01 (3) - Laserfiche WebLink

Terrace project, Greenbriar, Ridgeview Commons, and other developments in the area. He presented the site plan showing the development location, community building, three-story portions, access from Vineyard and Kottinger without thru-traffic, the community building opening toward vineyards, and said all buildings are linked. Next steps are for the Task Force to begin work on designing the conceptual site plan, development of the elevations and architecture, modeling to determine the mass, height and location so both the Council and neighbors have an opportunity to see what the project looks like on the site. They need to work on the financial pro forma, conduct more meetings with residents involved, finalize the ownership structure and other issues discussed previously. This phase will not lead to approval of the project, but what staff has is a conceptual site plan, the Task Force and staff feels the site plan offers a lot to meeting its goals, but there are more issues to be worked out. He said they could look at a two-story option along with the three-story option, and staff included a site plan for atwo-story option which spreads the development out too far, it causes a separation in the development and does not work as well on the site in terms of creating a neighborhood and maintaining as much open space on the site. They could also look at reducing the number of units down from 150, they can focus on costs, build some sensitivity analysis into the financial pro forma so we have a good sense on what those are, and they could suspend work on the project to work on something else, as well. He felt this step is critical to determine whether a development can be formulated that meets the Council and resident's needs and is compatible with the adjoining neighborhoods and neighbors. Mayor Hosterman said she has a fundamental problem with the cart and horse look of the project. But, her concern is that she would like to have an understanding before talking about two or three stories, numbers of units, connecting versus non-connecting, moving people and others, she would like to understand whether the same type of affordability that we can offer seniors today will remain in the future. If the Council moves forward, do we know with certainty that we will be able to serve the same segment of seniors we are serving today, or does the affordability component change such that we are serving a larger number of seniors but not at that low rate. Mr. Bocian said one of the Task Force's clear goals has been to create a development that retains the current rent levels at Kottinger and at Pleasanton Gardens. Based on financial analysis done before, it is feasible to transfer the same rent levels, and they are also looking at options for those units above the 90 units, but clearly the idea would be for identical affordability. Councilmember Sullivan questioned if those units above 90 would not be as affordable, and Mr. Bocian said one of the financing options looks at having a tax credit project, where you may have some units at 50% AMI similar to what is in place at Ridgeview. Some of them could also be higher at 60% of the AMI. Ultimately, what this comes down to is, how much money they are able to get in the project for grants and loans, how much the City would be willing to contribute to the overall construction of the project and what the total project development costs are. The actual rent levels are resolved at a later date, but he thinks it would be difficult to assume that you are going to have all of the units at Kottinger levels. Councilmember Cook-Kallio said she has visited the site a few times, someone she knows has been inside some of the cottages, and some of the issues have to do with updating it to meet current safety and other standards for the elderly. She confirmed rent paid is based on a percentage of what senior's income is. Councilmember McGovern said she had no idea that all of the units were going to be put on Kottinger and she does not understand what happens to Pleasanton Gardens in the plan. Mr.