Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - Affordable Housing Committee - 10/17/2017Approved on November 13, 2017 AFFORDABLE HOUSING COMMITTEE October 17, 2017, 4:00 PM, City Hall Members attending: Tom Bailey, Leslie Black-Plumeau, Sandy Dooley, Todd Rawlings, Michael Simoneau, John Simson (Chair) Others: Monica Ostby, Planning Commission liaison; Larry Michaels (date of City Council’s appointment unknown, left at 5:35), Kevin Dorn (arrived mid-meeting) Minutes by Sandy Dooley AGENDA 1. Welcome 2. Agenda Review: Additions, deletions or changes in order of agenda items 3. Comments and questions from the public not related to the agenda 4. Review and approve minutes of October 2, Committee meeting. 5. Committee review of what to include in an LDR amendment expanding Inclusionary Zoning citywide with designated priority zoning districts with special developer incentives 6. New business 7. Adjourn 1. Welcome: John called the meeting to order at 4:00 p.m. and summarized emergency evacuation instructions. 2. Agenda review: No changes proposed or made. 3. Comments, etc.: There were no comments from the public. 4. Review and approval of minutes of October 2, 2017, committee meeting: Leslie moved and Tom seconded motion to approve draft of the October 2, 2017, meeting minutes as circulated (with one grammatical correction). Motion approved unanimously. 5. Committee review of what to include in an LDR amendment expanding Inclusionary Zoning citywide with designated priority zoning districts with special developer incentives John handed out the following list of possible provisions of a citywide Inclusionary Zoning LDR and Special Urban District LDR that he had prepared, as follows: “1) Inclusionary zoning in all districts except city center permitting residential use. a. Keep same details in City Center IZ including tiered income requirement b. Permit in lieu payment of $60k per unit c. Parking requirement per aff. units 1 space per unit d. Waive impact fees for affordable units e. Should we address the “loophole”? f. What about unit size, finishings? Note: how do we resolve density bonus vs. IZ? PUD and IZ? We should try to add density and require more open and common land. Suggest consult with Paul (Conner). 2) Special urban districts designated to receive special incentives and higher densities, mixed use, 25% affordable tiered by income. All parking 1 space per unit Relief from Act 250? Waive impact fees for affordable units Waive any height restriction Mixed use in larger developments” Committee members engaged in lively discussion of these provisions with additional input. General consensus was reached as indicated below a. Keep same details in City Center IZ including tiered income requirement City Center: IZ effective for development ≥12 units; requires 15% affordable overall w/ 5% ≤120% AMI, 5%≤100% AMI, and 5%≤80% AMI – Committee supports for Citywide IZ b. Permit in lieu payment of $60k per unit – Committee supports for Citywide IZ c. Parking requirement per aff. units 1 space per unit– Committee supports for Citywide IZ d. Waive impact fees for affordable units – Committee considering having this apply to Special Districts only, not expanded Citywide IZ. e. Should we address the “loophole”? – Committee supports closing Burlington” loophole; Loophole occurs when developer sells lots for development that would otherwise be subject to IZ; developer or individual who purchases lot/s has no IZ requirement. f. What about unit size, finishings? Committee noted discrepancies between SoBu LDRs for City Center IZ and Density Bonus with respect to requirements re unit size and finishings for affordable units vis-à-vis market rate units. Committee favors allowing differences as provided for in City Center IZ LDRs 1) Special urban districts designated to receive special incentives and higher densities, mixed use, 25% affordable tiered by income. Committee discussed have the affordable percentage requirement be 30% affordable overall w/ 10% ≤120% AMI, 10%≤100% AMI, and 10%≤80% AMI in special urban districts All parking 1 space per unit - Committee supports for Special Urban Districts Relief from Act 250? – Limited discussion; Leslie shared handout re “priority housing project” and exemption from Act 250; more discussion exploration to follow. Waive impact fees for affordable units - Committee supports for Special Urban Districts Waive any height restriction – very little discussion Mixed use in larger developments – see topics discussed below. Topics discussed: A. If developer proposes to build “Live, Work, and Play with green space” development (aka concept Eric Farrell described) with affordable housing (not sure if minimum percentage was suggested), offer incentives for such a development in any part of SoBu that permits residential development. Committee members expressed concerns that this approach does not support CCRPC policy of 80 percent of new development in designated “town centers” or “downtowns” and 20 percent in rest of municipality. Monica plans to contact Paul and gather info on SoBu’s designated town center (or downtown). B. Some discussion of how to modify the definition of “affordable housing” in SoBu’s LDRs. Concerns raised in Paul’s Conner’s email and additional concerns raised by Leslie and Sandy discussed briefly but no specific change formulated. C. Differences between number of affordable units generated by current Density Bonus approach and Citywide IZ proposal raised but not fully explored. D. Oversight, monitoring, and enforcement of IZ and method of carrying out these responsibilities need to be addressed in new IZ LDRs. E. Perpetual affordability for Citywide IZ affordable units and units in Special Urban Districts or some other time frame (e.g. 15 years) was discussed briefly. F. In Special Urban Districts should we have additional incentives for developments that have higher percentages (e.g. 40% or 50%) of affordable units? Perhaps, higher density bonus. G. Additional possible incentives in Special Urban Districts mentioned: reduced minimum lot sizes, increased allowable maximum lot coverage, reduced setback requirements. H. Members mentioned new housing developments in Williston (Finneys Crossing) and Colchester. Question: do these development include affordable housing? 6. New (and Old) Business Outstanding topics for committee discussion/exploration (not an all-inclusive list): ● Leslie’s handout re “Priority Housing Project” and Act 250 ● Paul Conner’s email re committee’s proposed new definition of affordable housing and relationship to density bonus provision of LDRs, etc. ● Additional topics from John’s handout needing resolution (see above) Homework: Tom will research question of whether new residential developments in Williston and Colchester include affordable units. Tom and Mike will research who owns property along Shelburne Road and whether any additional developments there are in the pipeline. Dates for upcoming meetings: November 13, and November 27 (all at 4:00 p.m., City Hall, Second Floor Conference Room) 7. Adjourn – Leslie moved and Mike seconded that the meeting be adjourned. Committee approved motion unanimously at 6:00 p.m.