Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - Affordable Housing Committee - 01/05/2021January 5, 2021, SoBu Affordable Housing Committee Minutes- APPROVED Page 1 Approved on January 19, 2021 AFFORDABLE HOUSING COMMITTEE January 5, 2021, 2020, 10:30 a.m., meeting held online Members attending (online): Vince Bolduc, Sandy Dooley, Patrick O’Brien, Mike Simoneau, John Simson, and Chris Trombly; Member absent: Leslie Black-Plumeau Others: Monica Ostby, PC liaison; Kevin Dorn, City Manager; Guests: Dan Albrecht (briefly), John Burton, Alyson Chalnick, and Allan Strong, all SoBu residents. AGENDA 1. Call to order, agenda review, public comment, approval of minutes (12/15/20), announcements, Chair’s Comments 2. Discussion and possible action on South Burlington Land Trust request to add 2¢ to land preservation tax to ballot 3. Discussion and possible action on proposal to request that Planning Commission provide the scientific bases for changing the density calculation for development proposals from the base density multiplied by entire acreage of the parcel to be developed to the base density multiplied by the acreage of the parcel minus the acreage in the parcel that is in a Natural Resources Protection zone and additional areas under currently under consideration 4. Discussion and possible action relating to submitting amendment to PUD regulations to require inclusionary zoning city-wide 5. Review and possibly adopt 2020 Annual Report 6. Adjourn 1, Call to order, agenda review, public comment, approval of Minutes (12/15/20), announcements, Chair’s Comments: Public Comment: Dan Albrecht, on his own time and not in a professional capacity, brought to Committee’s attention Equity Impact Assessments and PowerPoint on this approach he had sent members. These assessments are relatively new in the planning world and have potential to help City identify unintended negative impacts on social groups relative to proposed changes to Land Development Regulations (LDRs)—for example, those currently being discussed relating to natural resource protection. Because Dan’s time to attend meeting was limited, chair allowed him to speak to an agenda item. To this end, Dan encouraged the Committee to oppose potential LDR changes that would reduce overall density due to removing undevelopable land from the density calculation. Reasons: (1) if the developable land can support the density, why punish the landowner? (2) the landowner may have owned the land for many years and assumed density allowed under current rules, so why change the rules on them? Minutes: Mike moved and Vince seconded motion to approve draft two of the 12/15/20 meeting minutes. Motion approved: 5-0-1. Patrick abstained as he did not participate in part of the meeting due to a conflict. Announcements: John reported that the Book Discussion Group re The Color of Law has been announced twice in the City’s online Newsletter. He said limit for group is 12 participants and encouraged committee members to opt out of participation should the group be fully subscribed and, as a result, exclude residents who are not committee members. Members made no formal decision but seemed ready to act on John’s suggestion. Regarding additional resources relating to the history of racism, Sandy recommended the movie 13th, which is available on Netflix and YouTube. January 5, 2021, SoBu Affordable Housing Committee Minutes- APPROVED Page 2 Chair’s Comments: Chris shared that Burlington had a discussion group on the same book this past fall. More than 50 people attended including Mayor Weinberger. 2. Discussion and possible action on South Burlington Land Trust request to add 2¢ to land preservation tax to ballot: Sandy shared that according to recent South Burlington Land Trust (SBLT) board meeting minutes, SBLT board members continue to lobby City Councilors with request that an Article be placed on City ballot seeking voter approval to increase the property tax add-on for the open space fund from 1¢ to 3¢ and some Councilors appear receptive to this proposal. Mike voiced his understanding that funding for an Indoor Recreation Facility is next on the Council’s agenda for major new additions to the tax burden. His view is that funding for School District bonds and the Housing Trust fund should be next on the list for new spending after the Indoor Recreation Facility. Patrick indicated his support for Mike’s position. Patrick added that he does not support more taxpayer funding for open space as it is not one of the three basic human survival needs. John (Burton) shared that an organization in which he is involved researched Vermont’s tax burden and found that it is higher than any of our neighboring states. Everyone agreed that now is not the time to seek to add to City residents’ tax obligations. Motion: John moved and Sandy seconded motion that (1) committee communicate to the City Council its opposition to an Article on a City ballot seeking approval for any addition to the current 1¢ for Open Space; and (2) the Committee’s request that the Council establish an annual procedure under which City committees and citizen groups present their proposals for new spending that the Council would use in setting priorities for additions to the property tax or new bond spending. Motion approved: 6-0-0. 