ROUNDTABLE MEETING - Discussion of housing with housing panel
DATE: March 5, 2008, 5:40pm
PRESIDING OFFICER: Mayor E. Denise Simmons
PRESENT: Mayor Simmons, Vice Mayor Murphy, Councillors Davis, Kelley, Maher, Reeves, Seidel, City Clerk Margaret Drury, Deputy Clerk Donna Lopez, Assistant to the City Council Sandra Albano.
ABSENT: Councillor Decker
PRESENT FROM THE CITY ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF: Robert W. Healy, City Manager; Richard Rossi, Deputy City Manager; Beth Rubenstein, Assistant City Manager for Community Development; Susan Glazer, Deputy Director of the Community Development Department (CDD); Christopher Cotter, Housing Director, CDD; Cassie Amoud, Project Planner, CDD; Anna Dolmatch, Housing Planner, CDD; Robert Vining, Homebuyer Coordinator, CDD; Stuart Dash, Director of Community and Neighborhood Planning, CDD; Lester Barber, Director of Zoning and Land Use, CDD.
PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: William Tibbs (Chair), Thomas Anninger, Patricia Singer, Hugh Russell, Charles Studen, Pamela Winters, H. Theodore Cohen.
ALSO PRESENT WERE: Peter Daly, Executive Director of Homeowners Rehab Inc., member of the Affordable Housing Trust (AHT); Michael Haran, Executive Director of CASCAP and AHT member; Gwendolyn Noyes, AHT member; James Stockard, member of the Cambridge Housing Authority board and AHT member; Gordon Gottsche, Executive Director, Just A Start; Lauren Curry, Just A Start; Gregory Russ, Executive Director, CHA; Terry Dumas, CHA.
ADJOURNMENT: 8:20pm
Summary of Major Discussion Points
March 5, 2008 Roundtable on Housing
Mayor Simmons called the meeting to order at 5:40pm and explained the purpose and agenda of the meeting. She invited City Manager Healy to introduce the presentation. Mr. Healy stated that this is the 20th year of operation of the Affordable Housing Trust. The City Council has made affordable housing one of its priorities and has committed the funds to enable its creation.
Beth Rubenstein, Assistant Director for Community Development, informed the Council that the presentation comes from two different wings of the work of the Community Development Department (CDD), that of the development of affordable housing and that of work on the zoning that sets the framework. She invited Christopher Cotter, to talk about the affordable housing program. Mr. Cotter provided a brief description of the City's affordable housing program. The City works with four nonprofit housing development agencies in Cambridge, Homeowners Rehab, Inc. Just-A-Start; CASCAP and the Cambridge Housing Authority, and has developed and preserved more than 1,800 affordable units. In addition the City offers first –time homebuyer programs and home improvement programs. The City's housing programs are designed to meet the needs of very low, low and moderate-income residents.
Mr. Cotter said that opportunities come to the City's attention in several ways, through brokers who call about sites that are on the market, word of mouth, outreach to property owners and foreclosure auctions. In assessing sites, the need for family housing is a big factor in site assessment. Cost is also a major factor in the City's assessment of a site; many opportunities do not move forward because they are financially infeasible. There are limitations on subsidy funds. The funding sources want to get the most housing for the subsidy being provided and Cambridge is an expensive housing market. Many sites ultimately go to market rate developers who pay more than the City can afford. Most of the sites that they look at do not go forward. Design is the third important consideration in site assessment. The City is proud of its award-winning affordable housing and pays particular attention when the site would call for adding new units or converting from a nonresidential use. He assessed 90 sites over the past five years and most did not work out.
At this time Mayor Simmons introduced Councillor Murphy to make comments before he had to leave to catch a plane to attend an out-of-state meeting of a National League of Cities committee of which he is a member. Councillor Murphy said that he would like staff to look a whether it is time to update the linkage fee paid by developers for commercial development; it has not changed for several years. He said he would like to find a way to provide for more family-sized units in the affordable Inclusionary Zoning units that private developers are required to provide, and he also requested that staff look at how Cambridge can provide even more transit-oriented development.
