Committee Report CR-2
The Housing Committee held a public meeting on April 2, 2008 beginning at four o’clock and five minutes P.M. in the Sullivan Chamber. The meeting was held for the purpose of a follow-up discussion of the issues raised at the City Council Roundtable discussion on housing on March 5, 2008 and a discussion of the committee agenda for the term.
Present at the meeting were Councillor Sam Seidel, Chair of the Committee, Mayor E. Denise Simmons, Councillor Henrietta Davis, Councillor Craig Kelley, Councillor Kenneth E. Reeves and City Clerk Margaret Drury. Also present were Beth Rubenstein, Assistant City Manager for Community Development, Carol Glazer, Deputy Director for the Community Development Department (CDD), Christopher Cotter, Housing Director of Housing, CDD, Cassandra Arnaud, Housing Planner, CDD.
Mayor Simmons said that the first thing that the City Council needs to decide whether Cambridge has a housing policy or not. If not, Cambridge needs to develop a housing policy. Cambridge should have larger affordable housing units. The criteria used to qualify applicants for affordable housing is confusing.
Councillor Reeves said that he believes that Cambridge does have a housing policy and that part of that policy is a preference for using affordable housing resources for family housing. Mayor Simmons said that she would call that a practice not a policy.
Councillor Reeves said that he too has been pushing for larger units for families, but there is information from the housing professionals that the demand among Cambridge residents is for smaller units.
Councillor Davis asked whether anyone had seen the recent article in the New York Times about the increasing demand for family housing in New York City. She emphasized the importance of looking at demographics. She also noted that sometimes when we talk about affordable housing, we are talking about subsidized housing, affordable to low and moderate income housing, but other times, we are talking about housing that is affordable to families who make too much money to qualify for subsidized housing. Cambridge needs more housing for families for all income levels.
Councillor Davis also said that she believes that Cambridge should build larger units for families even if that means that the units will go to families who do not currently live in Cambridge. She also would like to see the Cambridge Housing Authority (CHA) criteria of using “local connections” to extend the local preference beyond just current Cambridge residents.
Councillor Seidel requested that Ms. Rubenstein outline the underlying policy principles embedded in the previous discussion. Ms. Rubenstein said that at the March 5, 2008 housing roundtable discussion, the CHA reported that the waiting list for family housing is comprised predominantly of families needing one or two bedroom units. If the CHA builds three- and four-bedroom units, they will be filled by families, but those families will not be current Cambridge residents. Similarly, the housing developments financed by the Affordable Housing Trust currently use a strict Cambridge resident local preference. Building additional larger units and utilizing a less restrictive “Cambridge connection (former Cambridge residents, current Cambridge employment, etc.)” criteria would mean that families who are not currently Cambridge residents would occupy some of these units. That is a policy decision for which the CDD staff would like City Council input.
Councillor Kelley said that there seems to be a feeling that parents leave Cambridge because of the cost of housing; however, in the survey of why former public school parents left Cambridge, housing was not even one of the top three reasons. Parents left because of the school system. It is not necessarily true that building bigger affordable will keep families in Cambridge. Councillor Kelley added that the Council cannot talk about affordable housing without talking about density. The City cannot just put all of the affordable housing density into the neighborhoods. His concern with density is the increased cars that come with it. He does not have a problem with density if it doesn’t mean additional cars. He is very interested in the arrangement that Harvard has with the City with regard to the Riverside student housing, in which no parking permits will be provided for residents of that housing. Councillor Kelley also noted that with regard to changing the inclusionary zoning to allow for larger affordable family units in private developments with mostly one-and two-bedroom units, residents of the smaller units may not necessarily want to see a family of five move in down the hall.
Councillor Davis said that she would like to see more discussion about the possibility of allowing owners of single family buildings to create “granny units” within the building envelope.
Ms. Rubenstein said there are several possibilities that could be explored. For example, perhaps a large single-family house could be modified to create a subsidized.
Councillor Seidel returned the discussion to the question of the City’s housing policy. Councillor Reeves said that there are several guiding principles. One is long-term affordability. Another is that homeownership units are always limited equity units. For him, this is an issue, because the equity limitation forecloses the opportunity to build up wealth. Similarly, owners cannot rent their units, and if the owner dies, the family may have to move out.
Mr. Cotter said that these restrictions represent the balancing required in committing large amounts of public funds to the production of homeownership units. Without the equity restrictions, the units would cease to be affordable after the first owner sells his or her unit. The owner gets an affordable price, a return on his or her down payment and capital improvements with interest calculated in accord with U.S. Treasury Bills, and the income tax deductions available to homeowners. If the homeowner dies and the heirs have an income that qualifies them for access to subsidized housing, then they do not have to move. The problem comes if the heirs have an income that is too high to qualify for the subsidy.
Mayor Simmons said that perhaps the need is for the City to be extremely clear in telling these homeowners that for owners who want to accumulate wealth by building equity, they need to see the City’s limited equity homeownership as just a step to their final goal. Their next step would be to sell the limited equity back to the City and buy a market rate home.
Councillor Seidel asked the staff what assistance they would like to see the Housing Committee provide. Mr. Cotter said that he would welcome a discussion with the committee on the Council’s priority for family housing with a chance to talk about the implications and ramifications of particular interpretations and implementations. He also said that with regard to the criteria used to qualify applicants for affordable housing, he would like to have a discussion with the committee about the different ways that the local preference can be interpreted, and what policy implications those differences may present. Mr. Cotter also distributed a chart showing affordable housing distribution by neighborhood (
The committee then moved to a discussion of the chart on neighborhood distribution of affordable housing. Councillor Reeves said that the area beside the Manning Building in Central Square might be improved by additional density. He said that he would like the Housing Committee to look at where there could be additional housing with additional density in areas close to the MBTA stations.
Councillor Seidel then asked the members of the Council what they would choose, if they absolutely had to choose, their one greatest housing concern or priority. Their answers were as follow:
Councillor Reeves said that the Cambridge City Council has set affordable housing as its highest priority. He would like to hear from staff on how and where Cambridge could mass housing near transit areas because these are the places where density makes good sense. He also said that he would like to know how Cambridge can prevent North Point housing from being all one- and two-bedroom units.
Ms. Rubenstein said that members of the Planning Board were very interested in the discussion at the roundtable meeting of how to encourage units with more bedrooms. Councillor Reeves said that he knows that there are members of the development committee who would like to have discussions with policy makers about what could be different. Ms. Rubenstein said that there might be ways to provide incentives for creating units for larger families. She cautioned however, that building larger market rate units may mean that they will be mostly occupied by higher income couples who want two dens and then the family with children that could afford a two bedroom unit will have a harder time fining one.
Councillor Davis requested that the Cambridge Housing Authority be invited to send a representative to Housing Committee meetings on affordable housing for families and other relevant topics.
Cheryl-Ann Pizza-Zeoli, board member, CEOC, asked whether the chart of affordable housing includes expiring use housing. Mr. Cotter replied that expiring use housing is not included. Ms. Pizza-Zeoli encouraged the City to plan ahead with regard to the buildings in which the requirement for affordable housing use will be expiring in the next few years. She said that a group convened by CHAP A on this topic meets regularly. She also noted that the Cambridge Housing Authority is developing a new ten-year master plan that will require a lot of decisions.
Councillor Davis said that she would like to have a list/chart that includes affordable housing and other affordable housing. She would like to know the total amount of affordable housing in Cambridge.
Councillor Seidel thanked all those present for their attendance. He said that he would create a list of the topics and request that members of the committee prioritize them, and that there would be another meeting in approximately a month.