Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Affordable Housing Rehab topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Developer asks CRA for $750,000 toward rehab of 16-unit Alibaba Ave. complex; board flags parking and budget timing
Summary
A developer presented plans to renovate a 16-unit courtyard apartment at 1900 Alibaba Avenue and requested potential CRA support; board members expressed concerns about parking adequacy and said any funding decision must wait for next fiscal-year budgeting and resolution of parking and zoning issues.
A developer seeking CRA assistance presented a plan on Tuesday to renovate a 16-unit courtyard apartment complex at 1900 Alibaba Avenue and requested the agency consider a capital subsidy of about $750,000; board members said they will not commit funds this fiscal year and raised parking and timeline concerns.
The owner told the board the building, acquired in 2017, needs substantial rehabilitation and that total renovation costs are about $1.4 million. The CRA director said the agency’s historical approach to similar projects ranges from about $30,000 to $45,000 per unit and that a $45,000-per-door metric would translate to roughly a $750,000 contribution in exchange for a covenant on the property for an agreed term.
“Usually, we put in $800,000, towards helping people either do infill stuff or rehab large projects,” the director said, describing the usual developer-assistance budget line. But he cautioned the CRA reallocated funds this year to purchase properties downtown and will only know next year’s budget after county property-tax roll numbers arrive beginning June 1; final budget preparation follows July 1.
Board members focused on parking and zoning constraints. Several members said the property currently has roughly 10 parking spaces while the proposal calls for 16 residential units, which could lead to on-street parking that the city and neighborhood would find unacceptable. “We don’t want to allocate money, and then they come back to us and say, well, y’all told us y’all were gonna give us some money if there’s a problem with the logistics,” Board member Bass said, urging that parking be resolved before any commitment.
The board did not vote on funding. Members directed staff to continue individual meetings with commissioners to refine priorities, consider whether off-site parking or other zoning solutions are practicable, and return with a formal recommendation during the next budget cycle. The director said he will include any viable project in next year’s budget discussions if the board indicates interest and if parking and regulatory issues are resolved.
The project remains at the proposal stage; no binding CRA commitment was made at the meeting.
