HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/06/2025 Affordable i lousing Review Committee
MEETING MINUTES
Date: May 6, 2025
Time: 8:30am
Location:Town Hall Annex Board Room
Present: Applicant's Project Team:
• Al Krupski,Town Supervisor • Joseph Dunne, Owner
• Jill Doherty,Town Board • Jerome D'Amaro, Surveyor& Engineer
• Greg Doroski,Town Board • Ed Olsen, Dicor Construction
• Heather Lanza, Planning Director • Bud Sexton, Dicor Construction
• Mike Verity, Chief Building Inspector
• Marilyn Sierra, Housing Advisory Commission
• Elizabeth Thompson, Architectural Review
Committee
• Mara Cerezo, Planner
Agenda Item: Cutchogue Cottages
Location: Cutchogue
Zoning: R-40/R-80
Acreage of Project Site: 3.2 acres
Number of Units: 20(Plus one caretaker's cottage)
Type of Units: Rentals
Laserfiche Link: [INSERT HERE]
Project Summary:
The applicant proposes a 21-unit rental development consisting of two-bedroom, standalone cottages. Designed
as a rental adaptation of the Mattituck Cottages model, the project includes significant open green space at the
front of the site. It is located within the HALO and along the local bus route. All units are intended to serve
households earning between 80%and 120%of Area Median Income (AMI).The applicant has proposed donating
the front green space to the Town for use as a public park. A caretaker's unit is included as part of the
applicant's on-site management plan.
Discussion Highlights:
• The applicant shared preliminary site plans and architectural drawings.The cottages will feature simple
exteriors with cedar shake siding and upgraded interior finishes (e.g., quartz countertops, hardwood
floors, stainless steel appliances).
• While the buildings will have a consistent appearance, the applicant expressed openness to
incorporating design variations per ARC feedback.
• Priority for tenancy is expected to be given to members of the Cutchogue Fire Department.
• The applicant has experience in business management and residential construction but has not
undertaken a project of this scale and scope before.
• The applicant or a family member would reside in the caretaker's unit to care for the development.
• The applicant has not yet reviewed materials from the Hamlet Stakeholder Group but expressed
openness to doing so to align the project with local goals. The project site is located in the HALO which is
a designated area for increased residential development.
• The applicant affirmed that affordability in perpetuity has been factored into the project's financial
planning.
• A 100-year financial plan was reportedly submitted. Rents are intended to scale across households
earning 80%-120%AMI, in accordance with Town Code.
• The applicant has not conducted local stakeholder outreach and dismissed potential opposition from a
neighboring property owner. Committee members encouraged engagement with local civic groups.
• The project's location along Main Road,within a walkable area and near signalized intersections, was
seen as minimizing potential traffic impacts.
• Committee members expressed concern about the applicant's limited experience with projects of this
scale and noted that aspects of his communication approach may pose challenges for stakeholder
engagement and community relations. Given these concerns, the Committee suggested the applicant
consider partnering with a more experienced affordable housing developer.
• Questions arose regarding long-term site management, particularly in the event of ownership transfer. It
was recommended that covenants and restrictions include provisions for the caretaker unit and require
submission of an updated management plan upon transfer.
• The project received a Community Housing Suitability Index score of 36.25 out of 60, qualifying it for a
conditional recommendation.
o Strengths:Walkable location within the HALO, transit access, and inclusion of family-oriented
two-bedroom units.
o Areas for improvement: Reducing tree clearing, integrating green infrastructure, submitting a
more comprehensive financial strategy, and considering strategic partnerships to strengthen
affordable housing management credibility.
• Of the eight Committee members present, seven supported a conditional recommendation to the Town
Board to consider a change of zone for the site.The eighth member left to attend another meeting and
requested additional time to finalize their position.
Agenda Item: Next Steps& Follow-Up
• Cutchogue Cottages Next Steps:
o Committee members will review the draft memo to the Town Board.
o Committee will then submit final memo to the Town Board.
o If Town Board agrees to proceed, the applicant may submit a formal change of zone application.
