AUBURN — The City Council on Tuesday approved a resolution requesting that the Planning Board provide an opinion on whether the city should eliminate the long-debated income standard in Auburn’s agricultural zone.
The issue, which has been heavily scrutinized in the past, centers on a city standard that requires a certain level of income to be derived from agriculture activities as a condition to build a residence in the zone. The Agriculture and Resource Protection zone contains some 20,000 acres.
The resolution, which was approved by a 4-3 vote, sets a March deadline for the Planning Board to provide the opinion.
The resolution states that LD 2003, the ambitious legislation passed this year to combat the state housing crisis, would supersede the local standard by allowing two units on a parcel in a zone that allows residences. That law will go into effect in July 2023.
The request also asks the board to look at “the current strip zoning limitations in all areas outside of the Lake Auburn Watershed overlay in an effort to try to help address the housing shortage and demand upon existing housing stock.”
Both issues have been brought up in recent years and led to considerable public debate, with both ultimately not moving forward.
The council debated the issue in 2019, ultimately lowering the income standard from 50% of a family’s income to 30% of an individual’s income. According to the memo, the change has not yielded any increase in new farms.
Last year, proposed state legislation to eliminate the use of income standards failed.
Those opposing the bill said the zoning rules have been used as both a means to concentrate growth in the city’s urban neighborhoods, where there are services, and to ensure that farmland stays that way.
But those in favor of striking down the rule say it’s been unfair for the majority of taxpayers, including many who own property in the zone and can’t live there, and has stifled new housing at a time when it’s needed.
The council memo Tuesday said Auburn’s Planning Department has received numerous requests to petition the Planning Board to change zoning in order to construct a residence in the zone.
Members of the public were wary of the city wading back into the debate.
Pam Rousseau said she didn’t see the recent petition inquiries as reason enough to make a change.
“We need our (agricultural) zone,” she said. “It’s something that we can never get back.”
Jane Costlow, who serves on the city’s sustainability and natural resources committee, which will work with the Planning Board on the review, said there should be a “robust series of conversations” about the issue among people looking to balance the need for housing with preserving natural resources.
She reminded officials that while a previous study of the zone recommended doing away with the income standard, it also recommended that it be replaced with other language to making sure to maintain agricultural uses.
Mayor Jason Levesque said if the standard was removed, the 10-acre lot minimum would still apply, but that every 10-acre lot could have a residence. He said looking at the issue now will allow the city to designate growth areas.
Councilor Dana Staples, who voted against the resolution, said there were “problematic” sections of the document, including language that contradicts what the council recently heard from its consultant regarding watershed rules.
Councilors Rick Whiting and Belinda Gerry also opposed the resolution.
‘PERMIT READY’ HOUSING
Also on Tuesday, Mayor Levesque shared plans to create an ad hoc committee that would develop “permit ready” housing plans that interested builders or property owners could use.
Levesque said that as Auburn continues to see high demand for a variety of housing types, there are also lots of questions over the types allowed and potential designs. If approved, the city would contract with an architectural firm, which along with the committee, would develop several designs that would be available to potential builders for free.
“We are also faced with residents’ justified concerns that new construction will not fit into the current neighborhood aesthetic,” the memo states. “While choosing a plan from this list shall not be a mandatory condition of construction, by offering these shovel-ready plans free of charge to builders, the intent is to expedite and make new construction more cost effective while guiding style to what is acceptable” within neighborhoods.
According to the memo, the designs could be for several housing types, including townhouse-style homes, detached accessory dwelling units, single-family homes on historically nonconforming lots, and duplexes, triplexes and more.
Send questions/comments to the editors.
