Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09042024 PC AgendaIn compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the office of the City Clerk (951) 694-6444. Notification 48 hours prior to a meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to that meeting [28 CFR 35.102.35.104 ADA Title 11]. AGENDA TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING COUNCIL CHAMBERS 41000 MAIN STREET TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA SEPTEMBER 4, 2024 - 6:00 PM CALL TO ORDER: Chair Bob Hagel FLAG SALUTE: Commissioner Gary Watts ROLL CALL: Hagel, Ruiz, Solis, Turley-Trejo, Watts PUBLIC COMMENT A total of 30 minutes is provided for members of the public to address the Commission on matters not listed on the agenda. Each speaker is limited to 3 minutes. Public comments may be made in person at the meeting by submitting a speaker card to the Commission Secretary. Speaker cards will be called in the order received. Still images may be displayed on the projector. All other audio and visual use is prohibited. Public comments may also be submitted by email for inclusion into the record. Email comments must be received prior to the time the item is called for public comments and submitted to PlanningCommission@temeculaca.gov. All public participation is governed by Council Policy regarding Public Participation at Meetings adopted by Resolution No. 2021-54. CONSENT CALENDAR All matters listed under Consent Calendar are considered to be routine and all will be enacted by one vote. There will be no discussion of these items unless members of the Commission request specific items be removed from the Consent Calendar for separate action. A total of 30 minutes is provided for members of the public to address the Commission on items that appear on the Consent Calendar. Each speaker is limited to 3 minutes. Public comments may be made in person at the meeting by submitting a speaker card to the Commission Secretary. Speaker cards will be called in the order received. Still images maybe displayed on the projector. All other audio and visual use is prohibited. Public comments may also be submitted by email for inclusion into the record. Email comments must be received prior to 6:00 p.m. and submitted to PlanningCommission@temeculaca.gov. All public participation is governed by Council Policy regarding Public Participation at Meetings adopted by Resolution No. 2021-54. 1. Minutes Recommendation: Approve the Action Minutes of August 21, 2024 Attachments: Minutes Page 1 Planning Commission Agenda September 4, 2024 2. Director's Hearing Summary Report Recommendation: Receive and File Director's Hearing Summary Report Attachments: Memorandum RITSINFRS Members of the public may address the Commission on Business items that appear on the agenda. Each speaker is limited to 5 minutes. Public comments may be made in person at the meeting by submitting a speaker card to the Commission Secretary. Speaker cards will be called in the order received. Still images maybe displayed on the projector. All other audio and visual use is prohibited. Public comments may also be submitted by email for inclusion into the record. Email comments must be received prior to the time the item is called for public comments and submitted to PlanningCommission@temeculaca.gov. All public participation is governed by Council Policy regarding Public Participation at Meetings adopted by Resolution No. 2021-54. 3. Receive and File Presentation on Community Land Trusts, Regional Housing Trusts, and Housing Trust Fund (At the Request of Planning Commissioner Bob Hagel), Haide Urias Recommendation: Receive and File Attachments: Agenda Report Community Land Trusts - Local Housing Solutions COMMISSIONER REPORTS COMMISSION SUBCOMMITTEE REPORTS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR REPORT PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR REPORT ADJOURNMENT The next regular meeting of the Planning Commission will be held on Wednesday, September 18, 2024, at 6:00 p.m., in the Council Chambers located at 41000 Main Street, Temecula, California. NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC The full agenda packet (including staff reports and any supplemental material available after the original posting of the agenda), distributed to a majority of the Planning Commission regarding any item on the agenda, will be available for public viewing in the main reception area of the Temecula Civic Center during normal business hours at least 72 hours prior to the meeting. The material will also be available on the City's website at TemeculaCa.gov. and available for review at the respective meeting. If you have questions regarding any item on the agenda, please contact the Community Development Department at (951) 694-6444. Page 2 Item No. 1 ACTION MINUTES TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING COUNCIL CHAMBERS 41000 MAIN STREET TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA AUGUST 21, 2024 - 6:00 PM CALL TO ORDER at 6:00 PM: Chair Bob Hagel FLAG SALUTE: Commissioner Adam Ruiz ROLL