The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1989-GPTF-min.pdf AFFORDABLE HOUSING OPTIONS COMMITTEE GOALS AND POLICIES TASK FORCE July 11 , 1989 The first meeting of the task force was held at the home of Marion Reilly from 8 to 10 00 p m Chair Ellie Klauminzer Present Marion Reilly, Gail Colwell , Diana Garcia , Lillian MacArthur , Eric Michelson, Ruth Walton Visitors George Cooper , Zenia Kotuie Meeting Agenda I General reactions to readings Homework re problem lists from brainstorming II Agreement on the task and creation of work plan III Next meeting date and agenda Major Discussion Points Members identified the people who need housing as single parent families , town employees , the elderly (congregate and moderate income) ; indivi— duals with special needs ; low income families Type of housing needed rental units mentioned most prominently There was discussion over the ability of the town to control home ownership developments The problems of making accessory apartments afford— able was discussed; comment made that conversion to two family house may be more easily accomplished The cost of producing housing was discussed suggestions to explore ways for the town to provide lower rate financing, perhaps by using employee pension fund; investment by unions or other community groups Comment made that readings appeared to one member to suggest that our intent is to lower the property values of the town in order to make housing more affordable Next Steps Members agreed that the outline of the plan as presented was a reasonable way to proceed 3f 2 AFFORDABLE HOUSING OPTIONS COMMITTEE GOALS AND POLICIES TASK FORCE MINUTES July 18, 1989 - 27 Maple St - 8 00-10 30 p m CHAIR Ellie Klauminzer PRESENT C Abbott, G Colwell, D Garcia, L MacArthur, E Michelson, M Reilly, R Walton, G Weathers Visitors George Cooper, Zenia Kotule A) The task force addressed the first page of the list of problems ( identified in the first Options Committee brainstorming session) and how they fit into our scope A suggestion was made to use a points system in order to weight each factor There was consensus on the following 1) ESTHETICS a) Housing should blend with the rest of the neighborhood b) Family housing should include safe play areas c) It should be accessible to transportation (although most residents would have cars ) 2 ) We should try to identify how much affordable and luxury housing already exists in NEIGHBORHOODS Also demonstrate how the two have worked well in proximity 3 ) PROPERTY VALUES need to be addressed Phyllis Reservitz, DeWolfe Realty, can provide research 4 ) RESIDENTS We need to address the three groups--low income, moderate, and elderly--and define who we 're trying to serve, why, and how Further discussion yielded agreement that low income needs rental housing Moderate elderly also need rental but a different type of housing There is a 2 1/2 to 3 year waiting list for moderate elderly apartments Low income elderly are not in as crucial need of housing at this time Parents who are seeking housing for their adult special needs children were mentioned as another needy group There was also a discussion of how the children of low income families affect schools Although we agreed that additional children from any income category will increase costs, questions remained as to whether low income students in particular create more of a burden and/or whether they affect the ultimate quality of education The METCO Coordinator could be a resource for this information , July 18, 1989 Page 2 5 ) The TOWN has the role of educating residents on the costs and benefits of affordable housing It would be useful to spread housing proportionately throughout town but not all precincts have land The town can only grant itself the same variances that it would give a private developer It was agreed that there should be a balance between conserving land and building housing The most economical use of land is a cluster development, but we should identify what the density breaking point is Discussion about 774 led us to three points a) When the town builds housing, the affordable component should be more than the 20% of 774, "to maximum benefit"; b) we should strive to buy existing 774 units, through landbank and other financing; 3 ) a goal of the Planning Board is to maximize town control over development B) L MacArthur and R Walton reported on their research into the waiting lists at LHA, LexHab and privately owned housing They will provide separate copies of same C) E Klauminzer distributed a sample questionnaire on housing and asked members to evaluate and amend it, and also to come up with sources of information to justify our decisions and policies Diana Garcia, Recorder AFFORDABLE HuUJING AND OPTIONS COMMITTEE GOALS AND POLICIES TASK FORCE MINUTES ,_f JiLY _7 1089 - electmen s Meeting Room 00 PM f'HAIR Ellie Klauminzer ?RESENT Abbott G (.dwell D Garcia L MacArtnur R Walton G Weathers Visitors A Freilich I Bob Bowyer reported on