I asked BOA President Scott Lennon about the anticipated schedule for the Land Use and full board votes on Austin Street. I also wanted to make sure it didn’t have to go through any other committees such as Finance.
His answer follows:
“Austin Street is just in Land Use. We have a few more working sessions (10/29; 11/10; 11/12) scheduled and then we get it to the full Board. We are trying get a vote one way or another by 12/31. This is NOT etched in stone and if we need to add a working session or two we can/will. We have other non-Austin Street petitions too and you need to be fair to those petitioners as well. We do want to work within the full Board schedule though….”
According to City Clerk David Olson, if the board doesn’t vote this calendar year, the special permit request does not carry over to the new board. It would have to be withdrawn and refiled to start again.
I probably should have used the headline, “Austin Street Project might need to be refilled next year.” That might have sparked some conversation.
Or how about “Vote to import poor people could face delay” 🙂
What ever happened to the Firemen, Police Officers, Teachers. I thought it was for them too?
@Greg,
You seem very knowledgable about the affordable program.
You mentioned about importing poor people.
It got me thinking – How many of the affordable units will be made available to current residents of Newton?
@Simon: I do not know if our anti discrimination laws allows restricting rentals (or sales for that matter) to established residents or job titles. I doubt it, but I really don’t know.
But personally I would find such a restriction objectionable. After all, we were all “imports” at some point.
My understanding from ten year ago is that some cities reserve affordable units for city employees. To me, this seems a disaster waiting to happen. Besides being arbitrary, it is ripe for favoritism and self-dealing.
70% of the affordable units can designated for Newton residents.
Jeffrey,
(By the way, you owe me a phone call, you said you’d call me when you were leaving the forum Sunday night…I couldn’t find your number on line. My number is 617-795-7076 and my email is [email protected], lets talk).
Jeff, the logic of reserving units for city employees is that people feel that if the city employee lives in the city they work, they will have pride in their work, therefore, making the employee a better worker. Some cities, like Boston, only employ fellow Bostonians.
Tom, I will call/email. Thanks.
It seems odd that the number of units to be allocated to Newton Residents hasn’t been discussed. Who gets to decide?
@ Rev Howard. My understanding is that Newton residents are exactly like the other residents of the Lower Income Area (from Brighton to Everett to…?) and take their chances at the lottery, by law. There is no guarantee that the affordable units will be for Newton residents. In fact, it is illegal to designate an affordable unit for a specific person. That’s what I remember.
Isabelle, reading the information online from the Newton Planning and Development Dept. regarding Austin Street it states that “70% of the affordable units can be designated to Newton residents. I will try to find the exact document were I got this information and post it on this blog.
Isabelle, if you go to the Austin Street Partnets website under frequently asked questions you will find this statement “70% of the affordable units may be set aside for Newton residents”. This is confirmed in the Planning Departments information on the proposal.
I don’t mean to hijack the thread but if you move to Newton (no matter what your income), aren’t you a Newton resident?
Can someone remind me how much the affordable units will cost to buy or rent + how many bedrooms they are including square footage.
I’m trying to see how affordable they really are.
Perhaps my thinking is too simplistic, but I thought that the purpose of the affordable units was to offer housing opportunity to people who otherwise could not afford to live in Newton. If 70% of the 17 affordable units (= 11 or 12 units) are indeed set aside for people already residing in Newton, then these units are not for people who cannot afford to live in Newton. Only the remaining 5 or 6 units would be used to welcome people who otherwise could not afford to live in Newton.
What is the rationale for reserving 70% of these units for current Newton residents?
I’m not an expert on this by any means, but my understanding has always been that there is a distinction between affordable housing and low income housing.
Affordable housing is based on rates set according to median income and is designed to help reduce the cost burden, so what is “affordable” in a city like Newton would be different than in a city like Boston. The rates are set based on the median income of the city and designed to keep housing from becoming a burdensome portion of a household’s income.
Housing may also be eligible for subsidies or section 8 vouchers, but I’m not sure how that plays into the equation and system.
So forgive me if I am wrong here. The local businesses are against the development due to parking concerns (before and after). Many people are for the project due to the affordable units. But we don’t know who we are building them for? Surely not?
Simon, first of all I’m not sure any business has called out the post construction parking concerns (and certainly not all the local businesses). As for the affordable housing, as has been discussed on quite a few threads, the question is how low are the rents and if they get reserved at all for Newton residents. Frankly, while I’d prefer some percentage get reserved, the key fact for me is that the rent is affordable and will assist 17 families/couples/individuals to live in Newton or continue to live in Newton.
For the record, the details of the affordable housing will surely come out in full as the special permit is approved, but the parameters are set (i.e. we know the number of units and the general rent amounts).That is what is important for those of us who care about the affordability, and we can continue to advocate for even better terms with the developer on the margins.
