Despite controversy, council passes another affordable housing measure

Facing a severe housing crisis, the council granted homeowners and developers more flexibility in single-family zones. Some residents are worried it will change the ‘character’ of their neighborhood.

In the latest push for affordable housing, the Laramie City Council approved changes to the city code surrounding what can and cannot be built in single-family zones.

Ordinance 2044 passed on third and final reading Tuesday. It decreases the minimum lot area, lot width and setback requirements for homes in single-family zones of the city, while also eliminating the garage requirement.

The stated goal of these changes is to give developers a greater number of options when deciding what to build, while allowing for more housing to be built on the same amount of land.

“By decreasing these more, we’re just increasing flexibility for the developer,” Philipp Gabathuler, the city’s principal planner, told the council. “And most of these changes, sure enough, are most likely going to be seen in the current market in new development, rather than in existing neighborhoods.”

The ordinance also allows and defines accessory dwelling units. An ADU could be everything from a renovated garage to a detached rental unit in the backyard.

The code changes do not allow the construction of multi-family housing in single-family zones, nor do they allow the construction of multiple rental units.

“Even if you live in a (rural-residential) neighborhood on a 60,000-square foot lot, you’ll still only be permitted to build one ADU,” Gabathuler said.

The changes to single-family zoning represent the latest effort by councilors to address Laramie’s housing crisis. The council has separately approved denser housing in multi-family zoning and established basic health and safety standards for rentals.

The ordinance addressing single-family zones passed on a 6-3 vote, but would have passed by an even larger margin if not for some last-minute protests.

Councilor Pat Gabriel, for example, said he had received a flurry of calls and emails objecting to the ordinance.

“A lot of concern about this proposed ordinance and some really upset people,” Gabriel said. “I understand we’ve had two readings before where we haven’t really heard anything, and I was ready to go ahead and move on with this. But after discussions with a number of people, I think it’s in the best interest of council to postpone.”

The single-family ordinance had received very little attention before its third and final reading.

But in the days leading up to the ordinance’s final vote, a pair of letters published in the Laramie Boomerang, flyers placed (maybe illegally) in mailboxes, and a protest of about a dozen people outside city hall before the meeting brought greater scrutiny.

Ultimately, however, the ordinance did pass. Councilors cited skyrocketing housing prices, Laramie’s housing shortage, generational wealth gaps, economic development and property rights as reasons for their support.

“If we want to stay a vibrant and exciting community, if we want to stay a community with this economy that is, by all metrics, the diverse economy that Wyoming quests for — that needs workers, that needs people starting new companies, that needs people who have these entry-level houses,” Councilor Brian Harrington said.

‘Our neighborhood would be changed’

Objections came mainly from residents of Corthell Hill and other single-family zones, who were concerned about potential changes to the “character” of their neighborhoods.

John Rose, a local doctor who lives in a single-family zone, spoke during public comment to oppose the ordinance.

“When you move into a neighborhood like we did, you kind of expect a certain theme or a certain homogeneity to it,” Rose said. “And with this ordinance, if there was a lot between my lot and my neighbor’s lot, instead of having a house built similar to maintain the theme of the neighborhood and the family-centered nature of it, they could put in three houses, potentially, in radically different styles — no garages, now you have people parking on the streets — it changes things pretty significantly.”

He added that something should be done about housing affordability, but not this.

“I think this does a disservice to people who live there,” Rose said. “And I think that, in terms of attracting and retaining long-term residents — professors, physicians like myself, attorneys, accountants — it goes a long way to have a family-centric, quiet neighborhood with slightly larger houses on slightly larger lots.”

Mundy Aron said she also expected a “certain kind of neighborhood” when she moved to Corthell Hill.

“It just concerns me that our neighborhood would be changed,” Aron said, echoing her letter in Sunday’s Boomerang. “I think an additional possibility is there would be rentals in a single-family area, it would mean more parking on the street and just more crowding. And I don’t see our area as being a high density area. And to me, that’s what we’re trying to do with this proposal. I’m not against affordable housing — obviously we need it in Laramie — but in the present neighborhoods, I think the zones should be unchanged.”

Miscommunication and misinterpretation

Former Laramie City Council member Hugh McGinley also wrote a letter to the Laramie Boomerang, describing and decrying the changes being made to single-family zones. He expressed a concern later raised by many public commenters – that there had not been enough input from the community before this third and final reading.