3. Discussion and possible action on proposal to request that Planning Commission provide the scientific bases for changing the density calculation for development proposals from the base density multiplied by entire acreage of the parcel to be developed to the base density multiplied by the acreage of the parcel minus the acreage in the parcel that is in a Natural Resources Protection zone and additional areas under currently under consideration: Discussion included fact that both Monica and Mike have sought to learn whether LDR changes being considered would allow same number of residential units, more units, or fewer units than current LDRs. No answer forthcoming to date. So far, Interim Zoning has focused primarily on open space and not on impact of development. Monica’s assessment is that it is not the intent of Planning Commission to use the Interim Zoning LDR changes as a density reduction strategy. Patrick indicated that, often, developers perceive changes focused on natural resource protection as vehicles for a “density grab.” Patrick voiced concern about unintended negative impacts of the new process (changes being considered) on the economics of development in SoBu. He recommended that the Planning Commission ask someone like David White to develop a conceptual design for a development, adapt it to the new rules (theoretically), and estimate the cost. “Let’s test the theory.” Monica recommended that the conceptual design include Inclusionary Zoning. John said PC should be cautious about requirements for external amenities (i.e. beyond the buildings), their costs, and whether, in light of other requirements, developer should be responsible for cost of these amenities. Committee is unanimous in support of requiring more than one housing type in new PUDs for residential neighborhoods. Vince pointed out that Committee needs answer to question about impact of draft rules on development potential to fulfill the Committee’s mission. What is timing for PC decision-making on the draft rules? Monica: they hope to have public hearing in February. Monica will follow up with the PC re Committee’s question and suggestion re “testing the theory.” Chris thanked Monica for her support of committee’s work and goals. 4. Discussion and possible action relating to submitting amendment to PUD regulations to require inclusionary zoning city-wide: Patrick supports Inclusionary Zoning but wants City to consider income limits as they apply to homeownership because development costs vary across the city. Sandy mentioned Habitat as a resource for reducing costs of building houses. Committee supports having Inclusionary Zoning be part of the new PUD regulations for residential neighborhoods. Will PUD requirements include building and connecting to other City bike paths? Committee views Inclusionary Zoning—i.e. including affordable units in the development—more important than requiring the developer to build and pay for bike path. How can the committee advance this goal? Paul (Conner) initiated this idea with committee. Plan: have it be a Planning January 5, 2021, SoBu Affordable Housing Committee Minutes- APPROVED Page 3 staff recommendation to the PC and have subcommittee (Vince, Patrick & Sandy) working with Paul on neighborhood design advocate for inclusion of Inclusionary Zoning in PUD rules. Vince mentioned that Paul has not sent homework or proposed date for second meeting. Chris will follow up with Paul re subcommittee’s desire to continue its project with him. 5. Review and possibly adopt 2020 Annual Report: Sandy pointed out need in item 9 on page 2 to change “exploiting” to “exploring.” In addition, she proposed that first goal be modified slightly to read as follows: “Continue to educate the City Council, Planning Commission, and the general public on the positive impact of increased housing, including housing affordable for low and moderate income households.” Changes are underlined. Committee supported these proposed changes. Committee agreed to add goal of obtaining City Council to approval for changing name of committee from Affordable Housing Committee to Housing Committee. Discussion followed on whether providing feedback to developers on development proposals is part of committee’s mission. John provided history on this: Prior City Council chair was unwilling to support this activity; however, neither current City Council chair nor other current City Councilors have expressed concerns about committee’s provision of input to developers. Monica mentioned that Natural Resources Committee does this routinely and has developed a checklist that makes clear to developers what the Committee is looking at when it reviews applications. Monica will obtain copy of the NR Committee’s checklist and share with Committee. Members agreed not to propose committee name change in the near future. Motion: Sandy moved and Mike seconded motion that the draft Annual Report for 2020 as amended be approved and forwarded to the City Manager. Motion approved: 6-0-0. 6. Adjourn: Prior to motion to adjourn, the committee agreed, by consensus, to schedule its next two meetings as follows: Tuesday, January 19, 2021, 10:30 a.m., online Tuesday, February 2, 2021, 10:30 a.m., online At 12:35 p.m. Mike moved and Vince seconded motion to adjourn. Motion approved: 6-0-0.