Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - Affordable Housing Committee - 04/27/2021April 27, 2021, SoBu Affordable Housing Committee Minutes- APPROVED Page 1 Approved on May 11, 2021 AFFORDABLE HOUSING COMMITTEE April 27, 2021, 10:30 a.m., meeting held online Members attending: Leslie Black-Plumeau, Vince Bolduc, Sandy Dooley, Patrick O’Brien, John Simson, and Chris Trombly Others: Monica Ostby, PC liaison; Kevin Dorn, City Manager; Michael Mittag and Ariel Jensen-Vargas, SoBu residents AGENDA 1. Call to order, agenda review, public comment, approval of minutes (04/13/21), announcements 2. Communications Update 3. Review of and possible action regarding draft memo (prepared by Communications work group) to Planning Commission (PC) providing committee input regarding PC’s draft memo to the City Council 4. Discussion and possible action regarding Environmental Protection Standards 5. Discussion regarding “Gray to Green Communities: Addressing Affordable Housing and Sustainability” email from Councilor Emery 6. Adjourn 1, Call to order, agenda review, public comment, approval of Minutes (04/13/21), announcements Call to order: Chris called the meeting to order at 10:31 a.m. Agenda review: Vince moved and Sandy seconded motion to approve agenda as proposed. Motion approved: 6-0-0. Public Comments: None. Minutes: Vince moved and John seconded motion to approve the 04/13/21 meeting minutes as drafted. Motion approved: 6-0-0. Announcements: Four committee “vacancies” for which Leslie, Ariel Jensen-Vargas, Emilie Krasnow, and Minelle Sarfo-Adu have applied. If CC does not approve voting membership for students, committee will need additional applicant to have nine members. Chris will check with Andrea Leo to find out how many have applied with Affordable Housing as first choice. Patrick reported that CC approved final change needed for South Village to move forward with final phase of development, which includes construction of Inclusionary Units. Sandy received email from Donna Leban, an architect and SoBu resident, who is interested in Accessory Dwelling Units (ADU). Plan is to have this discussion with her when Paul Conner brings draft of revised ADU regulations to committee for review and input. Sandy shared with Donna her “dream project” of having an architects’ competition to prepare designs for triplexes, four-plexes, and small multi-family buildings that are attractive, energy-efficient, and not too costly. Discussion: “one design fits all” is impossible because each municipality has different design standards/requirements; in addition, some homeowners’ associations have their own design guidelines (e.g. South Village); the adoption of form-based codes (FBC) was supposed to minimized the “one-size-fits-one” problem, but FBC rules adopted so far have varied town by town; designs would need to include budget information (what are the materials and how much do they cost, plus cost of labor, etc.); if we want something that would be useful statewide, suggest that contest be how to minimize the cost of building “missing middle” housing types that comply with requirements of 2020 Stretch Energy Code; SoBu’s rules for Inclusionary units allow dwelling to include one unfinished bedroom—how much does this reduce the cost of construction; will SoBu DRB approve developments that include dwellings with unfinished bedrooms. Monica reported that she reached out to Minelle about The Color of Law book group—no reply to date. 2. Communications Update: Leslie’s submission to South Burlington Newsletter about Fair Housing Month and Minelle’s online presentation should appear in today’s edition. Vince submitted a piece to the SEQ Front Porch Forum neighborhood, which generated neighborhood pushback; Andrea (Leo) completed updates to the committee’s webpage. April 27, 2021, SoBu Affordable Housing Committee Minutes- APPROVED Page 2 3. Review of and possible action regarding draft memo (prepared by Communications work group) to Planning Commission (PC) providing committee input regarding PC’s draft memo to the City Council: Sandy summarized how decision to have Communications work group develop memo came about. Monica shared with Chris and Sandy PC’s draft memo to CC with questions regarding how PC should proceed vis-à-vis PC’s work on PUDs for the SEQ. Sandy was concerned that draft memo includes option for CC to direct PC to develop only the Conservation PUD for the SEQ. Chris concurred in her concerns and called meeting of Communications work group to review draft memo to PC on this subject that Sandy agreed to draft. Communications work group met, made improvements to draft, and deemed modified version ready to share with PC (end of Sandy’s summary). Draft memo sent to PC members so that they have a few days to review it. Committee members then expressed full support for memo. Patrick described role of memo as articulating the “unintended consequences” of an action or policy choice that may not be evident to those considering the action/policy choice. Many topics raised: fear of density, discomfort with any housing type other than detached single-family dwellings, what happens to TDRs with both options—TND PUD and Conservation PUD, can you develop as many units under PUDs as you can under current rules, need to do more education about the problem of increasingly high cost of housing and how higher density and housing types other than detached single-family dwellings play a role in bringing down costs, need to allow/encourage density in light of how much land will no longer be available for development due to new Environmental Protection Standards rules. Sandy moved and John seconded that committee approve memo to PC as drafted. During discussion Kevin shared that Jessica (PC chair) has requested that last sentence of memo be deleted (re forwarding memo to CC). Sandy and John agreed to this as a friendly amendment. Sought input from public attendees. Ariel reminded committee of importance of building up to increase density; response was that this would be part of forthcoming Infill PUD. Sought input from M. Mittag and found that he had exited meeting during Ariel’s comments. Motion as amended passed: 6-0-0. Chris will notify Jessica that amended motion passed unanimously and send amended version. Will send to CC later. 4. Discussion and possible action regarding Environmental Protection Standards: So far, committee has not identified aspects of proposed rules that produce clear concerns. Members’ consensus is that we should take a position whether it is entirely supportive, supportive with qualifications, or stating significant concerns. One concern is definition of “grasslands” and how they are incorporated into the rules. Questions about agriculture, forestry, and sugaring. Patrick raised his concerns about proposal to regulate Class III wetlands and the impact of these proposed changes, including the size of the buffers. The State does not regulate them. How much land will be removed from development if regulation of Class III wetlands goes forward as proposed? Patrick will attend PC’s May 4 listening session on proposed rules and convey his concerns and bases for them and ask questions. Goal is to make sure PC fully understands the concerns about the proposed rules that Patrick raised. 5. Discussion regarding “Gray to Green Communities: Addressing Affordable Housing and Sustainability” email from Councilor Emery: Most committee members have watched the webinar. Leslie contacted Councilor Emery and thanked her for providing this information. Responses to webinar: information is good and noted that Vermont has already implemented many of the recommendations set forth. Examples include establishment of VHFA for affordable housing (many decades ago) and adoption of 2020 Stretch Energy Code applicable to all new housing in VT—not just affordable housing. Vermonters understand the importance of energy-efficient construction as a means of making the cost of housing more affordable to the householders. The nonprofits work very hard (and have achieved considerable success) to build energy-efficient housing. While the webinar stresses the importance of energy efficiency in making housing more affordable to the householder, committee members saw it as tending to avoid the subject of how costly it is to construct energy-efficient structures. Leslie read the book that is basis for the webinar. Plan is for her to prepare a “book review” that highlights major messages from book and includes what a good job Vermont is doing in this effort. She will submit this book review to Andrea for inclusion in a future edition of the So Bu Newsletter. Future meeting dates/times: May 11 and May 25, both at 10:30 a.m. April 27, 2021, SoBu Affordable Housing Committee Minutes- APPROVED Page 3 6. Adjourn: At 12:36 p.m. Patrick moved and John seconded motion to adjourn. Motion approved: 6-0-0.