Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - Ad Hoc Housing Committee - 10/08/2020 - 1 AD HOC HOUSING COMMITTEE October 8, 2020 5:00pm-7:00pm Zoom Meeting Members: Mayor Pro Tem Stephens, Councilmember Cunniff, Councilmember Gorgol Attendees: Staff Members: Lindsay Ex, Caryn Champine, Meaghan Overton, Sylvia Tatman-Burruss, Clay Frickey, Ingrid Decker, Sue Beck-Ferkiss, DeAngelo Bowden, Megan DeMasters, Yaz Haldeman, Noah Beals, Darin Atteberry, Paul Sizemore, Jackie Kozak Thiel Presenters: Jessica Prosser (Aurora, CO), Sandra Wood (Portland, OR), Daniel Krzyzanowski (Aurora, CO), Kristin Fritz (Fort Collins) Community Members: Bob Pawlikowski, Jen Bray, Kevin Jones, Maggie Bolden, Tatiana Zentner, Kim Iwanski Call to Order: 5:03 Approval of September Minutes and Agenda Review: • Councilmember Cunniff moved to approve, Councilmember Gorgol seconded. Roll call for vote: Unanimous 2-0-0. Discussion Item: Housing Types and Zoning • Context setting: Zoning, density, and housing types in Fort Collins o Know land supply is likely not sufficient for anticipated growth o Missing middle – townhouses, attached, accessory dwelling units – is a small percentage of current housing stock, which is 63% single family homes o Land Use Code Audit recommendations include:  Align zoning districts and uses with structure plan place types  Create more opportunities for a range of housing options  Clarify and simplify development standards o Density and design  Density helps create walkable neighborhoods, supports housing choice and affordability, helps expand transportation options, supports community fiscal health, improves security, and helps protect the environment  When it comes to density, design matters  Low density units are inherently less energy efficient, limit ADA accessibility, and make solar more difficult and more expensive • Guest speakers from Aurora, Colorado and Portland, Oregon (moderated by Paul Sizemore) o What is your community’s story related to addressing a diversity of housing types?  Aurora: 2 • Kicked off two major projects in 2014/2015: complete rewrite of zoning code and the development of a brand-new comprehensive plan • During plan process, housing affordability showed up as one of the top challenges in the community • Tackling issues like equity, gentrification, resource usage, etc. • Population approximately 380,000  Portland: • Project initiated in response to demolitions and scale of infill, decreasing affordability and lack of choice • Population approximately 650,000 in Portland, 2.5 million in metro area • Least growth (20%) currently occurring in single family zones as these areas built out first • Missing middle housing includes duplexes, triplexes, courtyard apartments, townhouses, live-work spaces • “Better Housing by Design” – abandoned maximum densities and did form-based code – all based on scale and bulk, no longer counting number of units except minimum number of units must be met • Have allowed ADUs for many years – currently have about 5,000 o Want to encourage more but development of ADUs is expensive and not realistic for many people o How did you prioritize strategies and define what was most impactful?  Portland: • Have been opportunistic with ballot measures and grants • Areas of responsibility divided into regulated affordable housing (8-10% of housing stock), long-range planning • Projects with 20 or more units are required to achieve certain number of affordable units (now seeing a lot of 19-unit apartment buildings)  Aurora: • Plan addresses housing needs by expanding definitions and development standards, expanding use of mixed-use districts, and allowing for limited use of very small lots • Co-housing layout includes single family units supported by communal facilities • Cottage house layout comprised of small houses that are not more than 800 square feet and configured on a single lot • Special allowances for affordable housing include design standards, additional height allowed, parking requirement reduced, exempted from TOD public art requirement o Recognizing that land use alone will not solve housing affordability, what else are you coupling these solutions with to achieve your community’s goals?  Aurora: • Increased collaboration between projects focused on planning and zoning with those focused on housing, homelessness, HUD programs, etc. Can’t do one without the other. 3 • Focused on full spectrum of housing – people move through spectrum as they move through life • Want to have complete neighborhoods • Looking at jobs/housing balance • Exploring home share • All affordable housing needs some type of incentive • Preserving and increasing supply • Improving processes  Portland: • Additional zoning tools: size bonuses, inclusionary housing, accessory dwelling units, manufactured dwelling parks (naturally-occurring affordable housing) • Deeper affordability bonus • Other tools – Portland housing bond, Metro (regional) housing bond, affordable housing construction excise tax, naturally-occurring affordable housing, anti-displacement strategies (different strategies for renters and homeowners) • Discussion with Panelists o What metrics are being tracked? Seeing difference in affordable housing inventory?  Aurora has tracked number of units for about 10 years and amount of incentives, want to dig deeper into how to preserve affordability of homes and get more creative with tracking and incentives. How do you quantify the incentive of a zoning adjustment? o Tend to incentivize units with 20-year affordability on the horizon, but what does it look like when those expire?  Portland’s sunset dates on affordable units are 100 years out, so not a current concern o What are Portland’s policies around ADUs?  System development charges are waived, no other incentives o Older smaller homes become more affordable for first-time homebuyers – how to transition more of those renters into homeowners?  Aurora also sees this pattern where prime first-time homebuyer properties become rentals – a lot of older homes also bought by investors o Were elected officials generally supportive and helpful?  Aurora had some suggestions get very political, including lot sizes and ADUs (hoped to spread them more widely, scaled back to one neighborhood pilot project)  Controversial in Portland from the beginning, Planning Committee’s final vote was 5-4 and all the nay votes were people of color (concerns about gentrification and displacement) – in the end, 3 of the 4 Council members supported o Aurora talked about greater metro area – do you have strong partnerships in the region, particularly related to housing and transportation planning? 4  Regional conversations are critical, movement of people between Aurora and Denver is very common, shared challenges  Denver has more experience with some of the big city/urban challenges, Aurora learning from them  Largely focused on mixture of people experiencing homelessness along Colfax – tend to move between Aurora and Denver • Committee Discussion o Presentation on density was very enlightening – not a huge difference in aesthetic between 12-30 units/acre – would like to continue this conversation o Interested in ADUs but haven’t seen anywhere this has made a huge difference to housing stock  While not the solution, can still be part of the solution o Quicker wins to pursue: inclusionary zone discussion could be quick accomplishment on the way to bigger wins o Quick wins by stabilizing housing, whether renter or homeowner o Need to find better ways to operationalize City Plan o Want to create end-of-term report for new Council o Need to change affordable housing/deed restricted policies from 20-year affordability to in perpetuity or 100-year o If Land Use Code update does get funded, how long of a process is that?  Heard today that LUC overhauls can take years; our code hasn’t been overhauled since 1997, so it would be a long-term project, but can also prioritize which pieces get prioritized and updated first Actions Supported by Committee • Land use code audit o Increasing density specifically • ADUs as a tool • Preservation of units o Change affordable housing policies to 100-year restricted covenant vs. current 20-year • Transition – end of term report • Other committee suggestions o Quick wins – stabilizing housing and anti-displacement solutions, apply what we’ve learned from COVID o Inclusionary Zoning policy with specific triggers when pre-conditions are met Next Meeting Focus and Process Check-in: • Review land use code options, including timing and funding • Ideas around: o Anti-displacement and programmatic solutions to get at stability  Relate back to missing middle o Livable wage/demand-side strategies, especially for BIPOC community members Meeting Adjourned: 7:11