Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - Affordable Housing Committee - 11/13/2017Approved on November 27, 2017 FINAL AFFORDABLE HOUSING COMMITTEE November 13, 2017, 4:00 PM, City Hall Members attending: Tom Bailey, Leslie Black-Plumeau, Sandy Dooley, Michael Simoneau, John Simson (Chair) Others: Monica Ostby, Planning Commission liaison; Amy Demetrowitz, Champlain Housing Trust’s Project Development Director (arrived at 4:10, left about 5:00); Kevin Dorn (arrived late in 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 action on minutes of October 17, 2017, Committee meeting 4a. Chair’s report on meeting with Paul Conner 5. Organization for coming year - election of officers 6. Visit from Amy Demetrowitz from CHT to suggest developer incentives 7. Continue working on City wide inclusionary housing amendments 8. New business 9. Adjourn 1. Welcome: John called the meeting to order at 4:00 p.m., summarized emergency evacuation instructions, and shared that Todd Rawlings would be either late in arriving or not attending the meeting. (Larry Michaels had previously indicated he could not attend due to conflict.) 2. Agenda review: John proposed two additions: (1) review and action on October 17 meeting minutes, and (2) Report on meeting earlier in day with Paul Conner. Additions accepted by consensus. 3. Comments, etc.: There were no comments from the public. 4. Review and approval of minutes of October 17, 2017, committee meeting: Tom moved and Mike seconded motion to approve draft of the October 17, 2017, meeting minutes as circulated. Motion approved unanimously. 4a. Chair’s report on meeting with Paul Conner: John shared that at Paul’s initiative, he, Sandy, and Monica had participated in a meeting with Paul earlier that afternoon (11/13) to review, discuss, and provide feedback on City Attorney David Rugh’s (of Stitzel, Page, etc. firm) suggested modifications to the Committees proposed LDRs regarding Housing Preservation. These suggestions related to the provisions regarding building a new housing unit in the city to replace one that had been removed/demolished, the length of time a home owner would have to replace his or her own home on the same lot on which the owner’s home had been demolished, the amount of the in lieu payment to the SoBu Housing Trust fund when demolished housing unit is not replaced, and the current cost in SoBu of obtaining a demolition permit. John, Monica, and Sandy concurred with some of Rugh’s suggestions and differed with some. Paul agreed to draft a summary of the substance of the discussion; share it with attendees for comment; and, when an agreed upon summary is completed, forward it to Rugh. 5. Organization for coming year - election of officers: During a brief discussion Tom and Leslie proposed deferring this agenda item to a meeting at which more (hopefully all) committee members are present. All agreed with this proposal; agenda item was postponed. 6. Visit from Amy Demetrowitz from CHT to suggest developer incentives: Amy has worked at CHT for 23 years. Amy provided information showing how beneficial for nonprofit housing development organizations it is for municipalities to put in place a policy that discounts part or all of the impact fees that would otherwise apply. These discounts would apply only to developments that include minimum percentages of affordable housing units to be rented or sold at prices affordable to households with incomes not exceeding specific (i.e. low) levels in relation to the County’s AMI (Area Median Income). She indicated that CHT had paid $35,000 in impact fees to SoBu for its development of Beacon Apartments. In addition, Cathedral Square is paying $154,000 in SoBu impact fees for the senior housing development it is building on Market Street. Amy shared that CHT is working toward obtaining funding to build a 60-unit family apartment building in City Center at the corner of Market and Garden Streets. Based on current plans, Amy estimates that CHT would pay $221,000 in impact fees for this development (builder will be Snyder/Braverman). While a private developer of market rate housing may not view a reduction in impact fees as a significant incentive, it is a different situation for nonprofit housing developers. The reason is that nonprofits are typically assembling funding from 12 (or more) funding sources (often in relatively small amounts) and a reduction in the impact fees makes this process less difficult for the nonprofit developer. For example, Amy said her draft budget for the City Center development includes a request for $75,000 from the SoBu Housing Trust Fund. Amy provided the following information about the City of Burlington’s impact regulation that reduces impact fees for perpetually affordable housing units as follows: 25% discount in fees for affordable units whose price is affordable to households with incomes no greater than 75% of AMI 50% discount in fees for affordable units whose price is affordable to households with incomes no greater than 65% of AMI 100% discount of fees for affordable units whose price is affordable to households with incomes no greater than 50% of AMI CHT recently build the Bright Street Cooperative in Burlington for which it paid $41,000 in impact fees, which was a $73,000 saving over fees paid when no unit