Amesbury Housing Trust

By City Clerk at 12:42 pm, Sep 15, 2022 AMESBURY CITY HALL 62 Friend Street Amesbury, MA 01913 Amesbury Affordable Housing Trust MEETING MINUTES August 10, 2022 @4:30pm Members present: Margaret Hoffman, Kathy Troiano, Kerry Hamel-Pope, Mayor Kassandra Gove, Nancy Frick, Drew LeFleur, Steve Stanganelli (at 5:22pm) Staff: Angela Cleveland 1. Call to Order at 4:31pm 2. Minutes: Kathy motioned to approve the minutes from June 15, 2022. Nancy seconded. Unani- mously approved. Kathy motioned to approve the minutes from June 28, 2022. Nancy seconded. Unanimously approved. 3. Public Comment 4. Election of Chair and Vice Chair for FY 2023. The Mayor moved to nominate Margaret and Nancy Frick seconded. Unanimously approved. Margaret took over as chair. She asked to nominate Kerry as Vice Chair. Kathy seconded. Unanimously approved. 5. Communications • Housing Trust Account update: Principal Balance $142,306.30, Interest Earnings $17.09, Total Balance $142,323.39 6. Existing Business • Amesbury Rental Assistance Program Launch – Margaret mentioned that the Amesbury Rental Assistance Program has officially been launched and that it is available to residents. Mayor Gove suggested that we leave this item on the agenda to get regular updates. Nancy asked how we are promoting this. Angela mentioned that we sent it out to the Council on Aging, Veteran’s, Housing Authority, Retirement Board. Mayor Gove mentioned that we are also sharing on the Mayor’s Facebook Live event. We will also be sharing this on social media. • Grant Updates: Complete Neighborhoods Grant and Housing Production Plan (MVPC). 7. New Business • Council Referral: 2022-087: An Order to authorize the Mayor to surplus, procure a development proposal, and sell properties 58 Cynthia Road and 63 Cynthia Lane Disposition – Vote Required. Kathy asked if there has been a specific type of development proposed for these two parcels. Mayor Gove clarified that this is the first step in a long process. This is just to authorize the Mayor to surplus the property. It will then go to a Disposition Committee process. Public Comments: Constance McCleod, 24 Pamela Lane. General thoughts: The walking score is 3. Walking capability is essential for affordable housing. Increasing the density of this area will have a detrimental impact on that area. (see below). Judith Sullivan, 42 Pamela Lane. (see below). Brad Matthews, 40 Pamela Lane. Had an emotional response to the initial idea. Cares about affordable housing, but cares more about the people who live in affordable housing. This would put them in the middle of nowhere. (see writing). He mentioned that the Planning Board voted to send a negative recommendation to the City Council and that the properties be preserved as a greenway. See below for full comments. He then asked if the Council votes yes, what happens then? It will go to a Disposition Committee who will issue a Request for Proposals. This bill is to authorize the Mayor to surplus it. Drew said that we are charged with developing affordable housing. It’s not up to this Trust about the long-term plan of where or how, it’s developing affordable housing. Kathy said that we have a responsibility to at least investigate the option to develop these as affordable housing. The comments are very granular. This process is to investigate the properties further. Councilor Stanganelli said that he is speaking for himself, not the City Council. He agrees that the Housing Trust’s mandate is to build the affordable housing stock. He is personally in favor of the Bill as proposed. It would be worth talking about conditions if a developer comes forward to address the issues that the neighborhood has. Density, vegetation, addressing invasive species. We can put in place recommendations for future development. Kerry said that it is our responsibility to create new housing. We have a responsibility to investigate these properties and whether they are a good fit for affordable housing. She understands the challenges that the neighbors have presented. But she also understands that there are a lot of people that need affordable housing. That’s our job. Nancy agrees with everything that people said. It’s up to us to investigate. She would also welcomes neighbors to offer up places to build. There isn’t much, the Trust has looked for other properties. Gail Macalany, 67 Cynthia Lane. Is there other land that is being considered? This space just doesn’t feel right. It should be closer to town for convenience sake. Margaret responded that there are some others, but there aren’t many. Mayor Gove said that this is the first time we’ve had public comment and we have been working for over a year on finding parcels. We think other people would like to live in this area, just as the neighbors here tonight do. We are in a housing crisis. We need to add units. Infill is a strategy that needs to be used. We have