Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1996-09-25 Housing MIN ASHLAND HOUSING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 25, 1996 MINUTES CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Chairman Sea at 4:05 p.m. Other Commissioners present were Medinger, Hill, Tiffany, Vaughn, and Kenefick. Absent members were Ware and Hauck. Staff present were Madding and Yates. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES Kenefick moved to approve the Minutes of the August 28, 1996 meeting, Vaughn seconded and the Minutes were approved. MADDING'S TRIP PLANS John McLaughlin approved Madding's plans for a trip to the San Francisco area. Madding is planning to go around the 12th of October. ANNEXATION MEMO Madding announced at the October 8, 1996 Planning Commission meeting, there will be a public hearing to discuss the annexation criteria. There are only a couple of pieces of property left on the hillsides to be annexed into the City according to Madding. At the public hearing on the 8th, the Planning Commission can decide whether not they have enough information to make a recommendation to the City Council. The City Council will make the final decision. As noted in the annexation memo, Staff's recommendation differs from the Housing Commission. Hill, Medinger, Ware, Sea and Madding had a subcommittee meeting and decided on a proposal that was never formalized. Part of the committee's work was incorporated but the portion that was not was the "payment in lieu of developing affordable units". Kenefick wants to make sure the entire Housing Commission votes on any recommendation. Medinger is concerned that if the strict hillside development standards are put in place, then granting density bonuses would be in opposition to those standards. The wording could qualify to allow basement or garage mother-in-law units instead of creating another whole unit. Medinger would prefer to get a fee from the developer rather than a unit. Mahanay noted many people are doing this now. The unit would add value to the property and add to more mixed housing. Tiffany thought the intent of the ordinance was to provide detached housing. Medinger said accessory units can be suggested as an option. Tiffany preferred the developer give money towards the affordable housing fund. Hill said money paid in by the developer could go toward seed money and matching money that some of the non-profit organizations can get. Then the City does not have to oversee it or build it. Instead the non-profits can deal with it. The Housing Commission discussed the following options: Give the developer the choice as set forth in the proposed ordinance (G. 1 and 2 -- 25% of units affordable to buyers with incomes at or below 100% of median income or 15% of units affordable to buyers with incomes at or below 80% of median income). The developer could pay cash into the housing trust fund. Or, the developer could build mother-in-law basement/attic apartments. Kenefick wondered if it is even financially feasible to build affordable units on hillside lots. Medinger said the site work is immense and very expensive. However, Medinger feels that whenever possible, the developer should build affordable housing units. Madding asked the Commission to be mindful that in the last ten years Ashland has not had that many annexations. By asking the developer to pay into a fund, will that bring the pot of gold to fund the affordable housing trust fund? Staff believes annexations are getting tougher to do. These criteria will give developers a choice. The goal is to get housing created and in order to ensure creation of this housing, the developers have to build it. Tiffany asked why Staff is opposed to the buy-in. Madding said Staff is not against it if enough money could be collected to build a unit. Madding said if the Commission is going to recommend the developer pay into a fund, a formula needs to be developed. Vaughn moved to give the developer the choice of the 25% affordable (100% of median), or 15% affordable (80% of median), or if the developer builds on the hillside above Siskiyou Boulevard, they can pay into the housing fund in lieu of building affordable housing. The Commission will provide a formula for a cash payment after doing some research. Tiffany seconded the motion and it carried unanimously. Sea volunteered along with Medinger to attend the October 8th meeting as representatives of the Housing Commission. Madding said it was the Housing subcommittee that came up with the 100% and 80% median incomes. We are currently at 25% affordable at 130% median income and that is difficult. The Commission thought the newest wording of the ordinance is making it much more restrictive. Madding said if the math is wrong, it would be best to make another recommendation. The Commission decided the Commission would meet at 4:00 p.m. on October 3, 1996 at the Council Chambers to discuss the 25% and 15% and the math can be presented at the meeting on the 8th. SUBCOMMITTEE REPORTS Gathering Information - Nothing will be done until Kelly takes her trip. Funding - Madding said Ware had given her a memo about a program involving Klamath First Federal and the City. She would like Ware to talk about it at the meeting of October 23rd. Kenefick asked at the last meeting how the Commission could get the $100,000 and use it (what is the process?). Madding has not talked with Hauck but will do so before the next meeting. Madding said there is conference on affordable housing in Eugene. Kenefick thought Madding should go and ask if one of the Housing Commissioners could go. Madding will check. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 5:15 P.M. ASHLAND HOUSING COMMSSION 2 MINUTES SEPTEMBER 27, 1996