“There isn’t a subject more important for [advancing] economic development,” said David Hawkins, vice chair of the Rockbridge County Economic Development Authority, “than the availability of affordable workforce housing.”
Hawkins made this pronouncement last Thursday, Feb. 11, when he, Brandy Flint and Conor Mitts – director and administrative specialist for the county’s economic development office – made a presentation on this subject to the county Planning Commission.
The shortage of affordable workforce housing – a key finding of the Central Shenandoah Regional Housing Study conducted last year – is a “significant barrier” to drawing enough workers for economic development projects, Mitts told the Commission.
In response to the study, the EDA formed a housing study subcommittee. A survey was commissioned last summer by the subcommittee to better understand housing demand and preferences in Rockbridge County.
More than 300 responses were received. The survey showed that there was a significant demand for housing priced below $350,000 that’s located near employment centers and everyday services. Many of the respondents said they couldn’t afford housing priced above $150,000.
The EDA subcommittee held a meeting in the fall with local housing developers, contractors and Realtors to review the results of the survey and share insights into the local housing market. A consensus among those attending was that the most effective strategy for lowering housing costs would be to increase residential density allowances. This would spread infrastructure connection costs among more units, thus lowering the cost of each house.
Office of economic development staff researched zoning ordinances of nearby localities to look for ways to increase housing density and make it more affordable. A review of the zoning practices of neighboring counties showed that Rockbridge County allows a range of high- and medium-density housing but in practice these higher densities are constrained by infrastructure limitations and little land that is zoned appropriately.
In order to increase the availability of affordable workforce housing, the subcommittee is recommending strategic rezonings so that more areas of the county are zoned for mixed residential (R-2). In this district, singlefamily homes can be built on lots as small as a quarter-ofan acre. Duplexes and multifamily housing are also allowed in R-2.
Flint pointed out that less than 1 percent of land in the county is presently zoned R-2. A question for county planners is whether the county itself should take the initiative to rezone certain areas for higher densities or if the county should wait until private developers seek rezonings for specific housing projects.
Hawkins said the subcommittee is to explore funding sources that could support land acquisition, ingress and egress improvements and public utility extensions for potential housing projects.
Other strategies the subcommittee is recommending are to allow accessory dwelling units (ADUs) by right in residential and agricultural districts and to create a planned unit development (PUD) or flexible development overlay district.
It was noted that ADUs “offer incremental, lowimpact housing options that expand affordability while maintaining neighborhood character.” The subcommittee stated that reasonable size limits, design standards and location requirements would need to be established to ensure compatibility with existing development. Also, there should be a provision for prohibiting ADUs from being operated as short-term rentals to ensure new units support long-term housing needs.
A planned unit development ordinance, according to the subcommittee’s recommendations, would “enable innovative, master-planned developments where infrastructure capacity exists, offering an alternative to conventional subdivisions.” It’s recommended that a PUD zoning district or overlay be applicable to projects of more than 10 acres.
Within this district, “a flexible mix of housing types” would be allowed – “singlefamily, duplex, townhouse and small multi-family – in a unified, master-planned format.” Limited commercial or mixed-use components could be permitted “when appropriate for neighborhood design or walkability.” It’s recommended that “voluntary incentives for affordable units” be established to promote “open space preservation, green infrastructure or shared amenities.”
After hearing the presentation, the consensus of the Planning Commission was to direct staff to look into drafting ordinances that would encourage ADUs and PUDs. The idea of expanding R-2 zoning into areas where public water and sewer is present is also to be explored.
