that their employees lived closer to work than employers located in the unincorporated county. In particular, employers located within cities drew 60 percent of their workers from less than five miles away, as compared to 28 percent of employers located in unincorporated areas. By contrast, employers located in unincorporated areas were more likely than those in cities to draw their employees U from 5—9.9 miles away(25 percent vs. 16 percent), 10—19.9 miles away(21 percent vs. 11 percent), and 20 or more miles away(26 percent vs. 13 percent). 0 cv RRC Associates 12 Packet Pg. 2770 R.1.d Figure 8 To the best of your knowledge,where do your employees live (in your peak season), relative to the location of your business? r�. 60% 60% 0 Overall N tA 50% 0 Within incorporated cities 50% o k4 Unincorporated Monroe County E 40%46 W UJ 28% p 30% 25% ��, 26/0 p r: I 19% 4 21/0 20°/© 16/ 170 J 100/0 S 0°/© Share of employees living Share of employees living Share of employees living Share of employees living within 4.9 road miles within 5.0-9.9 road miles within 10.0 19.9 road miles 20 or more road miles of work of work of work of work r- 0 Employer Size (number of employees) • Number of employees: Most responding businesses (63 percent) employed 1—9 workers during their peak employment season,while progressively smaller shares employed 10—24 workers (23 percent), 25—49 workers (8 percent), 50—99 workers (4 percent), and 100+ o workers (2 percent). Employers in the unincorporated areas as a group were more likely than those in the cities to employ 1-9 workers (71 percent,vs. 59 percent of employers in cities). CD Altogether, responding businesses employed an average of 15.7 workers in their peak season, and a median of 6 workers. In aggregate terms, responding businesses employed a total of 5,799 workers in their peak season, equivalent to roughly 13.6 percent of peak QCEW o CJ employment in Monroe County.' 0 0 N 3 Monroe County had 42,656 QCEW jobs in March 2016. Note that employees at survey respondents included both QCEW and non-QCEW employees. RRC Associates 13 Packet Pg. 2771 R.1.d Figure 9 Share of employers by number of workers employed: Seasonal maximum (winter or summer,whichever is greater) r�. 80% 71% 700/o Overall CD 63% � 9% ; Within incorporated cities � 60% Unincorporated Monroe County —�a 50% W EUJ { 40% y Within Unincorp. 1 + Overall incorp.cities Monroe Co. O y 300/. 23%25°lo Mean employees 15.7 17.8 11.6 N y0% Median employees 6.0 7.0 5.0 d 20% 8% 9% 100/0 6°1© 4% 5% 3% 2% 2% 4 � Mai ozzassm-1/o � 0/0 . 1-9 10-24 25-49 50-99 100+ N Number of Employees(seasonal maximum) Source:2016 Monroe County Employer Survey. O r_ O • How many unfilled iob openings do you have at the present time? Currently, 28 percent of employers have unfilled full-time jobs, and 17 percent have unfilled part-time jobs. Combined, these unfilled positions are equivalent to 6.2 percent of total peak season employment at responding employers. (Stated another way, staffing at responding employers is current) about 6.2 percent short of their full needs.) 0 cv O O r_ O cv i x RRC Associates 14 Packet Pg. 2772 R.1.d Employer Space Characteristics • Single-tenant vs. multi-tenant buildings: Equal shares of businesses in both incorporated and unincorporated areas were in single-tenant buildings (50 percent) and multi-tenant buildings (50 0' percent). cv Figure 10 Is your business located in: c, 60% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% _... tA 40% Uj 30% Overall f � 1a Within incorporated cities � 20% L Unincorporated Monroe County } y a 10©/0 0 W 0% - A building shared with other tenants A building occupied exclusively by my business Source:2016 Monroe County Employer Survey. W • Gross square feet of floor area: Responding businesses reported occupying an average of 3,525 square feet of floor area and a median of 1,386 square feet. Roughly equal shares of employers occupy less than 1,000 square feet (35 percent), 1,000-2,499 square feet (34 percent), and0. 2,500 or more square feet (31 percent). Employers in incorporated cities occupy more space, on average, than employers located in the unincorporated county(average 4,441 square feet vs. 1,866 square feet). Relatedly, employers in the unincorporated county are comparatively likely to occupy 999 square feet of space or less (43 percent, vs. 31 percent of employers in the cities), while employers in the cities are c, comparatively likely to occupy 10,000 or more square feet(9 percent vs. 1 percent). 2 C 0 It should be noted that businesses occupying space in a multi-tenant building were likely to i report leasable space, a "net"figure (generally exclusive of common areas such as hallways, lobbies and bathrooms). Businesses occupying a single-tenant building, by contrast, are likely to have reported "gross" square footage (inclusive of such areas). RRC Associates 15 Packet Pg. 2773 R.1.d Figure 11 Gross square footage of building floor area occupied by your business 500/0 tiz^ Overall CD 4 43% ' 45/° Within incorporated cities CD 400/o A Unincorporated Monroe County := 35% 34%34% 35% 31°/i 32% O Within Unincorp. 30% Overall incorp.cities Monroe Co. U+ 25% � ' Meansqft 3,525 4,441 1,86646 Mediansgft 1,3861 1,500 1,000 200/. j 0 14% 14% v N 15°!© ti 13/°12% 12% � a 100/0 q 9% p 9% 6% 5°!° 2% 0% ., 999 sq.ft.or less 1,000-2,499 sq.ft. 2,500-4,999 sq.ft. 5,000-9,999 sq.ft. 10,000*sq.ft. N O Source:2016 Monroe County Employer Survey. Note: The survey asked businesses to exclude space in garages used exclusively for parking,exterior/outdoor spaces, unenclosed spaces,boats,and any other vehicles or vessels. The questionnaire also noted that"If your business is renting O space in a multi-tenant building,your gross square footage will likely be equivalent to your leased square feet of interior 0 space." • Type(s) of space occupied: The largest shares of respondents occupied retail/merchandising space (26 percent) and office space (25 percent). Lesser shares used space best categorized as restaurant/food service/bar (13 percent), home office (11 percent),warehouse (7 percent), and . various other types of space (6 percent or less each). On average, respondents reported using an average of 1.24 different types of space,with most employers using just one type of space, and others using a mix of space types. cv O O r_ O cv I x RRC Associates 16 Packet Pg. 2774 R.1.d Figure 12 Which of the following best describes the type(s)of space your business occupies? Percent of Employers CD 0% 5% 100/0 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% CD 26% cv Retail merchandising s 31% 18% Ca Office private(excluding medical office) 24% 25% + 13% Restaurant/food service/bar - 17% 9 N Home office/business is located in my 11% �� ` % home 7 18% n 41 4 1 1 7 7/0 afn Warehouse 69vc � 10% 0 Services(bank,hair salon,gas station, p 6% automobile care,etc.) W r- 13% 0 Medical(hospital/clinic,nursing home, 6% o vet clinic,etc.,including medical offices) 1. 7% 6% Hotel/lodging 8% Overall W 64 2% Within incorporated cities 0. 5% Docking/marine/port facilities 5% A Unincorporated Monroe County 6% r Institutional(school/college,church, 4% museum,day care,etc.) 2%,, 5% : 0 Industrial(incl. light/heavy industrial, 3,1 4 manufacturing,utilities,etc.) 5% 0 3% 2i Office-government 3% P2% Recreational(theater,athletic club, 2% 4 recreation center,etc.) 2 9 6% Other 5% 8% Source:2016 Monroe County Employer Survey. Multiple responses permitted(thus,sums can exceed 100%). RRC Associates 17 Packet Pg. 2775 R.1.d MICEMMEMCMENEENEENC= Job Generation Rates An important objective of the survey research was to document the intensity of employment among different types of industries and building types in Monroe County, by calculating the ratio of o' employment to floor space. This results in estimates of job generation rates, expressed as the number of total jobs (full-time/part-time and year-round/seasonal combined) per 1,000 square feet of space. cv The results can be used to help plan for the number of employees that are likely to be generated when new commercial space is built. c, The following method was used to calculate the number of jobs generated per 1,000 square feet of interior floor space: 0 1. For each employer, an employment generation rate was calculated as the ratio of total peak season employment (full-and part-time, year-round and seasonal jobs combined) to gross square footage of floor area, multiplied by 1,000. m 2. Within a given analysis category(e.g• type of space occupied, industry sector, etc.) survey v, respondents were arrayed lowest to highest by their employment generation rate. The median employment generation rate—that is, the rate relative to which half of employers were higher o and half were lower— has been summarized in Table 2 on the following page. r_ 0 The composite results show that employers in Monroe County have a median of 4.0 peak season employees per 1,000 square feet of floor space. Measured at the median, employers have similar employment generation rates in the incorporated portions of Monroe County (median 4.0 employees/ 1000 sqft) and the unincorporated areas of the county(median 3.8 employees/1000 sqft). 2 0) The employment generation rates show significant variations by type(s) of space occupied and industry sector. For example, businesses occupying space classified as "restaurant/food service/bar" have 0. significantly higher employment generation rates (median 7.5 employees/ 1000 sqft) than businesses occupying retail/ merchandising space (median 2.9 employees/ 1000 sqft). Additionally, employers classifying themselves as a bar/restaurant business (median 8.8 employees/ 1000 sqft) have higher employment generation rates than employers classifying themselves as retail trade businesses (median 2.4 employees/ 1000 sqft). It should be noted that sample sizes are small for several types of space and industry sectors, necessitating caution. Additionally, there are many nuances in how employment generation rates can o be calculated to best meet planning and regulatory objectives. As such, it is anticipated that the later phases of work may possibly utilize somewhat different categories or approaches in estimating employment generation rates than are described here. x RRC Associates 18 Packet Pg. 2776 R.1.d MICEMMEMCMENEENEENC= Table 2 Job generation rates(Employees per 1000 square feet of floor space) Median job generation rate(peak season Number , employees per 1,000 of survey sgft of floor space) responses TOTAL-ALL SURVEY RESPONDENTS 4.0 306 CJ Location of business Within incorporated cities 4.0 203 Unincorporated Monroe County 3.8 98 Which of the following best describes the type(s)of building space your business occupies?(multiple responses permitted) Home office/business is located in my home 7.0 30 Retail/merchandising 2.9 87 Restaurant/food service/;bar 7.5 41 Office-government 11.3 9 Office-private(excluding medical;office) 4.3 76 Medical (hospital/clinic, nursing home,vet clinic,etc., including medical offices) 2.7 18 Industrial(incl. light/heavy industrial,manufacturing, utilities,etc) 5.0 11 Warehouse 4.0 27 W Hotel/lodging 0.9 10 Recreational (theater,athletic club, recreation center,etc.) 11.7 5 Services(bank, hair;salon,gas station,automobile care,etc) 3.3 17 Institutional (school/college,church, museum,day care,etc.) 1.4 14 Docking/marine/;port facilities 8.8 9 Other 3.9 14 Which of the following best describes your type of business? o Agriculture/mining/oil&;gas 2.0 1 Construction 8.0 29 Manufacturing 4.1 2 r Transportation/warehousing/utilities 14.0 6 Wholesale trade 2.2 3 Bar/restaurant 8.8 34 Retail trade(grocery,sporting goods,etc) 2.4 58 Educational services(schools,training programs,etc.) 8.0 1 Finance/banking/insurance 3.9 12 Health care/social assist. (medical,dental,ambulatory, psychiatric,shelters,etc.) 3.4 34 2 i Professional,scientific,technical services(legal,accounting, architecture,etc.) 3.7 28 N Marina 6.1 4 Amusement,arts,entertainment, recreation 4.7 17 Hotel/lodging 0.8 9 Real estate/property management 3.3 19 C Other services(personal,daycare,auto repair,information/publishing,etc.) 2.4 24 m Government(excluding public schools) 8.6 8 Other 3.5 17 Source: 2016 Monroe County Employer Survey; RRC Associates. RRC Associates 19 Packet Pg. 2777 R.1.d Employer Perceptions of Housing Issues A portion of the employer survey was dedicated to understanding employer problems and perceptions related to employee housing issues. This section summarizes employer responses to these questions. o' • How difficult is it for your employees to find affordable housing in Monroe County? On a scale cv where 1 = "not at all difficult," 3 = "moderately difficult," and 5 = "very difficult," at least half of employers said it was "5 -very difficult" for employees in all job categories to find affordable c, housing—even upper management—suggesting a very challenging market. Finding affordable housing was perceived as most difficult for seasonal employees (83 percent "very difficult"), followed by general labor/service (71 percent), retail/service clerks (69 percent), entry level professionals (69 percent), office support staff(63 percent), mid-management(62 percent), and N upper management (50 percent). The opinions of respondents located in the incorporated and unincorporated parts of the county were statistically similar. Figure 13 How difficult is it for your employees to find affordable housing in Monroe County? —� Overall results,2016 q00% qq 90°/© ., q 9 0 9 4' 1tirii 1i 4.5 v t 4.4 ,,,,< �.G 4 4.4 .. 