This is an affordable housing first! Town attorney Teitz said: "But the board walks a fine line of imposing restrictions that are so onerous that they might be ignored."

The "onerous" restrictions (aka the affordable housing laws), are the problem.

So our town attorney says the solution is that the Planning Board should give the developers a break from following the law.

What "breaks" are the residents getting? Should we also just not follow the laws?

The developer of Nockum Hill must be thanking our town attorney this morning.

Please please please - someone hold the horses back on these developments until the State gets its head on straight with this law.

I wonder if our 3 state Legislators have put together a bill yet to fix the affordable housing act ( as they promised on campaign trail). Please call your legislators. Senator Bates, Representative Hearn, and Representative Malik and ask them where they are in there progress.

Mr. Teitz - do you work for the town of Barrington, or the developer of Blue Meade?
Your advice to ignore the law puts the Town in grave danger !!

Affordable housing...for who? I'm a single parent living in Barrington, by the grace of God I make a little over the medium income determined for Barrington..however w/ the Affordable Housing at Walker Farm I'd have to purchase a home at the highest price..over $200K while those that live there and make under the medium income by their home for about $40K less...there is no affordable option for me other then as a renter in Barrington...

Andy Teitz is extremely knowledgeable and experienced in this area, and his advice is sound. He offers VERY good counsel to the town. It sounds like most of the criticism on this thread is more aptly directed toward the RI Affordable Housing Act, rather than at the town government or its solicitor.

My understanding is that the town is bound to follow the RI Affordable Housing Act. That requirement drives a lot of decisions the town makes with regard to affordable housing, so that the town remains in compliance with the Affordable Housing Act, regardless of Mr. Morse's interpretation of the statutes and assertions to the contrary.

One must take Mr. Milman's above comments with a grain of salt, especially since Mr. Milman sits on the Planning Board, and has previously stated that he believes that the Planning Board has the power to make, and has actually made, changes to ordinances.

Mr Milman later backtracked from his "pliable ordinances" position by saying - "I'd prefer not to get into a detailed discussion about exactly which statutes and ordinances provide these powers".

http://barrington.patch.com/blog_posts/is-barrington-the-worst-of-worst

The issue is not about Mr Teitz's knowledge and experience, but whether the Planning Board is following Barrington town ordinance Section 185-184(c), and the RI General Laws, Section § 45-53-4(a)(4)(v)(C), where both state:

"All low and moderate income housing units proposed are integrated throughout the development; are compatible in scale and architectural style to the market rate units within the project; and will be built and occupied prior to, or simultaneous with the construction and occupancy of any market rate units."

In spite of these laws being poor public policy (my personal opinion), the issue is one of consistency on the Planning Board to follow the law, and how other developers might exploit loopholes if indeed the Planning Board took a position of "pliable" ordinances and state statutes.

This appears to be a very slippery legal slope for the town.

Gary, left you a long note on your home page a couple of months ago. Hope you got it ...it continues to read "pending approval".

Both Peter Costa and Manfried Diel ran (in part) on reforming affordable housing in Barrington. To those of you who voted Democrat because of your adherence to the party line, you have no right to post your complaints here.

Gary - I did not backtrack from anything. I did not want to answer your legal questions because I am NOT a RI attorney and thus am not qualified to provide legal opinions on RI law. But the Planning Board does interpret, administrate, enforce, adopt, modify, and amend town rules and regulations relating to development and land subdivision. The planning board also reviews and votes on comprehensive building permits. Therefore, interpretation of whether low income housing units are properly integrated into a development or have compatible architectural style, as per the town code, likely falls to the Planning Board. However, for a difinitive answer, you will have to ask someone else, like an RI attorney.

D. In accordance with Chapter 200, Subdivision of Land, and § 45-23-51.52 of the Rhode Island General Laws, as amended, the Board shall adopt, modify and amend rules and regulations governing and restricting the platting and subdivision of land and land development and shall control such subdivision and land development pursuant to such rules and regulations. Additionally, the Board shall adopt or repeal, and shall provide for the administration, interpretation and enforcement of, land development and subdivision review regulations. All such regulations and amendments thereto shall be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, Chapter 185, Zoning, of the Code of the Town of Barrington and all provisions of Chapter 23 of Title 45 of the Rhode Island General Laws, as amended.

