Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMN-IURANI-2013-07-12 108 East Green Street Ithaca, New York 14850 (607) 274-655 Approved Minutes IURA Neighborhood Investment Committee July 12, 2013 I. Call to Order The meeting was called to order at 8:37 AM by Chairperson Tracy Farrell with members Theresa Halpert, Karl Graham and Fernando de Aragón present. Also present were staff member Sue Kittel and Paul Mazzarella, Executive Director of Ithaca Neighborhood Housing Services. II. Public comment None. III. Review of Minutes –May 10, 2013 On a motion by Halpert and second by de Aragón, the minutes were approved unanimously. IV. New Business a) Homeownership in the City of Ithaca—presentation Mazzarella gave a brief power point presentation regarding affordable homeownership in Ithaca. He noted that the trends in the City housing market are very different from the surrounding region of upstate NY. The average sale price of homes within the Ithaca City School District from 2000 to 2008 went from less than $100,000 to about $200,000. The price of homes in the INHS target area, which is essentially the flats, showed a change in average sale price rising from $88,000 in 2000 to $180,000 in 2012, with no dip in sale price as a result of the recent economic downturn. The total number of sales of homes costing less than $150,000 in the City went from about 150 in 2000 to just 12 in 2012. Mazzarella noted that the drivers of housing demand include population and employment. The total population within the city rose less than 1% between 1990 and 2000, while Tompkins County had a modest growth of 8% in the same time period. The number of households in the City rose 41.6% during the same time frame, due to an increasing number of single person households. This is in contrast with Tompkins County which had a 13.4% increase in the number of households during that period. Mazzarella noted that in other places the percent increase in population growth roughly equals the percent increase in number of households. He also noted that approximately 60% of INHS’ first time homebuyers were single people. IN terms of employment, Mazzarella noted that Ithaca also does not follow regional or national norms. He reported that Tompkins County had the greatest increase in private employment in any area of the state since 2000. Since 2000, the increase in private employment has been: 2.5% in the Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency United States; 4.5% in New York State; 8.6% in New York City; and 18.5% in the Ithaca metropolitan statistical area. He contrasted this with Binghamton, which has sustained an 11.4% loss in private employment since 2000. Mazzarella also noted that Tompkins County is the biggest employer for both Schuyler and Tioga counties. He remarked on the 15,000 in-commuters each day. Finally Mazzarella provided the committee with an example of home financing to demonstrate the need for significant subsidies to make homes affordable. The example is as follows: For a single family home, typical costs $250,000 development costs, including acquisition, construction, architectural and other soft costs, etc. $180,000 market value (sale price) $70,000 shortfall for development of high quality, energy- efficient market rate housing To make the home affordable, a subsidy of another $50,000 or so is needed so that a low- income buyer can pay the mortgage and taxes on the home, making the total shortfall to construct one unit of affordable housing approximately $120,000. The committee asked questions about the subsidy needed to construct affordable housing and thanked Mazzarella for his presentation. b) Neighborhood Housing Initiative Program—discussion The Neighborhood Housing Initiative was discussed as a tool for creating affordable housing. Mazzarella noted that it was a difficult program to use because the subsidy amount is determined by formula at the very end of the project. This uncertainty about a final financial package for the development could make the project risky. The Housing Initiative Guidelines specify that the subsidy amount is limited to a maximum of $90,000 with an average anticipated to be $70,000 per unit and the total is determined to be the lesser of the total development cost minus the appraised fair market value after construction or $90,000 per dwelling unit. Project costs may include property acquisition, predevelopment, demolition/construction, soft costs, interim interest, developer fee and selling costs. Mazzarella noted that INHS is not in the position to undertake a project in which the funding is speculative. After some discussion, the Committee agreed to bring a resolution forward to the IURA guaranteeing a minimum project subsidy to be paid through the Neighborhood Housing Initiative supplemented by HOME funds, if needed. With this financing guarantee INHS will be able to move forward with projects proposed at 214 Second Street and 314 South Plain Street. In the meantime, the Committee directed staff to issue a Notice of Funding Availability for the Neighborhood Housing Initiative with a rolling application deadline. c) Environmental Review for the 2013 Grant—discussion Kittel reviewed the project classification table with the Committee. The environmental review is normally undertaken by the IURA but this has changed due to the recent MOU signed between the City and the IURA regarding CDBG and HOME grant administration. The environmental review will now be completed by the Common Council. d) Other Farrell raised the issue of unsafe buildings. She was made aware of a City initiative to address abandoned, unsafe buildings in the City. Sue Kittel is staffing a policy discussion for the City and Farrell will participate. The committee stressed their interest in not investing in properties which were not publicly owned or transferred to an affordable housing developer. There was also discussion of prioritizing CDBG and HOME funds for projects which cannot be undertaken through City capital projects. V. Old Business a) Property Disposition—discussion of properties slated for disposition with no proposals received—possible resolution The committee revisited the property disposition and asked that Kittel draft a resolution to remove previous stipulations required for purchase of 213-215 West Spencer Street and 701 Cliff Street, and to allow the IURA to sell these properties through a realtor. Property Disposition 213-215 West Spencer Street and 701 Cliff Street Whereas, the Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency has signed purchase and sale agreements with the City of Ithaca for parcels at 213-215 West Spencer Road and 701 Cliff Streets and has undertaken a process to return these vacant parcels to residential use, and Whereas, there were no responses to the request for proposals issued for either of these parcels, and Whereas, the Common Council stipulated that 213-215 West Spencer Street incorporate fully taxable housing in the form of an architecturally compatible multi-unit residential development, including affordable housing if feasible, and Whereas, the Common Council stipulated that 701 Cliff Street be redeveloped as multi-unit residential development (which includes a duplex) which is fully taxable, and Whereas, with these stipulations the properties are not seen as feasible redevelopment sites, and Whereas, the IURA Neighborhood Investment Committee considered this matter at their May 10, 2013 meeting and recommended the following; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, that the IURA hereby recommends that the City of Ithaca Common Council remove these development stipulations for the properties at 213-215 West Spencer Street and 701 Cliff Street and allow the IURA property to sell these two properties through a realtor with no stipulations as to final use. b) other None. VI. Motion to Adjourn The meeting adjourned by consensus at 10:55 AM.