Q&A
Discussion on affordability requirements in low-density proposals
3:34:11
·
109 sec
Council Member Hanif inquires about the absence of affordability requirements in low-density proposals, and Chair Garodnick explains the reasoning behind this decision. The discussion centers on the potential impacts of mandating affordability in these areas.
- Garodnick cites concerns that mandates might impede the construction of 'missing middle' housing
- He explains that these units tend to be more affordable due to lower construction costs
- The chair also mentions the potential for new opportunities for HPD and non-profit developers, as well as the use of the 485x tax incentive
- Concerns about hindering homeownership opportunities are also raised as a reason for not including affordability mandates
Shahana Hanif
3:34:11
Going into my questions, I've heard concerns that there are no affordability requirements in any of the low density proposals.
3:34:18
Why was this left out?
3:34:19
And is DCP looking at ways to add affordability incentives to proposals like the town center Sony.
Daniel Garodnick
3:34:27
Yeah.
3:34:28
Thank you for the question and thank you for your comments about the proposal.
3:34:30
We agree this is an urgent moment and we should be taking action here and appreciate your leadership.
3:34:37
We did not create a mandate for affordable in the transit oriented development and town center proposals for a couple reasons.
3:34:45
First, the lower cost missing middle type housing that would be enabled by those proposals tends to be more affordable as a matter, of course.
3:34:57
They're low less expensive to build and end up being more affordable for more people.
3:35:02
We were concerned by the possibility that adding a mandate would actually impede the ability for those units to be built in the first instance.
3:35:13
We knew that new multifamily opportunities through Town Center And Transit oriented Development themselves, even without the mandate, would create new opportunities for HPD, also for not for profit developers.
3:35:28
And new multifamily would inevitably use 485x, which also has its own affordability mandates.
3:35:35
And then the last thing is an important point here that having some opportunities for homeownership in these buildings, which we know is an important priority for the council and also something that's important to us, we were concerned that an affordability mandate might actually push those buildings to rental as opposed to the possibility of homeownership.
3:35:57
So those were the reasons
Lynn C. Schulman
3:35:58
Got it.
Daniel Garodnick
3:35:59
We we took the steps.
3:36:00
We
