HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - Affordable Housing Committee - 06/26/2018APPROVED on July 10, 2018
NOTE: Date/time/place of next meeting: July 10, 2018, 10:00 a.m., place TBD
AFFORDABLE HOUSING COMMITTEE
June 26, 2018, 10:00 AM, City Hall, 2nd Floor Champlain Room
Members attending: Tom Bailey, Leslie Black-Plumeau, Sandy Dooley, Todd Rawlings, Michael
Simoneau, and John Simson (Chair); Member absent: Larry Michaels
Others present: Monica Ostby, PC liaison
Minutes by Sandy Dooley
AGENDA
1. Call to order, safety orientation, agenda review, comments from the public
2. Review and approval of June 12, 2018, minutes
3. Chair’s remarks
4. Review of draft Burlington IZ Report
5. Continue to work on draft Citywide IZ focusing on density bonus issues, developer incentive, and
in
lieu payment policy
6. New business
7. Adjourn
1. Call to order, safety orientation, agenda review, comments from the public: John called the
meeting to order at 10:03 a.m. and summarized emergency evacuation instructions. There were no
comments from the public.
2. Review June 12, 2018, minutes for adoption: Tom moved and Mike seconded motion that June 12,
minutes be approved as distributed. Motion passed, vote: 5-0-1, with Leslie abstaining as she did not
attend the June 12th meeting. .
3. Chair’s remarks: (a) John shared that, along with CHT and SoBu personnel, he had attended the
Montpelier meeting at which the City’s application for $625,000 in VCDP funding for the 60-unit
Garden Apartments development in City Center was presented. The decision-making group appeared
to view the City’s application favorably. The decision on SoBu’s application will be announced on July
6th.
(b) John noted that Ed VonTurkovich, one of the developers seeking to build housing on UVM property
that borders Spear and Swift Streets, will be presenting their proposal to the Planning Commission
(PC) that evening, scheduled for 7:15 on the PC’s posted agenda. John indicated that he plans to
attend as he understands that the developers have stated a large proportion of the housing they want
to build will be “work force housing.” John invited other committee members to attend with him. Tom
and Sandy indicated their intent to attend. Building housing, other than University housing, on one
parcel included in the proposal requires a zoning change.
The PC is developing its workplan for the coming year and VonTurkovich is asking the PC to include
consideration of his zoning change request in the coming year. Monica informed the committee that
UVM is the second largest landowner in SoBu. Mike posed the question of whether the
VonTurkovich’s will support the adoption of citywide Inclusionary Zoning in SoBu. Todd raised the
question of whether the housing being proposed would be “work force” affordable perpetually or only
initially.
(c) John then proposed that committee members schedule its meetings for July and August. The
members agreed on the following dates and times:
Tuesday, July 10, 2018, 10:00 a.m.
Tuesday, July 24, 2018, 10:00 a.m.
Monday, August 6, 2018, 10:30 a.m. Note change in day of week and time
Tuesday, August 21, 2018, 9:00 a.m. Note change in time.
(d) Library Meeting – Mike asked if anyone had attended the City Council/Library Board meeting the
previous evening. John, Monica, and Sandy indicated that they had attended. Attendance and
questions raised suggested a high level of interest in and support for the proposed new Library/City
Hall/Senior Center, especially the new library. Monica raised the question of whether the senior center
space would be available for other programming when not in use by seniors and whether non-seniors
would be welcome to attend senior-focused programs. Sandy indicated she understands that the
answer to Monica’s first question is yes. No one could answer her second question.
4. Review of draft Burlington IZ Report: Todd distributed copies of the report that included color
printing. Thank you, Todd!
Tom indicated that he found BTV’s proposed approach to payment in lieu (allowed in some Census
tracts, not allowed in others, depending on Inclusionary rating), off site construction, and City’s right of
first refusal worthy of exploration/consideration.
Monica suggested that the Zoning labels reference the density after the required inclusionary units are
added. Todd saw merit in Monica’s suggestion but said this would only be accurate if Inclusionary
Zoning came into play with the first dwelling unit that is built. Monica shared perception that many
residents are confused about what density is allowed in various zoning districts, especially the
Southeast Quadrant (SEQ). Mike shared his perception that residents are not confused about zoning
in SEQ but instead resistant to development of additional housing these. John described the
“confusion” as a form of NIMBY attitudes.
Discussion moved back to the BTV proposal to base policy re allowing/not allowing in lieu payment on
the Inclusionary rating of the Census tract in which the development would be built. Todd shared a
table showing that, based on policy as currently drafted, in lieu payments would not be permitted in
nine of the City’s 28 Census Tract Block Groups. John asked if comparable data is available for
SoBu. Todd and Leslie replied yes. Committee members expressed interest in having this data for
SoBu. Todd and Leslie agreed to collaborate on producing this information in table and map form for
the committee.
5. Continue to work on draft Citywide IZ focusing on density bonus issues, developer incentive, and
in
lieu payment policy: Monica suggested putting higher priority on promoting development of
accessory units as a strategy for increasing availability of affordable housing, and encouraged
members to examine new “Carriage House” zoning regulation for the T-4 districts. She also
suggested using tax strategies as a method to offset cost of IZ, as an alternative to density bonuses.
Members’ responses were mixed; no one expressed support for eliminating density bonuses as an
offset to developers for IZ.
Tom suggested Impact Fee waivers; John said we are already promoting this in certain situations.
Tom asked if IZ has been more effective in some areas of BTV than others. The Census tract data
shows that some areas of BTV are more inclusionary than others. Sandy noted that the purpose of IZ
is to promote inclusion but does not result in a large volume of new inclusionary housing. Tom shared,
as an FYI, that 410 acres in SoBu have property assessed based on Current Use (not highest value
allowable use). This results in a $3 million subsidy from the State to SoBu and a $3 million reduction
in property taxes for SoBu property owners in the Current Use program.
Monica indicated desire for more time to explore alternatives to density bonuses as offset for
developers. Committee members indicated that many of the alternatives in documents she shared
are virtually impossible here because they involve SoBu’s implementation of new taxes and that doing
so requires approval of State legislature, which is highly unlikely.
John stated that other than examining the SoBu Census Tract data and coming to a position on our
proposed in lieu payment recommendation, he wants us to focus on reaching consensus on the draft
policy and send it on to the Planning Commission. “Our job is to get something drafted and send it to
the PC.”
6. New business: Sandy asked about the Impact Fee ordinance and progress made on drafting and
presenting it to City Council. John indicated that it is not getting the priority action of staff that he had
hoped for. His view is that it needs some additional advocacy on the part of committee members.
John agreed to contact Kevin. Sandy will contact Helen. John encouraged others to contact City
Councilors, as well.
7. Adjourn: Tom moved and Mike seconded the motion that the meeting be adjourned. Motion
passed (6-0-0) and meeting was adjourned at 12:00 p.m.
“Bike rack”
● Tom will prepare a “Summary” of the proposed changes (from May 29, 2018, meeting minutes)
● work on Committee’s page on the City’s website
● (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):
● Mike will consult with an accountant regarding what incentives the City might put in place to
encourage owners of undeveloped property to sell land at a “bargain price” to private developers.
● Mike will seek Yves Bradley’s input regarding development of more housing along Shelburne Road
corridor.