Oahu residents struggling with the cost of housing — and that would be most people, at one stage or another — have to feel encouraged by the conversations underway recently among members of the Hawaii Community Development Authority board.

HCDA is set to decide Nov. 25 whether to fill in the details on the broad strokes unveiled last week by a committee, ideas that would broaden the appeal to renters as well as below-market buyers.

It should vote to proceed without delay to developing a full proposal, with the public taking full advantage of the required hearings that will be scheduled.

The agency, established nearly four decades ago as a means of coordinating redevelopment in special districts, spends most of its time overseeing Kakaako planning and permitting.

Part of the mission is to ensure a community of varied socioeconomic backgrounds, and HCDA seeks to meet that objective by requiring that projects allot a portion of units priced affordably for a set range of income earners.

Unfortunately, the range was set too high — those earning 100-140 percent of the area median income (AMI). As AMI is now calculated, that category includes single people earning $57,820-$80,948 annually and families of four with incomes in the $82,600-$115,640 range.

The homes these householders could afford to buy on the open market has diminished steadily. Oahu home sales figures released last week underscore the problem, with a third consecutive annual median increase pushing house prices to an all-time high of $670,000.

Into that daunting landscape, a small bright spot glimmers. The authority, seemingly acknowledging it’s not doing enough to boost the housing inventory in the right areas, last week contemplated a conceptual plan for moving the dial a bit lower on the income scale.

One of the rules under review is the requirement that developments reserve 20 percent of units in large new residential projects at below-market prices. The preliminary proposal would reduce the qualifying range for this "reserved housing" to the 80-120 percent of AMI, with salary ranges of $46,256-$69,384 for singles to $66,080-$99,120 for families of four.

Other suggestions deserving further discussion in the committee’s report (subtitled "We Must Be a Part of the Solution"):

» The reserved housing requirement would be triggered for some commercial projects and any residential project with 10 or more units. This would replace the current rule triggering the requirement for residential projects on land parcels of 20,000 square feet or bigger.

» The outreach would affect renters as well. The current rule requiring below-market rentals to remain affordable for at least 15 years would be changed to stretch that minimum term to 30 years.

» HCDA now gets the first option to buy back reserved condos if the original buyer wants to sell within two to five years. Under another recommended change, the buy-back option would extend to 15 years, enabling HCDA to resell the units to other residents who meet income requirements.

» Renters and buyers in below-market projects would have their incomes checked yearly to see if they still meet the limits. Renters who don’t would have to move out. Condo owners earning above range would have to pay HCDA the difference between their purchase price and the original market price whenever they sell the unit.

Some changes would take more time to explore because they would require legislation or coordination with other agencies — another reason to start the process promptly. Ideas include proposing that the state Employee Retirement System put part of its investment portfolio in low-income rental housing projects, and that affordable projects built near transit stations have reduced parking-stall requirements, serving as a cost-saving incentive to developers.

It’s unfortunate that such initiatives weren’t launched earlier in the Kakaako visioning process. But that only highlights the reason to make up for lost time, and move the needle in the affordable-housing campaign now.