We tuned into the meeting a few minutes late because the Zoom link and password did not work. The reason for this joint meeting between the Affordable Housing Trust Fund and the Planning Board was to discuss adding a Planning Board condition for a Planned Unit Development (PUD) permit that would ask developers to provide a level of affordability where 10% of the units built would be affordable at 60% of the area median income (AMI).
Questions arose from board members on how this change could be made. Currently the Planning Board asks developers for 10% of units built to be affordable at 80% of AMI. The AHTF has been discussing the possibility of deepening the level of affordability to be more in line with Salem income levels and the recently failed Inclusionary Zoning ordinance, which had affordability of 10% at 60% AMI. City Planner Amanda Chiancola told both boards that this change could be amended by the planning board and would be a fully transparent requirement to potential developers, which can help them when negotiating the purchase price of land for development. Vice Chair of the AHTF Mickey Northcutt added that the difference between 60% & 80% AMI is not really a huge difference for the developers, but it is for the renters.
Discussion ensued about an idea brought up by Councilor Hapworth (from a previous meeting as he was not present tonight) regarding cutting costs for developers to enable more production of affordable units through expedited permitting. Hapworth’s proposal was questioned by some on the planning board. Carole Hamilton stated that the planning board process is very quick, so it meets that expedited goal already and should be off the table as a negotiating tool. She suggested other ways to reduce costs for developers so they can produce more affordable housing - like reducing widths of roads and sidewalks. Other planning board members felt that these items should not be removed as negotiating tools.
Noah Koretz and Ben Anderson discussed the Inclusionary Zoning ordinance, which required developers to provide data and back up documentation if they couldn’t meet the requirements of the ordinances. They asked how this would work for the planning board and wanted to know if this change should be an agenda item for the planning board.
Chiancola said that this planning board policy can be updated and amended by the planning board, and that she could write the policy so that it is loose because it is not an ordinance. Developers could work with the AHTF board around affordability and provide documentation to them after meeting with the planning board if they cannot meet the new affordability standard.
Public comment was taken and was supportive of the move to deepen affordability.
Suggestions were made about pushing for more accessible units, and more three-bedroom units. There were questions about which sites in the city were eligible for a PUD (Planned Unit Development).
The joint portion of the meeting concluded and the AHTF meeting continued with discussion of the use of Community Preservation (CPA) funds.
Councilor Morsillo asked how Salem can go deeper in its ask or requirement to build more affordable units. The board discussed using CPA funds for affordable home ownership. Northcutt added that state funds are not really going anywhere except to rentals. Morsillo asked why the CPA money was only creating affordable units for 30 years, creating expiring use units (units that remain affordable for a limited time but then revert to market rate). She requested that the units remain affordable in perpetuity. Northcutt added that the CPA funds require units built to be income restricted in perpetuity and the document under review might not be correct. Morsillo recommended that funds require perpetuity, and the city should not subsidize projects that only offer 10%. The AHTF board should try to get the CPA committee to be in agreement with these numbers.
This year, the CPA spent more money on affordable housing than ever before with awards to the North Shore CDC and several nonprofits offering rental assistance to low income renters. Zamborlini asked if the 10% at 60% AMI could be added to the CPA. Northcutt outlined that while the AHTF can encourage the CPA committee to look at this, we cannot limit who applies for grants. He added that many who receive money from the CPA go much lower than 60% AMI,
Zamborlini asks if the CPA can offer more than 10% units then. Northcutt adds that the state considers 100% AMI to be sufficient while Salem asks for 80%. The board agrees to ask the Community Preservation Committee (CPC) to amend their plan to ask for a higher percentage of units at a lower AMI.
Discussion of community housing goal: This is a continuation of the prior discussion.
Chiancola reviewed a memo outlining the number of affordable housing units created or permitted since 2015; her number included a few accessory dwellings units as well. She asked, “what is our goal? Should we try to get to 25% affordable - for instance?” In Salem, the most recent Housing Needs Study showed that 49% of our residents are low and moderate income. Northcutt says that the goal should reflect reality (actual community needs) not just a minimum goal to avoid punitive zoning action (40B) and to simply meet state or federal mandates. Salem can lead, we should identify actual needs and set a goal to meet them. In the Netherlands, 40% of housing stock is restricted in some way. The board agreed to draft a statement using 49% as the goal, but there was discussion about not wanting to set themselves up for failure and the need for more tools to produce affordable housing.
Public Comment:
Let developers know if there are any zoning changes that affect them and building more accessible units using Universal design.
Comments were made about the need for more 3 bedroom apartments and the fear that Salem is becoming a NIMBY community (Not in My Back Yard), and perhaps we could use different terms because “affordable housing” has negative connotations.
Chiancola apologized for the zoom problems and said that public comment is still open on each agenda item by emailing achiancola@salem.com
The meeting adjourned.
Present
AHTF Planning board
Mickey Northcutt Ben Anderson
Filipe Zamborlini Carole Hamilton
Rebecca Curran Noah Koretz
John Boris Kirt Rieder
Ben Andersen Helen Sides
Councilor Patti Morsillo J Napolitano
Councilor McCarthy Tom Furey
Bill Griset
Submitted by Lori Stewart and Lindsay Morsillo