Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Adams Cra Housing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
RDA presents $290,000 participation incentive for 10 Adams CRA townhomes; council questions subsidy need
Summary
The RDA presented a participation/incentive package that would yield about $290,000 for a 10‑unit Color Sky Homes townhome infill project in the Adams CRA; councilors questioned whether the market truly requires subsidy and asked for documentation of the developer's gap analysis.
RDA staff recommended consideration of a participation and incentive agreement with Color Sky Homes for construction of 10 entry‑level for‑sale townhomes in the Adams CRA.
Staff said the project is infill on a narrow vacant parcel and would produce three buildings totaling 10 units sized about 1,480–1,500 square feet with asking prices estimated between $310,000 and $440,000. The total project investment is over $4 million. Initial TIFF generation from the project was estimated at approximately $386,000; after returning 20% for housing and 5% for administration staff said roughly $290,000 would be available to support the developer’s financing gap.
The developer initially requested $620,000, then accepted the available $290,000 as the feasible RDA contribution, according to staff. The RDA added a clause requiring the units remain owner‑occupied for three years.
Councilors expressed unease about subsidizing what some described as marketable ownership housing, noting other recent for‑sale product in the city has sold well without subsidies. One council member asked why the developer’s stated gap fell from $620,000 to $290,000 and asked for supporting data. Staff replied that the developer’s gap is the applicant’s submitted figure; RDA staff evaluate that claim and brought the project forward because it met CRA objectives (attainable ownership, infill on vacant land) and supports a local developer.
No formal action was taken during the work session; council asked RDA staff to provide comparative market evidence and to confirm how the subsidy‑need calculation was reached before placing the item on a future agenda.
