Claremonters weigh in on housing

By PATRICK ADRIAN
Special to Eagle Times
CLAREMONT – Participants in a housing discussion on Thursday said that Claremont must improve its existing housing stock and provide a greater variety of housing options to attract younger families and workers and to support a diverse population. 

Over 40 Claremont residents and stakeholders attended a free community forum at the Sugar River Technical School. They were there to talk about what Claremont’s housing needs for the city to be a thriving economic and social community for all. The forum was facilitated by NH Listens and hosted by the City of Claremont and several partnering organizations, including the Greater Claremont Chamber of Commerce, Healthy Vibrant Claremont, Vital Communities, and the Upper Valley Regional Planning Commission. 

“The event’s purpose is to foster a conversation among residents,” said Tom Roberts, executive director of Vital Communities. Organizers will also use the community’s recommendations to inform their strategic planning of socioeconomic development, and they will share the community input with other stakeholders, including employers, realtors, bankers and developers. 

According to data compiled in Claremont’s latest master plan, completed last year, housing construction in the city has remained stagnant for the past twenty years. The existing housing stock is arguably old, with most homes built before 1973, when the federal government banned the use of lead-based house paints. A portion of these houses have not been well-maintained, and require aesthetic or structural improvements. 

The discussion groups  agreed that Claremont’s rental options lack variety and affordability at a time when an growing number of individuals and families – from retirees to the younger workforce – are looking to either rent instead of buy.  

“The housing situation in Claremont has become an impediment,” Mayor Charlene Lovett said during her opening remarks. “We need housing that’s going to attract a younger workforce.”  

Lovett shared a story about a young family who was recently trying to find a four-bedroom house to rent in Claremont. They found there were no such properties available.

“They are very interested in settling here,” Lovett said. “They just can’t find a place that meets their needs.  

Forum participants were divided into seven discussion groups of six or seven members. Each group spent 90 minutes with a NH Listens facilitator to discuss data, identify issues and causes, and to recommend a plan of action. At the end of the evening a representative from each group shared its discussion with everyone in attendance. 

Groups agreed that, while Claremont may have enough houses on the market, the quality of those houses do not necessarily meet consumer demands. Moreover, groups typically characterized “affordable housing” seekers broadly to include retirees, the elderly and young professionals and families. It was generally agreed that populations want modest though attractive and well-maintained housing. 

Attracting younger people and families is a high priority. According to data from the Upper Valley Lake Sunapee Regional Planning Commission, in 2010, 26 percent of the region’s households were headed by a person aged 65 or older, and by 2030 senior citizens are projected to comprise about 48 percent of all households in the region. Between 1990-2010, overall population and household sizes decreased in the region, The commission suggests the region needs to retain its younger population or attract young people to replace them.

The most common recommendations from groups centered on renovating existing housing stock and encouraging new housing construction that appeals to modern consumer demand. 

Many groups supported a need to selectively ease regulations that make it too costly for property owners, particularly landlords, to renovate their buildings. 

“A lot of our landlords are not wealthy people,” said Rep. John Cloutier (D-Claremont At-Large). Cloutier saw both sides of the issue; he said it was important to provide safe and well-maintained housing, but recognized it was costly to meet many local and state regulations in order to do so.  

Other recommendations included providing local tax incentives or “micro loans” to homeowners who make aesthetic or structural improvements to their homes or properties, or informing homeowners about available grants and programs for renovations. 

In terms of new housing construction, ideas varied among groups but there was a common demand for variety and affordability. One group said there should be rentals in the downtown area that appeal to young people.

“A vibrant downtown would be a catalyst for economic development,” said one participant. 

Other groups suggested that there be housing options for young families who could not afford large homes. Proposals included developments of tiny homes or mobile parks that appealed to young, professional families who seek similar families within a safe, child-friendly community.