Department of Community Development
Reference: Affordable Housing Definition and Matrix Update
To: Mayor Gregory Mills and Members of the City Council
Through: Michael P. Martinez, City Manager
Prepared By: Shawn Weiman, Affordable Housing Coordinator
Date Prepared: March 25, 2025
PURPOSE
Provide for discussion and seek direction regarding revisions to portions of the Brighton Municipal Code (Code) that define affordable housing and outline the process by which fee reductions are applied for, reviewed, and considered.
BACKGROUND
The basis for revising the Code definition of affordable housing was presented to the City Council during a January 28, 2025 study session. At that time, revised area median income levels, source of income limits, fee reductions, and strategies identified in the Housing Needs Assessment (HNA) were introduced. Additional points within § 3-5-10 Definitions and § 3-5-50 Application for Reduction or Subsidy are presented for consideration.
1. Minimum Duration of Restriction. Housing tax credits are used to finance many affordable housing developments and are locally allocated and monitored by the Colorado Housing and Finance Authority (CHFA), which requires a minimum fifteen-year restriction. The restriction period can be longer than fifteen years and is typically for thirty years. The current definition of affordable housing does not require a minimum restriction duration. The impact fee reduction application asks whether the development will include a restriction duration of at least ten years for rental housing or five years for owner-occupied housing.
2. Affordability Mechanism. The draft revised definition of affordable housing presented to the City Council on January 28, 2025, includes the requirement that a deed restriction be placed on the affordable units. The Brighton Housing Authority has requested that the land use restriction agreements they enter into with CHFA satisfy this requirement. The Colorado Department of Local Affairs (DOLA) has prepared a list of affordability mechanisms that satisfy Proposition 123 requirements and recognizes land use restriction agreements as well as deed restrictions, promissory notes, covenants running with the land, or other regulatory agreements enforceable by a jurisdiction or housing authority.
3. Special Need Populations. The current application for impact fee reductions includes a question as to whether the development will provide a minimum of 5% of the units to one or more “special needs populations including, but not limited to, large-family (three [3] or more bedrooms), homeless, elderly, disabled and agricultural workers.” Staff concludes that the current Code language intends to consider the merits of affordable housing projects based in part on whether these specific groups will be accommodated. The context of three of the listed groups warrants discussion.
a. Large-Family. Affordable housing income limits take into account household size and bedroom count, and State regulations prohibit discrimination based on familial status and using familial relationships as a basis for setting occupancy limits.
b. Elderly. “Elderly” is not defined and possibly connotates an age beyond that used to restrict what is commonly known as “senior” housing. Housing restricted to residents of a certain age is allowed under fair housing regulations, and existing senior affordable housing in Brighton utilizes 55- and 62-year age restrictions.
c. Disabled. “Disabled” is considered disability-first language which can be negative in nature. “Persons with disabilities” is the term used in the American Disabilities Act.
4. Fee Reductions. Since presenting a draft Affordable Housing Fee & Dedication Reduction Table (Table) to City Council in January, a concern was raised that overall, the reductions were too large. In addition, a Staff evaluation of the impact on the general fund (which finances enterprise fund fee reductions) found that the water and storm water fee reductions should be lower than drafted. Conversations among the City directors concluded that the level of reductions appearing on the currently used Attainable Housing Matrix (the “Matrix”) be transferred to the draft Table. Given the recent renaming of impact fees and the addition of a general services impact fee, as well as considering the concerns mentioned above, the draft Table was revised to reflect the Matrix as closely as possible.
In addition, it was recognized that seniors tend to own fewer vehicles and drive less frequently and for shorter distances than younger drivers, and senior housing often includes on-site amenities and programs. Both conditions reduce seniors’ impact on City facilities and personnel. Accordingly, a full waiver of the transportation and general services impact fees for senior affordable housing was included in the draft Table.
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS
To more effectively accommodate and encourage affordable housing development that will accomplish the goals of the HNA, to better identify certain population groups, and to make granting of fee reductions, subsidies, or other incentives more compatible with budgeting constraints and functions, Staff recommends:
1. That a thirty-year minimum affordable housing restriction duration be required for affordable housing to better ensure preservation of affordable housing inventory.
2. That alternate affordability mechanisms other than deed restrictions alone and using DOLA’s guidelines be accepted for affordable housing.
3. That (a) “large-family” be deleted and consideration of the project be made in part by the overall bedroom count mix; (b) “elderly” be replaced with “senior” and that consideration of the project be made in part by the level of age restriction, if any, and the minimum age for senior affordable housing be set at fifty-five; and (c) “disabled” be replaced with “persons with disabilities.”
4. That the draft Table, intended to replace the Matrix, be revised to more closely reflect the reduction amounts offered in the Matrix and include a full waiver of the transportation and general services impact fees for senior affordable housing.
REQUESTS OF CITY COUNCIL The City Council’s feedback and direction is requested regarding:
1. The restriction duration of affordable housing,
2. Alternate affordability mechanisms,
3. Revising population group terms, and
4. The draft Table fee reductions.
ATTACHMENTS
• Draft Affordable Housing Fee & Dedication Reduction Table 3-24-25
• Draft PowerPoint Presentation “Affordable Housing Definition-DRAFT-CC SS 4-8-25”