CALL: Hagel, Ruiz, Solis, Turley-Trejo, Watts PUBLIC COMMENT The following individual(s) addressed the Commission: • Rocky Hale (Items #2, #3, and #4) • Jim Collins (Items #2, #3, and #4) CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Minutes Recommendation: Approve the action minutes of August 7, 2024 Approved the Staff Recommendation (5-0): Motion by Ruiz, Second by Turley-Trejo. The vote reflected unanimous approval. PUBLIC HEARING 2. Planning Application No. PA23-0438, a Development Plan for Village A of the Altair Specific Plan to allow for 146 detached single family and duplex homes and one (1) park (APNs: 940-310-013, 940-310-015, 940-310-016, 940-310-045, 940-310-046), Scott Cooper Recommendation: Adopt a resolution entitled: PC RESOLUTION NO. 2024-15 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA23-0438, A DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR 146 DETACHED SINGLE FAMILY AND DUPLEX HOMES AND ONE (1) PARK LOCATED WITHIN VILLAGE A OF THE ALTAIR SPECIFIC PLAN (APNS: 940-310-013, 940-310-015, 940-310-016, 940-310-045, 940-310-046), AND MAKING FINDINGS OF CONSISTENCY WITH THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT AND DETERMINING THAT NO FURTHER ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW IS REQUIRED PURSUANT TO SECTION 15162 OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT Approved the Staff Recommendation (4-0, Hagel absent): Motion by Ruiz, Second by Watts. The vote reflected unanimous approval with Hagel absent. 3. Planning Application No. PA23-0439, a Development Plan for Village B of the Altair Specific Plan to allow for 109 detached single family and duplex homes and one (1) park (APNs: 940-310-044, 940-310-045, 940-310-046, 940-310-047, 940-310-048), Scott Cooper Recommendation: Adopt a resolution entitled: PC RESOLUTION NO. 2024-16 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA23-0439, A DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR 109 DETACHED SINGLE FAMILY AND DUPLEX HOMES AND ONE (1) PARK LOCATED WITHIN VILLAGE B OF THE ALTAIR SPECIFIC PLAN (APNS: 940-310-044, 940-310-045, 940-310-046, 940-310-047, 940-310-048), AND MAKING FINDINGS OF CONSISTENCY WITH THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT AND DETERMINING THAT NO FURTHER ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW IS REQUIRED PURSUANT TO SECTION 15162 OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT Approved the Staff Recommendation (4-0, Hagel absent): Motion by Ruiz, Second by Watts. The vote reflected unanimous approval with Hagel absent. 4. Planning Application No. PA23-0440, a Development Plan for Village C of the Altair Specific Plan to allow for 45 buildings containing 212 attached rowhomes (APNs: 940-310-013, 940-320-002), Scott Cooper Recommendation: Adopt a resolution entitled: PC RESOLUTION NO. 2024-17 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA23-0440, A DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR 45 BUILDINGS CONTAINING 212 ATTACHED ROWHOMES AND ONE (1) PARK LOCATED WITHIN VILLAGE C OF THE ALTAIR SPECIFIC PLAN (APNS: 940-310-013, 940-320-002), AND MAKING FINDINGS OF CONSISTENCY WITH THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT AND DETERMINING THAT NO FURTHER ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW IS REQUIRED PURSUANT TO SECTION 15162 OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT Approved the Staff Recommendation (4-0, Hagel absent): Motion by Ruiz, Second by Watts. The vote reflected unanimous approval with Hagel absent. COMMISSIONER REPORTS COMMISSION SUBCOMMITTEE REPORTS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR REPORT PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR REPORT ADJOURNMENT At 7:50 PM, the Planning Commission meeting was formally adjourned to Wednesday, September 4, 2024, at 6:00 PM, City Council Chambers, 41000 Main Street, Temecula, California. Bob Hagel, Chair Matt Peters, Interim Director of Community Development Item No. 2 CITY OF TEMECULA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT PLANNING DIVISION MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission Chair and members of the Planning Commission FROM: Matt Peters, Interim Director of Community Development DATE: September 4, 2024 SUBJECT: Director's Hearing Summary Report Community Development Director's Agenda item(s) for August. Date Case No. Proposal Applicant Action August 15, 202 PA24-0081 A Resolution of the Interim Director of Community Amanda Development of the City of Temecula approving Fritscher APPROVED Planning Application No. PA24-0081, a DH RESOLUTION Conditional Use Permit for a sports and N0.2024-03 recreational facility to operate Monday through Sunday from 5:00 AM to 7:00 PM at an existing building located at 42095 Zevo Drive, Units A4 and A5, and making a finding of exemption under section 15301 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) guidelines (APN 921-680- 003) Attachments: Action Agendas ACTION AGENDAS ACTION AGENDA TEMECULA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR'S HEARING MEETING AUGUST 15, 2024 -1:30 PM TEMECULA CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS 41000 MAIN STREET TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA CALL TO ORDER at 1:30 PM: Matt Peters, Interim Director of Community Development PUBLIC COMMENTS — None Item No. 1 1:30 PM Project Number: Project Type: Project Title: Applicant: Project Description Location: Environmental Action: Project Planner: ACTION: PA24-0081 Conditional Use Permit West Coast Training Center and Lionheart Studios CUP Amanda Fritscher A Conditional Use Permit for a sports and recreational facility to operate Monday through Sunday from 5:00 AM to 7:00 PM at an existing building. 