HomeMy WebLinkAboutStokes, Katy - North Fork Civics Affordable Housing Subcommittee 2025
Re: Zoning Code Update –Input re: Affordable Housing
Dear Southold Town Board and Zoning Team,
The Affordable Housing Subcommittee of the North Fork Civics Association is a group of long-
time North Fork residents who care deeply about preserving the values and character of our
hamlets. We want young families, teachers, farmers, fishermen, nurses, small business owners,
winery staff and our seniors to be able to live, work and age in place on the North Fork without
having to clog our roads by driving back and forth from much farther west. We feel strongly
that we don’t want the North Fork to become like the South Fork, where only the uber-rich can
afford to live and everyone else has to commute on crowded roads to work there. We want to
help ensure that there is long-range planning at the Town level focused on the need for starter
homes and family-sized rental units to help address the need for far more affordable housing
on the North Fork.
We are grateful to see that the following promise is made on the Welcome Page of the
proposed Zoning Code: “This update is more than policy; it’s a promise. A promise to preserve
farmland and the natural environment, and support local families with diverse housing. It’s
about ensuring our residents can afford to stay…” We all know Southold residents who have
moved away because of the cost of housing, and we know even more adult children of
Southold residents who can’t afford to return to Southold because they can’t afford housing.
The promise to provide diverse housing (not just $1 million+) is vital, as well as ensuring that
our residents can afford to stay. Unfortunately, not a single unit of affordable housing has been
built in the Town of Southold in the last 5+ years. During that same time period, the cost of
homes for sale has grown exponentially, and only a handful of homes have sold for less than
$800,000.
The Town of Southold needs affordable rentals and starter homes. It also needs residential
multi-family dwellings. We encourage the Town to work with and collaborate with residential
developers to ensure that the zoning rules encourage development of affordable housing
instead of being so onerous that it discourages such developments.
The Affordable Housing Subcommittee of the North Fork Civics Association has reviewed the
proposed revisions to the Southold Town Zoning Code and would like to offer the following
comments/questions:
1. Under the previous zoning rules, large houses could be divided into apartments. The
proposed rules no longer allow this. Why? Please revisit.
2. In many communities across the nation, ADU’s have been suggested as a partial solution
to address the lack of affordable housing, but rarely are many ADU’s created. There are
simply too many costs and burdens on residential homeowners to incentivize them to
build an ADU. The cost to a homeowner of adding an ADU to their property is expensive
-- likely more than $125,000 given the expenses of expanded septic capacity, hiring an
architect, a builder and a lawyer (for permitting and for drawing up a rental agreement),
etc. So the process needs to be as streamlined and simplified as possible (e.g. sample
architectural plans, sample leases, lists of builders who work on ADU's, lists of banks
who may give loans to build ADU's) and very well-publicized. How can the Town simplify
the process? What is the marketing plan to convince homeowners that building an ADU
is a worthwhile pursuit? What is the Town’s plan to streamline and simplify all of the
steps to creating an ADU?
3. To ensure that ADU's do not become market-rate housing, we believe that there should
be a cap on the allowable rent for any and all renters. This is what East Hampton does
for their ADU's. We believe the cap should be set at 90% AMI.
4. As we understand the proposed ADU regulation, ADU's can only be rented to family
members or people who are on the Housing Registry. We believe that the list of
possible renters should be expanded to include 4 categories:
a. family members
b. people listed on the Housing Registry
c. senior citizens
d. people who have proof of employment in the Town of Southold
5. We encourage the Town to apply to the State to be designated as a “Pro-Housing
Community”. We understand that millions of dollars of New York State discretionary
funds are available to communities that achieve the “Pro-Housing Community”
certification. Southold is the only town or municipality on the east end of Long Island
that has not yet applied to be certified as a “Pro-Housing Community.” This designation
would allow the Town to access funds from the state related to housing without having
to cede any control over the Town’s zoning rules.