The discussion then moved to zoning. Stuart Dash, Director of Community and Neighborhood Planning, CDD, reviewed the major changes in zoning from what existed 30 years ago, when the old industries were dying off in areas like Kendall Square and there was lots of Residence C zoning in the Agassiz neighborhood and along Harvard Street. In 1992, the City went through a community planning process to establish planning goals for the city. In 1993, the Planning Board published the planning principles and goals that came out of this planning process. These goals included preserving traditional neighborhoods at their current density and allowing housing to be built in non-residential zoning districts. In 1999, a citywide rezoning process started with adoption of the Backyard Zoning amendment, which doubled the open space required in residential lots for all residential zoning districts. In 2001 the Citywide Rezoning Ordinance was adopted. The ordinance provided for a major reduction of the floor area ration (FAR) in the base zoning in commercial zoning districts throughout the city. It also required improvements in the projected traffic load and protections for neighborhoods. Article 19 established project review for the entire city. Height limits were establishing for zoning districts that previously had no height limits and above ground parking was required to be counted as part of FAR.
Between 2001 and 2007, 2,400 housing units were completed. There are currently an additional 1500 units under construction. At this time 3,300 more units have been permitted; 2,300 of these permitted units are destined for North Point. Finally, an additional 450 units are currently in some stage of the permitting process.
In response to a question from Councillor Seidel, Mr. Dash informed the Council that there are about 44,000 total housing units in the city. Councillor Reeves said that he recently learned that that currently percentage 3-4 bedroom units amount to 28% of the total housing units, and that after the addition of the additional 5,000 units contemplated in the next 20 years, 3-4 bedroom units will drop to 23.8% of the total units.
Mr. Cotter said that the inclusionary units are predominantly 1-2 bedroom units. There are very few 3 bedroom units. Because the inclusionary units built by private developers are mostly 1-2 bedroom units, the Affordable Housing Trust prioritizes three bedroom units. Greg Russ, Executive Director of the CHA, said that the biggest need on the current CHA waiting list is for 1-2 bedroom units. He also said that the CHA has instituted a preference for applicants with "significant ties" to Cambridge, which can include someone who lived in Cambridge for 5 or more years and then had to move out.
Mayor Simmons and Councillor Davis said that they would like to see the rules be the same for all of the waiting lists for affordable housing.
Councillor Toomey said that he expected that this is only the first of several public meetings on this issue. He said that this is not about affordable housing; it is about the density and traffic that come with packing in housing, market or affordable, and it is about the unfairness of building it all in one or two neighborhoods. If you want to achieve more housing put 20 units at Shady Hill Square.
Councillor Kelley said that the bottom line issue is density. He would argue that the zoning should be exactly what it says it is, with no relief. Density needs to be squared around the city. Cambridge overall may be diverse, but Cambridge is not diverse in a block-by-block neighborhood basis. He would like more information about the agreement between Harvard and the City that residents of Harvard's new building will not be allowed to get resident parking permits.
Councillor Reeves said Chicago has accepted the fact that some parts of the city will be very tall. The issue is where would one promote the density in Cambridge. He is interested in the notion of building housing around transit nodes. If there was real enthusiasm, perhaps there should be a look at Central Square in that regard.
Councillor Seidel said that the projected 16%-17% increase in housing units over the next 20 years would put us close to the highest population that Cambridge has ever had. He added that the distributional part of affordable housing is important. He supports affordable housing but he agrees with the importance of having a discussion about why some neighborhoods get more than others.
Councillor Maher said that this community has a commitment to affordable housing. He urged staff to consider a change to the inclusionary zoning ordinance that would allow use of the square footage of the inclusionary units to calculate the required donation, so that perhaps there could be fewer but bigger units of affordable housing. With regard to the Wellington Harrington issue, the neighbors have been heard. He understands their frustration; the density in the neighborhoods is too much. The proposed building at the corner of Cambridge and Elm would be the only high building in the area.
Councillor Toomey said that inclusionary units should go in the areas of the city zoned for large development. Perhaps developers should give money to the City for second mortgages instead of building inclusionary units.
