The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutMN-IURANI-2016-02-12 108 East Green Street Ithaca, New York 14850 (607) 274-655 MINUTES IURA Neighborhood Investment Committee February 12, 2016 I. Call to Order The meeting was called to order at 8:31 by Chair Tracy Farrell. Present were T. Farrell, Paulette Manos, Fernando deAragon, Lynn Truame (staff), and Zac Boggs and Isabel Fernandez (guests). Karl Graham arrived at 9:01. II. Public comment None III. Review of Minutes – February 2016 Moved by F. deAragon, seconded by P. Manos. Unanimously approved as written. IV. New Business 1. Proposal for 402 S. Cayuga Street site – discussion Zac Boggs and Isabel Fernandez presented their proposal to redevelop the 402 S. Cayuga Street site as for‐sale housing. INHS has confirmed that affordable for‐sale housing at the site is financially infeasible, but INHS could build affordable rental units there. Boggs and Fernandez own their home on West Clinton Street, which they have been restoring, and are both landscape architects. They are in the process of completing an accessory rental unit on their property – a structure which they designed, took through permitting, and construction managed themselves. Their plan for the 402 S. Cayuga Street site would produce four townhouse units which would be rented for two to five years and then sold. Parking would be tucked under the buildings, as with the INHS proposal. F. deAragon asked how land ownership would be handled. Boggs replied that they would create lot lines through the site for each unit, establish a Homeowners Association for grounds maintenance, and create an easement for the shared driveway. DeAragon inquired whether the project could be put into INHS’ land trust. Fernandez responded that while their intent is to create units that would be affordable to families with moderate incomes, they did not intend to legally restrict occupancy to maintain affordability. P. Manos asked why the property would initially be rented rather than sold directly upon completion. Boggs replied that there are liability issues involved in selling new construction, which they are hoping to avoid by renting out the units initially’ however, they have not entirely ruled out direct sale. It was suggested that the IURA could require that the units be sold within some specified period of time after completion of construction. DeAragon asked how long term “moderate affordability” could be ensured, Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency noting that the initial sale price might be reasonable, but subsequent sales, if not restricted in some way, would probably not be. L. Truame suggested that if the INHS land trust model did not work, perhaps a deed restriction affecting future sales could be implemented. Boggs indicated they would be interested in exploring a mix of incomes in the project with some units having less costly finishes and a lower sale price. The committee expressed interest in the general idea being proposed and encouraged Boggs and Fernandez to further develop the proposal, including some way of ensuring the future affordability of the units and/or mixing incomes. Boggs and Fernandez may attempt an NHI bond application in this 2016 funding round and will contact Truame early next week to discuss the application. 2. Possible Consolidated Plan amendment to address emergency shelter – discussion T. Farrell explained that the 2014‐18 Consolidated Plan was written shortly after the Rescue Mission took over operation of the emergency shelter. Under the prior operator the shelter was rarely full; under the new operator it is consistently full. The Plan noted this dramatic increase in shelter usage and stated that the City would monitor this situation and potentially amend the Con Plan if it appeared there was a newly demonstrated need for expanded shelter space. The committee considered whether the Plan should be amended to include emergency shelter as a High Priority (rather than a Low Priority) need. The committee asked staff to secure additional information, including: typical waiting list numbers on any given night at the shelter, percentage of people housed at the shelter who have been sanctioned by DSS, whether there is a time limit on shelter stays, whether there is any indication of need for a family shelter (as opposed to the general population shelter we have now), whether occupants of Chartwell House and Magnolia House have generally been successful in securing permanent housing after leaving those facilities, what the typical length of stay is at Chartwell and Magnolia, and what the cost is to residents to stay at the Rescue Mission’s Court Street residence. The committee agreed that even before receiving this information we should move expanded emergency shelter from a “low” to a “high” priority. Truame will prepare a resolution for the February IURA meeting. 3. Rental Housing Advisory Commission agenda item: vacancy rates – discussion The Rental Housing Advisory Commission agenda for February 17 includes a discussion of vacancy rates in the City and the potential impact on rental rates. L. Truame plans to attend the meeting to hear this discussion and invited members of the NI to attend if they were interested. 4. Addition to the agenda: 2016 Work Preserve funding application – discussion L. Truame was invited to meet with Historic Ithaca on February 11 to discuss their 2016 Work Preserve application. HI recognizes they are serving two distinct populations at this time, each of which is important to their mission: one group is ready to receive specific employment training and assistance with a permanent job placement, and one has significantly greater needs and will not be ready for employment placement at the end of their time with Work Preserve. Recently, program participants from that second population have been referred to Challenge for placement in supported employment. The committee was asked to consider whether HI should submit applications in both the Economic Development and the Public Services categories this year, in recognition of this reality. After discussing the matter, the committee asked staff to let HI know that because our funding is awarded via a very competitive process every year there are risks to either continuing with a purely Economic Development application (the ED Committee may not support it), or splitting the application into an ED component and a Public Services component (the ultra‐competitive nature of the Public Services pool). Given that reality, the committee doesn’t feel comfortable advising HI as to how best to proceed. V. Old Business 1. Housing for School Success – update L. Truame provided an update on the project. The draft application is written, commitment letters have been received from ICSD, the Advocacy Center, and INHS, and are pending from AFCU and Workforce NY. Brenda Westfall has her board meeting on Tuesday February 16 and expects to be able to provide a letter indicating that IHA will take over the TBRA portion of the project in year two. 2. 203 Third Street final subsidy amount – update INHS will draw $8000 less than their full allocation in bond funds for 203 Third Street. This is because they are selling another property at the same time which is virtually identical (301 Madison), and there would have been a significant discrepancy in cost between the two due to their prior financing structures (301 Madison is a buy‐back, which INHS will be acquiring from the current owner for approximately $165,000). INHS is adjusting the 301 Madison sale price down by providing an internal subsidy; they are adjusting the 203 Third Street sale price up by decreasing our subsidy. Both houses will sell for $129,000. INHS will provide additional down payment assistance to the buyer of 203 Third Street, if needed, to allow anyone who would have qualified to buy the home at the originally‐intended sale price of $114,000 to qualify to buy it at the new sale price. VI. Motion to Adjourn The meeting was adjourned by consensus at 9:56.