Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutOCPB minutes 050416Approved 8/3/2016 1 MINUTES 1 PLANNING BOARD 2 MAY 4, 2016 3 REGULAR MEETING 4 5 MEMBERS PRESENT: Lydia Wegman-At-Large Chapel Hill Township (Chair); Tony Blake, Bingham Township 6 Representative (Vice-Chair); Paul Guthrie, At-Large Chapel Hill Township; Lisa Stuckey, Chapel Hill Township 7 Representative; Maxecine Mitchell, At-Large Bingham Township; Kim Piracci, At-Large; James Lea, Cedar Grove 8 Township Representative; Patricia Roberts; Cheeks Township Representative; 9 10 MEMBERS ABSENT: Andrea Rohrbacher, At-Large Chapel Hill Township; Buddy Hartley, Little River Township 11 Representative; Laura Nicholson, Eno Township Representative; 12 13 STAFF PRESENT: Craig Benedict, Planning Director; Michael Harvey, Current Planning Supervisor; Ashley Moncado, 14 Special Projects Planner; Meredith Pucci Administrative Assistant; Audrey Spencer-Horsley, Housing, Human Rights 15 and Community Development Director; 16 17 OTHERS PRESENT: None 18 19 AGENDA ITEM 1: CALL TO ORDER 20 21 AGENDA ITEM 2: INFORMATIONAL ITEMS 22 a) Planning Calendar for May and June 23 24 Lydia Wegman reviewed Calendar for next meetings. 25 26 AGENDA ITEM 3: APPROVAL OF MINUTES 27 a) April 6, 2016 Regular Meeting 28 b) April 6, 2016 ORC Meeting 29 30 MOTION by Lisa Stuckey to approve the minutes. Seconded by Paul Guthrie 31 VOTE: UNANIMOUS 32 33 AGENDA ITEM 4: CONSIDERATION OF ADDITIONS TO AGENDA 34 35 Craig Benedict: We will not be presenting item 8 tonight. 36 37 AGENDA ITEM 5: PUBLIC CHARGE 38 39 Introduction to the Public Charge 40 The Board of County Commissioners, under the authority of North Carolina General 41 Statute, appoints the Orange County Planning Board (OCPB) to uphold the written land 42 development laws of the County. The general purpose of OCPB is to guide and 43 accomplish coordinated and harmonious development. OCPB shall do so in a manner, 44 which considers the present and future needs of its residents and business through 45 efficient and responsive process that contributes to and promotes the health, safety, and 46 welfare of the overall County. The OCPB will make every effort to uphold a vision of 47 responsive governance and quality public services during our deliberations, decision, and 48 recommendations. 49 50 Public Charge 51 The Planning Board pledges to the residents of Orange County its respect. The Board 52 asks its residents to conduct themselves in a respectful, courteous manner, both with the 53 Approved 8/3/2016 2 Board and with fellow residents. At any time, should any member of the Board or any 54 resident fail to observe this public charge, the Chair will ask the offending member to 55 leave the meeting until that individual regains personal control. Should decorum rail to be 56 restored, the Chair will recess the meeting until such time that a genuine commitment to 57 this public charge is observed. 58 59 AGENDA ITEM 6: CHAIR COMMENTS 60 61 None. 62 63 AGENDA ITEM 7: 2030 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE (UDO) TEXT 64 AMENDMENTS - To make a recommendation to the BOCC on government-initiated 65 amendments to the text of the Comprehensive Plan and UDO regarding revisions to the 66 O/I (Office/Institutional) zoning district and establishment of a new permitted use type. 67 This item is scheduled for the May 23, 2016 quarterly public hearing. 68 Presenter: Ashley Moncado, Special Projects Planner 69 70 Ashley Moncado reviewed the abstract. 71 72 Tony Blake: Do you have to put a definition for distribution on page 39? 73 74 Ashley Moncado: The definition for distribution is the assembly and packaging. This is just a clarification since there 75 was some confusion of how distribution falls into the table of permitted uses. Assembly and packaging in Article 10 76 specifically calls out distribution so it’s already in there. 77 78 Lydia N. Wegman: Did you hear any concerns expressed about this amendment? 79 80 Ashley Moncado: No. We sent out letters to everyone in the County who currently owns property zoned as O/I. We 81 had 11 people attend and it was a good discussion, but there was no concern among the attendees. 82 83 Tony Blake: Looking at the table in the land use and zoning matrix on page 43 I noticed that this is only in the 84 commercial/industrial transition,n but not in the rural industrial. Is that something scheduled for later or is that initial? 85 86 Craig Benedict: The commercial/industrial land use category was limited to areas where there is public water and 87 sewer. 