2013-10-15_HRA_Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

HRA Meeting Minutes –Tuesday, October 15, 2013 Page 3 1 2 Ms. Eden Spencer, Project Manager with GMHC 3 Ms. Spencer reviewed marketing efforts proposed; and estimated preliminary pricing for units in the 4 range of $225,000 to $295,000, depending on their type. Ms. Spencer also noted the goal to use senior 5 regeneration funds to rehabilitate existing properties in Roseville that may be affected as part of this 6 project and relocation of existing residents. 7 8 Ms. Spencer reviewed the GMHC’s marketing options, with the intent of seeking competitive proposals 9 from a realtor marketing team, with no one currently identified, but seeking competition with the 10 overall goal of benefiting the community and based on a realtor’s familiarity with the Roseville 11 community. 12 13 Mr. Buelow opined that there were many exciting marketing options available with the various housing 14 types anticipated, expecting that they would generate significant interest. 15 16 Regarding financing for the project, Mr. Buelow referenced the detailed proforma included in their 17 proposal, and while not based on actual bids, providing an educated guess based on their other projects. 18 Mr. Buelow noted that this was very preliminary with many moving parts yet, including more realistic 19 cost projections and cost for demolition of existing structures. However, even with the total project cost 20 breakdowns not yet finalized, Mr. Buelow noted that there would be a financing gap. 21 22 Chair Maschka opined that he liked the transition on the senior homes and Dale Street; however, he 23 expressed concern with the intensity of the single-family and large homes on the western part of the 24 middle of the site, andquestioned if economics would allow single-story homes to make a better 25 transition on those homes on the west. Chair Maschka questioned the financial impacts and 26 implications in removing one home from each of those areas. 27 28 Mr. Rhoades advised that, at this point, everything remained flexible; noting that they had originally 29 started with thirty-five units, but since this was a joint effort, the GHMC remained receptive to the HRA 30 and neighborhood at this time in the concept development stage. Mr. Rhoades advised that they were 31 open to discussing all areas of the project throughout the process including amenities for the site. 32 33 Chair Maschka expressed his personal interest in more creativity in the middle of the site, allowing 34 fewer units (e.g. two less) andthe negative/positive impacts to the overall financial aspect for the 35 project. 36 37 Member Willmusnoted proposed soft costs including association costs, and the GHMC’s estimate of at 38 $1,000 per unit, seeking clarification of the variables included in that calculation (e.g. roof replacement 39 or just yard maintenance). 40 41 Mr. Buelow advised that it was intended as seed money to start, and as a work in progress, initially he 42 anticipated one association owner operating with a management company, then taken over by a 43 homeowners association; with the townhomes and single-family homes having different fees based on 44 common areas and spaces. 45 46 Regarding lawn and snow maintenance, Ms. Spencer suggested that may be addressed for the entire 47 site; however, there would need to be the creation of reserves for townhomes sharing areas needing 48 replacement and/or structural maintenance, but the detached, single-family homes would be treated 49 differently, as well as the Dale Street townhomes; with multi-layers, but allowing for corporate bidding 50 on certain items. 51 52 At the request of Member Quam, Mr. Buelow addressed construction financing in place, with a working 53 capital line of credit in set up with several banks, and $11 million in place right now to be used as 54 working capital; with another $10 million line of credit available specific for the Roseville project