AFFORDABLE HOUSING REVIEW COMMITTEE
TOWN OF S O U T H O L D
MEMORANDUM
To: Albert J. Krupski,Jr.,Town Supervisor
Members of the Town Board
Denis Noncarrow,Town Clerk
From: Members of the Affordable Housing Review Committee (AHRC)
Date: May 7, 2025
Re: AHRC Comments on Cutchogue Cottages for SCTM#: 102.-2-12.2
The proposed "Cutchogue Cottages" is a privately initiated housing project located on a 3.2-acre
parcel in the hamlet of Cutchogue.The applicant proposes the development of 20 two-bedroom
rental cottages and one caretaker's unit.All residential units are targeted to serve households
earning between 80% and 120% of the Area Median Income (AMI).The caretaker's unit is part of
the applicant's on-site management plan.
On May 6, 2025,the applicant presented the proposal to the Affordable Housing Review
Committee.The Committee reviewed the application in light of Southold Town's adopted housing
goals, the site's planning context, and the criteria of the Community Housing Suitability Index.
The site is located within the Hamlet Locus (HALO)Zone and benefits from proximity to public
transportation and walkable access to local shops and amenities in the Cutchogue hamlet center.
These attributes support the Town's objective of locating affordable housing in areas with access to
services and infrastructure.
The project demonstrates several positive features, including:
• Location within the HALO and a walkable area near transit;
• Inclusion of two-bedroom units, which support the need for family-oriented housing;
• A portion of the units designated for households earning 80%AMI.
However,the Committee identified several areas where additional development and refinement
would strengthen alignment with the Town's community housing objectives and improve project
readiness:
1) Financing and Project Capacity
While the applicant has indicated a general financing plan reliant on Town subsidies and private
lending, no detailed or diversified strategy has been submitted.The Committee recommends
the development of a comprehensive financial plan that includes external funding sources such
as state or federal tax credits and other relevant opportunities to ensure a more resilient
funding structure. Provide a list of possible sources for consideration.
2) Experience and Implementation Support
The applicant has not previously completed an affordable housing project of this scale.The
Committee recommends exploring partnerships with experienced affordable housing
developers or nonprofit housing organizations to support long-term project success.
a) Affordability Compliance:The applicant should clarify and revise the project's affordability
levels to comply with Town Code.This includes specifying the number of units by targeted
AMI and bedroom count.
b) Marketing and Compliance: The applicant should submit a proposed marketing plan that
complies with Town Code and Fair Housing guidelines.
c) Long-Term Site Management: To ensure proper long-term management, the Committee
requests that the applicant provide a proposed management plan along with sample
Covenants and Restrictions.
3) Sustainability and Environmental Considerations
The current submission does not include green building measures or environmental
infrastructure strategies.The Committee recommends minimizing tree clearing and
incorporating green infrastructure to support stormwater management and site sustainability.
Explore and propose strategies and initiatives to improve environmental sustainability rating.
4) Community and Stakeholder Engagement
To date, no formal outreach to neighbors, civic groups, or local stakeholders has been
documented.The Committee recommends that the applicant engage with the local community
to build awareness and support for the proposal and to ensure alignment with local goals.
Based on the Community Housing Suitability Index, the project received a score of 36.25 out of
60, which qualifies as a conditional recommendation.
Conditional Recommendation: The Affordable Housing Review Committee recommends that the
Town Board gather more information from the applicant prior to electing to consider a change of
zone for the subject parcel.The site is well-placed, and the applicant is an experienced builder,
however, the Committee advises that the applicant first address the areas of concern outlined
above to ensure the project is positioned for long-term success and community benefit.
To support transparency and engagement, the Committee suggests that the Town Board consider
scheduling a public informational session prior to advancing the zoning process.