88 89 Lydia N. Wegman: What would you like us to vote on? 90 91 Ashley Moncado: In the past the board has done the statement of consistency and amendment package together. 92 93 Lydia N Wegman: We might as well do them together. If there are no more concerns or questions we can go ahead 94 and vote. 95 96 MOTION made by Lisa Stuckey to recommend approval to the BOCC on the statement of consistency and the 97 proposed amendment package. Seconded by Tony Blake. 98 99 VOTE: UNANIMOUS 100 101 AGENDA ITEM 9: UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE (UDO) TEXT AMENDMENT - To make a 102 recommendation to the BOCC on government-initiated amendments to the text of the 103 UDO regarding sign regulations. This item is scheduled for the May 23, 2016 quarterly 104 public hearing. 105 106 Presenter: Michael Harvey, Current Planning Supervisor 107 Approved 8/3/2016 3 108 Michael Harvey reviewed the abstract 109 110 Paul Guthrie: Why did the attorneys make the decision to wait? 111 112 Michael Harvey: I think their concern is that there are other court cases pending that could clarify what Reed vs. 113 Gilbert. I also believe they wanted more time to review the proposal to ensure we did not create additional legal 114 hardships for the County. Finally there was a concern the proposal was becoming too complex and might create 115 further compliance issues associated with the Reed decision. 116 117 Lisa Stuckey: Isn’t this a nationwide problem? 118 119 Michael Harvey: Yes, we are not the only Planning Board reviewing this. A lot of communities are choosing not to 120 deal with it and just wait to get sued or wait to see if another community adopts an ordinance that survives a court 121 challenge to use as a model. There are several communities that are doing the same thing we are doing, specifically 122 trying to figure out how best to address the implications of the Reed case. 123 124 Lydia N. Wegman: Why are the on premise commercial signs within the agricultural support enterprises being 125 added? 126 127 Michael Harvey: They were supposed to be added when we originally created the zoning district but they were not 128 and we didn’t want to deny them signage. So as indicated within the footnote we are correcting a previous omission. 129 130 Tony Blake: Is there any attempt to align the two sign ordinance between the ETJ and rural areas? 131 132 Michael Harvey: No there is not currently a move to do so. Frankly I believe our policy with respect to signage is 133 differently from our municipal planning partners and we should not necessarily be looking for parity. 134 135 Lisa Stuckey: On page 107 and 109 I found the language very confusing. 136 137 Michael Harvey: This is language that has been approved by the county attorney’s office. 138 139 Michael Harvey: If you have any further questions outside of the meeting tonight I am happy to communicate further 140 with you about this item. 141 142 Paul Guthrie: What if you regulate the structure or the materials in the structure of the sign? 143 144 Michael Harvey: We could do that and in certain aspects of this ordinance we can still do that. 145 146 Lydia N. Wegman: Will the results of these court cases are going to address content? 147 148 Michael Harvey: Possibly which is why we are waiting on revising the ordinance. 149 150 151 MOTION by Maxecine Mitchell to recommend approval to the BOCC on the statement of consistency and the 152 proposed amendment package. Seconded by Tony Blake. 153 VOTE: UNANIMOUS 154 155 AGENDA ITEM 10: AFFORDABLE HOUSING STRATEGIC PLAN - To receive a presentation on the draft 156 Affordable Housing Strategic Plan and provide input and comments on the draft plan. 157 158 Presenter: Audrey Spencer-Horsley 159 160 Audrey Spencer-Horsley reviewed the abstract 161 Approved 8/3/2016 4 Patricia Roberts: I know your first responsibility is to get people housing but one of the things, and I’m a real estate 162 broker… People buy a house hoping to be upwardly mobile, to put equity in their house and the idea is when they 163 sell it they’ll be able to sell it, move on to something more desirable for them because they increase their status in 164 life. What I’ve seen when you do a whole neighborhood of affordable housing they’re not upwardly mobile. They don’t 165 have the 10 percent turnover like you need in a strong neighborhood. So you’re putting off your problem for maybe 166 10-15 years and their house has not increased in value because they can’t sell it on the open market. I just pull an 167 MLS, the habitat home over on Richmond Hills, nothing sold. 5-10, not a single house has sold on the open market. 