Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - Affordable Housing Committee - 02/05/2019APPROVED on February 5, 2019 AFFORDABLE HOUSING COMMITTEE January 24, 2019, 10:00 AM (scheduled time), City Hall, Champlain Room Members attending: Tom Bailey, Sandy Dooley, and John Simson (all 10:00 a.m.); Leslie Black-Plumeau (10:29 a.m. by phone and 10:51 in person): Larry Michaels and Todd Rawlings (as of 10:47a.m.). Member absent: Michael Simoneau Also present: Monica Ostby, Planning Commission liaison (as of 10:20); Regina Mahoney, Chittenden County Regional Planning Commission (CCRPC) (10:00); and Dan Albrecht, South Burlington resident (10:05). Minutes by Sandy Dooley AGENDA 1. Call to order, emergency procedure, agenda review, comments from guests 2. Review and approval of minutes of 1/8/2019 committee meeting 3. Chair’s comments: Report on meeting at CVOEO re grant, conversation with Superintendent David Young 4. Welcome Regina Mahoney to discuss her thoughts on our draft Inclusionary Housing regulations 5. Reports and updates by committee members 6. Discussion and adoption of committee work plan if complete 7. Adjourn 1. Call to order, emergency procedure, agenda review, comments from guests: Due to a misunderstanding regarding the time of the meeting, the meeting did not begin at or about 10:00 a.m., as scheduled. Once a quorum was achieved via Leslie’s participation by phone, John called the meeting to order at 10:29 a.m. He noted how to exit from building. John welcomed Dan Albrecht to the meeting. Dan’s input was deferred until later in the meeting. 2. Review and approval of minutes of 1/8/2019 committee meeting: John moved and Tom seconded motion that the minutes of the 1/8/19 meeting be approved as drafted. Motion passed 4-0-0 (Larry and Todd were not yet present). 3. Chair’s comments: Report on meeting at CVOEO re grant, conversation with Superintendent David Young: John reported that he and Sandy met with Ted Wimpey and Jessica Hyman at CVOEO to discuss the Vermont Natural Resources Council’s (VNRC) rejection letter regarding CVOEO’s grant application to assist the committee in its efforts to have Inclusionary Zoning adopted in the Transit Overlay District and Sandy’s follow- up conversations with Brian Shupe, VNRC executive director, and Kate McCarthy, VNRC Sustainable Communities program director. The group concluded that VNRC does not seem receptive to exploring/defining how application of smart growth principles in cities and suburban areas might differ from their application in small towns. In light of this, they decided not to pursue submitting a second application to VNRC for a smart growth grant. John reported that he had spoken with David Young at a Rotary Club meeting about the committee’s upcoming request that David send an email to School District employees seeking input regarding any challenges they have faced in seeking/finding/not finding affordable housing in South Burlington. David indicated his willingness to send such an email to School District staff. At this point, Dan shared his view that the committee’s proposal regarding Inclusionary Housing should be modified so that Inclusionary Zoning would apply to the entire City. He indicated that he knew other City residents that share this view and that he and they would support the committee’s efforts toward this end. John and Sandy explained that, in light of the fact that Interim Zoning currently applies in most of the City outside the Transit Overlay District, the committee’s request to City Council was for the Council to support moving forward on Inclusionary Zoning only in the Transit Overlay District at this time. They also stated that the committee fully supports the implementation of Inclusionary Zoning in the entire City, including the Southeast Quadrant (SEQ). However, because the committee anticipates that Inclusionary Zoning in the Transit Overlay District will be adopted before Interim Zoning ends, it would be impossible to integrate Inclusionary Zoning in the areas covered by Interim Zoning without complicating (and possibly) lengthening the time it takes for the Interim Zoning work groups to complete their work. Once Interim Zoning has ended, the committee will seek to have Inclusionary Zoning implemented in the rest of the City. Sandy mentioned that, on behalf of the committee, John had sent the City Councilors a letter (via email) stating the committee’s position that the number of future dwelling units allowed via zoning in the SEQ remain no less than the number allowed under current LDRs. This letter also stated that further reducing the potential future supply of homes in the City impacts the affordability of all City homes, given people’s desire to live here. Dan indicated he would be open to different Inclusionary requirements in different parts of the City, perhaps, a five (5) % requirement in the SEQ. He added that it is helpful to know that the committee’s proposal to implement Inclusionary Zoning in the Transit Overlay District is an incremental step toward a goal of implementation of Inclusionary Zoning in the entire City. John thanked Dan for coming and for his thoughtful comments. 4. Welcome Regina Mahoney (RM) to discuss her thoughts on our draft Inclusionary Housing regulations: John welcomed Regina and shared that he and Sandy met with her the day before to review her suggestions regarding how the committee’s draft proposal might be improved. Regina distributed paper copies of the committee’s draft proposal with her suggestions/comments. Regina led the committee through a “walk-through” of this document. What follows indicate the places where Regina suggested changes and the members present supported these changes. 18.01 B. Applicability (2) Covered Subdivisions. To be deleted. Reasons: it is a significant addition to Inclusionary rules that now apply in City Center; there are likely no places in the Transit Overlay District where this approach to development is likely to occur; and it would be an expansion of the workload that implementation of Inclusionary rules would impose on City staff. Committee members indicated support. 