Attachments:
• Cutchogue Cottages Submission Materials
• AHRC Meeting Minutes—May 6, 2025
• Community Housing Suitability Index—Cutchogue Cottages
Page 2 of 2
Community Housing Suitability Index
................. ...............I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I...............
Project Name: Cutchogue Cottages
Property Owner: Joseph Dunne
SCTM#: 102.-2-12.2
Each category below reflects a critical component of project viability and alignment with
Town goals.
1. Location &Accessibility(8 points): Evaluates how well the site supports walkable,
connected, complete neighborhoods.
Criterion Comments/Justification Points Score
Awarded
..........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Located in or near HALO/hamlet The parcel is located directly Upto4 4
center(!-0.5 miles)-4 pts outside of the Cutchogue hamlet
center, and is within the HALO.
0.6-1 mile = 3 pts
1-2 miles = 2 pts
>2 miles = 0 pts
Access to sidewalks or walkable There are sidewalks directly in 2 2
routes front of the parcel and they
extend down to the hamlet center
and up to the King Kullen
shopping plaza and beyond in
both directions.
Transit access (bus, shuttle, or Just over a quarter mile to the 2 2
senior transport) nearest bus shelter. About 7
minute walk via existing
sidewalks.
2. Infrastructure Readiness (10 points): Considers existing or planned infrastructure to support
development without excessive cost.
Criterion Comments/Justification Points Score
Awarded
.........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Public water available Available, but no current hookup. 2 2
a g e
Public sewer available Not available. 2 0
Adequate access to the existing road The project site is located on Main 2 2
network, including major streets Road.
Within'h mile of signalized Yes, less than a half mile from 2 2
intersections for safe and efficient where Main Road intersects New
traffic flow Suffolk Road.
Repurposes an existing building Not applicable. This is a vacant 2 0
(Adaptive Reuse) parcel.
3. Environmental Suitability(10 points); Evaluates ecological sensitivity and potential
environmental impacts.
Criterion Comments/Justification Points Score
Awarded
Outside critical environmental area The project site is not in an 2 2
identified CEA.
Minimal tree clearing(<2 acres) The entire parcel is 3.23 acres and 2 1
some of it will be cleared. Exact
estimate has not been provided.
Avoids farmland soils/ag districts The parcel is not located in an ag 2 2
district and avoids farm soils.
No known threatened/endangered Threatened/endangered bats exist 2 0
species on site in this vicinity.
Incorporates green infrastructure Drainage details are not shown in 2 0
(e.g., bioswales, rain gardens, submitted materials.
permeable pavers).
4. Project Design & Co ati ility( points);Assesses physical design, scale, and architectural
fit with community character.
Criterion Comments/Justification Points Score
Awarded
21If' a
Design complements hamlet While the proposed project 3 3
character and surrounding scale reflects a higher residential
density than adjacent areas, the
design remains in harmony with
the character of the hamlet.
Includes open space, usable green Each cottage has a small rear 3 3
areas, or community features year area, and there is a
significant green space in the
frontyard. In a meetingthe
applicant discussed his desire for
a park in that front open green
space.
5, Developer, Experience & Capacity(8 points):Assesses the ability to execute the project
responsibly.
Criterion Comments/Justification Points Score
Awarded
Proven experience delivering The applicant is an accomplished 4 0
affordable/community housing builder but does not have
projects affordable housing experience.
Applicant is pursuing funding or The applicant has not disclosed 2 0
partnerships with state, county, or plans to partner and seek
nonprofit housing agencies external funding beyond the
Town.
Detailed financing plan submitted Financing plan is not specific and 2 0
relies on unawarded subsidies.
6. Affordability& Unit Mix(8 points): Measures public benefit in terms of affordability depth
and who it serves.
Criterion Comments/Justification Points Score
Awarded
Serves households <-120%AMI Of the 21 units: 10 will be rented Up to 4 3.25
to 80%AMI, 10 will be a 100-120%
<<-80%AMI =4 pts, AMI, and one unit will be reserved
81-100% = 3 pts for the caretaker/owner.