168 But they’re not increasing their value, they’re not building equity, they’re not building wealth and that’s what I think we 169 want these people to be able to do. That’s the other thing; double wide’s and single wide’s depreciate. They do not 170 appreciate. So yes, they have a place to live but they’re not building wealth. And that’s the way out of poverty is to 171 help them build wealth. So normally a house in Mebane gets snapped up and no ones touched it. Because it’s the 172 stigma of everyone in the whole neighborhood being… It’s a habitat neighborhood. No one on the open market wants 173 to move into a habitat neighborhood. So what I’m trying to say is… keep that in mind. I think affordable housing is a 174 great idea, I’m suggesting every other house, every third house, a workforce housing so that you’re spreading this 175 out and it’s not a whole neighborhood. 176 177 Audrey Spencer-Horsley- So what do you define as a workforce housing? 178 179 Patricia Roberts: For firemen, a teacher in our community- a lot of our teachers can’t afford to live in Orange County- 180 but they may not meet the level of poverty that you were thinking of. The other thing is you need somebody who 181 knows… Maybe if you’ve never owned a house before you don’t know how to fix a $400 repair, or how often to mow 182 the yard or what to plant, if you’ve never owned a house there’s so much you don’t know. So to have people that 183 maybe have been incorporated in the neighborhoods and then you don’t have the stigma. 184 185 Maxecine Mitchell: In our neighborhood we have had people purchase homes that didn’t come through the habitat 186 program but they still fell within the income guidelines for Orange County. They weren’t eligible to do the habitat 187 program but habitat took and sold homes back into the neighborhood. And we all get along real well. And most of our 188 homeowners are, like myself, starting up our own businesses now. So it depends but I do understand your concern 189 because Richmond Hill is a beacon in the neighborhood and I actually tried to sell a house and the designs of the 190 home were a concern… And I know you can’t go build something elaborate but… And then, like myself, I’m just 191 knowledgeable enough so I try to do some improvements, try to maintain my home to keep the value. Also, with 192 habitat homes we walk into there with some good equity, but they also had to put regulations because I also used to 193 work the empowerment doing affordable housing development and people would get those homes and they would 194 sell them if they didn’t put certain stipulations and restrictions on them. And so you end up still losing affordable 195 housing stock that you have. 196 197 Paul Guthrie: Let me ask a question. On the edges of our neighborhood there are smaller houses and much more 198 modest price range, 2 of those houses were listed 10 days ago. The first one sold in 24 hours and the second one 199 sold to the owner at a contract offer the same day the sign went up. And I’m suspicious at least one of the sales is a 200 flipper. Is one of the problems in maintaining a steady market of modest homes the fact that the more modest homes 201 get flipped in an attempt to raise their price? 202 203 Patricia Roberts: Sure, it’s on the open market. Someone can buy it… Say the house in that neighborhood is 204 $400,000 and the smaller ones are like $200,000, they go in and add granite, maybe stainless steel and they put 205 $25,000-$30,000 and then they sell it for $75,000 over what they paid for it and they’ve made a modest profit. Again, 206 that’s the American way. 207 208 Paul Guthrie- It may be the American way but I think we ought to think about that as you’re developing a strategy to 209 build a larger group of modest priced houses… If we’re sitting here and thinking about what are some of the 210 alternatives that might be used to stimulate availability of modest housing for people with modest incomes, we have 211 to look at all the pieces of the puzzle and not just that one narrow thing that isn’t enough and people don’t make 212 enough money to live in. We’ve got to look at the market, we’ve got to look at what’s going on from a larger policy 213 stand point, and then you can get a good, strong, long-term thing. Otherwise you’re going to spin your wheels for the 214 rest of your life. 215 Approved 8/3/2016 5 216 Patricia Roberts- I think another thing is that affordable housing has to include rentals. 