Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - Affordable Housing Committee - 10/26/2020October 26, 2020, SoBu Affordable Housing Committee Minutes- APPROVED Page 1 Approved on November 17, 2020 AFFORDABLE HOUSING COMMITTEE October 26, 2020, 10:00 a.m., meeting held online Members attending (online): Leslie Black-Plumeau, Vince Bolduc, Sandy Dooley, Mike Simoneau, Patrick O’Brien. John Simson, and Chris Trombly Others: Monica Ostby, PC liaison (joined at 10:30); Kevin Dorn, City Manager Guests: Jonathan Bond, executive director of the VT Housing Foundation and SoBu resident, and Ariel Jensen-Vargas, SoBu resident and member of SoBu Housing Trust board AGENDA 1. Call to order, agenda review, comments from guests 2. Review and approval of minutes of October 13, 2020 3. Chair’s Comments 4. Report on SB Land Trust Sewer Proposal 5. Report on Land Development Regulations from Planning Commission 6. Discussion on next steps regarding Accessory Dwelling Unit State Law 7. Reports and updates by committee members a. Non-Residential Parcels (Mike and Leslie) 8. Adjourn 1, Call to order, agenda review, comments from guests: Chris called the meeting to order at 10:04 a.m. and welcomed guests, who introduced themselves. No change to agenda and no comments from guests. 2. Review and approval of minutes of October 13, 2020: Leslie moved and Vince seconded motion to approve 10/13/20 meeting minutes as drafted. Motion approved: 7-0-0 3. Chair’s Comments: Chris shared that he attended the October 13th Planning Commission and October 19th City Council meetings. At the latter, he informed the City Council that the Committee had taken a position in opposition to the South Burlington Land Trust’s (SBLT) “Draft Sewer Ordinance Amendment”, which SBLT board members had recently presented to the City Council. Chris followed up by sending the Committee’s statement on this subject to the City Councilors via email. He also thanked Vince for his well-stated opinion piece in The Other Paper. He will be “meeting” with Regina Mahony (CCRPC) and Paul Conner in the near future. He proposed including preparation of the committee’s 2020-21 Work Plan on the next meeting’s agenda. Committee members supported this proposal. Chris will sent members the most recent Work Plan. 4. Report on SB Land Trust Sewer Proposal: Chris reported that the SBLT proposal, which would end all future development in the SEQ (unless already approved), is being reviewed by the City Attorney. Kevin indicated that the SBLT seeks to achieve this goal via a “parallel path” to the Interim Zoning process currently in place. Amending an ordinance can be done much more quickly than adopting new Land Development Regulations (LDRs). Committee members voiced questions about whether a sewer ordinance can be adopted that is inconsistent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan. Monica raised the subject of a Planning Commissioner also being the SBLT Treasurer and whether this presents a conflict of interest. Members questioned how a person can support the SBLT proposal as an SBLT board member, given its impact on the SEQ, and simultaneously participate in Planning Commission deliberations and decisions relating to changes to the LDRs governing development in the SEQ. Members were clear that they do not know what, if any, involvement this Planning Commissioner had in SBLT’s preparation and decision-making vis-a-vis the Draft Sewer Ordinance Amendment. Monica does not know whether this proposal has been shared with Paul October 26, 2020, SoBu Affordable Housing Committee Minutes- APPROVED Page 2 Conner or Planning Commissioners. Vince mentioned that the Committee’s statement re the “Ordinance” raises questions that the City Attorney needs to address and report on. Committee members agreed. MOTION: Sandy moved and Mike seconded that Chris convey to the City Council Chair and City Manager the Committee’s request that its Statement on the Draft Sewer Ordinance Amendment be shared with the City Attorney so that the Committee’s concerns can be addressed. Motion approved: 7-0-0. Monica reiterated her position that the SBLT proposal should be shared with the Planning Commission. 5. Report on Land Development Regulations from Planning Commission: Monica reported that the Planning Commission (PC) would meet twice that week (October 27 & 28) and that PC Chair Jessica Louisos is likely to report to the City Council on November 2nd regarding progress on preparation of Interim Zoning-related LDRs. She also reported that, at the same meeting, the City Council will vote on whether to extend Interim Zoning, which will soon have its two-year anniversary. She encouraged members to attend the PC’s two meetings taking place that week. The meeting on 10/27 will focus on Article 15, in particular what land on a parcel may be included in the density calculation. She noted that having a development be approved as a PUD (as opposed to a subdivision) allows more land to be counted in the density calculation. The 10/28 PC meeting will focus on Articles 10 and 12, including a review of natural resource areas/hazards throughout the City. Monica has asked Paul to calculate the total additional acreage that will be removed from eligibility for development as a result of the proposals being considered. She is waiting for this information. Concern is that many more acres are being removed from potential development than added. Members plus Monica then engaged in wide-ranging discussion re the challenge of advocating for housing when