Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Senior Housing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Kenai commissioners discuss senior‑housing feasibility, wait list and market‑study budgeting
Summary
The commission reviewed a referral to investigate senior housing, reported contact with a local architect for a feasibility scope, discussed a tightened assisted‑housing wait list (about 116 people) and budgeted a market‑study, noting its current $6,000 budget may be insufficient.
Commission members discussed progress on a prior recommendation that Kenai city council investigate the need for additional senior housing.
Staff reported contacting a local architect for a feasibility study that would replicate the scope used in a 1988 study: demographics, soils, conceptual drawings, and conceptual rent/operating feasibility. The architect provided a ballpark estimate that staff described as roughly in the mid‑hundreds of thousands (staff reported a ballpark of about $250,000–$300,000). The commission did not adopt any procurement action during the meeting.
Members also discussed changes to the assisted‑housing wait list. Staff reported there are about 116 people on the wait list for partially subsidized senior housing; turnover has slowed and some applicants now wait much longer than in past years. Staff gave one example of an applicant who remained on the list for two years before being housed.
On market analysis, staff said they put $6,000 in the budget to obtain a new rental‑market study but that the outside quote they received exceeded that amount; the exact quote was not clear in the meeting record. Staff said the company that completed past market work was not available, and that a different local firm may be used.
Commissioners raised design and accessibility considerations for new housing, including unit‑mix (one‑ and two‑bedroom demand), ADA‑friendly features and how subsidized units should be structured so they do not compete with other subsidized housing. Members agreed these questions should be addressed in a full feasibility scope and discussed holding a work session once a draft scope and budget are prepared.
Why it matters: the commission’s recommendation has potential budgetary and land‑use implications for the city and for housing partners such as Alaska Housing; a feasibility study would inform council decisions about scale, affordability targets and funding needs.
