Laserfiche WebLink
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes <br />April 8, 2008 <br />Page 5 <br />Ms. Kvilvang stated this is correct. <br />3 Councilmember Roth asked if there is a time restriction on reaching the 60% threshold. <br />4 <br />5 Ms. Kvilvang replied that HUD defines "presale" as a purchase agreement with a deposit of <br />6 earnest money. It was her opinion that HUD likely does not define the amount of time required <br />7 to meet the threshold, and added it is likely the developer will be able to determine relatively <br />8 quickly whether there is interest in the project. <br />9 <br />10 Councilmember Roth stated it was his understanding that there are two types of cooperative <br />11 housing, i.e., limited market and market rate, and asked for clarification on the advantages and <br />12 disadvantages of both types, as well as what was used to make a decision on the City getting a <br />13 limited market cooperative. <br />14 <br />15 Ms. Kvilvang stated this was the choice of the developer and added that a limited equity <br />16 cooperative is where they are buying a portion of shares in the project and buying into a master <br />17 mortgage; the advantage of a limited equity is in keeping the project affordable. <br />18 <br />19 Councilmember Roth stated with a limited market arrangement, a unit's value will only go up a <br />20 certain amount each year, so over time, it could be viewed as more affordable if the market starts <br />21 to go up again. <br />22 <br />23 Ms. Kvilvang stated with a limited equity arrangement, if you are going to sell, there is typically <br />24 a long waiting list and the unit is still sold through the cooperative. <br />25 <br />26 Councilmember Roth stated from the list provided for a senior product, two of the three were <br />27 market rate cooperatives as opposed to limited market. He indicated that in changing the <br />28 Development Agreement, the City is going to have a lower tax base than if condominiums were <br />29 in place. He stated over time, with a limited market, that tax base could be somewhat arbitrarily <br />30 lower than what a market rate cooperative could be, based on the assumption that over time, the <br />31 value of the property will increase. He asked why the limited market arrangement was decided <br />32 upon instead of the market rate, and expressed concern that the City may be giving up a higher <br />33 taxable unit overall. He stated it was his understanding that the City approved this project in <br />34 order to enhance the community and increase the tax base, and questioned whether the City <br />35 should give consideration to a market rate arrangement. <br />36 <br />37 Mayor Faust stated when you do market studies, you look at your target audience, and if you <br />38 have a market rate versus a limited market arrangement, you end up with higher costs, higher <br />39 entry fees, and a higher down payment; as a result, from an affordability standpoint, you get <br />40 more with a limited market arrangement. He added the Development Agreement is not being <br />41 changed this evening and the resolution only authorizes the commencement of negotiations. <br />42 <br />43 Darrell Gemar, Pratt Ordway, representing the developer, appeared before the City Council and <br />44 stated they looked at both limited market and market rate arrangements and with the limited <br />45 equity, it is more affordable and there is more of a market right now for limited equity <br />46 arrangements. He stated they are still evaluating both types of arrangements but are leaning <br />