Council to advance Pinery Park pilot so developer can pursue $5.5 million renovation for low‑income elderly housing

City staff asked the City Council during a Sept. 8 work session to advance an ordinance that would authorize a 1% payment‑in‑lieu‑of‑taxes (PILOT) and a 3% municipal services agreement (MSA) for the Pinery Park apartment complex at 2300 Newstead to enable a developer to pursue a $5.5 million renovation and a Low‑Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) application.

The proposal, presented by Nicole (city staff), would fund interior and exterior upgrades at the 1979 complex, replace an existing 20‑unit townhome building with a 37‑unit building and maintain long‑term affordability restrictions tied to HUD and other federal contracts. Nicole told council the property “really does provide a key community resource for the elderly and disabled residents in Wyoming.”

Why this matters: Pinery Park serves a high proportion of low‑income, elderly and disabled residents. Staff said 90% of current residents earn less than $25,000 per year and 65% earn under $15,000; 64% are over age 62 and the median resident age is 66. The developer needs a local pilot/MSA commitment to pair with LIHTC financing from the Michigan State Housing Development Authority (MSHDA); council was told the developer’s application must be filed before Oct. 1, creating an expedited schedule.

What staff presented: Nicole summarized the renovation scope—bathroom and kitchen updates, HVAC, new windows and doors, roofing and brick repairs, lighting, carpet and paint, parking and sidewalk work—and the addition that would increase density. Staff provided a multi‑year revenue model showing that, under the recommended 1% PILOT and 3% MSA, the city’s general fund revenue would continue an upward trajectory because the MSA revenues would flow entirely to the city even though other taxing jurisdictions (county, school) would see reduced shares. Nicole characterized the project as a “rare” case where a PILOT/MSA structure would preserve or improve the city’s revenue trend while enabling substantial reinvestment in a property that serves very low‑income residents.

Questions and council discussion: Council members pressed staff on how the affordability restrictions would be enforced and for how long. When Councilmember Sean asked, “How can we be assured that the elderly, disabled, and low income continue to be given access to these units?” Nicole replied, “The units are restricted. So they have to qualify through their income, or through age verification or disability verification. That will go on for the life of the pilot.”

Council members also asked whether rents could rise and whether a sale could carry the PILOT forward. Staff said the property’s HUD contracts limit rent increases and that the PILOT in this case is tied to the loan; if the loan remains in place the PILOT remains in place. Staff noted the property previously had a pilot that was revoked when the property was sold under a prior owner; in this instance the developer anticipates pairing the PILOT/MSA with LIHTC and a LYTTAC refinancing to fund the renovations and to set aside long‑term maintenance funds required by LIHTC underwriting.

Next steps: Council indicated support to move the ordinance forward. At the end of the discussion Councilmember John said the intent is to place the ordinance on the consent calendar for final reading at the next council meeting so the developer can meet the Oct. 1 LIHTC application deadline.

Ending: Staff will return the ordinance for council action at the council’s next meeting; if council approves, staff said the PILOT/MSA and the LIHTC application would enable the planned $5.5 million renovation while preserving the property’s income and age restrictions.