6. To help offset the costs to a homeowner of building an ADU, the Town should adopt the
State Enabling Act which would provide the homeowner with a 100% exemption from
any increased tax burden as a result of the value of the ADU. This tax exemption is only
on the additional value of the ADU (not the main property) and begins to sunset after 5
years
Here are some comments specific to sections of the proposed Zoning Code:
Community Housing Overlay (CHO) District: Sec. 280-36
While the stated purpose of this section is to “designate the areas of the Town most
appropriate for the creation, through public and/or private initiative, of attractive and
affordable housing”, instead it requires approval on a case-by-case basis only after quite
a bit of money and effort has been expended by a development team on each proposed
community housing project. While there are many things that are allowed “as of right”
in the proposed Zoning Code, nothing about CHO’s is “as of right”. Reviewing the maps
of the Zoning Code, you will see that there is almost no CHO designated anywhere in the
Town of Southold. This new section of the Zoning Code is essentially all burdens that
must be surmounted by developers without any incentives to creating community
housing. We ask that the Town Board revisit this entire section and seek input from
developers and experts in the development of community housing to rewrite this
section.
The CHO District should not be limited to HALO zones. For example, in the hamlet of
Greenport, there are at least two areas where multifamily housing would be
appropriate, including the corner of Chapel Lane and Route 25 which already has a
sewer connection but is not in the HALO zone. The HR district would seem to be
appropriate for the area near Greenport Village, the economic center of the town, but
modest houses can’t be built where the requirement of 20,000sf per parcel is the rule.
We also ask that a provision be added stating that the Town will track the number of
Community Housing units created every year and make the number publicly available.
We ask that a survey be done to determine how many people on the Housing Registry
have cars and/or take the bus. There seems to be an assumption that people who
qualify for affordable housing need to live within walking distance of grocery stores and
schools. We all know how hugely popular the lottery was for the housing at Vineyard
View – the need for a car was not a problem.
Accessory Dwelling Units (ADU’s): Sec. 280.44
(A)(2)(b)(i): the suggested minimum square footage for an ADU (220 sq. ft.) is too small
and probably violates current building codes. We ask that the minimum sq. footage be
changed to 350 sq. feet. Also, why is the maximum sq. footage 750 sq. feet? What if a
nd
resident wants to turn their 2 story into an ADU and it is 1,200 sq. feet? Why should
they not be allowed to turn it into an ADU? We suggest that the maximum square
footage be changed to 1,500 square feet.
(A)(2)(b)(ii): why is the maximum size of an ADU limited to one bathroom and 2
nd
bedrooms? What if a resident’s home has 2 bathrooms and 3 bedrooms on their 2
floor that they want to use as an ADU? We suggest that this language be changed to
allow up to 2 bathrooms and up to 3 bedrooms.
(A)(2)(b)(iii): if a renter shows proof of employment anywhere in the Town of Southold,
why can’t they sign a lease for less than a year? For example, if someone has a seasonal
job or is a teacher, they may want to sign a lease for less than a year. We suggest that
an exception to this requirement for a year-long lease be allowed in cases where the
renter has proof of employment (and the homeowner is interested in a lease of less
than a year).
(A)(2)(b)(iv): To ensure that ADU's do not become market-rate housing, we believe that
there should be a cap on the allowable rent for any and all renters. This is what East
Hampton does for their ADU's. We believe the cap should be set at 90% AMI.
(A)(2)(c): why can’t an ADU be larger than “25% of the habitable space of the entire
nd
principal building”? What if a homeowner wants to rent out the entire 2 floor of their
home? Or what if an elderly homeowner wants to live in the “mother-in-law suite” and
wants to rent out the majority of the home to help her afford staying in place? Can’t
the 25% limit be raised to a minimum of 50%?
(A)(2)(f): the percentage in this section should be changed to match whatever
percentage is used in (c) above.
(A)(3): all of the comments above related to (A)(2) apply here to (A)(3).
(A)(3)(d): why must the “entirety of the living floor area of the Accessory Dwelling” be
on just one floor? Why can’t there be a loft? Let’s not limit architectural designs.
(A)(4)(a)(iii): We recommend eliminating the rule that says the ADU is limited 1,000 sq.
feet; it should be 1,500 or 2,000 sq. feet.
(A)(4)(i)(vi): If there is an uneven number of ADU’s built on the property, will the larger
number be market rate or affordable?
We hope you find this input helpful as you review and revise the draft Zoning Code.
Thank you again for taking the time to update the Zoning Code, and for all you do.
Best,
Katy Stokes, Chairperson, North Fork Civics Affordable Housing Subcommittee