RE: [Mpls] Affordable housing: another real-world Kingfield problem
I think you're right John, Ned seems to go by different monickers??? andrea jenkins Bryant -Original Message- From: John Goodman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, March 25, 2002 1:00 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Mpls] Affordable housing: another real-world Kingfield problem Hi, all -- Point of clarification, please... David Brauer wrote: A couple of nights ago, we met with a developer named Ned Abdul. Is this person Ned Abul-Hajj? -- John Goodman Central Neighborhood _ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com ___ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A Civil City Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls ___ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A Civil City Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
Re: [Mpls] Affordable housing: another real-world Kingfield problem
To me, the one part of this post that sticks out like a sore thumb is the following: Our neighborhood board has housing guidelines requiring 30 percent of any new more-than-duplex development be rentable at 30% of MMI, 30 percent at 50% MMI, and the rest market rate. Otherwise, we don't recommend upzoning, variances, or offer our meager potential NRP financing. I think it's great to have a vision for the community. However, business is business -- the numbers have to work. That means a development has to make 1) a reasonable profit in a reasonable period of time, and 2) the cash flow must work. Your board's policy might be workable for some buildings/sites and not for others, but you won't know unless and until you see the numbers for a specific project. For this reason, I hope your policy is not a hard-and-fast guideline, but flexible, and based on each individual situation. Reading a bit between the lines, your questions about the developer's plans might be entirely explained away by the numbers of the project. For example, hypothetically, you might need the same square footage for two 1-bedroom apartments that you need for a 4-bedroom apartment. But a 4-bedroom apartment won't yield the same rent as two one bedrooms, it will yield less. You might need the kind of cash flow a certain mix of units provides, depending on the mortage and a host of other factors. How the numbers work for the rest of the project will greatly shape, if not dictate, the size and type of units that can be included. I think you are right to be concerned with making decisions in haste. I spoke to a friend of mine who is getting into the development business about your neighborhood's questions and the concerns about being rushed. She said that developers need to take neighborhoods through their numbers so that the boards understand what's going on and why certain decisions are made and what the tradeoffs are. She said developers need to be patient with neighborhoods because it takes time to educate people and to not leave people behind. She said a good developer will do this. She also said that almost without exception developers need some amount of subsidy to create affordable housing because the numbers just don't work without it. I thought that was interesting in light of previous discussion on the list. Of course, it all depends on the individual project. I'm not disputing that some subsidies are ridiculously high -- there again you'd have to see the numbers to know the whole story. You're right to be looking for additional knowledge and input before and while your neighborhood board goes through its consideration of this project. Certainly, the track record of the developer should figure prominently in your deliberations. However, I would caution you against attributing motivation or interpreting statements as veiled threats -- alarmist thinking is counterproductive. In my experience, a good analysis of the numbers will tell you the whole story, lock, stock and barrel. The whole story can be gotten in other ways, of course, but that takes longer and is subject to interpretation. Focus your energy on understanding the numbers. That's what will tell you whether or not your board's policy is realistic in this instance. You might also want to bring in a developer or two to talk about the development business in general. It sounds to me like your board could use some general knowledge and a different, more helpful, framework to think through these projects. Barbara Nelson Burnsville (previously Minneapolis for 18 years) ___ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A Civil City Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
Re: [Mpls] Affordable housing: another real-world Kingfield problem