Chuck, I think it depends on whether the city is holding them to a 40B standard or some other standard. I believe ASP is clarifying the afforability numbers in their next FAQ to the Board.
Maximum allowable rents for 2015 for deed restricted apartments are $1,307 for a one-BR and $1,568 for a two-BR including utilities and at the ASP project it includes 1 parking space.
Rent can be no more than 30% of income to qualify for Affordable Housing. At 80% AMI that includes Newton a qualifying 1 person maximum income is $48,800, 2 person is $55,800. So while I would be happier with rents established at a lower percentage of AMI, they are still affordable to many.
I don’t know about the 70% Newton residents but I’m not sure that is accurate. It could be on the earlier proposal as a “may” that is not doable like the percentage of market rate units proposed to cost less with the city’s subsidy. I haven’t checked it out today so I, of course, may be wrong.
Market rate units are currently projected to be $2,370-$2,820 for a one-BR and $2,950-$3,450 for a two-BR, including one parking space or if separated rent could be $150 less without a parking space. Of course the project is projected to start construction in spring, 2017, unless the Austin Street infrastructure improvement can finish earlier, then they would like to start n fall, 2016 so their rent will depend on the market then.
@Bruce: You touch on a very important fact that is misunderstood by many. Many supporters appear to believe that the proposed “affordable” units at Austin Street are intended to be offered to those who otherwise would not be able to afford to live in Newton. However, contractually, this is not the case. Rather, the “affordable” units would be offered to individuals or families that earn 80% of Newton’s AMI. In other words, the “affordable” units at Austin Street are intended for a family of four that makes a yearly income of $78,800 or an individual who earns $55,150 per year. Effectively, what this means is that the City is working with a private developer to subsidize housing for individuals or families who are already doing pretty well. In fact, the average Massachusetts individual or family would not qualify for the “affordable” units at Austin Street. And for the record, ASP has been inconsistent in the numbers it has put forward, which has created significant confusion regarding the facts.
@Chuck: It’s very important to understand how Section 8 or other vouchers plays into this whole process. I could be wrong, but I have not seen anything on the record that would guarantee ASP will accept individuals or families with vouchers. Generally speaking, it is entirely at the discretion of the landlord. In my experiences living and working with individuals who pay rent with Section 8, I’ve learned that things don’t usually work out as intended.
@Tom Davis…re “In other words, the “affordable” units at Austin Street are intended for a family of four that makes a yearly income of $78,800 or an individual who earns $55,150 per year.”
I wouldn’t say family of 4 since there are no 3BRs and normally N BR+1 is assumed, right?
Also, my understanding is that the calculation for Austin St is being based not on Newton’s AMI but on HUD’s numbers for the Greater Boston area (Boston-Cambridge-Quincy). In 2015, that would be $55,800 for 2-person or $62,750 for 3 people.
http://www.huduser.gov/portal/datasets/il/il15/Section8_IncomeLimits_Rev.pdf
So an affordable 1BR for two people at Austin St should rent for 30% of $55,800/yr or $1395/mo incl heat and utilities. One person earning no more than (I guess 80% of …?) $48,800 in an affordable 1BR would be
paying $1220/mo for rent+heat&utils.
For a 2BR figuring the standard N BR+1 occupants (3 people) the AMI is $62,750. For anyone making 80% of that or less, would pay $1568.75/mo for rent, heat and utilities. (Note that this matches Marti’s number above.)
Is this correct?
Correction, the AMI figures *are* 80% of the AMI. Also, it’s based on an adjusted gross income.
By the way, I also found out that there will indeed be 70% of affordable units set aside for people that live or work in Newton or their kids go to school here (e.g. METCO families).
@Steven: Your calculation re: income levels might be correct. Can you recall where you read this information? When I look at the ASP presentation to the Land Use Committee, Newton’s AMI is used, not that of HUD nor Massachusetts. (Please see page 26 of http://www.newtonma.gov/civicax/filebank/documents/66572.)
Generally, by law, AMI references the area in which the project is proposed. However, when you go directly to the ASP website, ASP states that the affordable units will be reserved for households earning less than 80% of median income. Notably, ASP doesn’t note which metric it’s using to calculate median income. (Please see http://www.austinstreetnewton.com/frequently-asked-questions.)
Newton is in the included in computing the Area Medium Income of the HUD group Steve listed and that is the number used to determine income limits. Newton’s medium income of $98,500 is different from the area median income.
And yes, Tom got the 1 person wrong; it is $48,800. But formulas are for estimation and in actuality 1 and 2 income earners could have two children in the same bedroom. The apartments are small and the ones that are market rate, based on the sq footage and rent, may attract smaller families but the affordable apartments would be attractive to all who qualify, imo. I don’t know how the acceptance into the lottery is determined so there could get restrictions on family size vs bedrooms but I don’t think so, other than having only 2 to a room.
