2011-12-01-HPB-email-affordable housing

Browse Search

11. Construction of new housing on purchased open land is the most expensive means of creating AH units. Has the town explored using a “reverse mortgage” mechanism instead? If possible, this would keep seniors in their homes, preserve neighborhood character, increase town-owned AH stock, and cost less per unit. [To better understand and prepare for the true costs of affordable housing beyond construction costs, the following questions were submitted.] 12. What are the operating costs per unit of housing? 13. What is the per person cost in our operating budget to provide scholarships for program and services to people using affordable housing? 14. Are there any other extraordinary costs of providing services to the residents of affordable housing paid by taxpayers? If so, what are they? *15. Lexington is not an "affordable" place to live even if your housing is affordable. What are we doing about the conflict of helping people into town only for them to find it is so unaffordable in other aspects? *16. What is the best mechanism for collaborative planning of multiple uses of land? For example, a prior question asks about prioritizing uses/goals one over the other rather than also looking at ways individual projects may serve multiple goals; in fact our formal public process seems to make it hard to have the "what if"/imaginative, collaborative conversations it takes to explore collaboration. Process also makes it hard for non-town entities to be included early in the process without an "invitation". Even town entities need to be "invited" sometimes (eg, recreation needed to be invited into the Estabrook school planning process). *17 . What is the relationship between LexHab and the Housing Partnership and their respective strategies and expertise for achieving affordable housing goals? Can it be made more collaborative and transparent to the outsider? *18. Can we have policies about multiple types of projects, instead of trying to fit one model onto all opportunities? For example, dense cluster housing seems best suited and successful where there is available public transportation and nearby services; scattered single family homes fit other opportunities. Do we have a policy of taking the frontage of every open piece of land and putting housing at the street-side (for less expensive utility hookups) at the expense of streetscape/landscape views for all?