REPORT OF THE BLUE RIBBON
COMMISSION TO STUDY AFFORDABLE HOUSING
February __, 2000
Page 1
SUMMARY
Commission
Charge
COMMISSION ADMINISTRATION AND PROCESS
Membership
(Attachment 2: Commission Membership List)
Subcommittees
(Attachments 3-6: Subcommittee Reports)
Administrative
Support
RECOMMENDATIONS
PROMOTING HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES THROUGH ZONING
a. The
model regulations must encompass the essential elements that are needed to
ensure that the requirements and intent of CGS 8-2’s provision regarding
housing opportunities are adhered to, as definition of terms, affordability
plan, enforcement mechanism, covenants or deed restrictions, and procedural
matters the statutes requires.
b. The
model regulations must not dictate design and density requirements.
c. The
model regulations should state that municipalities that adopt them will be
presumed to have workable procedural rules for affordable housing
administration and enforcement.
2. Require each towns to adopt by a 2002 zoning regulations that encourage housing opportunities for multi-family dwelling and that promote housing choice and economic opportunity for low- and moderate-income households.
CHANGES REGARDING THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING LAND USE APPEALS PROCEDURE
1. Increase
from 25% to 30% the percentage of affordable units needed to constitute a
set-aside project under CGS 8-30g.
2. Increase
from 10% to 15% the percentage of units in a set-aside project that must be
sold or rented to persons or families whose income is less than or equal to 60%
of the lesser of the state or the area median income.
3. Require
that no rental unit at the 60% affordability level in a set-aside project shall
be priced higher than the lesser of the maximum rent level currently allowed or
100% of the HUD-determined fair market rent for the area.
4. Require
that no rental unit at the 80% affordability level in a set-aside development
shall be priced higher than the lesser of the maximum rent level currently
allowed or 120% of the HUD-determined fair market rent for the area.
5. Prohibit
the owner of a set-aside project from imposing maximum percentage of income
requirements on tenants receiving governmental rental assistance that are more
restrictive than those permitted under the program providing the assistance.
6. Extend
from at least 30 years to at least 50 years from initial occupancy the period
during which non-assisted affordable units in a set-aside project must be
subject to covenants or deed restrictions.
a. the
total number of units to be developed;
b. how
they will be arranged on the proposed site; and
c. the
roads, traffic circulation, sewage disposal, and water supply.
a. The
person or organization responsible for administering the plan, including
complying with income limits and sale or rental restrictions during the period
specified in the covenants or deed restrictions place on the affordable unit.
a. Affirmative
fair marketing procedures governing the sale or rental of the units.
b. An
example of how the sale or rental prices of the affordable units will be
calculated.
c. A
description of the sequence in which the affordable units will be built and
offered for occupancy and the general location of these units within the
proposed development.
a. Establish
criteria for preparing an affordability plan.
b. Develop
a formula for determining rent levels and sale prices, including maximum
allowable down payments in the calculation of maximum allowable sales prices.
c. Clarify
the costs that are to be included when calculating maximum allowed rents
and home sale prices.
d. Clarify
how family size and bedroom counts are to be equated when establishing maximum
rental and home sale prices for the affordable units.
a. Require
the commission to determine the date of receipt of the modified application the
same way it determined the date for the original application.
b. Require
the commission to hold a public hearing on a modified application only if it
held a hearing on the original application; otherwise allow the commission to
hold the hearing at its discretion.
c. Extend
the time period during which the commission must decided the modification (or
modified application) from within 45 days to within 65 days after its
receipt.
d. If
the inland wetlands agency must act on the modification before the commission,
the commission has up to 35 days from after that the wetlands agency acted to
decide modification.
Change the provisions in CGS § 8-30g providing moratoria on affordable housing appeals as follows:
1. Increase the time period for a moratorium on affordable housing project appeals from one to three years.
2. Towns qualify for the moratorium they earn housing unit-equivalent points that equal 2% of the total housing units reported in the latest U.S. census or 75 unit-equivalent points.