Councillor Davis said that the City staff and the Council need to start looking at projections of future demographics. There will be more seniors in Cambridge, and people want to stay in their own homes but the houses are big and expensive to heat. Perhaps the zoning could be changed to allow "granny" (aka in-law) apartments.
Councillor Davis added that a lot of the emotional element of this discussion is actually driven by fears about parking. Fear of more cars is driving too much of the talk. No one seems to trust that we can have a common goal for our community. We need the real numbers on parking. She remembers a building going up in her neighborhood, maybe six units, and the fear of all of the neighbors, including her, that they would never find parking spaces. After the building was finished and occupied, there was no noticeable change in the parking situation. Maybe we can be a little more flexible and park in front of our neighbor's house instead of our own once in a while. Density does work sometimes. We shouldn't completely throw out the idea of density in our neighborhoods.
Councillor Kelley said that the City Council also needs to consider the CHA's redevelopment needs. The CHA has some state-funded units that are in such bad condition that they cannot be used for housing. Perhaps Community Preservation Act funds should be used for that purpose
At this time Mayor Simmons requested comments from all of the members of the housing and land planning community invited to attend by the Assistant City Manager for Community Development. Their comments are summarized below.
William Tibbs, Chair of the Planning Board:
Project based cases are an extremely reactive way to do planning. Our zoning describes the zoning allowed in all of the districts in the city. The current zoning in a particular area typically allows for more density as of right than currently exists. Re-use of industrial areas may tend to produce more density. The 2001 city-wide rezoning was a substantial down-zoning. Inclusionary units are traditionally based on market trend, since the residential units are being built to market. The idea of allowing the number of required inclusionary units to be based on square footage is a very interesting idea.
James Stockard, member of the board of the Cambridge Housing Authority:
The Citizens Housing and Planning Association (CHAPA), the largest and most respected affordable housing and planning association in Massachusetts, gave Cambridge an award as the city doing the best job with regard to density. Density is a complicated issue. Peabody Terrace and Shaler Lane have exactly the same density. The most pricy neighborhoods in Boston, Beacon Hill and Back Bay, are the densest neighborhoods in Boston. All of us in the room tonight live in a house or development that added to the then-density. Everything is a moment in time. What is too much today is likely to be different in the future. One reason why mom and pop stores are disappearing is the lack of density. Small stores cannot afford the rent.
The three-bedroom issue is another issue that will be difficult for policymakers to discern. One product of the loss of rent control is the loss of families. On the CHA family waiting list there is a big demand for one-and two-bedroom units for Cambridge residents. If we want to shape the future of our community as a community where families can thrive, we will have to build for more families and get more families. That means that we will be building for families who are not from Cambridge. There are lots of families who need three- and four-bedroom units and would like to live in Cambridge, but they don't live here now. Mr. Stockard encouraged the City Council to fight hard for three-and four-bedroom housing.
Gregory Russ, Executive Director of the CHA:
84% of the families on the CHA family waiting list are families in need of one- or two-bedroom units, and 81% of those people on the voucher list are also smaller-sized families. The vast majority of those applicants are very low income. As of December, out of a household waiting list of 6,199, there were 127 families needing three- or four- bedroom units on the waiting list and eligible for the Cambridge local preference (Cambridge residents or significant Cambridge connection), and 844 similarly-sized families who are not eligible for local preference. Similarly, on the voucher list (formerly Section 8) there are 78 families who need three-bedrooms and are eligible for local preference and 945 who are not eligible for the preference. There is also the issue of the greater cost of building three and four bedroom units, which necessitates greater subsidies in a time of shrinking subsidies and dropping values of tax credits.
Gwen Noyes, principle of Oaktree Development and member of the Affordable Housing
Trust:
Her company has been focusing on doing as much green building as possible in the market sector. Healthy, walkable cities require density. We should look first at sites where public transportation is available. Market demand is largely for one- and two-bedroom apartments. She sees very little demand for big units. In the co-housing community in which she lives, they had to be very proactive and intentional to get families. In that experience, she found that families worried about the lack of yards and the reputation of the public schools.
