Get email alerts on the Housing Market Study topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents and Color Penfield Green press board for clarifications on RKG housing study
Summary
Public commenters and board members urged the town to clarify RKG Associates' housing market study — asking whether approved multifamily projects were included, what the vacancy figures mean, and for household-size trend data — and asked staff to follow up with RKG.
Get email alerts on the Housing Market Study topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Public commenters and board members used the Aug. 19 work session to press for clarifications on a draft fiscal impact analysis and housing market study by RKG Associates that is posted on the town website. Ann Bell urged the board to act on attainable housing recommendations and offered participation in a proposed Penfield housing coalition; Jill Carter read a Color Penfield Green letter that praised the study and urged clearer mapping of fiscal-scenario areas and flood-mitigation planning for Panorama Plaza.
Jill Carter read the group’s letter verbatim: “Color Penfield Green thanks the Penfield Town Board Supervisor Barry and RKG Associates for this well-thoughtout, comprehensive and easy to digest housing market study and fiscal impact analysis.” Board members identified several follow-up questions for RKG: confirm whether recently approved and proposed multifamily units (the Arbors and other projects totalling about 750 units cited in the draft) were included in absorption and vacancy calculations; segment multifamily totals by age-restricted and workforce units; and reconcile cited vacancy figures (the draft mentions both 4% and 7.8% at different points).
Council members also asked RKG to explain in plain language how absorption interacts with vacancy and to provide household-size trend data (average household size over time) to help the town decide whether zoning or comp-plan amendments are needed. Staff said they will set up a follow-up call with RKG and return to the board with clarifications and proposed next steps, including whether an addendum or comp-plan update is appropriate and how study recommendations should be implemented.
AI generated
The text on this page is AI generated. Summaries, highlights, analysis, and video transcripts are all produced from the original source material.
AI can make mistakes, so if you spot one, and we will fix it for everyone.
Note: the source content is unaltered by us. Any content source we link to, be it a video, an audio recording, or a document, is presented exactly as its publisher released it. That publisher is usually a government body, sometimes an individual official or another organisation.