Additionally, the comprehensive permit process is designed so that the Planning Board can hear and act on any and all concerns regarding the application. For a project to move forward, the Planning Board must approve a master (conceptual) plan, and a preliminary (detailed) building plan. The Board recently approved Bluemead's master plan, which does not include any details on architectural style, and only conceptual, non-detailed information about integration of low income housing units in the development.

If there are concerns regarding particular units within a project, the Board will hear them, they will become part of the record and part of the Board's decision. In my experience, the Board does everything within its power to make sure building projects not only comply with the affordable housing rules that you've cited, but also with the Comprehensive Plan, town zoning ordinances, and requests from people and neighbors concerned with the project. It is often a balancing act, as Andy Teitz implied with his "fine line" comment.

The best way to address these concerns is for the concerned person to attend the planning board meeting or write to the board with specific requests and evidence that can be put on the record as to the concern.

Seth,

As an attorney (in Mass), you should understand the legal significance between rules and regulations, and Town ordinances and State statutes.

Seth,

I'm not talking about affordable tax policy, but approval of the Sowam's project only on condition that the town council deals with the property tax abatement issue first.

What EBCDC did with Sweetbriar was to build the project first, then after completion, they came to the town pleading for property tax relief.

If the Planning Board had done a thorough job back when Sweetbriar was in the planning phase, they would have asked about any needed tax abatement's BEFORE the project went up.

They didn't, and residents got stuck with the bill to this day.

Barrington already has the highest property tax burden per capita in the state (I don't count the summer colonies of Block Island and Jamestown).

The Planning Board needs to start thinking about residents.

Gary -1.
Seth - 0.

Sticking points aside, it's up to Barrington taxpayers need to reach out to their state representatives and Town Council to help stop this "progress". For us common folks, the reason these types of developments are blossoming in town is because they can under State grace - the statute needs to be changed. Contact your state reps, but also your Town Council which seems to be rubber stamp happy on this issue right now. Newest development off Chachapacassett now moving quickly - am surprised our Rumstick neighborhood bretheren aren't out there in force over this issue. Regardless of your part of town, this is a small town and your voice can be heard. Please make every effort to attend the monthly Town Council meetings (next is Mon Jan 7 @ 6p), and bring as many friends as you can. There is a public comment section at every meeting - limited to 2 minutes, but step right up. If you can't attend the meetings, contact your State reps and Town Council reps directly and let them know your opinions on this or anything else going on. Here is the Barrington Town Council website which includes email addresses: http://72.46.3.26/towncouncil.php. You can review past meetings, upcoming agendas, etc. Posting your opinions on Patch is helpful to vent, but doesn't have the power of you reaching out to your state or local representatives. Remember - these folks are voted in, and are beholden to their communities.

Residents and voters of Barrington need to stop complaining about affordable housing! This is what you asked for and deserve by voting in the same old people last November. Our current general assembly legislators are at fault for voting for original affordable housing bill or not trying to change it over the last few years. You need to look at what is OUR legislators first priority this legislative cycle You think they would maybe work on improving the economy? Affordable housing law reform? No not either one of those issues, it is gay marriage. I wonder if that would have been the first bill out of the gate Peter Costa Jr. and myself would have sponsored or co-sponsored? Maybe we would have kept our promise that we ran on for repealing the affordable housing act and improving the business climate. Elections mean thing!

Seth,

Where affordable housing and the Planning Board is concerned, I expected you to label my points as "broad assertions" in your previous comment.

So to narrow it down, here is a short "to do" list for the Planning Board. It's just a starting point.

1) If the 10% mandate can never be met in Barrington (Councilor Speakman's words in the Hummel interview), what is the Planning Board doing to amend the Comprehensive Community Plan?

2) The Planning Board should raise the question of whether the Ursillo Law Firm is serving two masters in their legal opinions when it comes to affordable housing and Planning Board legal guidance.

3) The Planning Board should get an impartial and written legal opinion to confirm their authority to bend ordinances and state statutes in their decisions.

