Are we square? (WMP&I and Google images)

Returning for July before it summer semi-recess, the Springfield City Council blasted through a pile of grants, funding acceptances and other financial orders on July 14. The funding ranged from tiny grants to multimillion-dollar awards from the Massachusetts Gaming Commission.

Relatively noncontroversial financial items were not the only things to move with speed last Monday. The body granted first step to an ordinance that purports to control out-of-town landlords, provide transparency and address housing prices, if indirectly. However, it seems likely to complicate much-needed housing construction. Indeed, it may create an impediment to developing places to house the homeless and other populations.

Councilors Timothy Allen, Lavar Click-Bruce, Brian Santaniello and Tracye Whitfield participated virtually. City Council President Michael Fenton switched to remote participation late in the meeting.

The vice-president would takeover, but the presiding office needs to be in-person. Whitfield is the Council’s vice president. Consequently, the seniormost member, at-large Councilor Kateri Walsh, took over the meeting upon Fenton’s departure.

The exact impetus for the housing ordinance is unclear. At-large City Councilor Sean Curran announced in January he would advance the bill, although it has had starts and stops since. The ordinance’s purpose, supporters say, is to create some kind of minimal living standard. Last Monday’s debate suggested, at best, the need for the bill was, at best, a moving target. Opposition underscored how this would only complicate construction of much-needed housing.

Waiving good-bye to small homes? (via Facebook/Springfield City Council)

The ordinance sets strict square footage requirements for rental units in both new construction and reused structures. Of note, efficiency apartments would need to be at least 500 square feet. Developers could receive a waiver, but it would be subject to approval from both the Building Department and the City Council. Inaction by either could result in a waiver’s approval by default.

Before councilors got to the bill, however, they had requests for utility work and about 30 financial items to consider. The new fiscal year beginning July 1 ostensibly showered the Council with a cascade of grants and financial items.

Eversource’s requests for Locust, State and Worthington streets received approval. However, the Council continued 27 requests for internet provider GoNetSpeed. Councilors stated they were seeking further review to identify the work’s impact.

Peter Garvey, Director of Capital Assets, presented a $19,690,123 bond for school projects. Most should receive up to 80% reimbursement from the Massachusetts School Building Authority. The projects include roof and window replacement at Bowles School, Sumner Avenue School, Glenwood School and Central High School. Councilors approved the bond without dissent.

The body approved a land transfer on Ringold Street. The land will be used to build housing. The vote was unanimous, but Ward 1 Councilor Maria Perez recused herself.

Councilors accepted several grants under $100,000 summarily. These will go to the Elder Affairs, Health & Human Services and Library departments. There were several larger grants to these departments as well including $458,415 for senior center activities.

There was a $213,434 grant for shared streets and spaces. It will pay for work on Berkshire Avenue and Densley Road. The HHS Department also received $934,419 for homeless youth services.

Among grants over one million dollars were state funds for 911 support in the amount of $1,117,816. The Gaming Commission gave the city $1,256,196.67 for police coverage around the casino. The state Executive Office of Health & Human Services provided a $2,189,700 increase to the Safe & Successful Youth Initiative grant the city receives. This will be spread out over three fiscal years. The funds assist with city efforts to combat youth violence.

Some gaming adjacent financial items were in play. (WMP&I)

The final large grant was a competitive award from the Gaming Commission’s community mitigation fund. Chief Development Officer Timothy Sheehan said the $2,903,700 grant would fund several items. Among them are a traffic impact study, reuse study for Old First Church, gaming awareness, capital improvements to Symphony Hall, South End improvements and parking infrastructure.

All grants passed without dissent.

What would not pass by acclimation was first step on Curran’s ordinance. It cleared that first hurdle by a 8-4 vote, however. Councilors Click-Bruce, Whitfield, Malo Brown and Melvin Edwards aired concerns about the added costs this would place on developers.

Curran, however, described it as something that would simplify building.

“I wanted to create a common language and common terms of which we can understand when developers come and ask and request for their projects,” he said. Developers, he continued, would come and say they’re building a 1 or 2 bedroom or a studio apartment, but leave no clear impression about how big it would be.

One square foot in front of the other. (still via YouTube/Focus Springfield)

“It’s unfortunate that some developers come before the council and they provide us information that is less than, I feel, that is accurate,” Curran continued.

