10/27/2020 Planning Commission Minutes
Subject to Approval
PLANNING COMMISSION-MEETING MINUTES
TUESDAY, October 27th, 2020
The public hearing was web-based on Zoom at https://zoom.us/j/2574297243
Meeting ID: 257 429 7243
I. CALL TO ORDER - Chairman Rice called the meeting to order at 7:02pm.
1. Pledge of Allegiance
II. ROLL CALL
1. Appointment of Alternatives: N/A
Present: Michael Glidden, William Rice, Erin Leavitt-Smith, Julie Eaton, Alan Needham, Holly Beum, Craig MacCormac, David Blume, Richard Cortes
Absent: N/A
III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES of the TUESDAY October 13th, 2020 regular meetings
• Mr. Needham lead the minute review. Mr. Needham noted they are all page 2 again. Line 78 Ms. Beum noted there should be a space between she and explained. Line 85 there should be a space between inclusion and working noted by Mr. Needham. Ms. Leavitt-Smith explained on line 160 there needs to be a space between she and explained. She also stated on line 185 the word Aquifer is spelled incorrectly and occurs several times through the document. Line 191 Mr. MacCormac stated there needs a space between the words respond and stating and on line 186 spacing between the word Smith and asked as reported by Ms. Leavitt-Smith. Ms. Leavitt-Smith clarified that on line 188 she was objecting to the use of the picture; she requested to add the wording, objects to the use of the picture of this piece of land.
• Ms. Leavitt-Smith made a motion to approve the minutes as amended. Mr. Blume seconded the motion.
MOTION: All in favor, no opposed, no abstentions (6-0-0).
IV. Public Workshop
1. Affordable Housing Plan
• Chairman Rice started by explaining the Commission has been working on the Affordable Housing Plan, this is the time for members of the public and appointment/elected officials to provide input to the Planning Commission for the final draft of the plan. The electronic final draft was posted last Wednesday. Chairman Rice explained that the Commission had two avenues for input from the public for today's workshop; written comments to be read into the record and a live interaction with the Planning Commission for people who registered. Chairman Rice confirmed there was 2 written comments and 1 person present to talk. Mr. Glidden put together a brief PowerPoint presentation that framed the discussion and explained the purpose of the Affordable Housing Plan.
• Mr. Glidden presented the slides. He explained that 8-30j requires each community in CT to develop an Affordable Housing Plan that has to be updated every 5 years which explains how they will increase the number of affordable units in the town. Mr. Glidden stated the other statute, 8-30g, is the Affordable Housing Appeals Act; every community in CT is supposed to provide 10% of their total housing stock as what will be considered affordable housing. He stated 8-30g defines affordable housing in several ways; a deed restricted unit can be filed to restrict the sale/resale price of the house for a period of 30 years, government assistance such as a USDA or CFHA loan, rental assistance such as Section 8 or similar programs. Mr. Glidden explained a home is considered affordable based on a person’s income level; 30% of their income is the max they can spend on housing costs. Mr. Glidden explained that Simsbury is currently at 4.47% and in order to get to the 10% they would need to add 481 new affordable units and not approve a single market rate develop or add another market rate unit. He explained that the Commission discussed how they make progress towards the 10%. He presented the Commission’s goal of 1% over the next 5 years. Mr. Glidden further stated the Commission is seeking input from the public on the actions, goal and importance of affordable housing.
• Mr. Glidden read aloud the two written letters that were submitted to the Commission.
• Spencer Hill 10 Carver Circle Simsbury, CT; “In the section of the plan entitled why is affordable housing important there is no recognition to the importance of affordable housing increasing the towns racial diversity. While race and income are not casually related, there is a correlation. Persons of color in CT disproportionally have lower incomes. Recognizing that Simsbury is racially and social economically homogenous and that our housing stock is inaccessible for large groups of the state's population is important as our efforts to dismantle systemic racism. In terms of potential solution, increasing fixed income housing would improve the towns affordable housing. The goal would not be to create a concentration of low income housing but to integrate low income housing into the rest of the town’s zoning plan. Another potential solution is to voluntarily adopt another definition beyond the statutory requirements; the median income approach identified as 8-30g is too high. This value acts as a floor rather than a curling and the town can voluntarily adopt a policy focused on housing available to those with lower income levels.
• Susan Basina: “I want to offer some specific and also a multifaceted rational for accessory housing options throughout the town, one option for affordable housing and environmentally friendly and accessible housing at Simsbury Farms as another. Small accessory housing units can be very energy efficient and environmentally friendly and add little demand to town service and add additional income to the main homeowner. Accessory units can also provide the town with additional town revenue and distributed network of affordable housing throughout the town rather than here is an affordable housing district. Affordable housing should be integrated if possible. We need to avoid suggestion that we give up important pieces of open space and open space benefits people in different ways.
• Danielle Hill 10 Carver Circle, presented live via ZOOM. She is the founder of the Simsbury Diversity and Inclusion working group. She informed the Commission that she put on the recent meeting through the library. She explained the purpose of the meeting was more informational for the public on what affordable housing is, the polices around it and what Simsbury has been doing so far. She stated in an ideal world she would like to have several of the local grassroots organizations to come together and come up with cohesive plans to come to the Commission in hopes it can come to action by way of future policy. Regarding the proposed housing plan, she read the goal outline in the plan. She explained the current goal would put them at 9.74% which is still under the 10% however, she feels within 5 years they should be able to find ways to get to and exceed 10%. She stated the Dorset Crossing Plan that was provided as an example, would have 48 units for those with MS. She stated it is restrictive to other disability groups. She reported feeling 8-30 is a starting point and not a boundary. She reported feeling that Simsbury should be a lead town on the map and pave the way for Connecticut. Chairman Rice explained to Ms. Hill that the goal is to increase the affordable housing stock 1.0% over 5 years so they would be at 10.05 in 5 years. He thanked Ms. Hill and agreed that all of her comments were pertinent.