Peter Daly, Executive Director of Homeowners Rehab, Inc.:
Density is always a concern to neighbors when a new affordable housing development is being built. From his perspective, one of the best discussions of density took place at a community meeting of neighbors who were very concerned about the density that the Auburn Court development would engender and how it would affect their neighborhood. John Clancy of Goody Clancy, presented a slide show and invited the neighbors to indicate which designs they liked best. The designs that they liked were more dense that the ones that they did not like. Although Cambridge, in which 16% of its housing is classified as affordable housing, is doing a better job than its neighboring cities and towns, 16% is much lower than what Cambridge used to have. A great deal of affordable housing has been lost due to the loss of rent control, the expiring of the required affordable housing use of several properties built with federal subsidies, including Huron Towers, Briston Arms and 929 Mass. Ave, and now there is an additional group of buildings in which the requirement for affordable housing use is expiring.
As energy costs go up, green housing is becoming increasingly important to affordable housing development.
Michael Haran, Executive Director of CASCAP:
A 1979 paper for the Department of Elder Affairs lists 650 single occupancy units in Cambridge. They are almost all gone now, and their demise probably directly connects with the rise of shelters and homelessness. In two of CASCAP's recent projects, the Bigelow Street project and the re-development of the old nursing home on Harvard Street as affordable assisted living, the projects significantly lowered the density from that of the previous uses, and still there was neighborhood opposition. When discussing proposed affordable housing projects, it is important to look at the values of the City of Cambridge, and the importance of diversity, being able to walk instead of drive and being able to afford to live here have always ranked high as Cambridge values.
Charles Studen, newly appointed member of the Planning Board:
It is clear that there is a serious demand for affordable housing, but the issues are very complicated.
H. Theodore Cohen, Associate member of the Planning Board:
The traffic and parking issue seems almost irresolvable. Some neighbors want developments to have a space for every unit; others say that the best way to cut down on the number of cars is to cut back on parking. He is surprised that there is so much less demand for three-and four-bedroom units.
Hugh Russell, Vice-Chairman, Planning Board:
Single room occupancy (SRO) projects are expensive to produce and maintain. The difficulties faced by our nonprofit affordable housing developers in Cambridge are enormous, particularly the very high cost of land acquisition. Some of the most difficult cases have been the church conversion projects, where there is a potential for providing new housing, but the land acquisition cost, but the land acquisition cost means that the site will usually be bought by a market rate developer. The idea of changing the inclusionary unit requirement to allow square foot calculation of the donation deserves further consideration. However, the idea of allowing the private developers to make contributions to the Affordable Housing Trust to be used for affordable housing at locations other than the project site is likely to end up putting more density in the neighborhoods that are a focus of the Council's concern regarding density.
Deputy City Manager Richard Rossi said that the view of density and how much space families need is very different now. In east Cambridge where he grew up, there were lots of large families, but there were not lots of three- and four-bedroom units. Several children shared one bedroom. City Manager Healy agreed and added that he was one of five children raised in a two-bedroom residence in north Cambridge.
Councillor Reeves expressed concern that North Point housing built to date and/or permitted for future development has been all one- and two-bedroom units.
Mayor Simmons asked if there has been any problem with the resale of affordable units. Mr. Cotter said that there has not been any difficulty. The resale price is set by formula to keep the units affordable. The value of property is very high in Cambridge, and there is a big difference between the price of a market unit and the price of a limited equity unit. The price of the limited equity units is still much lower than the price of similar market rate units. Mr. Stockard added that housing cost is based on land, labor and building expense. Housing price is based on supply and demand. The difference between the two is what allows Cambridge's inclusionary zoning program to succeed.
Councillor Seidel said that the Housing Committee will continue this discussion. The committee will look at thematic first and then specifics. He expects the committee to look at allowable density (what density present zoning allows), the concept of density and zoning as encompassing the view of a particular point in time, and other related issues. He is also interested in what factors kept Cambridge affordable before rent control.
Councillor Kelley said that surveys have shown that families who leave are leaving because of the schools. That must be a part of the discussion if we want to keep families in Cambridge.
Mayor Simmons thanked all those present for their participation. The meeting was adjourned at 8:20pm.
D. Margaret Drury, City Clerk