Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Affordable Housing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Developer CHOC pitches district-level downtown housing plan to Cathedral City council
Summary
Community Housing Opportunities Corporation outlined a district master-planning approach that would aim to deliver hundreds of workforce and affordable units in downtown Cathedral City, proposing phased development anchored by city‑owned sites and district infrastructure to reduce costs.
A national community development nonprofit proposed a district-level approach to build workforce and affordable housing in downtown Cathedral City during the council study session on May 27.
Feliciano Vara, vice president for real estate finance at Community Housing Opportunities Corporation (CHOC), told the council that a coordinated, district master plan — rather than a series of fragmented parcel-by-parcel projects — could yield infrastructure savings and make projects more financially viable. "We propose and we see ourselves as potentially being a partner as a master developer ... with the goal of building a minimum of 400 units of market rate, workforce and affordable housing," Vara said.
Nut graf: CHOC and city staff framed the presentation as informational. Staff summarized regional examples and financing tools, including residual soft loans and use of Low Income Housing Tax Credits (LIHTC). CHOC emphasized LIHTC is competitive and time-consuming, projects often take seven to nine years from concept to occupancy, and achieving scale via a master plan could unlock state and federal funding opportunities.
What CHOC suggested: CHOC reviewed a feasibility exercise for a triangular 1.61-acre site near Buddy Rogers and Date Palm and reported that an intense, no‑parking program could physically fit about 285 units on that one parcel but would be impractical; instead, they proposed a downtown strategy that aggregates sites to meet surplus-land thresholds and district-level infrastructure needs. CHOC said a minimum program of about 400 units would allow district solutions that could lower off‑site infrastructure costs by 10–20 percent and make projects more attractive to capital partners.
Council concerns and technical points: Councilmembers raised questions about parking (decoupling parking minimums and shared parking), design compatibility with adjacent neighborhoods, phasing versus building all sites at once, the cost of underground parking, and ongoing operations funding. CHOC and staff discussed potential tools: surplus land act disposition pathways, pro‑housing code incentives, fee waivers, soft loans and district financing (an enhanced infrastructure facilities district) to help pay capital and operating needs.
Public input and next steps: Several residents urged regional collaboration (one suggested a regional housing trust fund) and requested transparent community discussion about long-term impacts on traffic, parking and the city’s character. Staff said the presentation was informational and that they would work with the city attorney, CHOC and other stakeholders to refine options and return with more detail to the council for possible next steps and grant timing.