• Chairman Rice asked the Commissioners, who attended Ms. Hill’s meeting, if there were any comments about affordable housing during the meeting that peaked their interest and what comments, or suggestions were offered. Mr. Blume stated he didn't recall any specific suggestions. Ms. Leavitt-Smith concurred. Chairman Rice asked Ms. Hill if that was correct and she stated yes it was more of an informational meeting. Mr. Blume added that the participants in that forum were very passionate and had much enthusiasm for affordable housing being a major step for increasing diversity and inclusion. Mr. Blume stated one participant did state Simsbury was not inviting when they were looking for a place to live. Chairman Rice asked Ms. Hill about her stating she feels there should be another meeting with the grassroots organizations. He explained that a lot of time was put into looking at how to increase affordable housing units in Simsbury and he feels there may be more options that they haven’t captured. He stated maybe these options could come from some of the grassroots organizations that she mentioned. He reminded her they need 481 units just to meet the 10%. He stated the math behind that sets them backwards because more market rate units are being built faster than affordable housing units. Chairman Rice explained he would love to hear other potential solutions outside of what they have researched and come up with. He would like to listen to options and would be open to scheduling another meeting. Mr. MacCormac agreed with Chairman Rice and stated he feels this is a fantastic idea and feels the more ideas and options they can get from the community would be welcomed. Chairman Rice did note he wish there was more participants at tonight's meeting. Ms. Leavitt-Smith stated she received some text messages explaining that people did not know there was a format and that they had to sign up so they possible might want to have a second meeting. Ms. Beum asked to speak with Ms. Hill. She explained they share her enthusiasm for this topic. She explained they have spent most of the year working on this plan and trying to go beyond 8-30g and she reassured Ms. Hill that they share her goals. Ms.Hill thanked Ms. Beum and stated there is so much opportunity to collaborate to get this done. She recommended possibly having a community liaison to be the person to bridge the gap between the Commission and the community/public. Ms. Beum did inform Ms. Hill that the action items does require a lot of volunteers. Mr. Blume stated one of those action steps would require someone to provide education to other professionals about what affordable housing really is in relation to 8-30g. Ms. Hill stated she feels a redefinition of 8-30g should come up in the legislature. Ms. Leavitt-Smith recommended in the future looking to get the state legislatives and state senators involved as they are confined to the law and how it is written now. She stated she hopes they can be creative but acknowledged it is limiting. Ms. Hill mentioned her favorite model of housing is sustainable urban planning and looking at the Toronto model of intermixed affordable housing with a co-op with your standard housing. She stated that would be standalone homes with town houses and apartment that are all centrally located around a town green with shops. Chairman Rice stated those are the ideas they have been looking for. Chairman Rice stated he feels the Commission should give the public another opportunity to participate. Ms. Leavitt-Smith noted she is getting feedback that the SCTV feed in't good quality and people are asking for another listening forum. Chairman Rice asked if any of the Commissioners had any objections. There were none. The next meeting is 11/10/20. The listening forum will be put on the agenda again for the next meeting on 11/10/20. This portion of the meeting was closed by Chairman Rice. Chairman Rice thanked the participants.
• Chairman Rice informed the Commission he was looking at the town of Stonington and stumbled across their affordable housing plan drafted in 2008. He shared with the Commission a part of Stonington’s affordable housing plan where they state that since 2008 Stonington has added 0 new dedicated affordable housing units but did add 545 new housing units. Mr. MacCormac and Ms. Beum asked for Stonington’s plan to be emailed to the Commission. Ms. Leavitt-Smith noted that is what she feels Chairman Rice has stated consistently, that is a dilemma. Ms. Beum stated she does agree it is difficult if they only do it with new construction but if they could get people who qualified for government assistance to buy homes in their town it would help. Chairman Rice also noted in the Stonington affordable housing plan it appears that they established an affordable housing advisory committee, which goes beyond the Planning Commission and town staff. He stated this came to his mind when Ms. Hill was discussing other grassroots organizations. Chairman Rice is not at the point where he wants to create an advisory committee as he feels they have the framework of their plan that just needs to be updated to include new elements that may be suggested. Mr. MacCormac stated he doesn't feel they need an official advisory committee but can take any and all input. Chairman Rice concluded with stating at the next listening forum he will press people to give detail into action items. Chairman Rice told Mr. Glidden that they still do not have input from the Board of Selectman. Mr. Glidden stated the Board of Selectman did not respond to the request. The Commission was vocal about being disappointed. Chairman Rice stated he will reach out to Eric and Maria from the Board of Selectman, directly as maybe they have had more pressing items. He further stated they have to get to a publishable document. Mr. Blume suggested that the draft plan be given to each member of the Board of Selectman. Ms. Beum asked if the Commission can get on their agenda. Ms. Leavitt-Smith asked if the request went to the actual board and Mr. Glidden confirmed it did and it was received by all the members. Chairman Rice is concerned that they will create a document that isn't in line with how the Board of Selectman see the town going. Ms. Leavitt-Smith did note there are some Board of Selectman members that are currently watching this public workshop.
• Chairman Rice asked Mr.Glidden for any correspondence. Chairman Rice asked about any correspondence or applications. Mr. Glidden stated there are no current applications but there will be an application for the next meeting for the road acceptance at Hendrick Cottage.
V. ADJOURNMENT Mr. MacCormac made a motion to adjourn the meeting. Mr. Blume seconded the motion. The meeting adjourned at 8:10pm.
MOTION: All in favor, no opposed, no abstentions. (6-0-0)
Respectfully Submitted,
Amanda Werboff
Commission Clerk