I was surprised that Matt Kelly said this doesn't help city's goals for affordable housing. Would like to hear more about his reasoning. (I've seen him speak on the topic at a candidate forum.)
In a presentation to the Canal Quarter Neighborhood back in February the developer noted the cost of the Mary's Landing units in the $600,000.00 range. As I have said, just building more housing does not bring affordability.
Thanks Matt for taking the time to spot the comment and reply. And needless to say, for being a part of FXBG Advance.
Yes, this point would have been a welcome addition in the story (ahem.) That said: I don't think the complainants are arguing against the price point. Would they be ok if it was $400k units?
Would your position change if the prices were more affordable, or are your other concerns more germane?
I should start by saying I do read FXBG Advance but I am not part of it.
We can't arbitrarily set price points. Having a little idea of what was paid for the land, cost of construction, and the current market conditions precludes that kind of discussion. As I have said, and confirmed in the regional affordable housing plan done back in 2010 and confirmed in the most recent study, affordability will require subsidies such as reduced construction fees, tax breaks, etc. That will require a robust community discussion but unfortunately there has been little interest in having it.
As for the project itself. It exceed the density per the Creative Makers District. By the city's Unified Development Ordinance to consider additional density the criteria is, 1) Application proposes the restoration of a character structure; 2) Application proposes a mixed-use development; 3) Application proposes high quality open space or exceeds the general or formal open space required. The project doesn't meet any of those criteria. Then the developer is asking for exceptions for minimum lot size, proposes minimal side yard setbacks, and the list goes on. It is a (3) story townhouse project surrounded by one and one and a half story homes in our unique downtown. There are places for this kind of project in the city but not here.
The biggest issue is having the option to have a public or administrative review of the Mary’s Landing project the city choose to exclude the public process. Is this how development is going to be handled in the future?
I was surprised that Matt Kelly said this doesn't help city's goals for affordable housing. Would like to hear more about his reasoning. (I've seen him speak on the topic at a candidate forum.)
In a presentation to the Canal Quarter Neighborhood back in February the developer noted the cost of the Mary's Landing units in the $600,000.00 range. As I have said, just building more housing does not bring affordability.
Thanks Matt for taking the time to spot the comment and reply. And needless to say, for being a part of FXBG Advance.
Yes, this point would have been a welcome addition in the story (ahem.) That said: I don't think the complainants are arguing against the price point. Would they be ok if it was $400k units?
Would your position change if the prices were more affordable, or are your other concerns more germane?
I should start by saying I do read FXBG Advance but I am not part of it.
We can't arbitrarily set price points. Having a little idea of what was paid for the land, cost of construction, and the current market conditions precludes that kind of discussion. As I have said, and confirmed in the regional affordable housing plan done back in 2010 and confirmed in the most recent study, affordability will require subsidies such as reduced construction fees, tax breaks, etc. That will require a robust community discussion but unfortunately there has been little interest in having it.
As for the project itself. It exceed the density per the Creative Makers District. By the city's Unified Development Ordinance to consider additional density the criteria is, 1) Application proposes the restoration of a character structure; 2) Application proposes a mixed-use development; 3) Application proposes high quality open space or exceeds the general or formal open space required. The project doesn't meet any of those criteria. Then the developer is asking for exceptions for minimum lot size, proposes minimal side yard setbacks, and the list goes on. It is a (3) story townhouse project surrounded by one and one and a half story homes in our unique downtown. There are places for this kind of project in the city but not here.
The biggest issue is having the option to have a public or administrative review of the Mary’s Landing project the city choose to exclude the public process. Is this how development is going to be handled in the future?