Tom, I didn’t see your comment at first. ASP has said many things as you point out. The fact is that you are right and for an apartment to qualify as affordable in the city’s inventory, it has to follow the law which uses the Area Median Income in the HUD region Newton is assigned. Newton’s AMI is $98,500 but HUD caps the 80% AMI so it’s lower.
I don’t have the HUD link right now but it is on the MA website under housing laws. In addition it is an attachment to the July Land Use Report, as well as the Austin Street proposal. These income limits are as of May 6, 2015.
80% AMI for 1 person, $48,00., for 2 people $55,800., 3 people $62,750., 4 people $69,700.
The project proposal now has 8 one bedroom and 9 two bedroom affordable at 80% AMI apartments. The rents are as stated above and must not be more than 30% of income.
@Marti: I’m sure you’re right as you’ve closely followed this longer than I have. To clarify my confusion, do you mind sending me the link to where you get the $48,800 for 1 person? When you read page 26 of ASPs presentation to the Land Use Committee, they go with $55,150 for 1 person. I could easily be missing information as ASP hasn’t been as consistent as possible.
“The rents are as stated above and must not be more than 30% of income.”
I think it’s 30% of the AMI figure regardless of actual income. So if 2 people have an AGI of $45K, they qualify for the 1BR but have to pay 30% of 55,800 (1395/mo).
By the way if you’re wondering what the income stats by job type, here is a link to a presentation that quotes some figures starting on page 17:
http://www.newtonma.gov/civicax/filebank/documents/66359
Tom,
http://www.newtonma.gov/civicax/filebank/documents/67699
This is the link to the pdf of a memo from July, 2015 from the Planning Department to the Land Use Committee.
On page 6, is the paragraph about maximum affordable rents and what the rents will be for Austin Street’s affordable apartments.
The attachment, page 8, is the chart HUD’s income limits.
Page 6
Maximum Allowable Rents for deed restricted units are established annually using HUD income limits and with assumptions about households most likely to occupy the apartment home. The rents include all utilities. If the utilities are paid by the residents the rent will be adjusted using Newton Housing Authority allowances. The monthly rent includes one parking space per unit. The maximum allowable rents for 2015 are $1,307 for a one bedroom unit, and $1,568 for a two bedroom unit. A household with a Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher or a Newton Housing Authority Voucher will be able to rent a rent-restricted apartment at 28 Austin Street. A table of area household income rates effective March 6, 2015, to qualify for housing services is attached (Attachment A).
Here’s other information.
http://www.newtonma.gov/civicax/filebank/documents/43954
This is the link to the pdf of Newton’s Fair Housing Guidelines to Resident Selection Preferences. It lists the criteria.
This is the Income Eligibility Requirement
Calculation of income the higher of actual income from assets (if >$5000) or an imputation of 2% of the actual value of total household assets added to the household income. Assets include checking and savings accounts, investment accounts, CD’s, retirement accounts, etc. The combined annual income from all income sources, including income from assets, of all income-earning members in the household must be at or below 80% AMI as defined by HUD for the area.
The affordable unit must be your full-time residence.
Tenants will be recertification yearly.
Including tha Asset Cap
The asset cap applies to households who are interested in renting an affordable home. For affordable units at or below the 80% income category, the combined total assets of the household cannot exceed $75,000. All liquid assets and real property are counted towards the cap except government approved college savings accounts and qualified retirement plans such as 401(k) plans, other IRA’s, Keogh plans, and pension plans, unless they are being liquidated to purchase a property. Applicants for affordable rental units can exceed the set forth asset limitations if all of the household members are over the age of 65 years. In this instance, a household can have combined assets, including all retirement funds of $250,000. Real estate is valued by the current assessed value of real estate by the municipality or county. An individual’s actual equity in the real estate is not considered.
Thanks for posting these documents, Marti. Definitely helpful. Even using the HUD guidelines, from my perspective at least, it still takes a fairly well off individual or family to qualify for the proposed affordable units. I was under the impression that we were trying to take proactive steps to make Newton an affordable place to live for those who couldn’t otherwise afford to live here. Especially if upward to 70% of the affordable units are rented to current Newton residents, this project doesn’t accomplish that goal.
As I mentioned above, the 70% of affordable units would be reserved for Newton residents *or* people who work in Newton *or* people whose kids attend Newton schools. So that would make those peoples’ lives easier if they can live near where their kids attend school or where they work. But that’s 11 or 12 units max.
It seems to me that there’s a small window of income that makes it work – 70-80% AMI – below which it’s not affordable and above which one is disqualified.
I and many others had wanted the affordable apartments to be for no more than 50% AMI which would allow maximum incomes to be $34,500 for one person, $39,400 for two, $44,350 for three and $49,250 for 4. This would help those who still have decent jobs but are paid less, for one example lab techs, lab associates and other people in healthcare who are required to have a college degree but can make less than $40,000. It would also help families with two income earners who don’t come close to making a combined income of $63,000 or $79,000.