Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Affordable Housing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Developer seeks city concurrence to add eight affordable units at Commodore Manor
Summary
In‑Fill Housing and Perry staff asked the council to concur with a LIHTC application to expand Commodore Manor by eight units, preserve deep affordability (50–60% AMI target) and pursue USDA and HOME funding; council pressed for safety, tenant relocation details and a support letter to boost scoring.
Mr. Duffy and a presenter from In‑Fill Housing briefed the Perry City Council on a proposal to expand Commodore Manor, a 1986 affordable housing community, by eight units under a Low‑Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) application. The presenter, Mr. Nash of In‑Fill Housing/Affordable Housing Incorporated, said the project would be funded primarily through USDA rural development financing with a pending HOME application and would aim to preserve rents for existing residents.
"Our goal is to add additional eight units to this," Nash said while showing renderings and interior upgrade concepts, adding that the project would preserve affordability “at 50–60% AMIs” and was open to targeting deeper affordability levels on council guidance. Nash described upgrades to kitchens, bathrooms, HVAC and water heaters and said the architecture for any new buildings would mimic existing structures to maintain neighborhood integrity.
Council members asked a series of operational and safety questions. One member pressed for clarity on tenant impacts during construction; Nash said the developer would offer temporary relocation options (move to other on‑site updated units, local temporary housing or hotels), with typical renovation windows of two to six weeks and a target of three to four weeks per unit. On construction timing, staff estimated 12–18 months from closing and suggested a possible early‑2027 start with completion by summer 2028 if financing closes on schedule.
Traffic and school‑safety concerns were raised about potential siting near a busy roadway and a high school pedestrian corridor. Nash acknowledged the concerns and agreed the architect would revise renderings and roadway illustrations to show access, proposed drive widenings and mitigation measures. Nash said the two roadway‑adjacent buildings shown in initial renderings were not the preferred placement; the team favored siting new units on an additional parcel at the top of the rendering.
The immediate request to council was concurrence—a letter of support to gain one scoring point for the LIHTC application—and staff said a formal concurrence/approval item would be placed on the council agenda at the regular meeting the next day. Mr. Duffy said the request did not require a resolution for tonight’s work session but would come forward for a vote if the council wished to act.
No formal vote was recorded during the work session; councilmembers indicated they wanted an updated site rendering, clearer relocation plans and confirmation of zoning/plan‑review processes before final approval.
Next steps: staff will provide updated renderings and a draft letter of support for council consideration at the regular meeting on the following day.