“It is fair to assume that few residents are aware of how city government is altering the character of not only residential areas, but of Laramie as a city,” McGinley writes.

He and others called for a postponement of the final vote, to allow more time for input. McGinley even called for council-sponsored forums to “discuss ways to address housing solutions that do not destroy the character of traditionally zoned residential areas.”

The council did consider postponement, but the motion to do so was voted down 6-3.

Mayor Paul Weaver rejected the idea that the council was operating in secret or failing to notify the public, and noted that the ordinance had received two earlier readings as well as a work session.

“This issue has been covered in the newspaper,” Weaver said. “The public notices for each of the meetings that we’ve mentioned have gone out in all the usual formats. The city government is not in the habit of emailing every resident each time a major ordinance, code change, revision comes before the council.”

The issue was also covered by the Laramie Reporter.

Weaver said it would be unfair to postpone the vote on single-family zones when the council did not postpone the vote on multi-family zones in January.

“We heard similar criticisms and concerns,” the mayor said. “The outstanding issues to me are simply that those neighborhoods were of a different zoning, but the impact of the changes isn’t any different. It seems like there are two different standards being applied, and it does not sit well with me.”

Still, the recent outcry served to peel off votes that would have otherwise supported the ordinance. On both first and second reading, the ordinance had passed unanimously and with very little discussion. In addition to Gabriel, Councilor Erin O’Doherty also explicitly cited the recent community interest as the reason for her changed vote.

During the ordinance’s first reading, O’Doherty had rejected arguments against the ordinance. Defending the provision to eliminate the garage requirement, she said, “It’s more important to house humans than cars.”

During the ordinance’s final reading Tuesday, O’Doherty said that she still personally supported the ordinance, but would vote how her constituents asked her to.

Ultimately, the council voted 6-3 to pass the ordinance, with Councilors Gabriel, O’Doherty and Bryan Shuster voting against. The arguments for the ordinance – touching on everything from generational income disparities to economic development – won the day.

‘Zero hope of buying a house’

Very few public commenters spoke in favor of the ordinance. This had been the case in all meetings about single-family zones previously, but the absence of a supportive faction was more noticeable during the final reading in the presence of such a well-represented opposition movement.

Patrick O’Toole spoke in favor of the ordinance, saying it was needed for housing affordability. 

“Most of my friends who are in, or are entering, their 30s have essentially zero hope of buying a house in the foreseeable future,” he said. “Most of us are supposed to take the next step in securing our economic futures by doing that, but a tragic number of people in my age group can’t do it. They can’t dream of it. They can’t think about it and they have to just shut that thought process down.”

Councilor Harrington, the youngest member of council, echoed this statement, saying he was in the narrow minority of his generation that actually owns a home. Still, his family faces an uphill battle.

“We looked at a house in one of the neighborhoods mentioned often this evening that, in 2018, the price was $294,000,” Harrington told the council. “The same house sold for more than $425,000 in 2022. That was the asking price; it sold above that. I know there are forces outside of this council’s control driving a considerable amount of that, but we should do, certainly, what we can to make housing more accessible in Laramie.”

The new ordinance allows homeowners in single-family zones to establish one accessory dwelling unit, or ADU, that could be offered up as a rental. There are thousands of rental units in Laramie, but half of Laramie residents are renters and they too face a housing shortage.

ADUs are not just cheap housing themselves; the rental income they generate can also help the homeowner offset the rising cost of the larger property on which the ADU is built.

Councilor Fred Schmechel said this is, in fact, the only way he affords the house he lives in. But Schmechel said he supported the ordinance because, for him, it comes down to property rights.

“I don’t get to pick what my neighbor paints his house with,” he said. “It can be the ugliest thing out there; I don’t get a say in that and I don’t get a say in what they get to do with their property. That’s the Wyoming way.”

Schmechel said the lack of affordable housing — defined broadly to describe a range of availability at every income level — is hurting Laramie economically.

“We’ve got a major housing crisis,” he said. “We’re already losing out with companies coming to Laramie because of the housing shortage that we have. The Laramie Chamber Business Alliance finds it difficult to recruit companies to Laramie because of the housing shortage that we have. And this isn’t the silver bullet, but it’s part of the equation.”