42095 Zevo Drive, Units A4 and A5 Categorically Exempt Section 15301, Class 1, Existing Facilities Yannin Marquez, Case Planner APPROVED BY INTERIM DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT MATT PETERS ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 1:45 PM Item No. 3 STAFF REPORT — PLANNING CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION TO: Planning Commission Chair and members of the Planning Commission FROM: Matt Peters, Interim Director of Community Development DATE OF MEETING: September 4, 2024 PREPARED BY: Haide Urias, Housing Analyst SUBJECT: Receive and File Presentation on Community Land Trusts, Regional Housing Trusts, and Housing Trust Fund (At the Request of Planning Commissioner Bob Hagel) BACKGROUND SUMMARY Planning Commissioner Bob Hagel requested staff to provide information on Community Land Trusts and Housing Trusts as relates to the provision of affordable housing. In consideration of this request, Staff reached out to Western Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG) to research the status of its Regional Housing Trust Initiative. This staff report provides an overview and comparison of Community Land Trusts (CLT), Regional Housing Trusts (RHT), and Housing Trust Funds (HTF) to assist the Planning Commission in understanding the key differences between these housing -related initiatives. The City is committed to providing affordable housing and as a result there are currently seven hundred eighty-one (781) affordable units housing low-income families, seniors, workforce individuals and families, not including the one hundred twenty-one (121) units currently in building plan review and construction. The City has a certified Housing Element approved by the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD), which includes enough vacant land zoned appropriately to accommodate our assigned Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) number of 4,193 units. In addition to the certified Housing Element, the City adopted a Permit Ready Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) program to facilitate additional housing opportunities. City staff will also be bringing forth an ordinance package to implement Housing Element Programs. These programs will help contribute to the total number of affordable units, which includes workforce housing and attainable housing. Currently, the City has two projects that are similar to the Community Land Trust model. The Habitat for Humanity project will be an attainable homeownership program for low-income families and Las Haciendas is a one hundred (100%) percent affordable housing apartment complex with seventy-seven (77) units available to low-income families. Habitat for Humanity Inland Valley, Inc. is a non-profit affordable housing developer that has worked with the City of Temecula to acquire land on Pujol Street in Old Town Temecula. They will build single family homes to provide families the opportunity of attainable homeownership. The homes will remain affordable for forty-five (45) years. Habitat for Humanity will be funding this project through various funding sources to ensure this homeownership development is available to low-income families long-term. Las Haciendas is a seventy-seven (77) unit affordable housing apartment complex built by Community HousingWorks (CHW), a non-profit affordable housing developer and operator, in Uptown Jefferson. This project is completely occupied, and providing housing that is attainable to the workforce community, low-income families, and individuals. Community HousingWorks worked with the City to acquire the land and received local and state funding to ensure the project remains affordable for a term of fifty-five (55) years. In both instances, the City provided land and funding to a non-profit organization for preservation of affordable housing by rent -restricting the units. The CLT and RHT concept are additional tools for the City to consider using to extend the affordability of these units for more than fifty-five (55) years. This report aims to clarify their respective functions, structures, and benefits. Affordable housing is a pressing issue in our city and exploring various housing strategies is essential to ensure housing stability for all residents. CLTs and RHTs are two distinct approaches to promoting and furthering affordable housing, each with unique characteristics and purposes. As for the Housing Trust Fund (HTF) this is a funding mechanism created by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) that provides grants to states to produce and preserve affordable housing. The Housing Trust Fund can be a potential a funding source for an established CLT or RHT. Community Land Trusts (CLTs): 1. Purpose: • CLTs are 501(c)3 nonprofit organizations that acquire and hold land to develop and maintain affordable housing units for low-income individuals and families. • Their primary mission is to provide long-term affordable housing and protect the community's interests by maintaining control over the land. This model is more sustainable for the longer -term preservation and rehabilitation of units. 