HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-28-25 Public Comment - B. Topp - Affordable Housing Ordinance CommentsFrom:Bryan Topp
To:Bozeman Public Comment
Subject:[EXTERNAL]Affordable Housing Ordinance Comments
Date:Monday, January 27, 2025 1:04:01 PM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you
recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
Bozeman City Commissioners,
I am writing to show general support and comment on the Affordable Housing Ordinance (AHO). I have
reviewed the draft and watched the Community Development Board meeting from January 13th. I will
also disclose that I am not a Bozemanite (Helenan), but do work for affordable housing developers across
the State of Montana. My specific perspective of this ordinance is through ongoing navigation of the site
plan approval process for an affordable housing development using the existing AHO. This brings up my
first comment in urging you to take action on this ordinance soon. Whatever the outcome, developers are
needing quick resolution for their projects as these are major changes for affordable housing financial
models, site design, density, architectural design, etc. This is especially impactful for those projects that
are using Low Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) funding where they likely have already received
approval for funding based on a design that may now need to be significantly revised.
Comments pertaining to the draft ordinance and the Community Development Board meeting:
There was discussion about making the duration of the affordability period in perpetuity. I believe
that is unfair to the community, developer and owner of such properties. It is impossible to
forecast what is to come and this doesn't even make sense when we think about the life of a
building and the future life of the site. I also believe that 50 years is too long. LIHTC funding
requires 30 years, and why put additional burden on those that are already doing the right thing for
the community. I have no issue with the change from 80% AMI to 60% AMI for the thresholds for
multi-family development for the Type B and Type C incentives.
Overall, the ordinance feels like it is almost encouraging growth outside of the existing
infrastructure. The ordinance seems to be trying to avoid conflicts with existing residential areas
when those are the best areas to connect to existing infrastructure (or upgraded infrastructure) and
services. Montanans and those moving to Montana have enjoyed and desire space.
Unfortunately, the reality is more people = less space. The concerns about parking, height,
density etc. are not unfounded, but the complaints are mostly due to "inconveniences". Creating
housing is worth an inconvenience (i.e. some localized parking congestion).
There was discussion about having neighborhood meetings about projects using the AHO.
Although, I believe in keeping neighbors aware of the projects in their neighborhoods, allowing the
community to decide if they will allow a project or to change a project is a major risk factor for an
affordable housing developer. Affordable housing developers need to avoid risks as much as
possible to keep a project viable. Public opinion and time are two major risk factors and this type
of requirement adds both.
The Type C incentives is the most impactful for major affordable housing developments that have
a true impact. The combination of the reduced parking, higher allowable density and higher
height limits are helping to make these projects viable. I would encourage to keep these
incentives as proposed, although I would prefer to see no parking requirement. The reality is at
60% or less of AMI, having a vehicle can be a luxury. The affordable housing developers that are
building these types of project know their target market and clientele well enough to know what
parking demand is viable for the project and location, and they should be trusted to do what they
feel is most viable.
Removal of the building design related deep incentive exemptions (existing code section
38.380.030.B.3.f) may have a direct impact on construction cost for affordable housing projects
and will cause major revisions to projects already going through conceptual design.
A grace period for projects already under design or already under review is prudent and fair to
reduce restructuring financial models or redesigning their projects. Although this ordinance has
been anticipated, the final incentives are still unknown. Some affordable housing projects using
federal funding sources are likely to being designed or have been designed using the existing
ordinance. If this ordinance takes effect immediately upon adoption, this will cause harm (redesigntime, adjustments to financial models, construction cost impacts) or potentially squash existingprojects that are moving forward using the existing ordinance. The existing project phases couldrange from developer due diligence, to conceptual design, to nearing submission for Site PlanReview or already have submitted for Site Plan Review (up until adequacy approval from what Iunderstand). That means some of these projects may be months or even a year into thedevelopment / design process and will now have to restructure finances and redesign theirprojects.Provide opportunity for flexibility in the ordinance. Being about to react to what may be working
and may not be working is key to the success of the program.
Overall, I greatly appreciate the work that the city has put into these revisions and the consideration of
larger affordable housing complexes within this framework. The overall commitment to creating more
affordable housing is dire in many of our Montana communities, and I thank you for making this
commitment for the Bozeman community. I hope to see resolution quickly and hope you consider
projects already using the existing ordinance for their projects.
Thank you!
Bryan Topp, AIA, NCARB
Licensed Montana Architect