1 4.3 �� ,r�17� q�� °f s ^E 0 80°/© �� 0 tA 70°/© A18 i i 3.5 60% Ln ) E 50% 3 (/ v 40% 1-Not at all difficult 2,5 C r 30 2 a % Moderately +� no -A 3- difficult 2 20% m 4 mum 5-Very difficult r Z 10% :Mean difficulty 1 5 mm ME 0% 1 Seasonal General Retail/service Entry level Office support Mid- Upper Other employees labor/service clerks professionals staff management management employees C 0 • How, if at all, has the availability of affordable housing in Monroe County affected the work i performance of your employees? Most employers (70 percent) believed that housing affected employee performance in some manner. Most commonly cited was displeasure with wage rates due to high housing costs (47 percent), followed by high turnover(38 percent), tardiness III from long commutes (17 percent), high absentee rates (8 percent), and other issues (8 percent, e.g. difficulty recruiting/finding workers, difficulty affording workers, scheduling conflicts due to m multiple jobholding, etc.). Employers located in the unincorporated county are more likely than those in the cities to cite tardiness from long commutes, consistent with the greater commute distances for employees of these businesses (noted earlier). RRC Associates 20 Packet Pg. 2778 R.1.d Figure 14 How,if at all, has the availability of affordable housing in Monroe County affected the work performance of your employees? r�. 60©ro 49% fA Overall 50% 47° tA 4`° N within incorporated cities V8 38 36/0 40©/0 triUnincorporated Monroe County 36% u W 3©% 30% s 70 { { t8 " 24% 2 W 200/o 1 17% E }c w 4° a 10% } 8%8%9% 8%9%7% 0% fn Displeasure with High turnover Tardiness from High absentee rate Other I don't believe wage rates due to long commutes housing has high housing costs affected employee performance 0 • How many people, in your estimation, were not hired or left your employment in the past 12 months because they lacked affordable housine? Fully 55 percent of employers said there were people they had not hired or who had left their employment in the past 12 months because they lacked housing. At this group of impacted employers, an average of 5.2 employees were not hired or left employment due to housing, which is equivalent to 24 percent of peak season employees at these impacted businesses, and 17 percent of peak season employees at all 0. businesses. • Seriousness of the issue of affordable/employee housing for local residents: Most employers feel that affordable/employee housing is a serious issue, with 29 percent rating it as "the most critical problem in the Monroe County area," and 50 percent rating it as "one of the more serious problems." Smaller shares responded that it is "a problem, but there are others which c, also need attention (15 percent), "one of our lesser problems" (2 percent), and "I don't believe it is a problem" (4 percent). Respondents located in the unincorporated county were somewhat more likely than those in the cities to describe housing as a lesser problem or not a problem (12 i percent vs. 3 percent), albeit still representing a small fraction of opinion. RRC Associates 21 Packet Pg. 2779 R.1.d Figure 15 Do you feel affordable/employee housing for local residents is: 600/o gyp/ 50%52% 5V/0 p Overall 7 o I` 0 within incorporated cities 40% CJ �- k4 Unincorporated Monroe County t W 4 29%30% W 30% 6 'o N 20©ro 25%16%25% d 10% 8% i 4% 2% 4%2% 1% 0% f 4 Esms- 1 don't believe it is a One of our lesser A problem,but there One of the more The most critical N problem problems are others which also serious problems problem in the need attention Monroe County area r_ 0 Anticipated Future Changes in Employment • Anticipated change in employees during the next five years: Over the next five years, a majority of employers expect their employment to remain about the same (55 percent). Of the remainder, more employers plan to increase (26 percent)than reduce (2 percent)their number of employees, while 17 percent don't know. Results for employers in incorporated vs. unincorporated areas were virtually identical. Among employers planning to increase their employment,future employment within five years is projected to increase by an aggregate of 32 percent relative to existing peak-season employment at those respective businesses. Taking into account expected increases and decreases in employment, employment is projected r_ to increase by a net of 7.3 percent across all respondents in the next five years. o cv i • Anticipated employee retirement in the next five years: Forty-four percent of responding employers anticipate having one or more employees retire over the next five years. Employers anticipate that retiring employees will be equivalent in number to about 7 percent of their total III peak-season employees. To the extent that retiring employees remain in the county and continue to occupy their existing housing units, the amount of housing available for m replacement workers could become correspondingly tighter without a commensurate increase in supply. RRC Associates 22 Packet Pg. 2780 R.1.d Figure 16 During the next five years,do you plan to: 600/o 55% 55% 56% oy •Overall �+ 50% N•Within incorporated cities I` 40% Unincorporated Monroe County EUj W 30% 26% 25% 27% t ` 20% ` 17% 17% 15% a 10% 2% 3% 2% cB i 0% Increase your number of Reduce your number of Stay about the same Don't know N employees employees 0 r_ 0 Employer Actions and Opinions Regarding Workforce Housing Assistance • What types of workforce housing assistance do you currently provide, and which would you consider providing in the future? Thirty-eight percent of employers said that they currently provide workforce housing assistance of some kind (Figure 17 to follow). The most prevalent type of assistance provided is assisting employees with housing search (21 percent), followed by o purchasing/owning units which are rented to employees (11 percent), providing to housing to employees as part of compensation (8 percent), providing rent subsidies (5 percent), down payment assistance(4 percent), master leasing units that are rented to employees (1 percent), and other assistance (6 percent). A somewhat larger 46 percent of employers said they either currently provide workforce o housing assistance or would consider providing assistance in the future. The leading type of current or potential assistance are assisting employees with housing search (26 percent), 0 purchasing/owning units that are rented to employees (13 percent), and providing housing as part of compensation (10 percent) (Figure 18). Employers located in incorporated cities were cv� somewhat more likely than those in unincorporated areas to say they would consider providing _ It assistance (11 percent vs. 4 percent respectively). RRC Associates 23 Packet Pg. 2781 R.1.d Figure 17 What type(s) of workforce housing assistance do you currently provide? 80% C� 700/o e o fA Overall � co cV 6 0% Within incorporated cities � 500/. mUnincorporated Monroe County Comments re:other assistance. W 4 % Increase wages Loans(e.g,first/last/security) s ,I r- 30% Co-sign,gas money,etc. d 20% ` 10% 4Q CO CO �' [ �' �' �' p COLn 0% Imul y J � - Assist Purchase/own Provide Provide refit Down payment Master lease Other None of the � employees units that you housing to subsidies assistance units that you assistance above with housing rentto employees as rentto search employees part of employees compensation 0 Figure 18 What type(s) of workforce housing assistance do you currently provide or would consider providing in the future? 80% 70O/o e o fA Overall o am 6 /. N Within incorporated cities Comments re:other assistance: � a. 300'`° mUnincorporated Monroe County Increase wages UUj Loans(e.g,first/last/security) i4 4 Co sign,gas money,etc. 00 30% y_ m U a 20% m ' ' 10% ° n °� �' co ro CV Assist Purchase/own Provide Provide rent Down payment Master lease Other None of the employees units that you housing to subsidies assistance units that you assistance above with housing rentto employees as rentto search employees part of employees compensation RRC Associates 24 Packet Pg. 2782 R.1.d • Level of priority that should be placed on types of housing for employees: On a scale where 1 = "low priority," 3 = "moderate priority," and 5 = "high priority," employers placed the highest priority on rental housing for year-round employees (84 percent responding "5—high priority" or "4"). Following in priority were entry-level for-sale housing for year-round employees (67 percent"4" or"5"), move-up for-sale housing for year-round employees (41 percent), and rental housing for seasonal employees (32 percent). N Figure 19 Please rate the level of priority that should be placed on creating the following types of housing for employees: Overall results 0 100% 5 90% 4 4 t t C� q p� 4.5 ppo�pp/tA 4) fht 4 Q' 'a. E 3..560O/© ter}tilt tk� Ln i7 u' 50% 2.9 3 a •. ' ' C 0 *' 40O/© t �4 ��t� .� f(f \ tl t }4 4 lrr d�1`tit i'S t� z.5 tit t ,, O 3C°/© .� Q' 0 10 0/0 0% 1 Rental housingfor Entry-level for-sale Move up for-sale Rental housingfor Other type(s)of year-round housingforyear- housingforyear- seasonal employees housing � employees round employees round employees(for WA=1 Low priority current homeowners ___ needing more space, „°° 3 Moderate priority e.g.increasing family 1 4 Cct size,etc.) r "` 5 High priority N - Mean priority 0 • Additional comments about employees: Employers were asked to share any additional comments with regard to employees. These comments are provided in the appendix to this report and provide additional information on some of the issues, problems and perceptions of i employers with respect to the availability(or lack thereof) of workforce housing. N x RRC Associates 25 Packet Pg. 2783 R.1.d r�. cv m c m c c c co T- CD cv c 0 0 c 0 cv i APPENDIX: QUESTIONNAIRE, TABLES & COMMENTS Packet Pg. 2784 R.1.d BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OUII� �� I1TOe Mayor Heather Carruthers,District 3 Mayor Pro Tern George Neugent, District 2 ' �� Danny L.Kolhage,District] The Florida Keys David Rice,District 4 Sylvia J.Murphy, District 5 ram. November 1, 2016 cv Dear Monroe County Employer: W Your valuable input is needed. You were randomly selected to receive this survey as an employer in Monroe County. This survey is a vital component of the County's effort to address affordable/workforce N housing needs. The information will ultimately be used to maintain our quality of life, strengthen our local businesses and enhance the livability and appeal of our county. While the aggregate survey results will be made public,you may answer anonymously. An independent company is assisting with this research to tabulate, analyze and summarize the information provided. The v, results will be used to help Elected Officials make informed decisions. 0 Please return your survey in the enclosed postage-paid envelope within 10 days of receipt. If you prefer to take the survey online, you can go to www.MonroeEmployer.com and enter the passcode 0 If you take the survey online, please recycle this paper copy(only one response per business will be accepted). Your participation in this effort is greatly appreciated. If you have questions regarding the survey, please contact David Becher with RRC Associates(the company assisting us with this survey)at(888)449-4772, 2 ext. 2111. If you have questions on how this relates to County planning efforts, please contact Maytd Santamaria, Senior Director of Planning and Environmental Resources for Monroe County, at(305)289- 0. 2500. Thank you for your help in this important community effort. cv Sincere 0 2 ayor Fle, ier Ca uthers c Commissi nej, dnroe County District III N� LU Packet Pg. 2785 MONROE COUNTY EMPLOYER SURVEY If you operate more than one business in Monroe County,please respond for the business located at/nearest to the address at which you received this survey. ABOUT • 1. Please describe your type of business: 4. How many employees do you have in summer and in winter ol) O Agriculture/commercial fishing/forestry/mining (including yourself)? (Include contract labor,if sole proprietor, 02) 13 Construction "I Construction 03) O Manufacturing Employees in Employees cn 04) 13 Transportation/warehousing/utilities summer Jun-Se winter Nov-E 05) O Wholesale trade Year-round,full-time(32+hrs/wk) 06) O Bar/restaurant Year-round,part-time(<32 hrs/wk) 07) O Retail trade(grocery,sporting goods,etc.) Seasonal,full-time(32+hrs/week) 08) O Educational services(schools,training programs,etc.) Seasonal,part-time(<32 hrs/wk) os) O Finance/banking/insurance TOTAL EMPLOYEES W lo) O Health care/social assistance(medical,dental,ambulatory, psychiatric,shelters,etc.) 5. To the best of your knowledge,where do your employees live 11) 13 Professional,scientific,technical services(legal,accounting, relative to the location of your business?Please enter the architecture,etc.) approximate number or percentage(not both)of employees i 12) O Marina your peak season that reside in each location.