2. Ownership Structure: • CLTs typically separate ownership of the land from ownership of the housing units. The CLT retains ownership of the land while allowing homeowners or other operators to own/rent the structures. 3. Governance: • CLTs are governed by a board of directors, which often includes community members, residents, and representatives with expertise in housing and finance. 4. Funding: • CLTs can access a variety of funding sources, including grants, donations, and low - interest loans, to acquire and develop affordable housing. N 5. Local Focus: • CLTs primarily operate within a specific geographic area, focusing on serving the immediate community's housing needs. Regional Housing Trusts (RHTs): 1. Purpose: • RHTs are collaborative organizations that pool resources and funds from multiple municipalities and stakeholders to address housing issues at the regional level. • They aim to create a more comprehensive and coordinated approach to affordable housing. 2. Ownership Structure: • RHTs do not own land or housing units directly. Instead, they facilitate funding, policy advocacy, and coordination among member jurisdictions and organizations. 3. Governance: • RHTs are governed by a board of representatives from member cities, counties, nonprofit organizations, and other stakeholders. Decision -making often involves multiple jurisdictions. Currently, WRCOG is recommending a nonprofit/Joint Powers Agreement variation model. 4. Funding: • RHTs rely on contributions from member jurisdictions, grants, and partnerships to support regional housing initiatives. 5. Regional Focus: • RHTs address housing challenges across multiple jurisdictions, emphasizing regional collaboration to tackle affordable housing issues more comprehensively. Comparison of CLTs and RHTs: • CLTs are localized entities focused on land ownership and housing development within a specific community, while RHTs take a regional approach, addressing housing challenges across multiple jurisdictions. • CLTs typically own and manage housing units directly, while RHTs facilitate coordination and funding for affordable housing projects but do not own the housing themselves. • CLTs often emphasize community engagement and control, while RHTs emphasize regional collaboration and policy advocacy. • CLTs secure funding through a variety of sources, including grants, donations, and loans whereas RHTs rely on contributions from member jurisdictions. 3 Conclusion: The City may consider both Community Land Trusts and Regional Housing Trusts as potential tools to address the City's affordable housing needs. As a member of WRCOG, staff will continue to monitor the Regional Housing Trust Initiative. City staff will reach out to CLTs currently in operation and conduct more research on this topic. City staff will continue to track funding sources at the state level that are tied to CLTs and RHTs. ATTACHMENTS: Community Land Trusts - Local Housing Solutions — Published May 11, 2021, localhousingsolutions.org 4 On this page Overview Approach Eligibility The local role Other considerations Examples Related resources �r Community land trusts This brief is appropriate for: Housing Market Condition: Soft Markets, Strong Markets Administering Agency: Department of Housing and/or Community Development Published: May 11, 2021 n Overview Community land trusts (CLTs) are mechanisms for creating affordable homeownership units and maintaining the units as affordable over the long-term. Traditionally, CLTs achieved and maintained affordability by retaining ownership of the land and requiring the homebuyer to purchase only the home that is situated on the land. While many CLTs continue to operate this way, others ensure affordability instead through other affordability mechanisms, such as deed covenants. CLTs are generally managed by a nonprofit or quasi -governmental organization and governed by a body comprised of purchasers of CLT homes, members of the public, and governmental and nonprofit stakeholders to ensure they remain grounded in the needs of the community. CLTs typically maintain long-term affordability by building resale conditions into the long-term ground lease that accompanies purchase of the structure. The ground lease generally includes a formula that is used to establish the price of the home at resale and