3 a
101-120% = 2 pts
Includes 2-3-bedroom units The project includes 21 two- Upto4 4
(family housing) bedroom one bath cottages.
>75% of units =4 pts
50-74% of units =3 pts
25—49% of units =2 pts
7. Alignment with Southold Town Housing Goals & Objectives (10 points): Measures how well
the project supports key goals from the Southold Town Comprehensive Plan and Community
Housing Plan.
Criterion Comments/Justification Points Score
Awarded
......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Incorporates sustainable building The applicant has not detailed any 2 0
practices plan for sustainable building
practices.
Includes non-Town funding sources The applicant has not disclosed 2 0
(e.g., grants, tax credits) plans to seek external funding
beyond the Town.
Consistent with hamlet character, Based on review of project as 2 2
existing infrastructure capacity, and outlined and scored above, the
environmental conditions project is consistent.
Provides safe, code-compliant, and Through the review and permitting 1 1
habitable housing with necessary process, this project will provide
infrastructure safe housing in Cutchogue.
Addresses or remedies blighted Offers larger family units which are 1 1
properties or overcrowded an identified need, and transforms
conditions an empty lot (with a history of
dumping/neglect) into an active
residential parcel.
Includes services that promote The applicant has not detailed any 1 0
housing stability plans for supportive services.
4 a g e
Developer has engaged with the To date the applicant has not 1 0
local community or stakeholder shared engagement with local
groups about project stakeholders.
Total.Score:
Category Project Highest
Score Score
Possible
Location &Accessibility 8 8
Infrastructure Readiness 6 10
Environmental Suitability 5 10
Project Design& Compatibility 6 6
Developer Experience & Capacity 0 8
Affordability& Unit Mix 7.25 8
Alignment with Southold Town 4 10
Tota l 36.25 60
Final Recommendation: Based on consistency with Town Comprehensive Plan goals.
0 0-24 points: Not recommended for zone change
• 25-44 points: Conditional recommendation; may require mitigation
• 45-60 points: Recommended for zoning change consideration
Evaluator'Comments:
The proposed Cutchogue Cottages project demonstrates some promising attributes, particularly
in terms of location, walkability, and its contribution to the affordable housing inventory. The
project is well-situated just outside the hamlet center and offers strong pedestrian access and
transit proximity. Additionally, all proposed units are two-bedroom, which aligns with the Town's
identified need for family-oriented housing, and a meaningful portion are designated for
households earning<80%AML
However, several areas of concern significantly limit the project's readiness and alignment with
Town housing goals at this time:
• Developer capacity and experience: The applicant has no documented experience with
affordable housing development, and has not pursued partnerships or funding sources
commonly leveraged in such projects (e.g., state or federal tax credits, nonprofit
collaboration). No concrete financing plan has been submitted.
5 a
• Sustainability and infrastructure: No green building features or infrastructure strategies
(e.g., stormwater management, energy-efficient systems)were included in the proposal.
Due to the project's density, a substantial offset of sanitary flow credits (i.e., a super
offset) may be required to meet Suffolk County Health Department standards.
• Affordability term conflict:The applicant has proposed allowing 10 units to convert to
market rate after 10 years, which is not permitted under Town Code. All units must remain
affordable in perpetuity.This requirement must be addressed immediately and may
significantly alter the project's financial and operational assumptions. The applicant has
been notified.
Given the total score of 36.25 out of 60, the project falls within the conditional
recommendation range. Moving forward, we recommend that the applicant:
1. Clarify and revise the affordability terms to comply with Town Code;
2. Strengthen the project's financial strategy, including identification of external funding
sources;
3. Consider partnerships with experienced affordable housing entities;
4. Provide more detail on environmental and sustainability strategies; and
5. Engage with the local community and stakeholders.
61 II) a