(ENTER 0 IF N( 13) O Amusement,arts,entertainment,recreation(including # OR % Within 4.9 road miles of business . recreational fishing) 14) O Hotel/lodging 4 How many lodging units do you have? # OR % Within 5.0-9.9 road miles of businE units(If you have suites,please count each # OR % Within 10-19.9 road miles of busine —� bedroom/bathroom combination as 1 unit.) # OR % 20 or more road miles from busine 15) O Real estate/property management # in total OR 100% e 16) 13 Other services(personal,daycare,auto repair, information/ publishing,etc.) 6. How many unfilled job openings do you have at the present 17) O Government(excluding public schools) time? 18) O Other: Full-time Part-time 2. (PROPERTY MANAGEMENT BUSINESSES ONLY) Which of the 7. Is your business located in: following services do you provide? O A building shared with other tenants O Commercial property management O A building occupied exclusively by my business O Residential property management 4 2a.How many residential units do you manage? total units 8. What is the approximate gross square footage of building flo 2b.Of the units you manage, how many are: area your business occupies? Please estimate your building Short-term rental units space as accurately as possible. Long-term rental units Gross square feet of floor area Other units Note: Please exclude garages used exclusively for parking, exterior/outdoor spaces,unenclosed spaces,boats,and any other veh, 3. (HOTEL/MOTEL&OTHER LODGING BUSINESSES ONLY) or vessels. If your business is renting space in a multi-tenant building, Approximately how much gross square footage(GSF)of floor gross square footage will likely be equivalent to your leased square fee area does your property(ies)have in the following categories? interior space. (ENTER 0 IF NONE) 9. Which of the following best describes the type(s)of building e GSF of floor area in individual lodging rooms/units space your business occupies? (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY) GSF of floor area in restaurants ol) O Home office/business is located in my home cV� GSF of floor area in retail shops 02) O Retail/merchandising GSF of floor area in meeting spaces,spas, 03) 13 Restaurant/food service/bar lobbies,and other guest service areas of property 04) O Office—government 05) O Office—private(excluding medical office) 4. Physical location of business: 06) O Medical(hospital/clinic,nursing home,vet clinic,etc.,incl.ME m 13Within city limits of Islamorada office) 07) O Industrial(incl.light/heavy industrial,manufacturing,utilities,e O Within city limits of Key Colony Beach os) O Warehouse O Within city limits of Key West 13 Within city limits of Layton os) 13 Hotel/lodging 13 Within city limits of Marathon lo) 13 Recreational(theater,athletic club,recreation center,etc.) 13 Unincorporated Monroe County—Upper Keys 11) 13 Services(bank,hair salon,gas station,automobile care,etc.; 13 Unincorporated Monroe County—Middle Keys 12) 13Institutional(school/college,church,museum,day care,etc.) 13Unincorporated Monroe County—Lower Keys 13) 13 Docking/marine/port facilities 14) O Other: Packet Pg. 2786 10. During the next five years,do you plan to: 17. Please rate the level of priority that should be place O Increase your number of employees: By how many? # creating the following types of housing for employees. O Reduce your number of employees: By how many? # LOW MODERATE O Stay about the same PRIORITY PRIORITY PI TY O Don't know Rental housing for year-round employees 1 2 3 4 Rental housing for seasonal employees 1 2 3 4 11. Approximately how many of your employees will be retiring in Entry-level for-sale housing for the next five years? #employees year-round employees 1 2 3 4 Move-up for-sale housing for year-round employees • (for current homeowners needing more space— e.g.increasing family size, etc.) 1 2 3 4 12. How difficult is it for your employees to find affordable housing Other(please describe: 1 2 3 4 in Monroe County? NOT AT ALL MODERATELY VERY NOT DIFFICULT DIFFICULT DIFFICULT APPLICABLE Seasonal employees 1 2 3 4 5 x 18. Do you have any other comments or suggestions regarding Retail/service clerks 1 2 3 4 5 x General labor/service 1 2 3 4 5 x affordable housing for employees in Monroe County? _ Office support staff 1 2 3 4 5 x Entry level professionals 1 2 3 4 5 x 0 Mid-management 1 2 3 4 5 x v, Upper management 1 2 3 4 5 x Other: 1 2 3 4 5 x 13. How, if at all, has the availability of affordable housing in Monroe County affected the work performance of your employees? (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY) O High turnover 19. Name of business(confidential and optional—for tracking O High absentee rate survey completions only): O Tardiness from long commutes O Displeasure with wage rates due to high housing costs O Other: OR O 1 don't believe housing has affected employee performance That's all! Thank you very much for your time and input. Please 14. How many people, in your estimation,were not hired or left return the survey to RRC Associates,the company assisting your employment in the past 12 months because they lacked Monroe County, by one of the following methods: affordable housing? persons Enclosed postage-paid envelope • FAX.• (303)449-6587(please remember to fax both sides) •15. Do you feel affordable/employee housing for local residents is: Email: david(o?rrcassociates.com O O One of our lesser problems O A problem,but there are others which also need attention O One of the more serious problems O The most critical problem in the Monroe County area OR O 1 don't believe it is a problem 0 16. Please indicate the types of workforce housing assistance you provide or would consider providing in the future. (CHECKALL THAT APPLY) CURRENTLY WOULD PROVIDE CONSIDER I Purchase/own units that you rent to employees O O Master lease units that you rent to employees O O Provide housing to employees as part of O OUJI compensation Down payment assistance O O Provide rent subsidies O O Assist employees with housing search O O Other assistance: O O None of the above O O Packet Pg. 2787 Monroe County 2016 Employer Survey Physical location of business Within incorporated Unincorpon OVERALL cities Monroe Coi Agriculture/mining/oil&gas 1% 0% Construction 9% 8% 1 Manufacturing 1% 0% h Transportation/warehousing 1 utilities 2% 1% 0) Wholesale trade 1% 0% r Bar/restaurant 11% 14% N Retail trade(grocery,sporting goods,etc.) 16% 18% 1 Educational services(schools,training programs,etc.) 0% Which of the following best Finance/banking/insurance 3% 3% W describes your type of business? Health care/social assistance(medical,dental,ambulatory,psychiatric,shelters,etc.) 10% 10% 1 Professional,scientific,technical services(legal,accounting,architecture,etc.) 9% 11% U Marina 2% 2% Amusement,arts,entertainment,recreation 6% 6% Hotel/lodging 5% 7% Real estate/property management 6% 5% 0 Other services(personal,daycare,auto repair,information/publishing,etc.) 9% 6% 1 W Government(excluding public schools) 3% 3% 0 Other. 7l0 5% 0- 0) IX 100% 100% 1f TOTAL W n= 2.1 385 248 1-25 47% 50% (If hotel/lodging)How many 26-50 33% 29% 1( 0 lodging units do you have? 0. 51-74 7% 7% 100+ 13% 14% C0 r CD TOTAL 100% 100% 1f N Average 61.7 62.9 0 n= 15 14 U 06 Jan 17 0 0 Source:RRC Associates 0 N I X LU Packet Pg. 2788 Monroe County 2016 Employer Survey R d Physical location of business Within incorporated Unincorporated Property management businesses only OVERALL cities Monroe County (Property management Commercial property management 17% 33% businesses)Which of the following property management services do you provide? Residential property management 96% 92% 100% ram. 113% 125% 100% TOTAL �y n= 23 12' 11 cv 1-25 32% 56% 10% 26-50 11% 20% (If residential property management)How many total 51-75 16% 22% 10% rooms/units do you manage? 76-99 5% 10% 100+ 37% 22% 50% TOTAL 100% 100%' 100% Average 130.5 138.3 123.4 n= 19 9 10 N 0 44% 86% 11% 1-25 13% 22%p r_ Of the residential units you 26-50 13% 22% manage,how many are: short- term rental units 51-75 13% 22% 76-99 6% 14% 100+ 13% 22% 2 TOTAL 100% 100% 100% Average 41.8 13.4 63.8 n= 16 7 9 CD 1-25 69% 71% 67% Of the residential units you 26-50 6% 11% manage,how many are: long- term rental units 51-75 13% 14% 11% W 0 100+ 13% 14% 11% TOTAL 100% 100% 100% Cyr Average 33.9 36.3 32.0 x n= 16 7 9 0 81% 100% 67% Of the residential units you manage,how many are: other 51-75 6% 11% units ns 76-99 13% 22% TOTAL 100% + 100% 100% Average 14.7 .0 26.1 n= 16 7 9 06 Jan 17 Source:RRC Associates Packet Pg. 2789 Monroe County 2016 Employer Survey R d Physical location of business Within incorporated Unincorporated OVERALL cities Monroe County Within city limits of Islamorada 9% 14% Within city limits of Key Colony Beach 1% 1°% ram. Within city limits of Key West 40% 60% Physical location of business: Within city limits of Marathon 16% 25% N Unincorporated Monroe County—Upper Keys 19% 57% Unincorporated Monroe County—Middle Keys 1% 4% Unincorporated Monroe County—Lower Keys 13% 39% 100% 100%i 100% '2 TOTAL n= 375 248 127 06 Jan 17 Source:RRC Associates m 0 r- 0 Lu 0 U 2 C 0 N I Packet Pg. 2790 Monroe County 2016 Employer Survey Physical location of business Within How many employees do you have incorporated Unincorporated in summer(Jun-Sep), including yourself? OVERALL cities Monroe County 0 6% 6% 6% 1-9 64% 60% 73% Year-round,full-time(32+ 10-24 19% 21% 15% hrslwk) 25-49 7% 7% 4% N 50-99 3% 4% 2% c, 100+ 1% 1% W TOTAL 100% 100% 100% c Average 11.9 14.3 6.9 n= 365 242 116 0 60% 62% 57% m 1-9 35% 33% 41% 0 Year-round,part-time 10-24 3% 4% 3°% z 25-49 1% 1% 50-99 0% 0% TOTAL 100% 100% 100% Average 1.9 2.2 1.3 n= 365 242 116 c 06 Jan 17 Source:RRC Associates c� cv 0 CJ 2 C 0 cv Lu Packet Pg. 2791 Monroe County 2016 Employer Survey R d Physical location of business Within How many employees do you have incorporated Unincorporated in summer(Jun-Sep), including yourself? OVERALL cities Monroe County 0 95% 95% 95% Seasonal,full-time(32+ 1-9 4% 4% 3% hrslwk) 10-24 1% 1% 25-49 1% 3% TOTAL 100% 100% 100% (, Average .4 '2 8 W n= 365 242 116 0 95% 95% 97% 1-9 4% 5% 2% Seasonal,part-time 10-24 1% ' 1% 1% 25-49 0% 1% TOTAL 100% 100% 100% Average .3 .2 .5 0 n= 365 242 116 1-9 64% 60% 72% 10-24 23% 25% 20% Total employees in summer 25-49 8% 8% 6% c 0. 50-99 4% ' 5% 3% r 100+ 2% 2% cV TOTAL 100% 100% 100% 0 Average 14.6 17.1 9.5 0 Median 6.0 7.0 5.0 0 n= 369 244 117 cv 06 Jan 17 _ Source:RRC Associates Packet Pg. 2792 Monroe County 2016 Employer Survey R d Physical location of business Within How many employees do you have incorporated Unincorporated in winter(Nov-Apr), including yourself? OVERALL cities Monroe County 0 7% 6% 7% 1-9 63% 60% 71% Year-round,full-time(32+ 10-24 19% 22% 15% hrslwk) 25-49 7% 7% 5% N 50-99 3% 4% 1% c, 100+ 1% 1% 1% W TOTAL 100% 100% 100% c Average 12.5 14.3 8.8 n= 359 238 114 0 60% 62% 56% 1-9 35% 32% 41% 0 Year-round,part-time 10-24 3% 4% 2% z 25-49 1% 1% 1% 50-99 0% 0% TOTAL 100% 100% 100% Average 1.5 1.5 1.5 n= 359 238 114 c 06 Jan 17 Source:RRC Associates c� cv 0 CJ 2 C 0 cv Lu Packet Pg. 2793 Monroe County 2016 Employer Survey R d Physical location of business Within How many employees do you have incorporated Unincorporated in winter(Nov-Apr), including yourself? OVERALL cities Monroe County 0 94% 94% 95% Seasonal,full-time(32+ 1-9 4% 5% 3% hrslwk) 10-24 1% 1% 1% ' 25-49 1% 2% TOTAL 100% 100% 100% c, Average .4 .3 .8 W n= 359 238 114 0 93% 92% 95% Seasonal,part-time 1-9 6% 8% 4% 10-24 1% 1% 1% TOTAL 100% 100% 100% y 0 Average 2 .3 .2 W n= 359 238 114 0 1-9 64% + 60% 70% 10-24 23% 24% 20% Total employees in winter 25-49 8% 9% 6% 50-99 4% 4% 3% c 0. 100+ 2% 3% 1% LU r TOTAL 100% 100% 100% cv Average 15.3 17.4 11.3 0 Median 6.0 7.0 5.0 0 n= 363 240 115 06 Jan 17 i Source:RRC Associates Packet Pg. 2794 Monroe County 2016 Employer Survey R d Physical location of business Within incorporated Unincorporated OVERALL cities Monroe County 1-9 63% 59% 71% Maximum total employees 10-24 23% 25% 20% during year(greater of summer o 0 0 or winter seasons;FT and PT 25-49 8/0 9/0 6/o employees counted equally) 50-99 4% 5% 3Q/Q N 100+ 2% 2% 1% CJ TOTAL 100% 100% 100% Average 15.7 17.8 11.6 Median 6.0 7A 5.0 I n= 369 244 117 06 Jan 17 Source:RRC Associates m 0 r- 0 Lu 0 CJ 2 C 0 N I Packet Pg. 2795 Monroe County 2016 Employer Survey R d Physical location of business Within incorporated Unincorporated Place of residence of employees OVERALL cities Monroe County Share of employees living Average 50.5% 59.6% 27.6% within 4.9 road miles of work n= 342 228 107 r�. Share of employees living Average 18.7% 16.2% 25.5% within 5.0-9.9 road miles of work n= 342 228 107 Share of employees living Average 13.9% 11.3% 21.0% c, within 10.0-19.9 road miles of work n= 342 228 107 W Average 17.0% 12.9% 25.9% Share of employees living 20 c or more road miles of work �+ n= 342 228 + 107 � 06 Jan 17 Source:RRC Associates m 0 r- 0 Lu cv 0 CJ 2 C 0 cv Packet Pg. 2796 Monroe County 2016 Employer Survey R d Physical location of business How man unfilled job openings do ou have at within Y 1Y incorporated Unincorporated the present time? OVERALL cities Monroe County 0 72% 72% 70% 1 12% 12% 13% 2 9% 9% 10% 3 5% 4% 6% Unfilled full-time jobs 4 1% 1% 1% (a 6 0°to 0°l0 W 8 0% 0% 10+ 1% 1% TOTAL 100% 100% 100% Average 7 ,7 .5 m n= 349 225 114 0 83% 81% 84% c 1 11% 12% 10% 2 5% 4% 5% " a� Unfilled part-time jobs 3 1% 1% 4 0% 0% 5 0% 1% 0. 9 1% 1% TOTAL 100% 100% 100% cv Average 3 .3 .2 0 n= 349 225 114 0 06 Jan 17 Source:RRC Associates c cv Packet Pg. 2797 Monroe County 2016 Employer Survey R d Physical location of business Within incorporated Unincorporated OVERALL cities Monroe County A building shared with other tenants 50% 50% 50% Is your business located in: A building occupied exclusively by my business 50% 50% 50% ram. 100% 100% 100% TOTAL �+ n= 363 238 117 N m 0-999 sq ft. 35% 31% 43% 1,000-2,499 sq ft. 34% 34% 32% What is the approximate gross square footage of floor area 2,500-4,999 sq ft. 13% 12% 14% your business occupies? 5,000-9,999 sq ft. 12% 14% 9% 10,000+sq ft. 6% 9% 2% TOTAL 100% 100%Q 100% .22 m Average 3525.2 4440.6 1866.1 m Median 1386.0 1500.0 1000.0 C 0 n= 319 206 107 06 Jan 17 0 Source:RRC Associates 0. cv 0 U 2 C 0 tV I Packet Pg. 2798 Monroe County 2016 Employer Survey R d Physical location of business Within incorporated Unincorporated Hotels/lodging: Gross square footage by catego OVERALL cities Monroe County 0-999 sq ft. 44% 38% 100% Gross square footage of floor 2,500-4,999 sq ft. 22% 25% area in individual lodging rooms/units 5,000-9,999 sq ft. 11% 13% 10,000+sq ft. 22% 25% TOTAL 100% 100% 100% c, Average 5627.2 6330.0 5.0 W n= 9 8 1 0-999 sq ft. 67% 63% 100% Gross square footage of floor o o area in restaurants 1,000-2,499 sq ft. 22/° 25/° 10,000+sq ft. 11% 13% TOTAL 100% 100% 100% y 0 Average 2611.1 2937.5 .0 z n= 9 8 1 0 Gross square footage of floor 0-999 sq ft. 78% 75% 100% area in retail shops 1,000-2,499 sq ft. 22% 25% TOTAL 100% 100% 100% Average 400.0 450.0 .0 c 0. n= 9 8 1 Gross square footage of floor 0-999 sq ft. 78% 75% 100% cv area in meeting spaces, spas, lobbies,and other 1,000-2,499 sq ft. 11% 13% guest service areas of property 10,000+sq ft. 11% 13% 2 TOTAL 100% 100% 100% Average 3666.7 4125.0 .0 04 n= 9 8 1 06 Jan 17 Source:RRC Associates Packet Pg. 2799 Monroe County 2016 Employer Survey Physical location of business Within incorporated Unincorpora OVERALL cities Monroe Cot Retail/merchandising 26% 31% 1 Office•private(excluding medical office) 25% 24% 2 Restaurant/food service/bar 13% 17% h Home office/business is located in my home 11% 7% 1 Warehouse 7% 6% 1CD r N Services(bank,hair salon,gas station,automobile care,etc.) 6% 3% 1 0) Which of the following best Other 6% 5% Ca describes the type(s)of building space your business occupies. Medical(hospital/clinic,nursing home,vet clinic,etc.,including medical offices) 5% 5% W Hotel/lodging 6% 8% t8 Docking/marine/port facilities 5% 5% Institutional(school/college,church,museum,day care,etc.) 4% 5% Industrial(incl.light/heavy industrial,manufacturing,utilities,etc.) 3% 3% Office•government 3% 3% Recreational(theater,athletic club,recreation center,etc.) 2% 2% 124% 124% 12 TOTAL n= 376 240 r- Increase your number of employees 26% 25% 2 During the next five years,do Reduce your number of employees 2% 3% you plan to: Stay about the same 55% 55% 5 Don't know 17% 17% 1 100% 100% 10 TOTAL n= 376 241 a 06 Jan 17 Source:RRC Associates Qg r N 0 U W 0 0 N I X LU Packet Pg. 2800 Monroe County 2016 Employer Survey Physical location of business Within incorporated Unincorporated OVERALL cities Monroe County 1 21% 20% 21% 2 26% 28% 24% r�. 