It is not clear that setting standards would meet this call for transparency. Softer touches like clear declarations for unit size could easily meet that burden.

Other, somewhat contradictory reasons also arose during the debate. Ward 6 Councilor Victor Davila claimed it was about living in dignity. He even suggested that not passing the legislation could lead to a population boom. Springfield is still down 20,000 people from its 1960 peak of roughly 175,000.

Curran invoked the city’s housing crisis and a common villain in city—out-of-town landlords—for charging more for less of a house. He claimed that “mom and pop” landlords in Boston had cashed out and were buying up homes in Springfield to convert into multiple rental units.

“They’re chopping them up in these small little apartments and they’re going to turn around and say to the City Council, ‘Hey, if these larger developers can do it, why can’t we?’” he said.

The housing crisis itself featured prominently in opponents’ arguments, too.

Councilor Brown, who represents Ward 4, observed that the size requirements could be especially onerous for developers reusing old buildings. Springfield is replete with empty or underutilized ex-industrial buildings—and increasing other commercial structures—that would be prime targets for apartment conversion.

“When you have a historic building, you have to build according to the design. You can’t knock walls down,” he said. “So, sometimes when you’re talking about square footage, they might not be able to actually do 500 square feet.”

Councilor Edwards, who represents Ward 3, observed that many residential projects that are not single-family homes already require subsidies. Another layer of bureaucracy would only make it harder to building, he argued. He noted that the city is already competing with other Massachusetts communities and others across the Northeast for housing investments.

Edwards in 2019. However, his comments last week can be summed up in his expression here. (via Springfield City Hall)

“Why would we want to put something in place that actually gives them pause on saying once again, Springfield’s already hard enough to do a business?” Edwards asked, rhetorically. “Now you’re going to make it even harder for those of us who build housing to operate within the city?”

One answer may lie in a point Curran laid out early in his presentation. While discussing waivers for units smaller than 500 square feet, he specifically invoked housing for the homeless. Northampton is planning to build a 30-unit facility with efficiency apartments for those exiting homelessness. Project documents indicate units will be 400 square feet.

Curran described this waiver process as straightforward. However, homeless housing could easily become a political football. Springfield has resisted projects that qualify for the state’s Dover Amendment. That law allows broadly-defined educational facilities to go up without regard to local zoning or approval. The Springfield City Council is generally more accommodating than some localities’ officials. Still, a homelessness facility could attract opposition depending on its location in the city.

In addition to the bureaucratic hurdles, at-large Councilor Whitfield was incredulous that the homeless single adults or others in need would pass on housing because of a unit’s size.

“If you’re thinking of a homeless person, they would not mind living in 350 square foot as opposed to living on a bench,” she said. Whitfield added that plenty of elderly individuals on fixed incomes would downsize rather than face uncertainty or worse.

Whitfield also raised concerns about how the ordinance could conflict with a state law that legalized accessory dwelling units statewide.

Among those who voted for the bill to advance, at least two expressed some reservations. Councilor Fenton, who represents Ward 2, said he understood the opposition, but believed it would do the good Curran outlined. Councilor Perez was a bit more hesitant. She did not want to see the Council dictating too much to developers.

Aside from Curran, Davila, Fenton and Perez, Councilors Santaniello, Walsh, Jose Delgado and Zaida Govan voted to advance the bill. Councilor Allen did not vote.

The final item was another ordinance that would clarify that residences could request an additional garbage barrel provided they pay another $90 annually for it. Public Works czar Christopher Cignoli said the proposal would likely lead to reductions in revenue from households that place bulk waste stickers on excess trash bags. However, the added revenue from second barrels would make it a wash.

The ordinance passed first step without dissent.

(WMP&I)

The housing regulation ordinance comes at an unusual time for Springfield. After no fewer than two housing bubbles since the Savings & Loan Crisis, demand is manifesting in both the rental and the homeowner markets. This suggests a more durable problem, which only more housing can address.

However, the construction market is somewhat in tension with the solution. Housing values—or potential rent—in Springfield are still too low for many developers to consider building absent subsidies. If there is an actual uptick in chopping up existing houses, there may be reasons to curb that activity. But without alternative housing becoming available to meet demand, prices will remain high. Both renters and homeowners—whose tax bills councilors have long decried—will struggle to pay rising costs for shelter.