#EM2021 – Candidate Question – Housing Needs vs Wants

Eagle Mountain needs a balance of housing and one of the types of housing we still lack is “move up” housing. For many years, Eagle Mountain was known as the place you can get more house for less, and “starter homes” for a great price, largely because of the distance to retail, goods, and services, which has steadily improved during the last few years. Many families moved here and grew here, but as they began to outgrow their first or second EM homes, they found themselves looking for a place to move up into. In the last 5 years, we have made a lot of progress in working with the development community to help encourage more “move up” homes. To have a fiscally healthy and stable community we need a mix of housing types. We need to continue to work to make sure the various types of homes don’t get out of balance.

This candidate after several email attempts did not participate in this questionnaire.

In my opinion, we need a variety of housing options in Eagle Mountain to reflect the diverse conglomerate of residents we have now, and will continue to attract. In our 40K+ population, we are far from homogenous when it comes to phases of life, socioeconomic status, family size and make-up, etc., so I think it unfair to large groups of people when there is too much focus on one (or a limited number of) idealized lifestyle/housing need(s). We need housing that will fit the needs (and budgets) of seniors, as well as newlyweds; growing families with one income, as well as young professionals; homesteaders/farmers, as well as apartment-dwellers. It’s not the type of housing that determines the quality of person who inhabits it. Safe, healthy neighborhoods are built as people

Based on information provided in an email dated April 29th, 2019 to PC, CC, Mayor and City Staff. This report identifies that 66% of all residential development in EMC is built on lots that are smaller than 0.19 acre. When we include lots that are under 1/4 acre that percentage climbs to 79.5%. With that context, I believe we should be advocating for more of the following housing types in order to create a greater balance in the housing types available. First, I would like to see an increase in the percentages of larger lot communities specifically in the 1/4, 1/3, 1/2 acre segment of lots. Larger lots than 1/2 acre are also desirable. I realize however that the percentage of these larger lot sizes may not need to increase. I would still like to see them be made available in quantities that will meet any continued demand for this product type. I believe this will help to create a more balanced and stable population that will choose to stay and contribute to the long term welfare of this great city. Second, I believe we are missing senior 55+ style housing types in the city. If we want to be a city that plans for and invites all to come and be a part of the community this segment of our population must be better accommodated. Maybe my age is showing here but I believe there is wisdom, expertise, and value that comes as we plan for and retain an older population.

Eagle Mountain needs balanced development. Unfortunately, the developers don’t share the same outcome desires. We need all phase of life living. However, that does not mean we need to adopt the poor planning policies of metropolitan cities. Yes we need apartments, but not high unit large building/development complexes. Our code allows for apartments of 12 units per building. We need move up single family homes that aren’t stack as closely as possible to each other. This is, has been and likely will continue to be one of the unique Utah ways of living that draws people here.

We do need a mix of single-family homes and multi units. The common theme we hear these days is affordable housing which is pretty tough to find. We can work within city code, and work with developers to create a community that can be generational (meaning not only could we afford a home but my children will be able to afford a home here and my grandchildren in the future).

The city needs to provide enough variety that citizens can move up and stay within the city. We do not need more high-density housing. There is not enough infrastructure to support it. Too much high-density housing will also negatively affect the rural feel of our city. The type of housing we need now is bigger lots, at least a quarter acre.

I would like to see more one acre lots and 1/3 acre lots. We need housing for all stages of life and all incomes. We are lacking in some of these areas, like senior housing, care facilities, and affordable housing.

Time after time, I hear from residents that they moved here for something different and the most important thing to them is they want a home that is safe. People want a home that has some room to grow. Residents have expressed they want a home that has enough space for their family and for the activities that they care about. Many people complain about the townhomes that are being built because it seems like so many are being built right now. We need to be careful to include some, but to not let a housing type get out of balance with other types.

This candidate after several email attempts did not participate in this questionnaire.

EM residents want to see a mixture of housing while limiting high-density. They want the ability to move up into bigger and better homes while remaining in the city. Citizens want bigger lots to help preserve our rural way of life.

They want the housing type that meets the needs of their lifestyle and income. For example, some want a large lot with animal rights so they can have horses. Some want a nice condominium or townhouse with amenities like pools. They don’t want the upkeep a home requires. Some want a simple home on a small lot. Some want a grand home on a large lot. Some just need a place to live, but their income isn’t enough for them to purchase a home. This includes those on disability and social security. They are looking for an affordable rental and they are really hard to find now.

Once again it goes back to the term affordable housing. We need a community that builds and designs in a pattern that is smart, anticipating the future, and desirable. We want a community that people desire to live in and the only way that is going to happen is to be at the table with those that are building our community.

I think people want options that will fit their particular lifestyle, values, and phase of life, and, as mentioned before, those are varied and diverse across our city. Some really value a spacious house/yard, and are okay with the responsibility of lawn care and property maintenance. Some value the simplicity of living in a small apartment. Some like to be somewhat removed from neighbors. Some don’t mind sharing walls. I think the only “type” of desireable housing that can be agreed on by all is that it be safe and affordable.

I believe most resident s share the same view as I do about no high density product and a focus on lots that don’t have the house touch each corner of the lot.

I believe the vast majority of residents are looking for single family homes that provide enough space to raise a family, grow a garden and provide adequate room for their teenage children to park a third car in the drive way. In a recent Envision Utah survey among 2500 high school students 90% of the respondents indicated that they intended and desired to live in a single family home. 80% of these same respondents indicated they wanted that house to be in the suburbs.