4) The Planning Board should address the full financial impact to the town on growth. There is no current impact study, and the board appears to be flying by the seat of its pants on these matters. This includes infrastructure upgrades. For example, at the Palmer Pointe presentation, the developer would only acknowledge that a water line ran past the development, but would not say if proper testing had been done on the drop in pressure to the surrounding neighborhoods from the added load .

5) The Planning Board needs to address financial impact (i.e. property tax abatement's) as a part of project planning, something that was not done for Sweetbriar and cost residents a lot.

@Lorraine.
I would not have even known you were a Democrat. It doesn't matter what party you are affiliated with or not affiliated with. Hopefully you didn't vote straight party ticket. By your passion for personnel property rights it looks to me you did not.
In regards to your statements about Counselors Strong and Coyne.
Words or phrases mean nothing. Only actions and results.
The problem with the whole affordable housing is that it was legislated by the Progressive Republican and Democrats in the RI general assembly.
If you have time you should read the following book by a Liberal Democrat Harriot Parke. Agenda 21

Fred,

Most Democrats are in favor of private property rights in the the same way most Republicans endorse the "velocity of money" economic theory (i.e the economy runs more efficiently when those at the top are not hoarding the cash).

Call me a moderate Democrat who also believes that hard work deserves it's privileges.

Taking a line from an earlier comment, thank you for your service to our country, and for the hard work of campaigning in the last election.

For all those interested:

JOINT MEETING

BARRINGTON PLANNING BOARD
BARRINGTON TECHNICAL REVIEW COMMITTEE
BARRINGTON HOUSING BOARD OF TRUSTEES
7 to 9 p.m. Tuesday, January 15, 2013
Library Auditorium Gallery Room, Barrington Public Library
281 County Road, Barrington, RI

AGENDA

1. Call Meeting to Order

2. Housing Board: Approve Minutes - December 18, 2012 Meeting

3. Pre-Application Meeting: Palmer Pointe Neighborhood – Plat 28, Lots 72, 73, 246, 248, 249 and 263 (Sowams Nursery property, east side of Sowams Road). Development of 48 new affordable housing units on property totaling approximately 7.5 acres. Proposal would be filed under the comprehensive permit process.

4. Adjourn

The Town of Barrington will provide accommodations needed to ensure equal participation in all meetings. Please contact the Town Clerk’s office prior to the meeting so arrangements can be made to provide such assistance. A request for accommodations can be made in writing to 283 County Road or by calling 401-247-1900, Ext. 301 (voice) or call 711 “Relay” if you are a TDY OR TDD user. The Barrington Town Hall, Barrington Public Library and Barrington Public Safety Building are accessible to the disabled.

Posted on January 8, 2013 at Barrington Town Hall, Barrington Public Library, the Town of Barrington Website and the R.I. Secretary of State Website

Two important questions on affordable housing should be addressed at this meeting:

1) Why hasn't the Planning Board pushed back on the issue that RI Housing demands that only "deed restricted" houses count in the 10% mandate?

When the RI Supreme Court recently ruled on the "fee-in-lieu" question for affordable developers, they looked at the affordable definitions under the Comprehensive Housing Production and Rehabilitation Act of 2004 and said:

"First, § 42-128-8.1(d)(2)-(3) provides definitions for the terms “[a]ffordable housing plan” and “[a]pproved affordable housing plan” as used in the Comprehensive Housing Production and Rehabilitation Act of 2004, but these statutory subsections make no reference to the imposition of fees."

http://www.courts.ri.gov/Courts/SupremeCourt/OpinionsOrders/opinions/09-93.pdf

The same definitions section, § 42-128-8.1(d)(1) defines "Affordable Housing", and equally, makes no reference to the words "deed restriction".

http://webserver.rilin.state.ri.us/Statutes/title42/42-128/42-128-8.1.HTM

Why hasn't the Planning Board asked RI Housing about this deed restriction requirement given the recent statements by the RI Supreme Court?

2) Will the Planning Board make their decision for Palmer Pointe with a requirement that EBCDC first get town council approval for the property tax abatement's?