been very conscious to protect open space – 100 acres since the beginning of her term. We know it’s important for the climate, quality of life, and our neighborhoods. But we have people living in cars in parking lots with kids in the schools. But we need houses, and it’s going to be in their backyard. I hope other boards and committees will see this need as well. Councilor Stanganelli apologized for being late and wanted to make note that housing is an important component of his personal role. He sees people struggle to stay in their homes. The Trust is working to find ways to do this, including our Rental Assistance Program. One of the key campaign issues that he ran on was affordable housing. He wants to work towards Accessory Dwelling Units, which will allow people to age in place. He is very keen on making sure that we balance our needs. He is not accusing anyone of specifically saying that, but there are people commenting that they don’t want something in their backyard. We are here to help. The City owns land, some of by tax title. This area was previously zoned for residential. We don’t know the specific reason for why it wasn’t developed. This will help us meet our goals of  achieving 10% affordable housing. The benefit of having a Council member on the Trust is that we can see the bigger picture. This bill as written gives us options for to develop housing. Brad Matthews said that none of the issues are about not in my backyard. It’s about how do we put people in that area of town without transportation to get to school, groceries, health care, etc. He reminded them that the Planning Board voted to send a negative recommendation back to City Council. Katelynn Lemieux, 7 Birchwood Point, Unit 204, served previously for the Amesbury/Merrimac Housing Authority. She was eligible for affordable housing at one time. Now she serves her own Housing Authority. It has a 10 year waiting list. Section 8 waiting list is 15 year list. She also lived far away from a downtown area. We don’t know what other people’s situations are. If we have an opportunity to take some land, it doesn’t matter the distance for some people. It’s about giving their child a home, it’s about keeping seniors in Amesbury. We have to take the chance to see what can be developed. It takes years for many people to get service, so if we can take this opportunity now, we should. Margaret asked that we take a vote on this. She asked for a motion to send a positive recommendation. Kathy made a motion to send a positive recommendation back to City Council for Order 2022-087: An Order to authorize the Mayor to surplus, procure a development proposal, and sell properties 58 Cynthia Road and 63 Cynthia Lane Disposition. Councilor Stanganelli seconded. Unanimous vote. • Housing Strategic Planning Proposal: Margaret read through the memo to the Housing Trust. Kathy said she is not aware of all of this, but she is in favor. The Mayor said we don’t have a Housing Planner dedicated to this work, so from the City’s prospective we want to be thoughtful about it and don’t want this to be a knee-jerk reaction to future planning. Drew asked who would be in charge of implementing the plan. Angie responded that primarily OCED would but there would be other partners involved. Councilor Stanganelli asked if we would choose the same consultant for the Housing Element and the Ordinances updates? Angie said it could be. Steve asked if there is someone in mind Councilor Stanganelli made the motion to allocate up to $6,000 for the consultant, with the remainder to come from the Housing Choice grant funds if they are secured. Nancy seconded. Passed unanimously. 8. Next Meeting Date – September 14th at 4:30pm. Nancy asked if we could consider a hybrid option. Kathy asked if we can do Facetime. Mayor Gove answered no, we use Teams, but could use Facebook live. Margaret asked if there are other communities running hybrid meetings. The Mayor said yes. We have had some complaints from the public. The legislation from the state gave us a lot of flexibility, but it’s not consistent across the board. This makes it challenging for the public. Margaret asked if this is up to each Board, Mayor said yes. She mentioned this could be challenging to staff. Councilor Stanganelli asked if we can develop standard procedures. It could be challenging. He would like to see us develop a policy in place though. 