18.01 B. Inclusionary Units (3)(b)(iv) RM may change wording of “in the same proportion as all other units in the development” to clarity meaning/intent. Committee members indicated support. 18.01 D. Inclusionary Subdivisions. To be deleted. Deletion necessary due to deletion of “Covered Subdivisions” above. 18.01 E. Affordability Requirements (1)(g) The style of the content of this section is unusual for a zoning bylaw. RM will reword to shorten, simplify, and clarify. Committee members indicated support. 18.01 F. Developer Options (1) Delete “or equally compelling circumstances” as too vague for consistent and fair implementation. Delete references to decision-making by Zoning Administrator and Development Review Board as this is covered elsewhere in the rules. Delete “Option (e) a payment or contribution in lieu of constructing required inclusionary units in the City Center Form-Based Codes District, shall be prohibited.” consistent with option (e) being deleted below. Committee members indicated support. 18.01 F. Developer Options (1)(a) Delete references to Zoning Administrator and Development Review Board and add back in South Burlington City Council as only the City Council has authority to accept a donation of land. Committee members indicated support. 18.01 F. Developer Options (1)(e) Delete this subsection, Contribution to the Housing Trust Fund. Reasons: Having this option is counter to the proposal’s inclusionary goal. The Transit Overlay District is the ideal area of the City in which to have inclusionary dwelling units. Committee members indicated support. The following four sections or the committee’s proposal were considered together. 18.01 G. Affordable Housing Density Bonuses for Fulfillment of Inclusionary Unit Requirements (2) AND 18.01 H. Affordable Housing Density Bonuses for Voluntary Provision of Twice the Required Number of Inclusionary Units AND 18.01 I. Affordable Housing Density Bonuses for Voluntary Provision of More than the Required Number of Inclusionary Rental Units at or below 80% AMI or More than the Required Number of Inclusionary Home-Ownership Units at or below 100% AMI AND 18.01 J. Affordable Housing Density Bonuses for developments with fewer than 12 dwelling units Committee supported RM’s suggestion to simplify by proposing a one-for-one bonus dwelling unit for each required inclusionary dwelling unit constructed and each voluntary inclusionary dwelling unit constructed. The committee tentatively supports providing a one-for-one bonus dwelling unit for each additional inclusionary dwelling unit constructed and priced at or below the lower of the required AMI maximums than is otherwise required by the bylaw. Committee will give this “tentative-support” decision a later review. RM will also clarify language regarding intent that bonus dwelling units are not subject to the Inclusionary Unit requirement calculation. Also, tables in these sections will be removed from the bylaw but converted to Appendices and used for illustration purposes when committee’s proposal is presented to the Planning Commission and at public hearings. 18.01 K. Parking Requirements Change to read: “The number of parking spaces required for each development shall be no greater than one space per unit.” “Inclusionary unit” was deleted and “development” was substituted in this change. Article 15 SUBDIVISION AND PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 15.02 Authority and Required Review C. Elective PUD Review. Committee supports deleting proposal to decrease parcel size of land necessary for elective PUD review because the PUD regulations are under review as part of Interim Zoning and likely to be modified. Follow-up: RM will incorporate these changes into the committee’s draft proposal and send revised document to committee members in advance of committee’s 2/14/19 committee meeting, at which committee members will review the document with RM. 5. Reports and updates by committee members: (1) Tom reported that the TDR committee meeting scheduled for 1/23 was cancelled due to weather/road conditions. He indicated that Amanda Lafferty, deputy city attorney, had attended the prior TDR committee meeting and reviewed statute, regulations, and history relative to TDRs, which Tom had found helpful. Tom indicated there are 4,200 acres of land in the SEQ. Using the 1.2 dwelling units per acre across the SEQ to determine maximum dwelling units (DUs) and subtracting DUs already built or permitted, there remain about 1,200 DUs yet to be permitted. Tom did not know total acreage of the Natural Resource Protection districts in the SEQ. (2) Leslie requested that “what should be done vis-à-vis the remaining TDRs” be included on the agenda for the committee’s 2/5/19 meeting. Other committee members supported this request. (3) Sandy reported that Habitat for Humanity has purchased a small lot behind the Price Chopper store on Hinesburg Road and plans to construct a four-plex on this lot. Sandy and Monica are working to connect the Habitat and GeoBarns folks to explore how they might work together on this project. Both Habitat and GeoBarns have expressed an interest in meeting. 6. Discussion and adoption of committee work plan if complete: John asked if committee members had projects to propose in addition to those identified at the 1/8/19 committee meeting. No one had additional projects to propose. John said he would draft a 2019 work plan for consideration at the 2/5/19 committee meeting. 7. Adjourn: At 12:20 p.m. John moved and Todd seconded motion that the meeting be adjourned. Motion passed 6-0-0. Bike rack: ● 1/8/19 Emails to K. Dorn and D. Young to be completed by 1/24/19 ● Keep and address at 1/24/19 committee meeting. Work on Committee’s page on the City’s website ● Combine with item immediately above. (Quoted from January 23, 2018, meeting minutes) “John asked Mike to prepare a work plan for the committee to collaborate with Coralee to enhance its effectiveness in communicating with residents via the City’s website and via other means. The plan should include specific assignments to be carried out by identified committee members. Mike accepted this assignment.” Homework (not yet reported on): All bike rack tasks should include date of assignment and date for task completion.