The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About7.4 SrHousingProposalUpdat CITY CLERK File # 430-50 AGENDA STATEMENT CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: September 3, 2002 SUBJECT: Senior Housing Proposals Update Report Prepared By: Julia Abdala/Housing Specialist ATTACHMENTS: 1. Proposal Comparison Chart RECOMMENDATION: ,~] ~, ~eive Staff's report and determine the preferred option for ~" selecting the Developer. FINANCIAL STATEMENT: No financial impact at this time. DESCRIPTION: On April 16, 2002 the City Council directed Staff to proceed with a Request for Proposals (RFP) to obtain proposals from developers interested in providing Senior Housing. The RFP was designed to solicit proposals to provide information needed for the City Council to select a developer to proceed with the project. The Senior Housing project would be adjacent to a new Senior Center to be constructed in 2003. At this time Staff has received proposals from four developers. These four proposals have been evaluated by Staff, three outside raters and by the City's housing consultant, Daniel B. Lopez, for financial feasibility. A chart comparing the four proposals that were received is provided in Attachment No. 1. All four developers have ample experience to produce and maintain affordable senior housing at the proposed site. All four developers are interested in working with the City and are flexible enough to be able to work next to a newly constructed Senior Center. The four proposals were from non-profits and would allow the senior apartments to be maintained as affordable for the life of the project. In order to construct this project the developers will need to apply for and retain funding from various sources. The type of funding they apply for and receive will affect some of the features of the project. The level of affordability preferred by this City Council will influence the type of financing for which the developer will apply. The final location and final appearance of the Senior Center will also impact the housing project. If the footprint of the Senior Center is shifted or located differently than in the original feasibility study, the senior housing project will need to be moved and this would impact the configuration of the building. The design that the architect presents and the City Council accepts for the Senior Center will influence the type of exterior that is provided for the housing. It is anticipated that the location and appearance of the Senior Center will be developed prior to the conceptual design phase of the Senior Housing. COPIES TO: In-House Distribution ANALYSIS It is necessary to evaluate which developer would provide a project for the City most compatible with the specific characteristics that the City Council is interested in promoting. Staffhas identified two potential options for selecting the developer. Option One: A special meeting of the City Council would be scheduled. At this meeting each of the developers would provide information on the project they would like to provide for the City. Council, as well as Staff would have the opportunity to ask questions of the developer. At the end of the interview process, the City Council would determine which developer would provide a project most in line with the City's requirements. The City Council would authorize the City Manager to negotiate an agreement with the selected developer. Option Two: The City Council could appoint a subcommittee of two members of the Council to meet, with Staff and the Housing Consultant to interview the four developers. At the end of the interviews, Staff, the Housing Consultant and the two Councilmembcrs would develop a recommended finalist for Council consideration. The criteria that should be considered with either selection process are: 1. Design and Compatibili _ty Issues - A. Site plan amenities will influence the type of financing that the developer pursues. The selection team should consider what types of amenities are most important such as: 1) size of units 2) balconies 3) community room 4) common open space B. Compatibility with the new Senior Center will affect the final product for Senior Housing. Some compatibility issues include: 1) amount of parking provided for Senior Hoursing, proposals range form .5 space per unit to 1 space per unit 2) access to parking garage or parking area 3) architectural design and its relationship with the Senior Center. 2. Financing - The RFP indicated that the City would provide the land for Senior Housing in the form of a ground lease for an extended period for a minimal rent. Preliminaril~y, the deVelopers are also requesting from $1,700,000 - $2,000,000 in financing from the City. During the selection process the following questions must be answered. A. How much is the City willing to direct toward financing this project. · If the City is intent on minimizing City financing, a lower number of units may be constructed. · The amount of financing the City is willing to provide to this project will influence the type of outside financing pursued by the Developer. · Minimizing City financing will influence what income range is targeted with this development. B. How soon does the City want to receive repayment of its loan? · The type of outside financing competed for would vary, depending on how the City Council answers this question. 3. AffordabiliW level - Proposals range from providing housing to seniors with incomes at 20% of median area income to 60% of area median income. This would create rents ranging from $220 - $787. A. How low an income level does the City want to provide housing for in this project? The type of financing for which the developer will apply will partially depend on the input received fi.om City Council. 4. Completion Time line - Proposals range from completion by June 2004 to August 2006. How quickly the City Council wants the project completed will affect the type of outside financing available to the developer. Some outside funding sources take more time to obtain than others. 5. Managerial Capacity and History- The new complex will be built on City land. It will be adjacent to a new Senior Center. The City will want to consider the management and maintenance of the Senior Housing Project. All four developers manage their own developments. Recommendation: It is Staff's recommendation that the City Council receive Staff's report and determine the preferred option for selecting the Developer. COMPARISON OF PROPOSALS FOR SENIOR HOUSING BY 4 DEVELOPERS 7/26/02 EDEN HOUSING, INC. EAH, INC. AM. BAPTIST HOMES OF THE WEST MERCY HOUSING OF CALIFORNIA Will dual track application HUD Sect. 9% Tax Credit 202 9% Tax Credit HUD Sect. 202 9% Tax Credits 9% Tax Credit Preliminary Amt. Requested in subsidy from City $1,700,000 $1,800,000 $1,980,000 $1,753,358 $1,774,095 $1,882,145 % Financed by City 21% 19% 22% 23% 19% 24% No units proposed, 54 units 48 units 50 units 48 units 48 units 44 units # lbdrm, 53- lbdrm 40- lbdrm 45- 1 bdrm 47- lbdrm 47- 1 bdrm 44 ~1 bdnn #2 bdrms 2 bdn~s (1 for 8- 2 bdrm (incl 5 - 2 bdrms 1- 2 bdrms (mgr) 1 - 2 bdrm (mgr) mgr) 1 for Mgr) Square Footage of 1 bdrm 540 sf Same Not listed Not listed Not listed Approximately 600' units 2 bdrm 790 sf sf. All units Rental Affordability 53 units 22 units<45% 5 units <30% From <20% of medic n 24 units <45% All < 40% median <45% 24 units<50% 5 unitS < 40% to <50% of median 23 units < 50% lunit mgr 1 unit < 60% 25 units < 50% 1 unit mgr 1 unit mgr 15 units < 60% Earliest possible completion date 8/30/06 3/4/05 June 2004 May 2006 May 2006 2/25/05 Requesting pre- construction financing? Not yet Not yet Not yet Not yet Not yet Yes, amt. Not listed Total Construction Cost $8,167,471 $9,265,740 $8,998,495 $7,534,158 $9,573,379 $7,933,500 Total cost per unit $151,249.46 $171,587.78 $179,970 $156,962 $199,445 $180,307 _CitY subsidy per unit $31,481.48 $37,500.00 $39,715 $36,528.29 $36,960.31 $42,776.02 ATTACHMENT