9. Councilor Stanganelli made a motion to adjourn at 6:04pm. Nancy seconded. Unanimous vote. Public Comments (received via email and in person) Via Email: Tracey J. Chalifour, Birchwood Point. The Housing Trust members may not be aware that on Monday, August 8th, the Planning Board agenda included this item: 2022-087: Authorize the Mayor to surplus and sell 58 Cynthia Road and 63 Cynthia Lane At that meeting, the PB voted to make a recommendation to City Council that the aforementioned two parcels NOT be surplused and sold, but rather kept as green space due to a lack of green space in that area. Councilor Wheeler attended the meeting - he may have a more eloquent way of capturing the decision. The reason I am commenting is because this agenda item may be a moot point since it was referred back to Council. In person: David Courier, 6 Pamela Lane. Concerned about individuals using those parcels. He would like to see affordable housing going to people living in it. He hopes that the units can be owner- ship, which is much more beneficial to the community. He asked if the problem that there are not enough affordable ownership units. In person: Hello, Housing Trust member, I am quite personally in favor of Affordable Housing, just like you are. In fact, I am particularly con- cerned for the well-being of Affordable Housing residents. As such, I have come to see that afforda- ble housing residents would be significantly disserved by Cynthia Road’s location, almost at the NH border. Affordable housing residents in Amesbury should be able to be integrated into the broad com- munity, and be enabled to engage in, and benefit from, Amesbury’s rich resources and full range of community activities. The Cynthia Road location actually inhibits this goal. Let me explain. Cynthia Road’s remote location, 2 miles from the center of town, and its lack of public transporta- tion, would isolate financially restricted ‘affordable housing’ residents. Their access would be se- verely limited to: (1) schools (requiring City-funded busing) and school events like parent-teacher meetings and sporting events; (2) doctors, dentists and other health services; (3) downtown shopping, cultural happenings, and to participation in community activities and governance (like this meeting); and to (4) their jobs that could well be reached by local or regional public transit if it were easily accessi- ble. Such residents’ only recourse would be to own multiple cars, one for each family member need- ing independent transportation, which would create grave financial strain on families whose incomes are already restricted, and who are only eligible for Affordable Housing because their income is signifi- cantly lower than average for this region. The State’s goal of local and regional public transportation being easily accessible to residents of affordable housing developments would also be disserved, because Cynthia Rd. does not provide any such readily available access. According to Google Maps, it is a 45-minute walk from Cynthia Road to the City’s Transportation Center in town, which along with downtown’s resources, should be the centering point of Affordable Housing development in Amesbury. Just imagine trying to walk and hand-carry your shopping packages from downtown back uphill the 2 miles to Cynthia Road in the summer’s heat and thunderstorms, or in winter’s frigid days and snowstorms. As Amesbury’s Planning Board voted just this week, there needs to be much more research on the availability of other more suitable locations for affordable housing, as well as research on other op- tions for development or conservation of the Cynthia Road parcels. As such, they voted to not recom- mend that the City Council approve Bill No. 2022-087. A number of us NeighborsOfCynthiaRoad would be happy to collaborate with the City to find and recruit better suited locations for exceptionally well-designed affordable housing developments – ones that that truly serve their residents, and can bring honors and PR benefits to Amesbury. This ‘City of Innovation’ built that reputation in part on its innovations supporting building practices, with sawmilled boards and manufactured nails. Why shouldn’t Amesbury reignite that reputation by demonstrating award-winning excellence in affordable housing development that is recognized for its quality and its service to its residents’ well-being? BTW – I for one have been doing research on designers and build- ers of such world-class affordable housing, some of whom are officed in Boston. Please join the Planning Board in not recommending approval by the City Council for Bill No. 2022- 087, and instead recommending more research and recruitment effort in locating more suitable lo- cations for affordable housing in Amesbury (and finding other purposes for the Cynthia Road parcels). Thank you for your caring service to affordable housing residents, Bradford Matthews, 40 Pamela Lane, Amesbury 01913 Via Email: My name is Peter Ahl, my wife and I have lived at 62 Cynthia Road for 26 years. We have enjoyed living in this neighborhood and what it has to offer. However, we are concerned about the proposed sale of 58 Cynthia Road (Parcel 22-72) and 63 Cynthia Lane (Parcel 23-163) for afforda- ble residential development. Although we are in favor of affordable housing and the opportunities it of- fers, this location is not ideal for many reasons. These parcels are not close to