Council Member Schulman questions on affordability and MIH option
Council Member Schulman asks about deeper affordability. Lobel says the project margins don't lend themselves to 30% AMI but is happy to discuss further. Schulman asks which MIH option; Lobel says Option 1 and Option 2 have been penciled, applicant accepts Option 1.
Council Member Shulman?
Yeah, thank you.
Would you be willing to commit to deeper affordability than the minimum required under MIH?
Yeah, you know, we've talked about this as an applicant team.
I think one of the benefits of this project is that we're able to keep the unit sizes somewhat large.
And of course, because of MIH and the regulations therein, those units will be, the larger units will be available to the affordable units in the same ratio as they are in the building.
I'd say that while we do regularly have projects where we are able to provide increased affordability, including, for example, 30% in option one, I don't think that the margins in this application would really lend themselves to that.
It is a relatively small project in terms of the numbers, only 59 units.
So I'm happy to talk to Gabby about that in the future.
But at this point, I think it would be somewhat challenging.
Which MIH option are you talking about?
We have penciled out.
Option one and option two, but the applicant understands and is accepting of option one to the extent that's selected by the council.