the Massachusetts Housing Partnership meeting he had attended earlier today The MHP is examining revisions to the Chapter 774 rules A special legislatipe -ommi;sion has suggested that the law be maintained with some changes tc be made through administrative regulation ( as opposed to changes through legislaticn ) In referring to the discussion draft of the document 1r Bowyer emphasized local housing plans and community objectives The or-pcsed plan o. Gid -,11-3w ,ommunities the opportu .it disapprove of plans not consistent with local needs --a phrase that has not yet been adequately defined h kev element of local control is the need for defined local objectives to be in place so that a ,ammunit-r decision is not based on a particular proposal Responsible assessment of local needs would he an essential basis for develcpment of an acceptable community plan and such a plan could not be constructed in such a way that no proposal would ever be acceptable The ultimate test cf a community s objectives would still be (low many units save been built? A possible vehicle for udging performance by towns might be peer--review committees of like towns vera luesti .n= ,ogre rai_ - d by the alou- 1 ) is acreage a valid measure [as well as units] In developing a incal plan a community would need to define the value of open space to that community in achieving balanced land use d ) Would there be weighting for peer-review? `This idea is i Ln_eptuai out pr.esumaoiv Judgments would only .e made by communities that have produced affcrdable housing 5 ) Could a local plan be amended to respond tc changes in local conditions ? Yes 4 ) Are 774 permits always hostile? No despite local perception II Lillian MacArthur has received informaticn from LHA about waiting lists for state and federal assistance programs The numbers will '`, (1151- hiito-I t the mm tt - III The Jommittee attended to several administrative details mhe questionnaire will be discussed at our next meeting Tasks will be assigned at a subsequent meeting IV The G , P task force joined with the Techniques task force for a full committee meeting at 9 ,O PM Uathy Abbott RecLrder NEXT MEETING Tuesday 8/1/89 8 U0 PM at ; Gerard Terrace AFFOrDABrr HOUS: G OPTIONS COMmIT-77 JOA-S POE :ES -ASK 7CRCE �1 /1 V J 1 1 I fi _ YJ1 Cv DRO fle = - , ..r ace Present dere ` ?el 1 G "O .de I u Garc a G Weathers aum ; zee .. cnelson acArrnur i. riboott 17 a t Jh s ' , s -eor ae "cope-- :en i a nt : e -'-e leer - 7ss ua ea to Erne et p ; The minutes Li - P e _ eoren ., souse or - ..es- na re Ja prese -ne .ommirtee 7r dome gUeSL i i s Jr, .. = se. e es- . - - sur e The Neer [ a rt ;te _ PelS DP area yc - a espunse _ P as rot u e dii need help generat ng interest n th s sur ey es _;ec ..lea _.re quest on on an : ..3e enUu C 'De lc •.. u. � n na- o e sees to earn ana . The - Jo a f the discoss! oa as on what groups •e ace trying to reach ana the nest : ay of reaching them ne can ao se 'era sur cmpec e f .cra` across the _ Some' groups are a ready more nowleaeaole such as T' M u tner gro.,ps 7D each are churches and fraternal groups iarion suggested that the demograph us of the responders sr.o'u i a ne up ith the aemograph i cs of the town Pass Ole questions about the responders- owner renter famil "-age and engin : es ..er [ h :..e,ti i r'gton suggested that .de should limit answers to multiple choice for eas er acu at on Er c a So suggested `hat e neer some reasons 'ram -he community as to :shy :„erington needs u_ o, oao e rr a r rernaps e3sore co r. cc sea = me ;. .4;J so an ai -ne Jp 1 ri i ons ,uesr on =.i on iia a quest. nnaire Encu a ce e :paraea ` J .. ode all groups- oung, e aer : town employees single parents etc _ - .as agreed trot the pub; c neeas be nformed of renta end housing costs cetore they can answer question #1 'lany nornentte a are unaware of present ua enrs It ,das ueue aea -ha- a re ennone cur e ;u " -at ,e =. uooa lee. .e ;onimim -ee _ -pat ne s.ir P _nou u a e place r lepterr,Jer --er The :yrJuustarget-ea an ear e J c =a :a s eru .chaps c .. = a c pcec ; J organizations - 7n the spot :o ecti ?n Jf data dDu ..ie the best .day to have the survey returned Collection boxes are a an s r ee B ghat quer- ons should be aadea ae , etea" It was agreed that Gail s questions were good It was felt `hat a cover etter shou d be c uded .lith the P -r quest onai "e e anon _ aefire affo. uab e housing anu 'r e are conauer g a survey ..athy `e i t that question 7 cou i z .Je L JrtJS nc ; some n SO 73 oe nc aeo ' `ne cover sneet Snuula be int : .-gar on on the ;•;erage fists of entals ana ingtor Aar ana Er IL ata Uai meet :cion = -1 i„g'JS' - _1;su.Ass -b s =..iL the ' Jai -em kiaea us -ra- 'e need to eep n m no that mnne .71 '' 1 be Ieeaea to puc :nase uni r5 az Fran n ana .at aain nOOQS ii re - tore C Ass gnme.n.ts ' be discussed at the re' t meet -g The -'e: t meeting oe f Jyust 8 az Eli e Klaumiunzer s house at he 'set rg 55 Ed. OL rred at C 07 Pespectfu iY submitted uz , a ton ecorcer