the bus route serving downtown Amesbury, Newburyport, Newbury and Salisbury, providing access to services like education, cultural resources, health care, recreation, and shopping. This is already a densely populated area which would become more congested with the ad- dition of more housing on these small parcels of land. There would be very little room left between this and the existing Northbrook Condominiums, Whitehall Lakes Condos, and Orchard heights single fam- ily homes. The trees and vegetation on these parcels absorb a great deal of rain and snow runoff, processing it naturally. They provide a habitat for many insects, animals, and birds. The alterations necessary to convert them into buildable lots would have a negative impact on this habitat, and on drainage and ero- sion as well. There have already been at least two projects completed to deal with excess water runoff in this area. When the land adjacent to these parcels was developed there were reasons why they were not in- cluded. They do not qualify as buildable lots under current zoning and have significant slopes on both sides. To ignore these concerns and make alterations that might require retaining walls or a slope cov- ered with rocks is not the best use for this land. For these reasons we oppose the sale of these parcels for development and hope they can continue to offer the important benefits of green space to the resi- dents of the adjacent communities. Thank you. Peter & Pamela Ahl 62 Cynthia Road Amesbury, MA 01913 Dear Housing Trust Members; Via Email: My name is Nancy Collier and I live at 76 Cynthia Lane. I have serious concerns about the proposal for the lots down the street from me being developed and sold to people least able to afford quality housing. My concern is deepened by the problems I have experienced with my own unit. When I bought it, it was uninhabitable mostly due to the settling of the ground which resulted in water getting in around a window, rotting the wall and floors and leaving a gaping hole that looked down to the base- ment. The window has been fixed by a contractor but is still not sound. The window directly above it when fully closed still leaves a gap on one side big enough to stick a finger through. My concrete patio is cracked as well as the garage floor. When it rains water gets into the garage. My floors are uneven and my walls are not straight. If you drive past my home then look at the parcels the city is proposing to develop you will see my prop- erty looks much more stable. Also driving down Cynthia and Pamela you can see many smaller retain- ing walls that have buckled and have been replaced. Those walls are not supporting homes but rather preventing dirt from spilling onto driveways. Can the city be sure that any homes built on those parcels and held up by retaining walls, last in an area that serves to absorb runoff from rain water and melting snow. I care very much about affordable housing and have never thought that low income people should be treated like second class citizens. If the city does wish to pursue the sale of these lots for 40b development, it is my hope that a careful study be conducted to look at the stability and longevity of anything built there. Thank you for your consideration.  Proposal to Allocate Funding from Housing Trust Fund to Hire a Strategic Planning Consultant The City has a lot of planning to do pertaining to housing over the next 12-18 month. About 90% of this planning will include elements of affordable housing. These projects include, but are not limited to: 1. The proposed 40R Smart Growth District in the East End Neighborhood 2. A Housing Chapter (Element) for the I AMesbury 2030 Master Plan 3. An Affordable Housing Production Plan update created by the Merrimack Valley Planning Commission 4. Creating an Action Plan to address the new MBTA Communities Regulations 5. Modification of the existing 40R Smart Growth District to accommodate new multi-family housing. 6. Potential changes to zoning of the Golden Triangle/Elm Street parcels to accommodate 300-400 housing units 7. A 40B development on Main Street 8. Proposed changes to zoning to update the Affordable Housing Zoning Ordinance and create an Accessory Dwelling Unit Ordinance. To accomplish this, the City would like to hire an experience consultant to guide us through a process to develop a plan for how to accomplish these tasks, what the timing looks like, who should be involved, and how we message the importance of them individually and holistically. Affordable housing is a top priority for the City, and this consultant will be essential in helping us communicate and accomplish these tasks successfully. It is estimated that a consultant will cost about $8,000. The proposal for the Housing Trust’s consideration is to allocate up to $6,000 for the consultant, with the remainder to come from the Housing Choice grant funds if they secured.