217 218 Tony Blake: But by state law you can’t put a rent control or rent cap on anything. And so therefore Chapel Hill with an 219 almost zero vacancy rate is an artificially distorted rental market. And I brought a couple of little facts in here because 220 when I read this report one of the biggest missing pieces to me was the students. University of Chapel Hill has 221 29,135 students according to US News and World Report, 47 percent of those students live off campus. I went and 222 looked at the Carolina Demography site and it has really amazing… In North Carolina, statewide, poverty rate was 223 17.2 percent in the 2009-2011 ACS. Among college students living off campus 57 percent fell below the poverty line. 224 Statewide poverty rate declined 16.4 percent when off campus students were excluded from the poverty rates. They 225 go on to say Chapel Hill, home of UNC, had a poverty rate decline from 23.7 percent to 11.5 percent, the decrease of 226 12.2 percent was the largest among all North Carolina places examined in the study. That’s what’s missing to me 227 from this study, is the impact of students. 228 229 Audrey Spencer-Horsley- And students are excluded so when you look at the demographics that’s included, and 230 students were in fact one of the first things… The data takes the student numbers and takes that out of the 231 calculations… I’ll get you the data. It’s data that’s produced by HUD, that’s one of the very first things they do, and 232 that’s why we use the HUD data because we cannot serve students with our programs. But let me just say a few 233 things because you all have brought out several points. Regarding the students; that was one of the first things that I 234 talked to the non-profit community about and some of the advisory boards, I think there has to be a conversation with 235 the university. When you talk about the free market, I think to tell students, “You can’t live off campus”- to me that’s a 236 college or university policy but I think if you allowed that policy you are impacting the community. So how do you 237 compensate for that? I think it’s more adversely affecting your seniors and people at the lowest end of the spectrum. I 238 did some outreach so I talked to groups of seniors at the Seymour Center and at the Hasmor Center as well as just 239 residents. I went to some classes that the County offers and I went to different parts of the County talking to folks and 240 one of the consistent things is they feel like at this point seniors are not welcome and are being pushed out of the 241 County. And it’s not just because of the market taking over, that’s a big part of it but also they’re concerned about the 242 taxes. And with those 2 things it really doesn’t leave them anywhere to live in this County and they did talk about... 243 and they talked about it in particular relative to Chapel Hill and they said they feel like the County’s becoming one of 244 privilege and part of that in Chapel Hill and the neighboring is it’s an attractive community and it’s doing what the 245 market should do but I think the County along with the jurisdictions have to figure out how you strike the balance 246 between allowing students to live off campus and still have affordable housing for everybody else, if you want a 247 diverse community. That’s one side. I want to go back to the habitat homes. It depends on whom you’re talking to 248 and who you’re trying to reach, because many of the residents specifically ask about being able to own a habitat 249 home. So to a segment of the market, no, that’s not an option but it really wasn’t made for that segment of the 250 market. It was made for people who have limited incomes. It at least provides them an opportunity to become home 251 owners, and one of the things that I say to people who want to be upward mobile and I encourage that and we’re 252 trying to provide all the resources and support we can to allow people to be upward mobile. But that is really more on 253 the employment and job side, which is another issue that was discussed. So, it’s not just about the housing, it’s about 254 the neighborhood, it’s about access to opportunity, it’s about transportation so that you do have the opportunity to get 255 a better job or work 2 jobs if you desire, because you want that next house. And so there are pros and cons but one 256 of the primary reasons that keep habitat homes from being marketful is the restriction and the restriction is there 257 