challe nge s and o ppo r tunitie s
play

Challe nge s and o ppo r tunitie s T ar a Bar auskas, E xe c - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Affor dable housing pr oduc tion in Santa Monic a Challe nge s and o ppo r tunitie s T ar a Bar auskas, E xe c utive Dir e c tor Co mmunity Co rp o f Sa nta Mo nic a Co mmunity Co rpo ra tio n o f Sa nta Mo nic a E sta b lishe


  1. Affor dable housing pr oduc tion in Santa Monic a Challe nge s and o ppo r tunitie s T ar a Bar auskas, E xe c utive Dir e c tor Co mmunity Co rp o f Sa nta Mo nic a

  2. Co mmunity Co rpo ra tio n o f Sa nta Mo nic a  E sta b lishe d in 1982  Ove r 1,700 units o f AH in Sa nta Mo nic a , o ve r 4,000 pe o ple se rve d  Ve rtic a lly inte g ra te d-Pro pe rty Ma na g e me nt, Se rvic e s, De ve lo pme nt  Va rie ty o f pro duc t type s-ne w c o nstruc tio n, re ha b  Clo se to 6,000 pe o ple o n wa iting list

  3. Re habilitate d pr ope r tie s and ne w c onstr uc tion

  4. De ve lo ping in SM to da y- c ha lle ng e s a nd o ppo rtunitie s Pr ope r ty ac quisition c halle nge s  Sc a rc ity, e xpe nse o f site s  Ma ny site s ha ve pe o ple living in the m, do n’ t wa nt to re lo c a te  Hig hly c o mpe titive , re q uire s sho rt time fra me s a nd c a sh o ffe rs  L a ndma rks pro c e ss c a n ta ke time a nd po se risk  Co st to a c q uire e xisting b uilding s to re ha b – a ppro x $450K -$650K pe r unit (just a c q )

  5. Pr ope r ty ac quisition c halle nge s  Sc a rc ity, e xpe nse o f site s Addr e ss L ist Pr ic e Sale Pr ic e Units L and $/ unit Sold Gra nd Vie w Blvd, W.L A $5.6M $5.7M 50 $112K Ye s L inc o ln Blvd, SM $5.8M No t so ld 36 $161K No Do wnto wn (two lo ts), $12.25M No t so ld 75 $163K No SM Mic hig a n Ave , SM $6.6M $6.62M 38 $175K Ye s 14 th Stre e t, SM $7.8M $7.8M 39 $200K Ye s 6 th Stre e t (o ne lo t), SM $6M Pe nding 30 $200K No Ve nic e lo ts $7.6M No t so ld 36 $211K No T he Arro yo $16.4M $16.4M 64 $256K Ye s

  6. De ve lo ping in SM to da y-c ha lle ng e s a nd o ppo rtunitie s (c o nt) Pr ope r ty ac quisition oppor tunitie s  City-o wne d la nd (purc ha se o r le a se )  Ada ptive re use / re de ve lo ping site s with o the r use s  Mo re nimb le a c q uisitio n fund o r pro c e ss c o uld he lp

  7. De ve lo ping in SM to da y-c ha lle ng e s a nd o ppo rtunitie s (Co nt) Proje c t de sig n a nd la nd use c ha lle ng e s  I nfill site s with pa rking o nsite a re e xpe nsive  Arc hite c tura l b e lls a nd whistle s a re e xpe nsive  City c o de re q uire me nts c a n a dd c o st  Building pe rmit pro c e ss is le ng thy  Zo ning in ma ny a re a s is a limita tio n; c o uld b uild mo re units with hig he r de nsity/ F AR a llo we d  Pa rking re q uire me nts drive c o st a nd re duc e numb e r o f units de ve lo pe d

  8. De ve lo ping in SM to da y-c ha lle ng e s a nd o ppo rtunitie s (Co nt) Proje c t de sig n a nd la nd use opportunitie s  Administra tive a ppro va l is a sig nific a nt to o l in de ve lo ping AH; c o uld b e e nha nc e d furthe r  Co uld lo o k a t de nsity a nd pa rking re q uire me nts o n c o mme rc ia l c o rrido rs o r ne a r tra nsit  Co uld lo o k a t stre a mlining L a ndma rks a nd ARB pro c e ssing fo r 100% AH pro je c ts  Co uld lo o k a t le ss tra ditio na l/ mo re inno va tive ho using type s to re duc e c o sts-mo dula r, ADU e tc