provisions that limit resale to income -eligible families and give the CLT a purchase option when the home is put up for sale. Resale formulas vary from one CLT to another and typically reflect a balance between the goals of preserving long-term affordability of the CLT units and allowing the homeowner to build wealth. Homeowners build wealth in two ways: through the forced -savings gained by paying down the principal balance of their mortgage and through the share of home price appreciation allocated to them under the resale formula. This section describes some of the considerations for communities interested in developing a community land trust. Approach CLTs provide a mechanism for creating affordable homeownership opportunities and maintaining affordability over the long term. The CLT accomplishes these goals by (a) making homeownership units affordable through the use of a subsidy (or another mechanism such as inclusionary zoning) that brings down the initial purchase price of the units to qualified buyers and then (b) maintaining long-term affordability to future purchasers through a legally binding mechanism, such as a long-term ground lease or a deed covenant. The CLT is a form of shared equity homeownership. Other forms include deed -restricted homeownership (/housing-policy-library/deed- restricted-homeownership/) and limited equity cooperatives (/housing- policy-libra ry/limited-equity-cooperatives/). Shared equity homeownership is an approach to homeownership that balances the dual goals of maintaining the long-term affordability of homes to future home purchases and allowing purchasers to build wealth through homeownership. For more information on shared equity homeownership, including a discussion of the continuum of strategies under this umbrella, explore these Shelterforce Z and Joint Center for Housing Studies Z resources. (Opinions differ L'� on whether a fourth policy, shared appreciation mortgages (/housing-policy-library/shared- appreciation-mortgages/), should be considered a form of shared equity homeownership since it focuses on recapturing and preserving the buying power of public subsidies to help future buyers, rather than on preserving the affordability of specific homes.) CLTs purchase, or are granted, land within a community to steward for affordable housing. This land may or may not already have existing structures. In some cases, CLTs are involved in the development of homes for the program. The sites owned by the CLT may be contiguous, grouped together in one or more areas, or distributed on a scattered -site basis throughout the community. The housing can be single-family homes, multifamily buildings, or individual units within a multifamily building. Typically residents are homeowners, but a CLT could also lease their land for affordable rental housing, depending on the project and community needs. The CLT manages its land holdings as affordable housing for the community in perpetuity. Under the traditional CLT model, the land trust maintains ownership of the land and leases it out for affordable housing uses. This is typically done by selling the structure (whether a single-family home or a unit in a multifamily building) to an eligible buyer, along with a long-term ground lease (typically 99 years) that specifies (among other things) the terms under which the home may be sold to the next purchaser. Under this model, purchasers own the building (or attached unit) and lease the land from the CLT. Purchasers are often individual homeowners, but can also be co- operatives or non-profit housing organizations or developers. As owners of the land, the land trust maintains a degree of control over initial and subsequent uses. These rights include an option to repurchase the buildings when the owner wishes to sell, control over the resale price, and limits on eligible future purchasers and the use of the building or unit. Owners typically pay a monthly ground lease fee which covers administrative costs and costs associated with the property ownership (such as property taxes). The fee can also fund a long term property repair reserve. Most ground lease fees are low; often fees are less than $100 per month and sometimes as low as $1 per year. Although a long-term ground lease coupled with sale of the building is the traditional, and most common, approach used by CLTs to maintain long-term affordability, there are also variations on the typical model. In one newer variation, the land trust sells the land and property as a package, and maintains long-term affordability through deed covenants or other restrictions. This method is particularly useful in multi -family buildings, where the CLT purchases one or more units but does not own the entire building. In other cases, the CLT may choose to provide a long-term lease for both the land and the building, instead of selling the building. CLTs also stipulate a resale formula that determines the sales price of the property in the case of a sale. The formulas are typically structured to balance the community need for affordable homes