meets any of the above criteria. Burlington has impact fees for traffic, fire, police, parks, library, and schools. Consensus: Committee is strongly supportive of SoBu adopting a fee policy discounting impact fees for housing units to be rented of sold at prices affordable to households having incomes substantially below the AMI. The City Council acts on the amount of impact fees to be charged. The Planning Commission is not responsible for developing impact-fee policy proposals. Follow-up: Amy will prepare a memo indicating what the SoBu impact fees would be for the planned family housing development in City Center and how those fees would be reduced if SoBu adopted a regulation comparable to that of the City of Burlington and send it to John. Amy left the meeting. John will speak with Paul (Conner) and Kevin (Dorn) about Committee’s support for impact fee discounts for affordable housing. Tom and Sandy will use Amy’s memo to prepare a draft impact fee discount proposal for review at the next Committee meeting. Leslie suggested we consider AMI levels for our policy proposal that are a good fit for SoBu’s affordable housing goals and not necessarily use Burlington’s AMI levels. Monica suggested that an additional impact fee discount be provided for housing units that include three or more bedrooms. When the time comes for communicating with City Councilors, committee members agreed to reach out to City Councilors as follows: John to Helen and Tom, Mike to Pat and Tim, and Sandy to Meaghan. 7. Continue working on City wide inclusionary housing amendments: John reviewed with committee the following sections of October 17th committee meeting minutes: 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.” Discussion at 11/13/17 meeting: (A) Committee members agreed the minutes reflected discussion and positions committee reached at the 10/17/17 meeting and offered no changed views (coming after review and reflection). (B) Special Urban Districts as previously defined by Committee are all R-12 and R-15 zoning districts. (C) Question: Should Basic Density regulations (limits) apply in Zoning Districts that are not Special Urban Districts or should developers that choose to build affordable housing instead of contributing to the Housing Trust Fund receive a density bonus? No conclusion reached. (D) Leslie provided definition of “priority housing project” (under State statute): For rental housing, the development meets definition when at least 20% of housing units are offered at rents affordable to households with incomes no greater than 80% of AMI and affordability must remain for at least 15 years. For home ownership, the development meets definition when at least 15% of housing units are offered at prices no greater than 85% of VHFA’s maximum purchase price limit or 20% of the units are offered at prices no greater than 90% of VHFA’s maximum purchase price limit. (E) Committee discussed need for SoBu to have State designation ("Downtown" or "New Town Center") for anticipated Special Urban District contingent to Shelburne Road so that affordable housing developments can be recognized as “priority housing projects” and receive special treatment under Act 250. Leslie is researching whether this can be done with this area designated as a “Neighborhood Development Area.” (F) Members mentioned how, in addition to geography (“East South Burlington” and “South South Burlington”), it is impossible to expect the City to have only one development area; for example, bifurcation of City by the Interstate, having Fire Station and Sewage Treatment Plant off Shelburne Road, need special designation to enable policies that minimize Shelburne Road’s “poster child for strip development” appearance. (G) Discussion also included recognition that the Chamberlin neighborhood, less the airport noise impact, is an ideal, existing, affordable neighborhood, which is difficult to impossible to recreate elsewhere. With proper noise mitigation and sound proofing, the noise impact may be sufficiently reduced to keep that area sustainable and desirable. (H) Task for 11/27 Committee meeting: committee to define Special Urban Districts; i.e., where are they. (I) Explore possibility of having legislation modified to permit SoBu to have two "Downtown" or "New Town Center" designations. 6. New (and Old) Business Outstanding topics for committee discussion/exploration (not an all-inclusive list): ● 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 Homework: John will speak with Paul (Conner) and Kevin (Dorn) about Committee’s support for impact fee discounts for affordable housing. Tom and Sandy will use Amy’s memo to prepare a draft impact fee discount proposal for review at the next Committee meeting. Sandy will invite Rep. Helen Head (chair of House Housing, General, and Military Affairs Committee) to November 27th Committee meeting. John will bring City zoning map to next meeting. Past homework: Tom and Mike will research who owns property along Shelburne Road and whether any additional developments there are in the pipeline. Date/time/place of next meeting: November 27, 2017, 4:00 p.m. (may be changed to 3:45 p.m.), City Hall, 2nd Floor Conference Room 7. Adjourn – Mike moved and Tom seconded that the meeting be adjourned. Committee approved motion unanimously at 6:05 p.m.