Council Member Thomas-Henry questions applicant on bedroom mix and MIH Option 3
Thomas-Henry asks whether the applicant has considered three-bedroom units or more two-bedrooms; St. Jacques says they hadn't but are happy to look into it. She asks about using MIH Option 3 for lower AMI bands; St. Jacques notes Option 1 allows 25% affordable while Option 3 allows only 20%, resulting in fewer affordable units.
Thank you, Chair.
A couple of questions.
To piggyback on Councilmember Lewis'question about the bedroom mix, have you considered any three bedrooms or a larger number of two bedrooms versus the one bedroom?
That's something we hadn't considered, but we're happy to look into.
Okay.
So Community Board 4 has expressed concerns, as you can imagine, about the affordability within the proposed development.
While there is a wide...
Right away of MIH options.
Have you considered using MIH option three to reach lower AMI bands?
This is, again, something we hadn't considered, but we're happy to look into.
There were also quite a few recommendations that came from the borough president.
Have you been able to review those and are those some things that you're in line with?
I'll just jump back to the MIH option three question quickly.
I just will note that, as you're aware, the MIH option one allows for a 25%
set aside for affordability, there would be fewer affordable units by using MIH option three.
I think I just said that backwards.
MIH option one would allow for 25%, while MIH option three would allow for only 20%.
So it would result in fewer affordable units.
So that was one aspect of thinking about.
Using MIH option one.
And then with respect to the president's conditions.