with the opportunity for homebuyers to build wealth through homeownership. Common types of formulas are "indexed formulas" and "shared appreciation formulas." Indexed formulas use economic indicators, such as the area median income, wages, or consumer prices, to determine the home's sales price. These indices typically provide a more accurate reflection of families' purchasing power than changes in home values. Shared appreciation formulas calculate a sales price by adding some percentage of the home's value appreciation to the original sales price. Consider, for example, a homeowner who purchases a CLT home for $200,000. If the market value of an equivalent home increased by $40,000 during the period of ownership, and the CLT utilizes a shared appreciation model that allows the owner to keep one -quarter of the home price appreciation, the sales price would be set at $210,000 (the initial $200,000 purchase prices plus one -quarter of the $40,000 appreciation). CLTs are usually non-profit or quasi -government organizations with a specific board structure. Boards are typically made up of a combination of three types of community members: purchasers of CLT homes (or other occupants of CLT-owned properties), the general public (to represent future purchasers), and public representatives (for example government officials, funders and non-profit leaders in the community). By balancing the voices of these groups, the CLT holds itself accountable to the full community. Some CLTs are part of an existing organization, for example a local foundation or other community non-profit. CLTs generally rely on grant funding to provide the subsidy that allows units to be made available to home purchasers at below -market levels. Common sources of grant funding include local government funds or allocations of federal sources like CDBG and HOME funds, as well as foundations and local philanthropy. Some CLTs aim to maintain the long-term affordability of homeownership units made affordable through inclusionary zoning, density bonuses or other local affordability incentives or requirements. In such cases, the affordable units become part of the CLT, while the market - rate units remain unfettered and capable of generating revenue to help cross -subsidize the affordable units. As the CLT's portfolio grows, many programs generate revenue by collecting ground lease fees or membership fees that allow them to sustain their operations. Many CLTs offer ongoing support to home purchasers. These programs can include homeownership classes and resources for property maintenance and improvement. They can also include financial education or coaching programs. Owners of CLT homes, as mentioned above, also often play a leadership role in the management of the CLT. Eligibility CLTs generally place limits on the incomes of home purchasers and define an "affordable" home for their communities based on local conditions and priorities. Many CLTs require homebuyers to have incomes that are no greater than 80 percent of the area median income (AMI). This is particularly true for projects where federal funds are used where this is the maximum permissible income. However, different programs set different limits. For example, Community Home Trust 0 in Orange County, North Carolina, restricts homebuyers to incomes between 80 and 115 percent of AMI. Some CLTs give preference to families who work in the community. Other programs target first time homebuyers (typically defined as having not owned a home in the previous 3 years). Most CLTs also require homebuyers to attend a homebuyer education (/housing-policy-library/housing- education-and-counseling/) course or financial education class prior to purchasing a home, which they may offer directly or in partnership with a local non-profit organization. Purchasers of CLT homes may also be subject to other restrictions. For example, the ground lease often stipulates that the purchaser cannot sublet the property and must maintain the structure to a certain standard. If these conditions are not met, the CLT can find the purchaser in violation of the lease. The local role Local governments can be instrumental in developing CLTs and work closely with existing CLTs in their community to promote and preserve affordable homeownership opportunities. Some communities have adopted inclusionary zoning ordinances (/housing-policy-libra ry/inclusionary- zoning/), which incentivize or require developers to develop affordable housing in the course of developing market -rate units. In communities with these programs, the new affordable units may be designated to a local CLT to manage, such as in Chicago. Local governments can also prioritize CLTs for allocations of local funds and federal funds that the community allocates, such as HOME and CDBG funds. In addition, local governments can help to publicize CLT homes when working with potential homebuyers and fund homeownership education and counseling. Other considerations Like most other homebuyers, homebuyers in a CLT need to qualify for a mortgage. In order to do