the people that need housing are not part of the community b/c of the scarcity of housing, especially housing with prices that median income households can afford. As Mike pointed out, the folks that advocate for increasing the amount of land protected as natural resources have many strategies available to them. A proposed Committee objective for Interim Zoning is that the changes in LDRs do not reduce the number of housing units that may be developed in the City and, in addition, that development in the SEQ is compatible with future adoption of Inclusionary Zoning citywide. Raising this question with Paul and Jessica was suggested. Members voiced particular concern about the lack of “equity” vis-à-vis housing opportunities, especially for home ownership, when one compares the prices of housing in the SEQ, which is a neighborhood of very high income households, and housing prices in the other parts of the City. Leslie shared information indicating that while 72% of while households own their homes, 21% of Black households own their homes. Events occurring during the pandemic have heightened public awareness of these inequities. Monica mentioned a discussion of racial justice at a recent high school soccer game. Examination of the City zoning map, changing the committee’s name, and challenging the views behind NIMBY attitudes were proposed. Monica believes that the change from density calculations to building-type requirements in PUD regulations will result in increased housing units affordable to median and below-median income households. It was noted that the Energy Committee has proposed additions to the LDRs that would promote energy conservation. Patrick would like the Committee to review these regulations with the goal of assessing how they might increase construction costs. Vince advocated identifying ways in which the City has reduced opportunities for housing. Sandy referred to the Joint Center for Housing Studies of Harvard University’s report, Fostering Inclusion in American Neighborhoods, which cites research demonstrating that “when income inequality rises, economic growth falls” and other negative outcomes associated with income inequality and socio-economic segregation in neighborhoods. Members want the City to embrace the goal of having all neighborhoods be inclusive. Members do not consider a community in which some neighborhoods provide meaningful housing opportunities for middle and low income households and other neighborhoods provide little or no housing opportunities for middle and low income households to be an inclusive community. The latter should be October 26, 2020, SoBu Affordable Housing Committee Minutes- APPROVED Page 3 considered a community of neighborhoods segregated on the basis of socio-economic status. Individual members shared several priorities, including addressing the socio-economic disparities in SoBu; seeking a new name for the Committee; promoting equity; increasing diversity in Committee membership; and facilitating City Council’s greater understanding of the benefits that would flow from more housing, more affordable housing, and more inclusive neighborhoods in SoBu. 6. Discussion on next steps regarding Accessory Dwelling Unit State Law: Chris proposed postponing this discussion because Paul indicated that the Planning staff has not yet developed a plan for implementation of these changes. Committee will postpone until Chris hears from Paul. Leslie summarized the statutory changes relating to ADUs. She also shared that research indicates there are about 16 short-term rentals (e.g. Airbnb’s) in SoBu. Number was somewhat higher before the pandemic. 7. Reports and updates by committee members: a. Non-Residential Parcels (Mike and Leslie) Mike – of seven or eight owners of property zoned Commercial or Industrial, only one raised a concern. The concern was that allowing residential development in these districts might diminish opportunities for industrial development. Question: should we focus in the short term on maximizing the preservation of undeveloped land in current residential zones for future development, thereby postposing action on this proposal? Is there still time to have Planning Commission include the Housing Space report’s map showing land ideal for housing in their development of LDRs related to natural resource area protection? Monica – PC has on its post-Interim Zoning agenda to develop LDRs for a “Campus” PUD. Possible next steps: Compare Housing Space report’s map with maps recently produced for Planning Commission. Hold a Zoom meeting with property owners of Commercial/Industrial land. Research where including housing in Commercial/Industrial zones has been done successfully elsewhere. Review site maps of these SoBu properties. Explore anticipated future Industrial development in SoBu. Consider impact of pandemic on Commercial/Industrial development. Contact CHT to obtain their input on this proposal. Sandy brought to members attention that the City Council appears likely to approve a 36-unit development of triplexes to be located at 600 Spear Street and the DRB is reviewing a proposal for multifamily housing on the South side of Swift Street. Mike added details relating to these applications. 8. Adjourn: Prior to adjournment, committee decided to meet again on Tuesday, November 17, 10:30 a.m. and Tuesday, December 1, 10:30 a.m. Note change in time. Assumption is that meeting with be online. At approximately 12:00 Noon, Mike moved and Leslie seconded motion to adjourn. Motion passed 7-0-0.