Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Rda Housing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
RDA approves $5.5M participation for 80%‑AMI units at Independence at the Point
Summary
Bluffdale’s RDA approved a participation agreement with Dakota Pacific (Plentiful Way) to subsidize deed‑restricted apartments targeted to 80% AMI. The $5.5M allocation is staged by permit and completion and carries a 20‑year deed restriction with reporting and remedies for noncompliance.
At a special RDA session Nov. 12 the board approved a participation agreement to support an apartment project in the Independence master planned community that will include deed‑restricted units targeted at 80% of area median income (AMI). RDA staff said the agency will allocate up to $5.5 million (net present value basis) to the project in performance‑based tranches tied to permits, building completion and compliance reporting; the deed restriction and reporting obligations will run for 20 years.
Grant, RDA staff, said the subsidy is designed to close a financing gap that would otherwise prevent the developer from building the project. The developer, represented by Ray of Dakota Pacific (Plentiful Way Title Holder LLC), agreed to a marketing plan aimed at critical workforce households (police, fire, municipal, school employees) and general 80%‑AMI occupants; the deed restriction and participation agreement impose tenant‑income and tracking requirements and create remedies for default.
The assistance is structured in three main tranches: an initial permit‑level payment tied to Building 1 permits (approx. $500,000), payments upon exterior/site completion (approx. $1.7M), a later payment at Building 2 completion (approx. $1.3M), and a final compliance tranche of about $2.0M after reporting on occupancy and deed restrictions, with exact figures and timing laid out in the contract exhibits. RDA counsel and staff noted default, remedy and clawback provisions in the agreement and said funds are released as milestones are met to limit exposure.
Board members asked about market risk and enforcement. RDA counsel said that if the developer materially breaches marketing or deed‑restriction obligations the agency retains contractual remedies (including repayment claims and termination), but acknowledged enforcement would require legal action if necessary. Staff emphasized regular reporting and a requirement to record the deed restriction prior to final tranches.
The RDA board voted to approve RDA Resolution 2025‑90 authorizing the participation agreement and deed restriction. Staff said the developer planned to submit building permit applications promptly and that construction on a first building could start in the coming construction season if permits and weather align.