3 10% 10% 12% (If expect to add employees) 4 4% 5% 3% N How many employees do you expect to add over the nex five 5 16% 16% 15% years? 6 6% 3% 12l o i U 7 2% 3% 8 1% 2% N 10+ 14% 13% 15% TOTAL 100% 100% 100% m Average 4.5 4.5 4.6 n= 96 61 34 c (If expect to reduce employees) 1 33% 20% 100% By how many employees do you expect to reduce your 2 50% 60% workforce over the next five years? 3 17% 20% TOTAL 100% 100% 100% Average 1.8 2.0 1.0 n= 6 5 1 0 56% 56% 59% 1 20°% 20% 20% tv 2 15% 16% 14% 0 3 3% 4/° 3/o W° ° � Approximately how many of your employees will be retiring 4 1% 1% 1% in the next five years? 5 2% 3% 2% 04 6 1% 0% 1% x 8 0% 0% 10+ 1% 0% 1% m TOTAL 100% 100% 100% Average 1.0 1.0 .9 n= 347 223 ' 116 06 Jan 17 Source:RRC Associates Packet Pg. 2801 Monroe County 2016 Employer Survey R d How difficult is it for your employees Physical location of business Within in the following groups to find incorporated Unincorporated affordable housing in Monroe County? OVERALL cities Monroe County 1=Not at all difficult 5% 3% 7% 2 2% 1% 5% Seasonal employees 3=Moderately difficult 3% 3% 2% 4 8% 7% 9% N 5=Very difficult 83% 85% 77% TOTAL 100% 100% 100% W Average 4.6 4.7 4.5 n= 132 87 44 1=Not at all difficult 5% 5% 6% 2 3% 3% 2% m Retail/service clerks 3=Moderately difficult 10% 8% 15% 4 14% 16% 8%Q 5=Very difficult 69% 69% 69% 0 TOTAL 100% 100% 100% Average 4.4 4.4 4.3 n= 155 105 48 1=Not at all difficult 5% 3% 8% 2 3% 2% 5% 0. General labor/service 3=Moderately difficult 10% 13% 6% 4 11% 13% 8%Q 5=Very difficult 71% 69% 73% TOTAL 100% 100% 100%Q 2 C Average 4.4 4.4 4.3 I n= 04 193 127 64 _ 06 Jan 17 Source:RRC Associates Lu Packet Pg. 2802 Monroe County 2016 Employer Survey R d How difficult is it for your employees Physical location of business Within in the following groups to find incorporated Unincorporated affordable housing in Monroe County? OVERALL cities Monroe County 1=Not at all difficult 4% 3% 7% 2 5% 6% 3% i Office support staff 3=Moderately difficult 13% 16% 9% 4 14% 18% 9% i N 5=Very difficult 63% 57% 72% TOTAL 100% 100% 100% W Average 4.3 4.2 4.4 n= 205 .i 131 69 1=Not at all difficult 1% 1% 2% 2 4% 7% m Entry level professionals 3=Moderately difficult 13% 11% 19% 4 13% 13%4 13% 0 z 5=Very difficult 69% 69% 67% 0 TOTAL 100% 100% 100% Average 4.4 4.4 4.4 n= 160 104 54 1=Not at all difficult 4% 5% 2% 0. 2 6% 7% 6% W Mid-management 3=Moderately difficult 17% 19% 15% cv 4 12% 8% 19% 5=Very difficult 62% 62% 59% TOTAL 100% 100% 100% 2 C Average 4.2 4.2 4.3 I n= 04 165 107 54 _ 06 Jan 17 Source:RRC Associates Lu Packet Pg. 2803 Monroe County 2016 Employer Survey R d How difficult is it for your employees Physical location of business Within in the following groups to find incorporated Unincorporated affordable housing in Monroe County? OVERALL cities Monroe County 1=Not at all difficult 11% 13% 9% 2 11% 14% 5%Q Upper management 3=Moderately difficult 16% 15% 20% 4 11% 10% 14% N m 5=Very difficult 50% 48% 52% TOTAL 100% 100% 100% W Average 3.8 3.7 3.9 n= 174 114 56 1=Not at all difficult 17% 14% 29% 2 3% 5% m Other 3=Moderately difficult 13% 14% 14% 4 13% 18% 5=Very difficult 53% 50% 57% 0 TOTAL 100% 100% 100% Average 3.8 3.9 3.6 n= 30 22 7 06 Jan 17 w Source:RRC Associates 0. Lu cv 0 CJ 2 C 0 tV I Packet Pg. 2804 Monroe County 2016 Employer Survey R d Physical location of business Within incorporated Unincorporai OVERALL cities Monroe Coui High turnover 38% 38% 3E High absentee rate 8% 8% 9 How,if at all,has the r� availability of affordable Tardiness from long commutes 17% 14% 24 housing in Monroe County , affected the work performance Displeasure with wage rates due to high housing costs 47% 49% 44 of your employees? N Other 8% 9% 7 tJ I don't believe housing has affected employee performance 30% 27% 3E 148% 145% 15E W TOTAL n= 355 232 1 .2 0 45% 40% 5E 1 10% 10% 9 . 2 14% 15% 11 3 9% 10% 7 How many people,in your estimation,were not hired or 4 7% 8% 4 left your employment in the past 12 months because they 5 4% 3% 5 lacked affordable housing? 6 3% 4% 1 7 1% 1% 8 1% 0% 1 10+ 8% 9% 7 0. TOTAL 100% 100% 10C Uj Average 2.8 3.2 N n= 347 225 1 0 One of our lesser problems 2% 1% 4 U W A problem,but there are others which also need attention 15% 16% 1 E Do you feel affordable/employee housing One of the more serious problems 50% 51% 47 21 for local residents is: The most critical problem in the Monroe County area 29% 30% 2E I don't believe it is a problem 4% 2% 100% 100% 10C TOTAL n= 365 235 1 06 Jan 17 Source:RRC Associates Packet Pg. 2805 Monroe County 2016 Employer Survey R d Physical location of business Within incorporated Unincorporate OVERALL cities Monroe Coun, Purchase/own units that you rent to employees 11% 12% 101/ Master lease units that you rent to employees 1% 1% 1° .o ram. Provide housing to employees as part of compensation 8% 8% 81/ What type(s)of housing Down payment assistance 4% 4% 4° Q assistance,if any,do you N currently provide for your m employees? Provide rent subsidies 5% 7% 21/ tJ Assist employees with housing search 21% 22% 20 Other assistance 6% 8% 41/ None of the above 62% 58% 670YN 118% 120% 1164 TOTAL n= 296 188 1 G m Purchase/own units that you rent to employees 4% 3% 51/ Master lease units that you rent to employees 2% 2% 40 Provide housing to employees as part of compensation 3% 4% 1°/ What type(s)of housing Down payment assistance 0% 1/o o o assistance,if any,would you consider providing to your W employees in the future? Provide rent subsidies 3% 3% 41/ W Assist employees with housing search 7% 9% 40 Other assistance 4% 6% 1°/ None of the above 82% 79% 84 0. TOTAL 105% 106% 1044 CD n= 206 124 7 c44 Purchase/own units that you rent to employees 13% 14% 141, 0 Master lease units that you rent to employees 3% 2% 40Y 0 Provide housing to employees as part of compensation 10% 11% 91/ What type(s)of housing assistance,if any,do you Down payment assistance 4% 5% 40 N� currently provide or would you consider providing to your Provide rent subsidies 7% 9% 51/ employees? Assist employees with housing search 26% 28% 23 Other assistance 8% 11% 41/ m None of the above 54% 49% 60 126% 128% 1231, TOTAL n= 298 190 1G 06 Jan 17 Source:RRC Associates Packet Pg. 2806 Monroe County 2016 Employer Survey R d Please rate the level of priority that Physical location of business Within should be placed on creating the incorporated Unincorporated following types of housing for employees. OVERALL cities Monroe County 1=Low priority 5% 4% 7% 2 2% 3°% 1% Rental housing for year- 3=Moderate priority 9% 8% 11% round employees cv 4 18% 17% 21% T 5=High priority 66% 68% 60% TOTAL 100°% 100% 100% Average 4.4 4.4 4.3 n= 347 229 113 1=Low priority 21% 21% 21% 2 14% 16°% 9% Rental housing for seasonal o 0 0 employees 3=Moderate priority 33/0 35/0 31/o 4 16% 15% 17% r_ 5=High priority 16% 13% 22% TOTAL 100°% 100% 100% Average 2.9 2.8 3.1 n= 295 197 94 c 1=Low priority 8% 6% 11% 0. LU 2 4% 3°% 7% (0 Entry-level for-sale housing 3=Moderate priority 21% 21% 22% N for year-round employees 4 19% 20% 18% 5=High priority 47% 49% 43% 0 TOTAL 100°% 100% 100% I Average 3.9 4.0 3.8 n= 314 207 102 uJ 06 Jan 17 Source:RRC Associates Packet Pg. 2807 Monroe County 2016 Employer Survey R d Please rate the level of priority that Physical location of business Within should be placed on creating the incorporated Unincorporated following types of housing for employees. OVERALL cities Monroe County 1=Low priority 14% 12% 19% Move-up for-sale housing for 2 12% 12% 13% year-round employees(for current homeowners needing 3=Moderate priority 32% 33% 31% more space,e.g.increasing family size,etc.) 4 18% 20% 16% 5=High priority 23% 24% 20% TOTAL 100°% 100% 100% Average 3.2 3.3 3.0 n= 274 181 89 1=Low priority 32% 29% 40% 3=Moderate priority 32% 36°% 20% Other type(s)of housing 4 16% 14% 20% 0 5=High priority 21% 21% 20% `-' r_ TOTAL 100% 100% 100% Average 2.9 3.0 2.8 n= 19 14 5 06 Jan 17 2 Source:RRC Associates 0. Lu cv 0 CJ C 0 cv Packet Pg. 2808 R.1.d r�. N m c m c c c N c 0 0 c 0 i x Appendix: Open-Ended Comments MONROE COUNTY EMPLOYER SURVEY 2016 Packet Pg. 2809 R.1.d Table of Contents Please describe your type of business other 1 Which of the following best describes the type(s) of building space your business occupies? (other)............................................................................................................ 1 How difficult is it for your employees to find affordable housing in Monroe County? other employee type) 2 W How, if at all, has the availability of affordable housing in Monroe County affected the work performance of your employees? (other 3 Please indicate the types of workforce housing assistance you provide or would consider providing in the future. other 3 Please rate the level of priority that should be placed on creating the following types of housing for employees. other 4 Do you have any other comments or suggestions regarding affordable housing for employees in Monroe Count 5 N 0 C 0 N U Packet Pg. 2810 R.1.d Monroe County Employer Survey 2016 Please describe your type of business: (other) Type of Business(other) Beauty Salon r�. Boat yard Chamber of Commerce Church cv Church/religious facility Fabrication of marine products Internet Services W Kitchen cabinetry, design and sales Marine mammal research &education facility o Media and marketing Museum Museum Museum/Not for profit Non profit animal shelter nonprofit Non-profit z Non-profit Non-profit Non-profit affordable housing Not for profit Not-for-Profit Prison Private Golf Course &Clubhouse Process server Recycling cg Religious Which of the following best describes the type(s) of building space your business occupies? (other) 0 Type of Building Space Occupied (other) i Airport Animal housing Boat sales Condo Condominium Greenhouse Historic buildings < House type building on commercial property Mobile RRC Associates 1 Packet Pg. 2811 R.1.d Monroe County Employer Survey 2016 Type of Building Space Occupied (other) Mobile Mobile Mobile service/cleaning Non-profit Prison Private Golf Course &Clubhouse `V Professional, legal Property manager\'s housing and meeting area Psychology practice Residential condominium Ship Strip center, 5 tenants, 5 units Visitor Center Workshops with homeless m How difficult is it for your employees to find affordable housing in Monroe County? 0 (other employee type) r- Difficult to Find Housing(other employees) Bartenders Both self-employed Business owners CEO Chef _ 0 Day care teachers delivery driver Licensed electricians cv Maintenance Owner 0 Pastor c, Professionals real estate sales Realtors i cv Sales Agents ' RRC Associates 2 Packet Pg. 2812 R.1.d Monroe County Employer Survey 2016 How, if at all, has the availability of affordable housing in Monroe County affected the work performance of your employees? (other) Housing Availability Effects on Work Performance(other) Business barely sustains housing Callouts due to working 2 jobs Can't find affordable Can't live close Cannot afford employees Cannot find employees Cranky employees Difficult to attract out of market candidates Difficult to find great affordable help Difficult to recruit people Distracting because of high price Good group of employees now. Used to have high turnover rate due to high housing cots in keys and had to _ commute from Homestead. High stress, low productivity High turnover of clients! Z I don't believe we need more subsidized housing. 0 Limited workforce Many don't last long Nearly bankrupts us No employees No one can afford Monroe's 'affordable housing' Recruiting workers o Tardiness due to holding multiple jobs to pay for housing They struggle cg Unable to afford to buy Unhappy with high cost of housing unprofessional and low skilled We assist our employees when needed We a well but housing is an issue o pay g � 0 cv Please indicate the types of workforce housing assistance you provide or would consider providing in the future. (other) Housing Assistance Provided or Considered (other) Affordable home ownership Bunk room available while on duty Co-sign equitable salaries Fair salaries RRC Associates 3 Packet Pg. 2813 R.1.d Monroe County Employer Survey 2016 Housing Assistance Provided or Considered (other) First last&security loans Gas money Higher wages r�. Higher wages to accommodate higher housing expenses I manage apartments Increase base salary `V Loans Offer reduced rate, dockage Pay higher than average wages possibility of a loan Possibly purchasing a mobile home at Stadium and only charge the lot rent to the employee. Provide housing Provide median income homes for sale Rehab and ownership Small loans from F/L/S We have given loans in the past We house the homeless 0 We pay living wage-$42.50/hr plus benefits z r- 0 Please rate the level of priority that should be placed on creating the following types of housing for employees. (other) Priority for Employee Housing(other) 1 bedroom 1 bath rentals "a0 Homeless shelter I don't know, you figure it out. Parsonage provide to pastor not compensation N Possible efficiency units where you could build many in a small footprint. Allow homeowners to rent out accessory units as rental units for a restricted rent amount. We need higher wages-this would do away with the housing problem 2 r- 0 i RRC Associates 4 Packet Pg. 2814 R.1.d Monroe County Employer Survey 2016 Do you feel affordable/employee housing for local residents is 1) one of our lesser problems; 2) a problem among others; 3) one of the more serious problems; 4) the most serious problem in Monroe County; or 5) not a problem? Do you have any other comments or suggestions regarding affordable housing for employees in Monroe County? N Problem of Affordable Housing j (1=Lesser problem,4=Most critical problem,5=not a Comments problem) 1 Drinking alcohol; drug use; lack of skill and lack of vocation; painkillers prescribed by doctors-these are problems. This affects ALL of the workforce. 