so, they need to meet underwriting requirements, which often include credit score thresholds and income verification. Underwriting a mortgage on a CLT property can be challenging for lenders, who may not be familiar or comfortable with the financial structure. Many CLTs maintain relationships with lenders and local loan officers so that they can direct interested homebuyers to lenders who have experience with the land trust model. Examples Champlain Housing Trust CJ in Vermont (formerly Burlington Community Land Trust) is the largest community land trust in America, with approximately 565 ownership units and over 2,200 rental units. The land trust offers shared equity programs to potential homebuyers, as well as ongoing support to residents through homeowner education, financial counseling, and loan programs for rehab and energy efficiency improvements. First Homes U Community Land Trust in Rochester, MN supports affordable homeownership in the Rochester area. The CLT has significant support from The Rochester Area Foundation and from the Mayo Clinic, the area's largest employer. The board structure of First Homes differs from other community land trusts in that the foundation plays a significant role, a topic discussed in this case study Z. First Homes is also a member of the Minnesota Community Land Trust Coalition Z, which supports ten community land trusts throughout the state. The Chicago Housing Trust Z (formerly Chicago Community Land Trust) is a nonprofit organization that works very closely with the city to preserve long- term affordability for homes created through City programs. The mayor appoints board members with City Council consent and the city provided staff and funding during the land trust's early years. The organization maintains long-term affordability through deed restrictions which last for 99 years rather than through a traditional ground lease. The organization also provides pre- and post -purchase workshops for homeowners and works with local lenders and lawyers to help facilitate successful purchase of the units in the program. Related resources • With funding from the Housing Solutions Lab, a team of researchers at the University of Utah, Kansas State University, and Queens College, NY studied whether community land trusts can function as a path to homeownership for immigrants. They conducted qualitative case studies of immigrant -inclusive CLTs (https:Hlocalhousingsolutions.org/wp- content/uploads/2023/09/Final-version_-CLT-Executive-Summary- 2023.pdf) and developed a database of CLTs Z overlaid with information about immigration patterns and Welcoming City status in the U.S. This research uncovers opportunities and provides examples for cities to develop inclusive housing models that address the economic, linguistic, and other barriers that immigrants may face. • Burlington Associates provides a number of informative documents and tools in its Community Land Trust Resources Z website. Presentations, information sheets and interactive tools cover topics like: Community Land Trusts 101, choosing a resale formula, developing and marketing land trust homes, and funding CLTs. The e-book Starting a Community Land Trust Z is also available. • Grounded Solutions L'� is a national network that provides support for Community Land Trusts and other forms of shared equity homeownership. Their CLT Start -Up Hub Ci provides resources for organizations interested in developing a new CLT, including suggested activities for each step along the path from idea to implementation. • This 2020 interview Z with Tony Picket, CEO of Grounded Solutions, explores how CLTs can be used to advance racial and economic justice. • This article from Zoning and Planning Law Report Ei outlines how local governments can develop and work with community land trusts to preserve affordable homeownership. The article highlights community land trusts in Chicago and Irvine, both of which were started by local government. It also provides recommendations for localities on starting city-wide CLTs. • Street Level Advisors' Comparing Shared Equity Resale Formulas Z tool was designed to help community leaders understand the relative performance of different shared equity resale formulas. This tool allows a side -by -side comparison between several models and allows the user to change these input assumptions to immediately see changes in the relative performance of each of the models in terms of both ongoing affordability and equity building for homeowners. • Under the Lens: Community Ownership Takes Center Stage Shelterforce (July 2021), Shelterforce launched an article series to explore how community land trusts, limited -equity housing cooperatives, and other models of community ownership are changing. The series includes profiles of individual local housing initiatives, including a description of a Community Land Trust in Durham, NC Ci, and analysis of recent innovations in community ownership, such as the viability of using the community land trust model to preserve the affordability of limited - equity co-ops Z.