Lloyd lacks affordable housing

Posted 12/12/18

An investigation by the Southern Ulster Times shows that the Town of Lloyd has failed to require developers to provide Affordable Housing for moderate income families in portions of their residential …

This item is available in full to subscribers.

Please log in to continue

Log in

Lloyd lacks affordable housing

Posted
An investigation by the Southern Ulster Times shows that the Town of Lloyd has failed to require developers to provide Affordable Housing for moderate income families in portions of their residential projects as is mandated in Chapter 100-36 of the Town Code. A Freedom of Information Law request filed by the Southern Ulster Times reveals there are no affordable housing units in the town nor are there any records held by the Supervisor, the Planning Board, the Building Department, the Assessor, councilpersons Claire Winslow or Joe Mazzetti to show that developers have had to meet the Affordable Housing provisions in the code. The Code requires that 10% of the total number of residential units or lots of a project must be set aside for Affordable Housing. The record shows that developers of the recently approved Trail View Place or in the nearly completed High Bridge apartment complex do not have affordable units within their projects. Building Department Director Dave Barton said he has reminded the developers of Mountainside Woods and the Dollar General/Housing project of their responsibility to provide Affordable Housing. Whether these later two projects will comply is not known at this time. The code provision offers a rationale on the importance of affordability to a growing community. “The purpose of this section is to enhance the public health, safety, and welfare by promoting high-quality, moderately priced housing located in neighborhoods throughout the community for households of moderate-income levels in order to meet the Town’s goal, as expressed in the Town’s Comprehensive Plan, of preserving and promoting a culturally and economically diverse population in the Town, and to meet existing and anticipated future employment and volunteer needs in the Town.” As part of the approval process, developers must submit a detailed Affordable Housing plan to the Planning Board that includes such items as a description of their project, the total number of market rate units or lots, the square footage and number of bedrooms in each affordable unit, the occupancy status and the pricing of each affordable unit or lot, to name a few of the key provisions in the code. The code also specifies that sales or rentals run in perpetuity and do not drop off should an owner sell their home or a renter move. The code points out that the Town Board may supervise the Affordable Housing requirements or they may appoint a Housing Administrator (which the town has not done) to ensure that the requirements are met by the developer. Either way, a Certificate of Occupancy is not supposed to be issued without the developer submitting to the town verified sales/rentals prices of its units to confirm that they have met the code’s requirements. The town, in turn, must maintain an edibility priority list and annually certify and re-certify applicants for Affordable Housing. There are no town records to show that any of these provisions have ever been followed. A verbal exchange on September 22, 2016 between then Planning Board member Peter Brooks with Tremont Hall/High Bridge project representative Patti Brooks (no relation), shows the failure of the Planning Board to enforce the code. Peter: Any plans for affordable housing? Patti: Not to the best of my knowledge. Peter: Our code does encourage affordable housing. Patti: It does, this is proposed to be market rate housing. Brooks then drops this line of inquiry without mentioning that developers are required, not just “encouraged,” to provide Affordable Housing in Lloyd. He acknowledged this oversight last week, saying, “frankly I think at the time I wasn’t that thoughtfully involved in exactly how it’s supposed to work. It looks as though the process by which the Planning Board should operate and even more so, a process by which the town should manage it after it’s been approved, I’m not sure that is even happening.” Barton informed the Planning Board that he will review this issue with the town’s attorney and their land use attorney. “We’ve already gone fairly deep into this hole and we are sort of unpacking it,” Barton said. “You can’t go back on an approval and I don’t have actual judicial authority to oppose that stuff on an approval that has already occurred. Whenever you vote, you create law and I enforce that piece. So the real answer is, we’re working on it.” Barton, however, did not cite any legal case or opinion that states a town cannot go back to require Affordable Housing in an already approved project. He also said that the town’s land use attorneys may be forthcoming with more documents and records from years past that deal with any possible waivers or agreements that could have been given to developers to exempt them from the requirements of the Affordable Housing statutes. Barton said that presently in Ulster County, under the Affordable Housing statutes, a family of four, with an income under the median county income of $58,794, qualifies for a two bedroom apartment, with a payment of $1,469 per month in rent, which includes taxes and utilities. Brooks, now Planning Board Chairman, described the town’s Affordable Housing code as a, “bear to administer,” especially the requirement that once a unit is purchased or rented, the affordable aspect follows the unit, “for the rest of all time.” Planning Board member Scott McCarthy said Councilman Joe Mazzetti is right to point out that many of the provisions in the code are ambiguous and should be revised, “to get some meat on them so we can bite into them and make them right and work with them.” Chairman Brooks, however, said the Affordable Housing code is, “not ambiguous, it’s drastically specific.” Barton said there is, “no teeth in the law and no remedy” when it comes to the Affordable Housing code. He asked what happens if a developer sells a designated affordable unit for more than is allowed. “What’s the violation; there is no remedy in the law,” he said, “The affordable statue is a terrible law the way it is written now. It’s onerous, it’s an extra level of government. I don’t want to do it and it’s a nightmare of paperwork and tracking.” Barton predicted that the appointment of a Housing Administrator might force the town to create a small department to keep track of all the affordable units and related paperwork, placing even more pressure upon the town’s annual operating budget. “It’s much more complicated than any other piece of government that I know of that we have now,” he said. Supervisor Paul Hansut said the Affordable Housing requirement is part of the overall site plan approval process at the Planning Board stage. He said he is waiting to see what the town’s land use attorney has to say and would also like the Planning Board to weigh in on this issue. “I definitely think there’s got to be some further review of it and in the first of the year we’ll start looking at it again,” he said.

By Mark Reynolds mreynolds@tcnewspapers.com