1 People accept Key West for other reasons. If you can't afford it 'it is what it is.' 1 Tax incentives or rental or work force housing, don't raise taxes on people —� renting to longterm 1 The Upper Keys is fine with workers coming in from homestead o 2 Enforce laws with regard to illegal rentals r_ 2 I believe many money people would like The Key before the wealthy, no labors or trades people. What they don't seem to realize is the great increase of services (cost). 2 I don't feel it's the most important issue. We live on an island. It's expensive. My main problem with retaining employees is they move away disenchanted with lots of things here. Not just rent. 2 I feel housing should be close to place of employment. It should not be up o the keys. 2 Increasing density for affordable workforce housing brings many impacts to neighbors and should be discouraged. No affordable housing should be cv given fractional ROGO/BPAS as all potentially contribute to emergency evacuation traffic stream. 2 It seems that the current economic environment is driving rent rates very high. This is probably a cyclical issue due to strong local economy and low home ownership. Capitalization rates for investors is creating a situation where too much affordable rentals are being built. During the next i downturn in our economy,for profit landlords will do whatever they need in order to generate rents. Having high density projects with subsidized _ rent will not be a good situation for our community. Please focus efforts on building homes that can be purchased by middle income workers and professionals that make up the fabric and strength of our communities. Then they will be able to stay as long term residents.Thanks! 2 none -our situation is not typical as we have a small professional group 2 Property taxes must decrease before affordable housing can even be seriously addressed 2 Should be more discounted housing for employees. RRC Associates 5 Packet Pg. 2815 R.1.d Monroe County Employer Survey 2016 Problem of Affordable Housing (1=Lesser problem,4=Most Comments critical problem,5=not a problem) 2 Tax paying dollars should not be used on housing for profit making businesses. It's understandable for government,teacher, fire, police, etc. We should be subsidizing rent for bartenders so that private individuals/businesses can still turn a profit. This survey is for only one T part of our business. The biggest struggle of our entire agency is recruiting j and maintaining the specialized staff needed for the local services we provide. It's frustrating that we struggle with staffing for a state mandated program, etc. I know of two people who have affordable housing. One moved here to be a hairdresser, which is needed but not essential. The other works part-time as a club DJ, and had a list of arrests. 2 The definition of affordable needs to be modified based on wages available to be earned in the Florida Keys transient workforce. Finding qualified, educated, employees who are willing to work, are honest, not alcoholics or drug addicted is very difficult. If you do find someone who meets employment and background checks, being able to pay them so they can live here becomes the issue. When such a person is found, you o do your best to be able to pay them efficiently so they can afford to live here. 0 2 The employers in this county are for the most part pathetic. You have no job security,they don't pay decent wages, given the cost of living down here, they think that just because you live here ('in paradise')that's their 'license' to pay you welfare type wages . I've lived here since 1969 and it's gotten worse, it's sad. 2 What happens to legitimate concerns re hurricane evacuation? Too many workforce housing units which REALLY are NOT affordable for the average 0. employee!! 3 Affordable housing is a myth. If you want to live here you have to pay the price-there plenty of other places in the US that are more affordable. 3 Affordable housing is a priority but I don't think it should be available in high dollar like Old Town. 3 Affordable housing should not be$2500 a month. That's not affordable. 0 3 Affordable housing should not be placed in Old Town Key West. The city can get higher taxes for second homes which will not impact our schools o and other services. Clean up Stock Island and put affordable housing N there. 3 Allow more downtown enclosures; reduce short term rentals that are illegal; need more affordable 'affordable' housing 3 Anyone can see, affordable housing is a huge issue. I am personally on the waiting list, and have not moved 10 positions (out of 191) in 9 months. This indicates the demand is critical! 3 Apartment buildings like the rest of the United States 3 Biggest reason for lack of GOOD potential employees. RRC Associates 6 Packet Pg. 2816 R.1.d Monroe County Employer Survey 2016 Problem of Affordable Housing (1=Lesser problem,4=Most Comments critical problem,5=not a problem) 3 Create educational opportunities to further careers of all working citizens. EMT, teachers, firemen, police-teach them to be frugal. State mandates to be paid for by the state or Feds. 3 Developers of new commercial floor space in Monroe County should also T develop workforce housing. The county should require this. j 3 Employers need affordable housing too! I wish I could pay my employees more but I can barely afford my own rent and bills. 3 Focus priority on smaller spaces/efficiency apartments for 1-2 people that they can afford and promote saving money. 3 High business rents make it difficult to pay employees 3 Hopefully firm can help reduce the criminal insurance rates which would correct the housing for owners. Increased enforcement with increased work requirements in public housing. 3 Housing within Monroe Co. has been critical for years, and with larger developers showing interest, becoming more so. It's edging labor out of the area. o 3 1 believe that the large employers who have many low wage employees '- should bear their share of the cost of housing for their employees.They gain the most from tourism and should therefore shoulder more of the burden than the average worker or county taxpayer. Perhaps a special tax on employers with more than X number of lower wage employees that goes straight to an affordable housing fund. 3 1 can tell you this subject is one of the main reasons we can't fully staff our stores and in the number one reason I lose good employees. Employees o talk about it everyday. 3 1 give up 3 1 think housing could be more affordable if rental laws were enforced. cv 3 Ideas for employers: Offer low interest financing$/or tax incentives for purchasing employee only housing. Property investors aren't going to be interested in renting space for less than their mortgage payments. 3 If apartments were allowed upstairs houses that would be affordable and create low rent. 0 3 if we don't get some reasonable housing there won't be anyone here to i service the tourist. `V 3 In the past year there are two of us leaving due to cost of living regarding housing. We can no longer afford to live here. One of us after 12 years in the Keys. Friends outside this business (5-6) have left; some after 25 years of being here. 3 Increase density restrictions and raise building height to promote inexpensive building techniques 3 It is a disparaging situation that I cannot find qualified employees that have housing because the wages do not match the living expenses in this area. I do not know of a solution. I have lost a great employee and a well RRC Associates 7 Packet Pg. 2817 R.1.d Monroe County Employer Survey 2016 Problem of Affordable Housing (1=Lesser problem,4=Most Comments critical problem,5=not a problem) qualified employee due to housing problems. Because of a lack of affordable and quality housing, I am forced to hire less than desirable employees. Employees living in substandard housing or in conditions not meant to be lived in is a concern, and I know that this is an overwhelming problem in Monroe County. I do not believe a minimum wage or more j government housing is a solution.This appears to be a longstanding problem that has not been solved and I do not see it solved in the near future. Having employees riding a bus for hours each day is not a solution. Passing out cost of living vouchers has the potential to create slum lords and will still contribute to over priced housing. Monroe County and tourist rely upon the services that small business and employees provide. 3 It's a problem- I'm happy to see this outreach to local business owners. It's nearly impossible for me to hire experienced professional talent out of market- but we do make it happen. 3 It's important to have/provide affordable housing available to Monroe County citizens so out of area people don't take the local jobs keep earned o $$ in the keys. 3 Many employees living together and/or with others together in order to afford living in Key West 3 Most of our employees are having to work two jobs to make it. We pay well enough that it shouldn't be the case but prices for what's available are crazy. 3 Most our employees are long term - most make over 16-18/hr. 3 Much of this does not apply to my mobile service. No employees at this time. 3 My staff has not had high turnover. One left 2 years ago for a better paying job. However,with no C-O-L-A-it is getting very hard to all of us to stay. Prices go up but wages do not. 3 Need good staff that can afford it here. I pay$18/hr and that is still not enough. o 3 no 3 No 0 3 none 3 Obviously we are limited by space, so housing in other areas of the Keys `V and a transportation system that is Keys based in addition to the one currently running would work 3 One of our biggest problems is cracking down on the illegal transient rentals. I think quite a bit of headway has been done but more can be done. The fines are often waived for first offenders making it a no risk scenario to rent short term until you get caught the first time. Fines need to be charged on the first offense to help support a strong program to investigate and prosecute transient rental violations. RRC Associates 8 Packet Pg. 2818 R.1.d Monroe County Employer Survey 2016 Problem of Affordable Housing (1=Lesser problem,4=Most Comments critical problem,5=not a problem) 3 Provide property tax breaks to companies for property purchased for employee housing. 3 QUIT FEEING US TO DEATH! LOWER TAXES! MAKE IT AFFORDABLE TO N ENJOY DOWNTOWN WITHOUT HAVING PAY$20 TO $30 TO PARK! SHRINK T GOVERNMENT! ALLOW PEOPLE TO ENCLOSE A PORTION OF THEIR STILT j HOMES FOR INCOME AND LOWER RENT. PROBLEM SOLVED! 3 Raise minimum wage. Place regulations on predatory builders and landlords. 3 Rate of growth is the cause of all thisM Stop the madness. Give permits and the market will solve the problem. No more government interference!! 3 Regarding affecting work performance: Housing issues do not influence job performance. But when existing lease not renewed,they have not been able to find a comparable replacement and have moved away. Housing as —� part of compensation is too much like serfdom. 3 Rentals are way too high! o 3 Stop deed restrictions on affordable housing above commercial. Provide r- tax incentives for development of apartments on top of commercial. 3 Subsidized housing-should be short term only, max 3 years, annual re- verification to qualify. Too much fraud. 3 The cost of doing business here is crazy!! 3 The high rent in this community has chased away what would be great 2 potential employees. They cannot afford the rent prices despite the fact I pay way above minimum wage. o 3 The overall cost of living here in Monroe County causes companies to loose good employees to areas with better cost of living. Not only is housing cost very high, but it is hard to find. 3 This is an important issue for the whole county. Our business is family run and does not really fit the norm for this survey. 3 Very difficult to find affordable rent/own for year round; difficulty recruiting good people; place a priority for full time workers OVER seasonal renters 0 3 We are very fortunate to have an established local workforce, who for the 2 1 most part, have housing. Our problem is with hard to fill positions that we N have to recruit from out of town. Finding adequate housing is very difficult for those who are re-locating. 3 We seem to have more median income housing than we need and nothing much for those in a lower income bracket 3 Why doesn't Key West build high density buildings like AIDS Help did at Poinciana? 3 Yes, we need it. We turn people away at our office multiple times per week needing affordable rentals, in the Lower Keys it's a huge issue! Please consider building some or allow it to happen. RRC Associates 9 Packet Pg. 2819 R.1.d Monroe County Employer Survey 2016 Problem of Affordable Housing (1=Lesser problem,4=Most Comments critical problem,5=not a problem) 4 1) Need dedicated source of local funding to implement A.H. policies. 2) Lobby State of FL to fund Sadowski Housing Trust Fund 100%every year. 3) Resurrect Housing Finance Authority for Monroe County. N 4 Affordable does not mean $2,000. Why does government allowed T unmarried couple to live in government subsidy housing when boyfriend j makes way over$for housing? 4 Affordable housing cannot be for people making$20-$20K a year. Try the lower end, hard working under$20K. Rates currently too high for realistic affordable housing. 