because of what Maxecine says. That’s the only way you can keep them affordable, so you don’t want putting public 258 investment or private investment in something that’s supposed to be affordable and then some flipper comes in and 259 takes advantage of that investment and makes big bucks and moves on, you still don’t have affordable housing and 260 you still have a problem in the community as far as having a range of housing to meet a range of incomes. That’s the 261 challenge of a community when you’re talking about inclusiveness and workforce housing is a part of that and I think 262 what this plan has tried to do is to talk about the range of housing. It’s to build a range of rentals. 263 264 Patricia Roberts- Neighborhoods need to be mixed. Just not all one size house and people do need to be able to sell 265 your house. Because if not you have put a millstone around our neck. Someone that needs to move out- like one that 266 Maxecine was trying to sell, those people have moved out but they’re stuck with a house payment but they’ve moved 267 on because they found another job somewhere else. You have to make sure that their houses are sellable. 268 269 Approved 8/3/2016 6 Maxecine Mitchell- Also, one of the things is they’re trying to have the people sell their house back to another low-270 income family. That’s what it’s designed for. So, for me, and I do agree with you, jobs do matter… But the desire is 271 for affordable housing to keep it within the affordable housing community. Not to go outside of that. Unfortunately, in 272 Carrboro they got bought up and they all turned on to students. All I saw was college students. What happened to the 273 families? Whether they were renting or owning they’re gone. And you’re not going to get them back. 274 275 Tony Blake: And the students move in where the transportation is and people who are in poverty need public 276 transportation to get to work. 277 278 Audrey Spencer-Horsley- And one of the things that was very clear, as I was talking to people that need the housing, 279 is transportation is king. And it’s almost synonymous with affordable housing and if you provide an affordable unit for 280 somebody that doesn’t have access to jobs or service you’re really locking them into poverty. 281 282 Lydia Wegman- Is the $5,000,000 going to be building housing in the towns or only in the County? 283 284 Audrey Spencer-Horsley- It’s intended to be Countywide; it’s not limited. Because the non-profits that are probably 285 going to be the primary developers work in the entire county. 286 287 Tony Blake: But you can’t really build the density you need without water and sewer, right? 288 289 Audrey Spencer-Horsley- Right, and that’s a challenge too. One of the things we’re looking at or we considered was 290 where there was infrastructure or where the infrastructure was planned. 291 292 Patricia Roberts: Because one of the problems with Chapel Hill and Carrboro is it takes so long to go through the 293 process. 294 295 Audrey Spencer-Horsley- And I heard that too. And I was at a meeting with the developers and that was their pet 296 peeve was that it takes too long and it costs money when you take that long. 297 298 Lydia Wegman- Audrey, with the $5,000,000 who is deciding where the non-profits are going to build? Is that up to 299 the non-profits? What’s the decision process? 300 301 Audrey Spencer-Horsley- Most of the non-profits have their own strategic plans and their pipeline of the type of 302 housing that they do, and the interesting thing that I found have their niches. Like Habitat primarily does home 303 ownership for low income persons, and then you have Community Home Trust that is a little higher end, it’s more of 304 what you would consider the workforce housing, and then you have those that do more of the rental housing that 305 serve the very lowest of income which is not much produced annually, and then you have somebody like Cossa 306 that’s kind of in the middle, that does have experience and has done larger developments but they don’t do as much 307 new construction large scale as large scale acquisitions. But to answer your question, one of the things that we will 308 be working with the Board and having public comment on is where the housing goes and looking at the design 309 criteria. And one of the things that the Board said is they don’t want impacted areas, for example. They don’t want 310 large developments where you’re going to have all of your low income in one place and we want to make sure that 311 they are designed standard, has universal design so that it could accommodate somebody that has a disability or a 312 senior that wants to age in place. Those are the kind of things we will be looking at. Then we will probably put out a 313 request for proposal and it will be based on a competitive process and who best needs and leveraging other funding. 