Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Affordable Housing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Developer pitches 50–100 modular workforce homes and asks Milford to form RDA support
Summary
Logan Hill of Millstream proposed a 50–100‑unit modular rental community targeting data‑center and mine workers, asked the council to consider a redevelopment agency (RDA) or tax‑incentive structure to offset about $300,000 in horizontal costs; council directed further study and to coordinate with planning and state property contacts.
Logan Hill, a partner at Millstream, told the Milford City Council on June 16 that his firm can deliver a rapid, fully furnished modular housing community of roughly 50 to 100 units to serve expected workforce demand from nearby mining and data‑center employers.
Hill said Millstream would buy land, install horizontal infrastructure (roads, sewer, water easements) and build and operate furnished rental units arranged to provide some privacy and common space. "We will buy the land, set up the horizontal development, and actually build the houses on‑site," Hill said, and added the firm typically holds and rents the units rather than sells them.
The developer identified a 21‑acre site adjacent to the hospital as a leading candidate and said utilities are accessible. He estimated a site build‑out of about four months to prepare 50 units, and that the modular units are designed to last 20 to 25 years. Hill said the horizontal development alone could be in the "ballpark of $300,000," a preliminary number he presented for discussion.
Why it matters: Hill asked the council to consider forming a redevelopment agency (RDA) or other mechanisms that could defer or redirect tax increment or other local incentives to reduce initial costs and make rental levels affordable. "Right now it does not pencil at all," he said, urging the city to examine creative tools such as tax‑deferral or use of city‑owned sites to make the economics workable.
Council members pressed on durability, long‑term use, and scale. One member asked if the units are intended for short‑term workforce housing or permanent occupancy; Hill said the product can serve both and that the firm has explored pivoting to townhomes or single‑family units if long‑term demand emerges. Several council members said they prefer taking time to vet the product and consult planning and zoning about required changes, curb and gutter, sewer easements and land‑use compatibility.
Staff noted a state‑owned parcel on the south end of town (about 20 lots) that currently carries an 80% AMI restriction if the state keeps ownership; staff said the city could purchase at fair market value and use the lots for different housing types if it wanted to avoid the AMI restriction.
No vote or formal commitment was taken; Hill asked what additional information the council wanted. Council direction: continue conversations with planning and zoning, pursue appraisals and introductions to state property staff, and return with specific cost estimates and potential incentive structures. The council did not authorize an RDA at this meeting.
Next steps: Staff will follow up with Hill, contact the state appraiser for the south‑end lots, and place any zoning changes or RDA proposals before planning and zoning and later the council for formal consideration.