4 Build it now!! Before it is too late. It might be too late now!!! Re: Q10- may sell business because of lack of good employees. 4 Definition of'affordable housing' needs to be more realistic-$1500 for a 1 bedroom? Also needs more pet friendly units. 4 HELP! 4 Housing is nearly affordable to most workers unless it's a crappy ill- maintained house or mobile. Income doesn't allow any single living- must o share with others that are non-family. r_ 4 I think there needs to be a funding source: tax increase or toll booth! 4 If there were more long term mobile home parks and small multi-unit rentals this would improve housing. No one wants to live in large apartment communities. Not when they can work and live in Miami for better wages and housing. Quality- nice housing is needed! Large apt communities won't help. no one wants to live there and they have a choice- not working down here. Duplexes or 3-4 units are what should be o built. OR create subsidies that allow mobile/manufactured home purchases where employers can co-sign. Credit isn't something most retail, hotel, and restaurant employees have in the positive. If you build large apt communities and make the paperwork too complicated it WON'T HELP. 4 In general, 8 out of 10 perspective job candidates turn down job offers due to ability to find affordable QUALITY housing. At times, housing (rentals) are not affordable. 0 4 It is a critical issue. There are rental assistance programs in place in Martha's Vineyard that is successful and in place because they have same i issues. 4 It is a Legislative issue- need height and density increases for workforce housing. Government and private partnership. 4 It is easy to say. But affordable is $600 a month. Make dormitory style facility, shared common areas. 4 It is essential that the County (in general)cease growth initiatives until low,very low, and extremely low affordable housing can be caught up with demand. 4 It is illogical and irresponsible for elected officials to enact laws requiring employers to raise minimum wages, without, at the same time, enacting RRC Associates 10 Packet Pg. 2820 R.1.d Monroe County Employer Survey 2016 Problem of Affordable Housing (1=Lesser problem,4=Most Comments critical problem,5=not a problem) laws limiting the ability of landlords to increase commercial and residential rents. 4 It is near to impossible to afford to live here when you own the business N not just the employees. Everyone is being priced out. 4 It's a critical issue. 4 It's ridiculous that rich people are buying homes with affordable rental units and turning them into single family dwellings that are used as vacation rentals or that sit empty for all but 2 weeks each year! This is a very serious problem and not fair that people can't find a DECENT place to N live for a reasonable amount of money! 4 Let's stop talking about it and do something that is truly affordable. $2300 for 2/1 is 'not affordable'Tarpon Harbour. 4 My wife and I, like most, have to supplement our business income buy working other jobs to cover the cost of living in the Keys. v, 4 Not applicable to my business 4 Please do something practical for the work force in Monroe county. This is o a very old issue that has never really been solved. 4 Please do what you can for locals. We lose too many due to high cost of living. We train them and they all leave because of the current cost and we lose money because of it. 4 Please provide affordable housing for work force 4 Please provide more affordable rental housing for local employees 2 4 Process in future based on real need. Most occupants of affordable housing misstate income, rent the dwelling, or report exaggerated bills. 0. How does affordable house tenants drive Mercedes and BMW's? 4 Quit giving money away. Provide low interest loans for buyers/employers to buy and provide housing for employees. N 4 Renovate the old Harris School, build micro apartments for the Key West single labor force. 4 Rescind the ban on downstairs enclosures 4 Skilled workers are very hard to obtain due to high cost of living. 4 Stop Illegal Short term rentals under 28 days! o 4 The cost of rent in Monroe County is ridiculous and it creates a vacuum for i young professionals attempting to live, work, and raise a family here. There is no way to save to purchase homes while paying rent. Business x owners are struggling to find qualified employees due to the fact that even good salaries are many times no match for the cost of living. This results in high turnover. m 4 The county really needs to do something about it. It is an awful mess and they just take money from developers who promise affordable housing but never deliver and the county never punishes them.The county commissioners are getting rich from their pockets being padded by RRC Associates 11 Packet Pg. 2821 R.1.d Monroe County Employer Survey 2016 Problem of Affordable Housing (1=Lesser problem,4=Most Comments critical problem,5=not a problem) developpers and they flat out do not care about the workers who make this island what it is , 4 The vacation rental market is destroying the few affordable units that were in existence. T 4 There are no homes to rent for 12 months in Marathon. All houses are j being rented by the week to tourists. Workers can't find a house in town. 4 There is NO affordable housing. 4 There just is no such thing in Monroe County anymore. RV lot rates are 0 $1500 or more. We need to allow the use of downstairs enclosures. Ease building permits for employee housing. 4 This is a critical issue and the cost of training new employees is a burden. Level of service suffers and guests do not get value! 4 This is the number one reason for employees leaving. 4 This issue MUST be addressed due to the growth of Monroe County 4 This survey will be just another waste of time unless something is done immediately to create housing. It's an emergency!! z 4 We are closing our building here because we can't afford it at the moment. 4 We definitely need places for lower income families 1500 to 2000 a month is not affordable to many making 600 a week 4 We must re-visit our wetlands designations and allow housing to be built in heavily impacted impounded wetland areas 4 We need affordable housingM My employee of 7 years just left because 2 of housing and I have not replaced her yet. 4 We need affordable housing. Affordable isn't$2500. 5 Bus employees in from Homestead. Have buses that are punctual and clean; let employers or employees pay for it so the taxpayers isn't burdened. N 5 Either employers should pay more to keep local employees (higher wages) or employee can get lower housing in Homestead, 30 minute drive or bus. Free or affordable housing will bring freeloaders to our community causing a rise in crime and threaten safety. We paid enormous prices for our homes (housing) for peace of mind and security. Residents should pay their own way or seek another town. i cv 5 FYI I manage many year round rentals. Large and small. Many sit vacant month after month. I do not believe there is an issue with housing. I've been a landlord for 45 years here in the Upper Keys. 5 Give tax breaks to the owners of the properties if they keep them year- round rentals for workers in the County. 5 Gov't should not be in the landlord business. 5 1 do not believe housing is a problem. Our rental rates are in par with other parts of Florida. I rent in other areas and I pay more in other parts of Florida. RRC Associates 12 Packet Pg. 2822 R.1.d Monroe County Employer Survey 2016 Problem of Affordable Housing (1=Lesser problem,4=Most Comments critical problem,5=not a problem) 5 There is plenty of affordable housing. People should further their education, move, or get another job if they are struggling.There are opportunities for people to purchase houses too, but it seems as though people want handouts/subsidies which are not fair for people who have T worked hard to live in paradise. j 5 When trailer parks sold out to developers there went affordable housing Allow more units per property. Major incentives for builders to develop. Control rent on additional affordable units. My business is family only and we all own our homes in the same block of .2 business. Reduce impediments caused by zoning laws, building dept, planning, density limits, height limits, environmental restrictions, etc and problem will solve itself We need housing for people who live here and work. When you build the v, needed houses that is needed, make sure that the rich don't bu people Y them and after a few years they jack the rent payment up high as they 0 have done, like at the Truman, housing that was supposed to be for low '✓ income. o I do not meet your requirements for affordable housing. I do not make enough to apply and I own a business here. I own my home I purchased 27 years ago for less than $70,000. If I came here within the last 10 years, I would never have made it. I only hire sub-contractors who own their own 0 homes. a, Ours is a satellite law office, therefore, most of the questions do not apply to us. The problem is not with housing, but with low wages! We need a min. wage for Monroe County. Many cities, etc. are smart enough to pass a min. wage law! These large hotels are making tons of money but not passing it on to the workers. They don't even pay them full time so they can afford paying health insurance. It is also the stores. People working 2 0 and 3 jobs. 0 r_ cv i m 0 RRC Associates 13 Packet Pg. 2823 R.1.d H,,,,- ,H- - C_ ASSOCIATES., r�. MEMORANDUM N TO: Mayte Santamaria, Senior Director, Planning and Environmental Resources, Monroe County, FL CJ FROM: RRC Associates (David Becher) and Jim Nicholas DATE: May 30, 2017 W RE: Proposed Prototypical Housing Unit for Monroe County Workforce Housing Support Study A. Nature and Size of Prototypical Affordable Workforce Housing Unit in Monroe County One of the most important considerations in determining the need for affordable workforce housing in the County is to define just what is a prototypical affordable workforce housing unit. In other words, what size and type of affordable workforce housing unit will need to be built when need is determined. The prototypical workforce housing unit was determined by compiling the data on existing affordable workforce housing units built within the last decade, for which the County had information on size (square feet), the number of bedrooms, and the costs to build the units.These selected units are reasonably dispersed throughout the Keys, and consist of nine different developments of varying size totaling 554 units.'The developments include: 2 • A multi-unit land trust development—Middle Keys; 0 • A multi-unit modular development — Upper Keys; • Meridian West (Harbor Bay Investments)—Lower Keys; • Tradewinds Hammocks Phase 1—Upper Keys; • Blue Water—Upper Keys; 0 • A multi-unit townhome development—Lower Keys; U • A multi-unit apartment development built in 2016—Middle Keys; C • A multi-unit senior living apartment development—Upper Keys; and o • A multi-unit apartment development under construction in 2017— Middle and Lower Keys. These affordable workforce housing developments include a varying number of bedrooms that serve x families of different sizes. Not surprisingly,the majority of the units (56%) are two bedrooms.The nine developments are identified In Table 1: Affordable Workforce Housing Developments, Monroe County, along with the number of units they include,the size of the units (in square feet), and the number of bedrooms in each unit. 'There are 824 existing affordable workforce housing units in the County. 4770 BASELINE ROAD,STE 360•BOULDER,CO 80303•TEL 303/449-6558•FAx 303/449-6587•RRCASSOCIATES.COM Packet Pg. 2824 R.1.d Proposed Prototypical Housing Unit for Workforce Housing Support Study May 30, 2017 ® a r a ram. Multi-Unit Land Trust Apartments 16 1,109 17,744 Multi-Unit Modular Apartments 72 1,120 80,640 6 750 4,500 2 1,364 2,728 30 1,364 40,920 0 Meridian West(Harbor Bay Investments) v, 17 600 10,200 68 817 55,556 17 1,034 17,578 Tradewinds Hammocks Ph 1 11 700 7,700 35 890 31,150 20 1,050 21,000 Blue Water 0 2 660 1,320 24 801 19,224 10 1,165(4BR) 11,650 Multi-Unit Townhome Development 2 40 1,150 46,000 49 1,275 62,475 Multi-Unit Apartment(Built 2016) 16 710 11,360 27 950 25,650 8 1170 9,360 Multi-Unit Senior Living Apartment o 28 695 19,460 0 14 757 10,598 0 0 0 2 1 Multi-Unit Apartment(Under Construction 2017) 6 710 4,260 22 950 20,900 14 1170 16,380 TOTALS 554 548,353 SOURCE: Monroe County Planning and Environmental Resources Department, and data from individual builder/developers of affordable housing developments. RRC Associates and Jim Nicholas 2 Packet Pg. 2825 R.1.d Proposed Prototypical Housing Unit for Workforce Housing Support Study May 30, 2017 To determine the average affordable workforce housing unit from this information, the following analysis was conducted. First, the size (in square feet) of the average unit was determined by totaling the area (in square feet) of each of the units identified in Table 1, and dividing the total area of the units by the total number of units—resulting in an average unit size of 990 square feet. Next,the number of bedrooms for the average unit was determined by adding the total number of bedrooms in these units, , and dividing the total number of bedrooms by the total number of units—resulting in an average cv bedroom size of 2.2 bedrooms for the average unit. See Table 2: Affordable Workforce Housing Average Unit Size and Number of Bedrooms, Monroe County. r ° a r ° oil 1 9 ° Average Size of Workforce Housing Units Total Square Footage Workforce Housing Units Table 1 548,353 Total Number of Workforce Housing Units Table 1 554 Average Size(in square feet) of Workforce Housing Units 990 Sq.Ft. Average Number of Bedrooms Per Workforce Housing Unit Total Number of Bedrooms Workforce Housing Units Table 1 1204 Total Number of Workforce Housing Units Table 1 554 Average Number of Bedrooms Workforce Housing Unit 2.2 Bedrooms