3. Units will receive points based according to the following schedule:
|
Unit |
Points |
|
Market-rate units
in a set-aside project |
0.25 |
|
Family* ownership
units at or below 80% median income |
1.00 |
|
Family ownership
units at or below 60% median income |
1.50 |
|
Family ownership
units at or below 40% median income |
2.00 |
|
Family rental
units at or below 80% median income |
1.50 |
|
Family rental
units at or below 60% median income |
2.00 |
|
Family rental
units at or below 40% median income |
2.50 |
|
Elderly
income-restricted units |
0.50 |
*Family units are those for which no age restrictions have been imposed.
4. Units count toward the moratorium threshold when they receive their certificates of occupancy or when newly implemented long-term deed restrictions on already existing housing take effect.
5. Points would be earned toward a moratorium net of demolition and net of actions that decrease and/or eliminate affordability.
6. Moratoria do not apply to proposed projects receiving government funds if 100% of the units are at the 60% affordability level. But each unit in these projects earns points according to the schedule above and counts toward subsequent moratoria.
7. Moratoria do not apply to projects receiving government funds to build 40 units or less.
State Incentives to Towns where Affordable Housing was built
1. The state should create an Affordable Housing Fund to reward towns where new affordable housing was built. It should allocate the funds based on the housing unit equivalent schedule used to determine a town’s eligibility for a moratorium.
2. Towns where the number of affordable units increases by 2% of the total housing stock receive priority for open space funds.
3. The state will provide increased technical to towns that want to build affordable housing but do not have the staff to draft the plans.
Restore Capital Financing for Developing and Rehabilitating Affordable Housing
a. Affirmatively further racial and economic
integration, including expanding multi-family rental housing opportunities in
suburban and rural communities.
b. Provide
for the revitalization of urban neighborhoods, including expanding
homeownership and increasing multi-family rehabilitation in the central cities.
c. Provide
a full range of supportive housing options for people with special needs or who
are at risk of becoming homeless.
a. Establishing
principles for operating these programs and holding them accountable.
b. Providing
a full range of financing tools, including low-interest loans and grants that
can be used for construction, gap, and long-term financing.
c. Using
nonprofit, community-oriented organizations to implement the programs and
funding community loan funds.
d. Facilitating
public-private partnerships and using state funds to leverage private dollars.
e. Providing
one, simple point for applying to housing assistance programs.
a. Funding
local planning initiatives.
b. Building
on state and federal processes such as continuum of care, enterprise
communities, and neighborhood revitalization zones.
c. Annually
funding training and technical assistance for nonprofit development
organizations, allowing them to build the capacity to develop and manage
housing.
a. Make
sure that state development deals specify wage and benefit and hour
requirements.
b. Require
that that as many jobs as possible be full-time.
c. Insure
that workers can form a union in a simplified manner and free of employer
resistance.
1. The
state should appropriate funds for the full range of services needed to assure
that the housing market functions fairly and efficiently, and that families and
individuals succeed in their housing.
The table below lists the services and the annual appropriation:
Service
|
Annual Appropriation
|
|
Increase fair
housing enforcement and discrimination testing |
$1,000,000 |
|
Increase mobility
counseling fund |
300,000 |
|
Double
landlord-tenant mediation funding |
800,000 |
|
Double rent bank
funding |
1,500,000 |
|
Supportive
Housing Pilot Initiative* |
2,000,000 |
|
Capacity building
for nonprofit developers |
1,000,000 |
|
Community-based planning |
500,000 |
|
Beyond Shelter
(follow-up services for homeless people |
1,000,000 |
|
Pre and Post
Homeownership Counseling Programs (six programs) |
450,000 |
*The $2 million for the program is to
leverage $8 million from federal and other sources.
a. Repeal
CGS § 8-70a, which creates a pilot program for selling or leasing moderate
rental housing projects.
b. Provide
flexible one-for-one replacement requirements.
c. Provide
operating support for state-assisted public housing so that rents do not exceed
30% of residents’ incomes.
d. Require
grievance procedure and tenant participation mechanisms in state-assisted
public housing and appropriate state dollars to support tenant organizations.
a. Add
fair housing analysis to the existing site selection decision making.
b. Establish
development funding set-asides for housing initiatives in towns that are not
exempted from the affordable housing land use appeals procedure.