Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAffordable Housing Board - Minutes - 09/07/1995AFFORDABLE HOUSING BOARD MEETING MINUTES September 7, 1995 The meeting of the Affordable Housing Board began at 4:10 p.m. in the Community Planning Conference Room, 281 North College Avenue, Fort Collins, Colorado. Board members present were Chairperson Mary Cosgrove, Joanne Greer, Ann Sanders, Christa Sarrazin, Tom Sibbald, Sue Wagner, Tony Kavanagh, Susan Nabors, and Bob Browning. Staff members present were Ken Waido, Dickson Robin, Felix Lee, and Tess Heffernan. Gina Janeft was present from City Council. Doug Schwartz, from Light and Power, and Bruce Brown, from County Weatherization, were also present. Public comment was solicited. Betty Maloney, from the Affordable Housing Task Force, addressed the issue of difficulty in gaining community approval in placing affordable housing projects and the need to educate the community on affordable housing. She explained that a study has been performed on what happens to property values of structures located near affordable housing or public housing projects. The study found no difference in the property values of these structures. Ms. Maloney added that John Barnett from the County has great insight into the unique processes of affordable housing and wished to pass his name onto the Board. Ms. Maloney also mentioned that the Affordable Housing Task Force will be conducting a community education process on affordable housing and suggested this Board and the Affordable Housing Task Force work together in their community education to avoid duplicating efforts. John Meleski, of the Building Review Board, requested to delay his comments until later in the meeting. After some discussion, this was agreed to by the Board. Lou Stitzel wanted to emphasize the importance of total community education. She feels that too often neighborhoods act like separate entities, and they must act as part of the whole community. She believes that it is important to determine how to help people develop the capacity to live in neighborhoods trained to be a part of the whole community. No further public comment was heard. Ms. Cosgrove requested a change in the previous meeting minutes. Her belief is that the comment she had made in the discussion of household composition actually had to do with the mini task forces looking at trying to liberalize those policies. She didn't feel such was accurately reflected and suggested Staff change the wording. No other corrections were noted. AHB Minutes • • September 7, 1995 Page 2 Moved by Ms. Nabors, seconded by Ms. Wagner: To approve the minutes anticipating the correction about discussion on household composition. Motion approved unanimously. Tess Heffernan, the City's Neighborhood Resources Manager, explained her department as follows: The Neighborhood Resources Office has been in existence for six months and consists of basically Ms. Heffernan and one support staff. The mission of the office is threefold: 1) Build neighborhood capacity to work on issues of interest to neighborhood groups; 2) Empower groups and individuals to solve their own problems through troubleshooting, providing help in resources and/or information, and enabling people to accomplish what they need for themselves; 3) Work with the City organization to aid City Staff members in working with neighborhoods. The Congress of Neighborhoods is used to provide training to individuals for leading neighborhood groups. Community outreach is utilized by the department. The department has a neighborhood resources center, a workstation for neighborhood groups or individuals. This provides access to a computer, a place to meet, a way to create newsletters, fliers, minutes, et cetera. The department also provides a newsletter to the neighborhood groups. The department does not set the issues that neighborhood groups deal with. Ms. Heffernan provided copies of the City's Neighborhood Handbook, which is a summary of the operating neighborhood groups and information about the City organization. Discussion was held on the possibility of this Board contacting any neighborhood groups for possible affordable housing discussions. Ms. Heffernan suggested that such contact should be directly through the chairperson of a group rather than through her. It was suggested that the Affordable Housing Board should be represented at the Congress of Neighborhoods, and it was believed that the Board was represented last year by an undetermined individual. Ms. Heffernan stated that she would make sure the Affordable Housing Board was placed on the list for future Congress of Neighborhoods meetings. Discussion was held on the preferability of communicating with neighborhoods on the issue of affordable housing prior to the issue being heard by the Planning and Zoning Board. It was determined that prior discussions with neighborhood groups would be beneficial. Ms. Heffernan could be utilized as a facilitator in these discussions. Ms. Heffernan's advice was sought in formatting the affordable housing educational AHB Minutes • • September 7, 1995 Page 3 process for the community. She stated objectivity through numbers is often beneficial, concise, short presentations are best, and face-to-face contact is the most favorable. Discussion was held on the status of $15,000 for development of a public education program regarding affordable housing. It was stated that the $15,000 has been requested but not actually obtained at this point. Staff was asked to notify the Board of where the money will come from and how it should be used. A date for Ms. Greer's subcommittee meeting will be set at a later time. Ms. Cosgrove, Ms. Wagner, and Marsha Denadety, from the Larimer Affordable Housing Task Force, have volunteered as subcommittee members. Mr. Robin will attend as the Staff resource person. Mr. Robin presented an update on the Pioneer Mobile Home Park as follows: - There is a petition to annex and rezone a 70-acre parcel with the intention of developing roughly 35 to 40 acres for mobile home units with approximately 250 spaces. - Application for rezoning is MM, use by right for a mobile home park. - A tentative open -house neighborhood meeting is scheduled for the third week of September. - The item will be going to the Planning and Zoning Board on September 25th. - The item will go before the City Council for decision on October 3rd. - A relocation program has been initiated by Neighbor to Neighbor. - An amount of money has been set aside per household to help with relocation. - It is anticipated that Neighbor to Neighbor may be applying to access part of the $235,000 that has been set aside. Possible neighborhood resistance to the new mobile home park was questioned. Mr. Robin said no opposition has surfaced at this point in time and is unsure of possible future opposition. Notice of the upcoming neighborhood meeting for the project was requested by the Board. Mr. Felix Lee gave a presentation of the Model Energy Code. He stated that the first reading for the revisions of the Code had been tentatively scheduled for the October 17th City Council meeting. Discussion was held on the Building Review and Natural Resources Boards prior rejection of the Code. It was stated that the Building Review Board would like to see substantiation of figures in the Code, and the Natural Resources Board would like more information. The question of the most significant difference between the current standard and the proposed standard was raised. Mr. Lee replied that basement insulation would be AHB Minutes • • September 7, 1995 Page 4 the most significant difference. Currently, basement insulation is not required. Mr. Lee stated that there is considerable evidence that significant heat loss occurs through the basement system. He stated that at least 50 percent of the up -front additional cost of implementing the upgrade will be a result of the basement insulation. However, all additional costs from upgrading will be returned to the consumer through energy bill reduction according to the Model Energy Code calculations. Discussion was held on the apparent inequity in the new construction home upgrade requirements in comparison to no upgrade requirements for existing homes. Mr. Schwartz replied that during construction is the most cost-effective time to address energy conservation in homes, and it is oftentimes not cost effective to upgrade existing homes. However, he suggested that feelings of existing inequity could be an issue raised with City Council. John Meleski relayed his concerns with the Model Energy Code. He explained he has not had an opportunity to analyze the figures set forth by Mr. Schwartz. However, he has performed a superficial estimate as to insulating the basement walls and did not agree with Mr. Schwas figures. The only portion of the Code Mr. Meleski did agree with was the idea of having the general contractor sign off on a house upon completion to verify that the house was insulated properly. Comments were made that although the initial added cost may not be substantial and will be returned through reduced bills, any additional cost will decrease the number of people who will qualify for loans. Discussion was held on whether or not any local communities with similar compositions of climate and energy costs have adopted these energy upgrades and, if so, whether any studies have been undertaken on whether this Code upgrade will actually be beneficial. Mr. Schwartz replied that Longmont and Boulder have adopted codes which are identical with most of the requirements in this model. However, he is unaware of any local level evaluation. Comment was heard that past experience demonstrates insulating basements oftentimes is a worthless effort because of improper installation. It was suggested that perhaps floor joist insulation would be more beneficial. Mr. Schwartz replied that some training would ensure proper basement perimeter insulation and doing such was more effective than insulating the floor and isolating the basement from the heated space of the house. However, it was believed that insulating the floor would be somewhat less expensive than insulating