per Unit SOURCE:Table 1: Affordable Workforce Housing Developments. Monroe County Because the prototypical unit should be a complete buildable unit, instead of using the average of 2.2 0. bedrooms per unit and an average size taken from units with different numbers of bedrooms,we suggest the prototypical unit should be set at 2 bedrooms per unit and calculated specifically from the population of 2 bedroom units identified in Table 1—resulting in a size for the prototypical affordable workforce housing unit of 955 square feet. See Table 3: Size Prototypical Affordable Workforce Housing Unit, Monroe County. C 0 cv x RRC Associates and Jim Nicholas 3 Packet Pg. 2826 R.1.d Proposed Prototypical Housing Unit for Workforce Housing Support Study May 30, 2017 cv Multi-Unit Modular Apartments j smaller floorplan 6 750 4,500 larger floorplan 72 1,120 80,640 Meridian West (Harbor Bay Investments) 68 817 55,556 0 Tradewinds Hammocks (Phase 1) 35 890 31,150 Blue Water 24 801 19,224 Multi-Unit Townhome Development 40 1,150 46,000 Multi-Unit Apartment Built 2016 27 950 25,650 Multi-Unit Senior Living Apartment 14 757 10,598 Multi-Unit Apartment Under Construction 2017 22 950 20,900 TOTAL 308 294,218 0 Average Size of 2 Bedroom Unit (Square Feet) 955 SOURCE:Table 1:Affordable Workforce Housing Developments. Monroe County 0 2 In sum, and based on a review of the data on existing affordable workforce housing units built within the last decade, for which the County had information on size (square feet),the number of bedrooms, and 0. the costs to build the units, the prototypical affordable workforce housing unit has 2 bedrooms and is 955 square feet in area. See Table 4: Prototypical Workforce Housing Unit, Monroe County. cv 0 0 e6 ° rya Ca 0 0 Number of Bedrooms 2 Size of Unit (in square feet) 955 1 SOURCE:Analysis in Tables 1,2 and 3. x m 0 RRC Associates and Jim Nicholas 4 Packet Pg. 2827 R.1.d Proposed Prototypical Housing Unit for Workforce Housing Support Study May 30, 2017 B. Costs of Workforce Housing The costs of the prototypical unit are based on the square foot costs of building affordable workforce housing.The square foot costs are based on six affordable workforce housing developments for which development costs information was available through a survey of local builders/developers. The total , costs of these projects are shown in Table 5: Costs to Construct Affordable Workforce Housing Developments, Monroe County.The total building and land cost of the 350 units where data was available was $118,824,593.2 The total square footage of the affordable workforce housing units built in these projects was 376,655 square feet. 0 . rn .. o W r_ Multi-Unit Land Trust Middle Modular Apartments Keys Attached 16 17,744 $3,918,936 $4,175,944 $1,039,528 $5,215,473 $293.93 Built 20072 Multi-Unit 2 Modular Upper Modular Apartments Keys Attached 110 128,788 $24,461,352 $25,374,846 $5,000,000 $30,374,846 $235.85 0. Built 2010 Multi Unit Lower Modular Townhome Keys Attached 89 108,475 $31,105,831 $32,231,782 $8,900,000 $41,131,782 $379.18CD r Built 2015 Multi Unit Middle Conventional Apartment Keys Attached 51 50,050 $15,265,341 $15,265,341 $2,100,000 $17,365,341 $346.96 Built 20163 Multi-Unit 0 Senior Upper Conventional Living Keys Attached 42 30,058 $7,811,110 $7,811,110 $771,668 $8,582,778 $285.54 Apartment I Built 20173 Multi-Unit Middle Apartment and Conventional Under Lower Attached 42 41,540 $13,654,373 $13,654,373 $2,500,000 $16,154,373 $388.89 Construction 2017 Keys TOTALS 35 376,655 $96,216,943 $98,513,396 $20,311,196 $118,824,593 $326.405 SOURCE:Data provided by Monroe County affordable housing developers,December 2016 and March 2017. z This number addresses and includes land costs for one project where the land was provided by a land trust, but the true costs of a unit will include both building and land costs. RRC Associates and Jim Nicholas 5 Packet Pg. 2828 R.1.d Proposed Prototypical Housing Unit for Workforce Housing Support Study May 30, 2017 •• N o � NOTES:'Building costs include the costs of design,engineering,contingencies,site preparation,utilities,and mark-up. tJ ZThe Multi-Unit Land Trust Apartments Built 2007 was built in conjunction with a land trust and had no land costs.Land W costs this project is included even though the land was provided by a land trust,because land costs are costs that should be included in determining the cost to build affordable workforce housing.Land costs for the project was estimated by taking the land costs of the Multi-Unit Townhome Built 2015 and the Multi-Unit Modular Apartments .0 Ch Built 2010 and dividing the land costs by the total square footage of the other two projects to establish an average land costs per square foot.This was then multiplied by the total square footage of the land trust project. 3These developments were reported with significant communal or office areas.Costs were adjusted to account for the proportion of the project in actual residences. 4 This number addresses and includes land costs for one project where the land was provided by a land trust.See note 2. 5The cost per foot is the result of eliminating the high and the low costs per foot of floor area. 0 Based on the total costs of building 376,655 square feet of affordable workforce housing at a cost of 0 $118,824,593, the simple average square foot costs of an affordable workforce housing unit is$321.73. Costs range from a low of$235.80 to a high of$388.89. Table 6 shows several different ways to look at costs per foot of floor area. A simple average gives great weight to lower or higher values. A weighted average gives more consideration to larger verses smaller projects. A median is just that, a mid-point between the extremes. The last alternative is to drop the highest and lowest costs and then calculate the average of the remainder. Among the various methods, it is recommended that the last, dropping the highest and the lowest per square foot costs, be used as the typical costs of a workforce housing unit. Note should be taken that costs are all inclusive;the costs include land, site preparation, hard buildings costs, soft costs, utility extensions and connections, and a reasonable return to the builder/developer. 0 0 Simple Average $321.73 0 Median $320.45 2 i Weighted Average $315.47 Average, Excluding High and Low Per Square Foot Costs $326.40 x Average Square Foot Costs Used $326.40 Based on a per square foot costs of$326.40, the costs to build a prototypical unit of affordable workforce housing is$311,712. See Table 7: Costs to Build Prototypical Workforce Housing Unit, Monroe County. RRC Associates and Jim Nicholas 6 Packet Pg. 2829 R.1.d Proposed Prototypical Housing Unit for Workforce Housing Support Study May 30, 2017 Average Cost per Square Foot $326.40 Size of Unit (in square feet) 955 TOTAL COST OF UNIT $311,712 SOURCE:Analysis in Tables 4,5, and 6 ! CJ 0 m 0 r- 0 Lu cv 0 CJ 2 C 0 cv RRC Associates and Jim Nicholas 7 Packet Pg. 2830 No. 01-2016 A RESOLUTION OF THE MONROE COUNTY AFFORDABLE HOUSING ADVISORY COMMITTEE PROVIDING RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA, ON THE TASKS m ASSIGNED TO THE COMMITTEE FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A WORKFORCE HOSUING DEVELOPMENT PLAN. WHEREAS, on May 21, 2008, the Board of County Commissioners of Monroe County adopted Ordinance 014-2008, which amended the Monroe County Code to establish the Affordable Housing Advisory Committee, including its assigned duties; and WHEREAS, Monroe County Code Section 2-701 includes the specific duties of the Affordable Housing Advisory Committee; and WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners, at a regular meeting held on the 20th of 0 August, 2014, approved an agreement between FCRC Consensus Center, FSU, and Monroe County z Board of County Commissioners for professional services on Affordable Workforce Housing `T- CD Stakeholder Assessment; and C�l CD WHEREAS, at a regular meeting held on the 20th of May, 2015, the Board of County Commissioners reviewed and discussed the Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report generated by FCRC Consensus Center, FSU, dated April 2015; and cv i WHEREAS, at a regular meeting held on the 20th of May, 2015, the Board of County � Commissioners adopted Resolution 139-2015 assigning additional duties to the Affordable Housing 2 Advisory Committee; and WHEREAS, at a regular meeting held on the loth of June, 2015, the Board of County Commissioners adopted Ordinance 014-2015 amending Section 2-700 of the Monroe County Code to establish the 14 members of the Affordable Housing Advisory Committee and directed staff to amend Resolution 139-2015 to add one additional duty to the committee; and WHEREAS, on October 16, 2015, the Affordable Housing Advisory Committee adopted 1 Resolution 01-2015, providing recommendations on the first three tasks assigned to the committee for the development of a workforce housing development plan; and WHEREAS, at a regular meeting held on the 17th of November, 2015, the Board of County x Commissioners adopted Resolution 393-2015, supporting and encouraging collaboration between the County of Monroe and incorporated municipalities of Monroe County on addressing the issues of E affordable and workforce housing; and Packet Pg. 2831 WHEREAS, on November 20, 2015, the Affordable Housing Advisory Committee adopted Resolution 02-2015, recommending to the Board of County Commissioners an amendment to the Local Housing Assistance Plan, as required by the State Housing Initiatives Partnership Program Act; and WHEREAS, on November 20, 2015, the Affordable Housing Advisory Committee 9 recommended to the Board of County Commissioners a Review of Surplus Land Inventory and T' Inventory List and provided an inventory of county-owned real property which may be appropriate for affordable housing; and ; WHEREAS, on January 22, 2016, the Affordable Housing Advisory Committee adopted Resolution 03-2015, recommending that the Board of County Commissioners support and fund a nexus study as the first step in considering the expansion of the current County residential inclusionary housing program to cover transient and commercial development in the County; WHEREAS,the Monroe County Affordable Housing Advisory Committee has held meetings on August 21, 2015, September 18, 2015, October 16, 2015, November 20, 2015, December 18, 2015, January 22, 2016, February 19, 2016, March 18, 2016, April 22, 2016, May 20, 2016, June 17, 2016, and July 22, 2016 to produce consensus recommendations to the BOCC on the issues included in their 2 charge; 0 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MONROE COUNTY AFFORDABLE CD HOUSING ADVISORY COMMITTEE: CD The Monroe County Affordable Housing Advisory Committee provides recommendations to the BOCC, attached as Exhibit 1 and incorporated herein. i PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Monroe County Affordable Housing Advisory Committee at Ni a meeting held on the 22nd day of July, 2016. � X Jim Cameron -absent-Tim Root X Capt. Ed Davidson X Jim Saunders _absent Hana Eskra X Stephanie Scuderi X Bill Hunter X Ed Swift IH c t� X Warren Leamard X Randy Wall 0 X Kurt Lewin _absent Jodi Weinhofer X Ken Naylor absent William Wiatt i 2 Packet Pg. 2832 EXHIBIT 1 TASK# 1 & 2 WORKFORCE AND WORKFORCE HOUSING DEFINITIONS AND NEED OCTOBER 2015AHAC CONSENSUSRECOMMENDAnoNS 1. The BOCC should review the Committee's recommended definitions for "Workforce" and "Workforce Housing." If the BOCC accepts the Committee's recommendation, it should direct staff to propose any c44 Land Development Code amendments needed to incorporate them. 2. Workforce means individuals or families who are gainfully employed supplying goods and/or services to Monroe County residents or visitors. 3. Workforce Housing means dwelling units for those who derive at least 70% of their income as members 2 W of the Workforce in Monroe County and who meet the affordable housing income categories of the Monroe County Code. 76 4. Based on the current, available data, the Committee believes there is an unmet Workforce Housing need throughout Monroe County, specifically near employment centers. It recommends the BOCC recognize that Monroe County continues to experience a critical Workforce Housing need. The need and demand for Workforce Housing appears most critical for those households at the median, low and very low- income levels and is most severe in the middle and lower Keys. Z TASK# 3 QUALIFYING & MONITORING DEED RESTRICTED AFFORDABLE HOUSING cv CD OCT®BER 2015AFIAC UNANIMOUS CONSENSUS RECOMMENDATIONS o The bold language for recommendation #7 belo�a��a�ere rug erted refinements that�a�ere agreed to by the AHAC at the June 17 meeting. CD The Committee recommends the BOCC take action to strengthen the County's ability to qualify and monitor deed restricted affordable housing in unincorporated Monroe County. N 75 5. The BOCC should direct staff to continue to build its database of deed-restricted units. 6. The Committee strongly recommends staff coordinate, collaborate and share information with the Monroe County Housing Authority, municipalities, nonprofit entities, and the real estate sector to create a dynamic countywide database,inventory for existing affordable housing. 7. By October 2016, County staff should develop proactive mechanisms including code requirements and fines based on HUD guidelines to enhance the monitoring of affordable housing including consideration of securing the services of the Monroe County Housing Authority, additional County staff i or 3T` party monitoring services or some combination thereof. Funding estimates for such a program should be developed and evaluated by staff and the Monroe County Housing Authority and should be considered in deciding how to develop the most cost effective monitoring and qualifying approach. 8. The Committee strongly recommends staff coordinate and share information with the municipalities in E developing these options,with a goal of developing a countywide monitoring mechanism program. 