314 315 Tony Blake: Yeah, the USDA has funding for this and funding to help people build businesses to provide 316 employment. But what’s your input on this place where Chapel Hill’s doing a 99 year lease on the land next to the old 317 cemetery down by Legion Road. I thought they were going to build affordable housing apartments there? 318 319 Audrey Spencer-Horsley- They’re initially doing 80 units and then they’re proposing to do 60 units. We have a little bit 320 of funding in that project already. 321 322 Kim Piracci- In this time and this place it seems like there’s very little student housing. 323 Approved 8/3/2016 7 324 Lisa Stuckey- And that’s true. When I went to NC State only freshmen were guaranteed student housing on campus. 325 With everyone else it was a lottery and maybe 10 percent got in. So the local community had to absorb the rest of 326 them. 327 328 Tony Blake: But the students definitely skew the statistics and I would recommend that you at least put a statement in 329 there about students because when I read it… 330 331 Kim Piracci- There are empty dorms? 332 333 Audrey Spencer-Horsley- There are empty dorms. 334 335 Tony Blake: There are a lot of empty dorms that UNC has said are too expensive to refurbish. The big one is down 336 near the Friday Center, it’s huge. 337 338 Lisa Stuckey: I know there was a policy because I was on the Carolina North Committee and there was a lot of 339 pressure on the University from the community, a bed for every head, and that if they were going to grow they were 340 going to build dorms. And they built them. 341 342 Audrey Spencer-Horsley- And I can tell you that I’ve talked to the faculty, I’ve talked to students that actually attended 343 the University and the dorms are not being utilized. 344 345 Lisa Stuckey: I think that’s a conversation that needs to take place because the University has said they’ve been very 346 supportive of having the kids live there. 347 348 Audrey Spencer-Horsley- And the policy is the first year they have to live on campus. The students want the 349 amenities… And if a group of students live together they can live cheaper than on campus. 350 351 Craig Benedict: What’s being discussed is supply and demand and the potential of upward mobility and mobility to 352 take that equity with you and do more. What’s happening with the students is there’s such a demand that the housing 353 prices go up and that diminishes the housing availability right there. And so it’s an uphill battle for that affordable 354 housing element, whether it’s workforce or lower, the market’s going to control that and it’s going to make it more and 355 more difficult. 356 357 Tony Blake: I’m all for paying taxes to have a pluralistic society and a diverse community and all of that. On the other 358 hand, I object to my taxes going to support the student whose parents are well off and able to afford dorm rooms. 359 360 Lydia Wegman: So I don’t understand the strategic plan. What is it, what role does it play? It seems to be identifying 361 land use as the key problem… The first 2 things are the overgrowth and exclusionary zoning practices. Those are the 362 2 things where you say yes, they’re impediments. But, from everything I’m hearing they’re far greater impediments 363 than the opportunity to build way out in the County where there’s no transportation, people can’t get to work easily 364 and the density issue doesn’t strike me as the main… So I’m expressing concerns of the strategic plans and how it 365 fits in with all the other things… 366 367 Audrey Spencer-Horsley- Those observations came out of the analysis of impediment. So, that’s looking at 368 something slightly different than affordable housing. That’s looking at fair housing. That’s looking at where land use 369 practices can discourage inclusive communities and so that’s where it’s coming from. The part about the rural buffer 370 doesn’t mean that the rural buffer isn’t a good thing because that’s a local decision. But it’s like anything; it has pros 371 and cons. If you’re going to have the rural buffer it’s just like Patricia was talking about the market. If you’re taking 372 certain land off the table.. what’s left you drive the price up on. So once again, it’s a supply and demand. So that’s 373 really what it’s speaking to. 374 375 ----- Just to throw this out, one of the problems that’s been discussed a whole lot in the town of Chapel Hill is the cost 376 of maintaining affordable housing. That’s been a really expensive, unexpected concern over the years. They bought 377 Approved 8/3/2016 8 affordable housing units but then the folks that live in them can’t afford to maintain them. And it’s really become a 378 huge issue. 