  9. De ve lo ping in SM to da y-c ha lle ng e s a nd o ppo rtunitie s (Co nt) F inanc ing c halle nge s  Pro je c ts de ve lo pe d a re g o ve rne d b y funding re g ula tio ns-AHPP (Unit size s, re nts), T CAC (de a dline s, re q uire me nts), City re q uire me nts (time line s, limite d funding )  T CAC funding is ve ry c o mpe titive , we c o mpe te with a ll L A Co unty pro je c ts; tie b re a ke r c o mpe titio n  No t ma ny o the r funding so urc e s to le ve ra g e  All funding so urc e s va lue c o st e ffic ie nc y a nd lo c a l ma tc hing re so urc e s  Co nsulta nts a nd c o ntra c to rs do n’ t g ive “disc o unt” to AH; we pa y ma rke t.  So me fe e s a re a ive d, o the rs no t (pe rmit fe e s); a ro und $15K / unit  Pre va iling wa g e a dds 15-30% c o st  Re so urc e s fo r se rvic e s funding (spe c ia l ne e ds)

  10. Pa st Pro je c ts-c o sts High Plac e E ast, Comple te d June 2014 2602 Br oadway, Comple te d Oc tobe r , 2012 Addre ss: 2401 Virg inia Ave . Addre ss: 2602 Bro a dwa y   Units: 44 Units: 33   T o ta l Co st: $19,567,593 T o ta l Co st: $23,944,782   Pric e / unit: $592,957 Pric e / unit: $544,199   Pa rking : Sub te rra ne a n Pa rking : Sub te rra ne a n   High Plac e We st, Comple te d Nove mbe r 2012 2802 Pic o, Comple te d June 2013 Addre ss: 2345 Virg inia Ave . Addre ss: 2802 Pic o Blvd.   Units: 47 Units: 33   T o ta l Co st: $20,080,701 T o ta l Co st: $23,605,039   Pric e / unit: $608,506 Pric e / unit: $502,234   Pa rking : Sub te rra ne a n Pa rking : Sub te rra ne a n  

  11. De ve lo ping in SM to da y-c ha lle ng e s a nd o ppo rtunitie s (Co nt) F inanc ing/ de ve lopme nt oppor tunitie s  Additio na l funding re so urc e s , timing , re duc tio n o f c o st  Additio na l c o unty funding fo r se rvic e s a nd re nta l sub sidie s  Stre a mline pe rmit a nd c o nstruc tio n pro c e sse s  Co uld re vie w pre va iling wa g e re q uire me nt o r c re a te a lte rna tive

  12. De ve lo ping in SM to da y-c ha lle ng e s a nd o ppo rtunitie s (Co nt) Othe r c halle nge s and oppor tunitie s  Co mmunity do e sn’ t a lwa ys e mb ra c e AH in the ir c o mmunity; a lso issue s with de nsity, he ig ht a nd pa rking . Asso c ia te d issue s with ma rke t ra te de ve lo pme nt.  Ca n wo rk to b uild mo re suppo rte rs fo r the missio n; so me a lre a dy e xist  AHPP pro g ra m is a g re a t to o l, c o uld b e furthe r re fine d. Onsite ve rsus o ffsite o ptio ns.

  13. L I HT C funding b a sic s  T wo pro g ra ms– 9% a nd 4%  T wo ro unds a ye a r  Must ha ve AL L e ntitle me nts a nd a ppro va ls e xc e pt b uilding pe rmit to a pply (b urde n to de ve lo pe r)  Hig hly c o mpe titive -pre c isio n is c ritic a l  L ike ly o nly 1 9% pro je c ts a ye a r wo uld g e t a llo c a te d in SM

  14. 9% pro je c ts must pic k a ho using type a nd se t-a side a t a pplic a tio n Housing T ype s  L a rg e F a mily (65% g o a l)  Spe c ia l Ne e ds (25% g o a l)  SRO (typic a lly o ve rla ps)  At-Risk (typic a lly o ve rla ps)  Se nio rs (15% g o a l) (fo r 62+) Se ta side s  No npro fit (ho me le ss prio rity with c e rta in funding -must b e 50% ho me le ss)  Rura l  At-risk  Spe c ia l ne e ds/ SRO

  15. Que stio ns?

Download Presentation
Download Policy: The content available on the website is offered to you 'AS IS' for your personal information and use only. It cannot be commercialized, licensed, or distributed on other websites without prior consent from the author. To download a presentation, simply click this link. If you encounter any difficulties during the download process, it's possible that the publisher has removed the file from their server.

Recommend


More recommend