9. The Committee strongly recommends that the County identify and fund an enhanced enforcement program as an essential element for maintaining affordable workforce housing in the County. This program should address compliance and enforcement of deed restricted property to maintain our 3 Packet Pg. 2833 available housing stock. a) Authorize Code Compliance and/or the Monroe County Tax Collector's Office to more aggressively pursue illegal rentals. b) Require that owner-occupied units be homesteaded. TASK#4 DEVELOP SOLUTIONS FOR RENTAL WORKFORCE HOUSING 10. The AHAC recommends the BOCC direct staff to evaluate and develop comprehensive plan and land development code amendments to create a workforce housing overlay which can be applied to W properties (through a map amendment) to provide additional density bonuses for workforce LN developments that offer only workforce housing rentals in perpetuity on Tier III designated lands. (foivaei y 4 a.) 11. The AHAC recommends the BOCC direct staff to evaluate and recommend a proactive approach to enhance the enforcement against illegal vacation rentals; tourist housing and vacation rentals of affordable housing units;including additional code compliance staff to focus on short-term rentals and continued partnership with the Monroe County Tax Collector. (foivaeily 4 b.) � 12. The AHAC recommends the BOCC direct the Land Authority to evaluate and provide recommendations to the BOCC on utilizing Land Authority funds to buy back expiring deed c� restrictions in order to preserve rental affordable housing. The Land Authority should consider N remaining deed restriction timeframes and make recommendations on potential monetary offers to T_ provide for a range of additional deed restriction Nears, including a priority for perpetual deed c restrictions in order to preserve existing affordable housing. (foivaely 4 C.) i 13. The AHAC recommends the BOCC direct staff to evaluate and provide recommendations to the BOCC on strategies and best practices for engagement, outreach, public awareness and education to i address the NIMBY ("Not in my backyard") sentiment to workforce housing and collaborate with the developers,municipalities, the private and non- profit sectors. (foivaelly 4 d.) 5 TASKS #5 & #6 DEVELOP INCENTIVES FOR WORKFORCE HOUSING ON TIER 3 PROPERTIES, INCLUDING STRATEGIES FOR INCREASING DENSITY. 0 14. The AHAC recommends the BOCC consider issuing requests for proposals (RFP) for the development of workforce housing on county-owned land as a key priority. The AHAC recommends the BOCC direct staff to collaborate with other public entities which own land in the county and recommend how best to increase and target incentives for leasing back the properties to workforce housing developers. i The AHAC also recommends the BOCC direct the Land Authority to prioritize the purchase of additional Tier 3 lands for the development of workforce housing. The BOCC may also consider future RFPs for the development of affordable housing. (foivaeiy 5/6 a.) x 15. The AHAC recommends the BOCC direct staff to evaluate the legal, financial and legislative issues and develop recommendations on the development of a property tax incentive for homeowners that rent a lawfully established existing market rate unit to a member of the workforce in any Tier within the very low,low and median affordable housing income limits and rental rates. (foivaeily 516 b.) 4 Packet Pg. 2834 16. The AHAC recommends the BOCC direct staff to evaluate the legal, financial and legislative issues and develop recommendations on the creation of a 10-Near tax incentive for the development of only workforce housing. (foivaei y 516 c.) 17. The AHAC recommends the BOCC direct staff to maintain and update the inventory of County owned 9 land that can be used for affordable housing development. (foivaeil d y 516 ) a) cv 18. The AHAC recommends the BOCC direct staff to evaluate and develop comprehensive plan and land —,°'— development code amendments to allow property owners of Tier 3 designated lands with an existing U market rate dwelling unit to add an accessory workforce housing residential unit which will require the use of an affordable ROGO. Staff should evaluate residential zoning districts, density standards,income W levels,maximum size of the accessory workforce housing residential unit and the minimum property size for the development of an accessory residential workforce housing unit. This can be a method to W incentivize the development of smaller"starter units" for the workforce. (folvaelly 516 e.) 76 19. The AHAC recommends the BOCC direct staff to evaluate and develop comprehensive plan and land development code amendments to create a Workforce Housing overlay for the Planning Commission to W recommend and Board of County Commissioners to approve an extra story for the development of an exclusive workforce housing project,up to maximum of 40 feet. (foivaeily 5/6 f.) 0 20. The AHAC recommends the BOCC direct staff to revise existing Land Development Code Section 130- 161.1 to provide another incentive for the preservation of affordable housing and the development of CD CD market rate housing on Improved Subdivision (IS),Tier III properties as follows: CD "ROGO exemptions transferred under this program may be transferred on a 1 for 1 basis _ ie to Tier III. single-family residential lots within the Improved Subdivision aS) land use district and the same ROGO planning subarea for the development oCD f single family detached dwelling units. a efe fi�ffisf be fffe'e fe eeffiffiefeift! 8 CVO cv N 4 " (foivaei y 516 g.) 21. The AHAC recommends the BOCC direct staff to evaluate and develop comprehensive plan and land development code amendments to create an additional workforce housing density bonus in the Mixed Use Zoning District to provide additional density only for the development of workforce rental housing in the median, low and very low income categories which is deed restricted in perpetuity and located on Tier 3 designated lands. (foivaeily 516 h.) 2 TASK# 7 DEVELOP STRATEGIES TO INCREASE THE MONROE COUNTY HOUSING i AUTHORITY'S ROLE IN WORKFORCE HOUSING, SPECIFICALLY AS A MANAGEMENT ENTITY FOR RENTAL WORKFORCE HOUSING See Task 3, Recommendations 7-9 that address this Task. � m 5 Packet Pg. 2835 TASK# 8 EXPLORE AND PROPOSE LOCAL FUNDING SOURCES TO HELP EXPAND WORKFORCE HOUSING IN MONROE COUNTY Unquestionably these recommendations will be costly, in developing these recommendations, the AHAC believes from the past 12 months of discussions that the Commission should set a 10-year target of raising 9 at least $10 million annually from local funding sources to help expand workforce housing in Monroe County and address the unmet Workforce Housing need throughout Monroe County, specifically near N employment centers. 22. The AHAC recommends the BOCC direct staff to evaluate the legal, financial and operational issues and make recommendations on whether and how to establish an annual fee on non-primary residences W that are not utilized as long-term rentals (6 month rentals or greater) to be dedicated to supporting workforce housing and the enforcement of regulations. (foivaeily 8.a.1) 23. The AHAC recommends the BOCC direct staff to evaluate the legal, statutory, financial and operational issues and make recommendations on whether and how to establish a property tax exemption for non- primary residences that rent their residence for not less than 6 months (long term) to a member of the Monroe County workforce. Every property owner claiming the additional reduction in assessed value must annually file an application with the Monroe County Property Appraiser, including documentation C and affidavit regarding the qualifying workforce housing occupant of the residence for the year in which c the reduction is sought. (foivaeily 8.a.2) 24. The AHAC recommends the BOCC direct staff to evaluate the legislative, economic and financial issues, including and take the necessary steps and make recommendations on whether and how to c propose to statutory amendments to increase by 1 penny the Tourist Impact Tax to provide additional W dedicated funding for the acquisition of land for workforce housing and construction of workforce cgl housing in Monroe County. Evaluate including a sunset date of 10 years_ (Fornae1ly 8-1� 1 N N I 25. The AHAC recommends the BOCC direct staff to engage with the Community Foundation of the N Florida Keys(CFFK), municipalities, and the business and tourist sector in Monroe County to establish a community workforce housing fund administered by the FKCF that can provide additional dedicated funding for workforce housing in Monroe County and rental assistance loans. (Forlveily 8 d) 26. The AHAC recommends the BOCC direct staff to evaluate the legal, financial and economic issues and make recommendations on whether and how to increase the ad valorem tax on residential/commercial properties and commercial properties that are not rented at affordable rates in order to provide in order W to provide additional dedicated funding for the acquisition of land for workforce housing and construction of workforce housing in Monroe County. (For/veT_ly 8-e) c I 27. The AHAC recommends the BOCC direct staff to evaluate the legal, financial and economic issues and make recommendations on whether and how to create a tax incentive for commercial properties that include workforce housing on the same site._(Forlveily 8-e.1) x TASK# 9 REVIEW AND RECOMMEND WORKFORCE HOUSING STRATEGIES AS m AMENDMENTS TO STATE STATUTES (TASKS A-D) 28. The AHAC recommends the BOCC direct the Land Authority to evaluate and provide recommendations to the BOCC on utilizing Land Authority funds to buy back expiring deed restrictions in order to preserve rental workforce housing. The Land Authority should consider remaining deed 6 Packet Pg. 2836 restriction timeframes and make recommendations on potential monetary offers to provide for a range of additional deed restriction years, including a priority for perpetual deed restrictions in order to preserve existing workforce housing. (Formerly 9-a.) Note:Land Authority staff has stated that statutory amendments)could not be needed for draft recommendation. 29. In light of the workforce housing crisis in Monroe County, the AHAC recommends the BOCC continue N to support 4 the provision of Sadowski Trust funding and the dedicated tax credit project for the 2 Florida Keys as a key legislative priority. (Formerly 9-b.) TASK 10 DEVELOP STRATEGIES FOR DEVELOPING INCLUSIONARY HOUSING LN REQUIREMENTS FOR HOSPITALITY AND COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENTS TO SUPPORT BUILDING WORKFORCE HOUSING. - 30. "The AHAC recommends that the Board of County Commission support and fund a nexus study as the first step in the expansion of the current County residential inclusionary housing program to cover transient and commercial development in the County." AHAC January 2016 Resolution to the BOCC March 2016 AHAC Meeting. The Committee emphasized with staff and the BOCC the urgency of completing the nexus study as soon as possible in order to advance policy recommendations on establishing an inclusionary housing program for transient and commercial development in the County. 31. The AHAC recommends the BOCC direct staff to evaluate the legal, financial and economic issues and N make recommendations on whether and how to amend the land development code to not allow CD T' inclusionary requirements to be satisfied through `linkage' under Sec. 130-161 (c) with affordable y housing units built in proportion of the government investment. (Formerly 90-a.) 32. The AHAC recommends the BOCC direct staff to evaluate the legal, financial and economic issues and N make recommendations on whether and how to amend land development code to not allow inclusionary C44 requirements to be satisfied through `linkage' under Sec. 130-161 (c) with affordable housing units already-ex _ already-existing/built. 75 _(Foraerly 90-b.� Note:linkage should not be available for existing affordable projects as they do not address the need for additional affordable housing. TASK 11. OPPORTUNITIES FOR INTERGOVERNMENTAL COOPERATION ON WORKFORCE HOUSING 0 33. Building on the February 2016 Workforce Housing Intergovernmental Roundtable and the continuing participation of municipal planning directors in the AHAC process, the AHAC recommends each i jurisdiction pass a resolution to commit their respective Planning Director's meet to discuss at least twice a year to explore and implement consistent strategies for closer intergovernmental cooperation and collaboration on workforce housing. (fowler y 9 9 a) x Note:At the March 2016 AHAC meeting the Committee agreed that intergovernmental cooperation is a "very important"element W of the AHAC's)cork and tasks on)rorkforce housing. There)ras agreement that the planning directors review the potential areas that have been identified for cooperation at the Intergovernmental Roundtable and report back to their respective governing boards and the AHAC rrith any recommendations or suggestions for the Committee's consideration. e( 7 Packet Pg. 2837 Below are the potential intergovernmental cooperation opportunities identified in the February 2016 Imergovernmental i�orkforce Housing Roundtable: A. Collaborate on monitoring and qualify* Affordable Housing(AHAC Recommendation on Task 3) -� B. Seek to develop consistent affordable housin,g terminology CD C. Develop a more consistent intergovernmental approach to deed restrictions D. Identify county and municipal Funding Sources for Affordable Housing E. Purchase land to Address the Gronving Vorkforce Housing Crisis. 44 E Support inclusionary Housing and Redevelopment ' G. Provide incentives for Building Vorkforce Housing H. Vork together on Homeonmers and Flood Insurance Costs L Take a new look at the Hurricane Evacuation Formula J. Reviewpolicies on backyard houses and nvork force housing K. Communicating with the public on the workforce housing need&solutions � 0 CD cv CD to T- CD cv cv cv CJ 0 CJ 2 C 0 x 8 Packet Pg. 2838