the basement perimeter. Bruce Brown stated that he believes a tremendous amount of analysis has been done across the country with existing home weatherization, and with this new Code, an average of 15 to 20 percent savings on fuel bills has been realized. He believes this upgrade is an incremental step that should be taken. AHB Minutes • September 7, 1995 Page 5 A suggestion was made that perhaps this upgrade could be an option rather than a requirement. A request was made for a study on who would be excluded from purchasing a new home with these energy upgrades as interest rates increase incrementally. Mr. Lee, Mr. Brown, and Mr. Schwartz were requested to return for the October Board meeting with further information that may answer some of the questions raised on the Model Energy Code. Mr. Schwartz stated he would like to have a list on specific information the Board is looking for. He also wanted to add the following comments: - Cost is a barrier whenever energy improvements are suggested, and the dilemma is payment of additional costs on the front end to reduce cost on the back end. - It is important to recognize that this is one of the few increased costs that pays back. - From an affordable housing standpoint, the total cost of owning a house must be examined, not just placing all concerns with keeping initial costs as low as possible. - This upgrade is a good long-term investment that provides lower energy bills. A motion on the Model Energy Code was delayed until further information is received. Mr. Waido summarized the rebate program. Mercy Housing is building an affordable housing project outside the city limits of Fort Collins and has requested a rebate proportionate to what they would have paid in the city. Two questions therefore arise: Should the rebate program be extended to affordable housing projects that are built in the City's urban growth area outside the city limits? If so, how much of a rebate would be applicable since not all City improvement fees would apply? Several questions were raised by the Board: Does the Board have the financial capability to fund affordable housing projects outside of the city limits? Would the County be willing to also provide financial assistance since the City would be providing assistance in the county? If money is being collected from the fee generators within the city, can those funds legally be distributed outside of the city? Will such actions really benefit the residents of Fort Collins? It was decided that no further determination should be made until Staff speaks with legal counsel to determine the legality of distributing funds outside of the city limits. However, a letter was received from Mercy Housing on this request, and it was determined that Ms. Cosgrove and Mr. Browning would draft a letter in response to their request addressing the following points: 1) Encouragement should be given in support of building an affordable housing project. 2) Legal advice was being sought on this issue. 3) The Board would like to know the reasoning behind Mercy's reservations about being annexed into the City. AHB Minutes • September 7, 1995 Page 6 Discussion was held on the delays that have occurred in developing the work plan for this Board. It was stated that the work plan will be ready for presentation at the October meeting. Mr. Waido stated that HUD has not yet produced anything in writing on the Board's conflict of interest. He also stated he had recently returned from a meeting with HUD and relayed that HUD felt that members of this Board would have a conflict of interest if they were making any recommendations regarding HOME program or CDBG program activities even at a policy level. It was felt that City Council needed to make a decision on what they wanted the Board to do regarding this conflict of interest. Ms. Janett relayed that City Council still wants the Board's expertise and review. It was determined that the Board needed to wait for a letter from HUD, and at that point, they could file for an exemption. Mr. Waido stated that the Board members would be receiving a copy of HUD's letter as soon as it is received. Mr. Sibbald questioned why he had not received the memo from Staff that had been requested at the Board's previous meeting pertaining to new impact fees developing as a result of Development Phase 2. Mr. Waido replied that he had requested that the Affordable Housing Board get a copy of these materials. Ms. Janett explained that the following areas of service have been selected: police, fire, recreation, general government, cultural, and costs have been determined for various land use. There is also a request to look at the equity issue between single family and multifamily housing. All issues are being examined for presentation to the public. Mr. Sibbald stated that he would like to see all the figures before public presentation is made. It was undetermined whether such materials would be completed before the next meeting of the Board. Ms. Sarrazin moved adjournment, seconded by Ms. Greer. Upon unanimous vote, the meeting adjourned at 6:30 p.m.