379 380 Audrey Spencer-Horsley- Well again, it’s not a simple answer but if I got a choice between me and my family living 381 out here on the street I’m going to live in a cruddy house. And I would encourage anybody that dares to go to one of 382 those mobile home parks, you can see.. I said to me when I first moved here and everyday it killed me to ride up and 383 down 85 and look over into the mobile home park and look into the conditions. I said, “ How can people just pretend 384 that this doesn’t exist?” and I was just looking at it from the outside in but I talked to some of the people there and 385 one of the things that they talked about is not having sanitary sewer and they were saying how the smell in the 386 summer is nauseating. And sometimes they have to leave because you can’t even bear the smell, and the owners 387 are taking advantage of the fact those people have nowhere to go. That’s the part that sickens me the most because 388 those people, they’ve shown me some of the documentation. They’re getting letters like you own $4,000 for water 389 and we’ll set up a monthly payment plan for you. They brought me some of their documents. 390 391 Tony Blake: More than that, I was a volunteer firefighter and first responder in the rural county and I can tell you that 392 a lot of these trailers are old, they’ve passed the number of duty cycles they should have and they’re fire traps. 393 There’s something call the burn belt in North Carolina and it is primarily focused on trailers that are older than a 394 certain vintage and they have old aluminum wiring and they catch fire very easily. It’s something else that’s got to be 395 done. It’s a public safety problem. 396 397 Lydia Wegman: So let me ask you one more thing Audrey… Is there anything that the Planning Board can provide to 398 you? Should we have a continuing dialogue? What…? 399 400 Audrey Spencer-Horsley- Absolutely, a continuing dialogue. One of the things that the staff here provided was some 401 of the existing standards that are allowed that I know in other communities I’ve worked for have been very 402 controversially so it’s amazing to me that some of the things are… Which I think is great. Then, I’m wondering… Do 403 people really know, and so how well, and do you all have a problem letting people know that there is the opportunity 404 to do some… Like the accessory unit, and other types of housing. And so how comfortable are you, I would assume 405 that if it’s here that it’s something that you would want people to take advantage of? 406 407 Craig Benedict: There are some things that are ongoing. We’ve made some changes already with allowing more 408 people related by blood living in one house, co-housing opportunities, allow people to have a little more affordable 409 option. We’re going to take a look at what Michael’s working on. Kind of like a tiny home. We have existing density 410 bonuses now for affordable housing, but people haven’t used them. We’re going to analyze it to see why doesn’t the 411 private sector think it’s feasible. In the past we haven’t had the water and sewer within our planning jurisdiction make 412 work but now we do. Most likely, I think the mind set a lot for affordable housing over my 10 year here has been 413 single family. And I think it has to move to a multi-family, whether it’s multi-family ownership or multi-family rental, to 414 get those densities to where they can be. 415 416 Lydia Wegman: So based on what Audrey’s saying it sounds as though it will be helpful if we could make some effort 417 to inform people about these additional uses and some of the additional uses that you were thinking about. 418 419 Craig Benedict: And I think what we’ll set up is, in maybe 2 or 3 months from now, a little review committee that will 420 just have a little work session for us to talk about… 421 422 423 AGENDA ITEM 11: ADJOURNMENT 424 425 Motion to adjourn made by Patricia Roberts. 426 ___________________________________________ Lydia N. Wegman, Chair