Time for an all encompassing critique from a housing provider. A couple of nights ago, we met with a developer named Ned Abdul. Ned has struck a deal with the owners of the Good Samaritan nursing home, 4425 Nicollet, a former 105-bed hospital that has been on the market since 2000. Good Sam represents Kingfield's best shot at adding affordable housing. However, the road to getting there has been filled with potholes, CM Many of the said potholes are the neighborhood group and the demands placed upon the private sector builder. If I was a non-profit I would just get the city to overlook the rules. Such as the Lydia House project. Damn the rules, zoning, or ordinance just go get 7 votes. The nursing home sat on the market for over a year, mostly because the asbestos-ridden, systems-corroded building was grossly overpriced at nearly $2 million. While this was going on, the Kingfield board established a policy seeking affordable housing or a community school. CM Policy should be stricken, dictate or stumbling block could be inserted. Good Sam finally woke up to economic reality late last year and dropped the price to $890,000. There were two developers whom the board had talked to who were very interested and very committed to affordable housing. But fairly quickly, Good Sam picked Ned Abdul. We CM Who is we? The neighborhood board? Is the Neighborhood acting as Real Estate Agent? Does an Agency Relationship exist? Kingfield board members beware. If your group is actively involved, you can be actively sued. think his money is more ready; he's prepared to do market-rate, so Good Sam can get their money more quickly. I only met him last week, but Ned Abdul is the source of some controversy. He lost his landlord license over the poor management of a place at 18th Chicago some years back, was mixed up in some mortgage-flipping stories Steve Brandt chronicled, had a role in an overpriced, flipping-like scheme on the north side that the school district got mixed up in, and apparently was involved in a Whittier project where he had to be removed from the rehab. CM-True statements or what ever. It sure is nice getting maligned in the e-press. Makes me want to do business in this city. On the other hand. Why doesn't our city do this kind of deep personnel searching with it's employees and larger contractors? That said, the guy has apparently done a lot of other projects successfully. He's currently renovating the old Latham's Table/Blue Nile in Lyn-Lake, as well as lots of other small and large projects. He said the mortgage-flipping stuff was a business disagreement and has since done business with the plaintiffs again; as for Chicago Ave., he said he no longer manages properties, he just develops them, hiring a company called Matcom manage them. (Anyone know anything about their record?) Ned has been pretty clear he doesn't plan to own the building long-term. He wants to sell it quickly to an institutional investor. He has long said he has a purchase agreement, though we can't confirm that, and now says he will close on the building in early April. The real estate agents won't return our calls for confirmation, after being very available when the building was on the market. Ned is requesting a 20-percent zoning variance from the city; his hearing is April 1. The property is currently zoned R-4, meaning it's limited to 24 units. Ned wants to build 29, and he needs the neighborhood's recommendation. As you can imagine, the neighborhood board is highly skittish about his track record, and there's some hope that if we recommend against the variance, perhaps the deal isn't doable and a better developer emerges. Then again, Ned says he will own the building whether there are 24 or 29 units. He said it's in the neighborhood's best interest to recommend for the variance, because a 29-unit rehab will have a better mix of 1-, 2-, and 3-bedroom units, where a 24-unit building will have more 3- and 4-bedroom units. The barely-spoken threat is that fewer, larger units, a Good Sam project will more single moms with tons of welfare kids. Go with more units, Ned seems to be saying, and you get a better mix. However, some board members think Ned needs 29 units to do the deal at all. CM-The above 5 paragraphs numb my mind. Yet I read purchase agreements, draft addendum, etc for a living. Why put up with this stuff from neighbors? I'd buy and purchase somewhere else. Will any of it be affordable? Ay, there's another rub. In one breath, there's the welfare mom threat, but at the same time, Ned says the project will be market rate for now, since he has to close on the building before he can even try to get subsidy to add affordable units. He did say he would be applying to the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency and others for subsidy. However, there is no commitment to affordability and little trust on our part right now. CM You don't
[Mpls] Affordable housing: another real-world Kingfield problem
A couple of nights ago, we met with a developer named Ned Abdul. Ned has struck a deal with the owners of the Good Samaritan nursing home, 4425 Nicollet, a former 105-bed hospital that has been on the market since 2000. Good Sam represents Kingfield's best shot at adding affordable housing. However, the road to getting there has been filled with potholes, and I could use the list's collective expertise to help us wade through to whatever opportunities may remain. The nursing home sat on the market for over a year, mostly because the asbestos-ridden, systems-corroded building was grossly overpriced at nearly $2 million. While this was going on, the Kingfield board established a policy seeking affordable housing or a community school. The school district said it was too small for a public school, so we aggressively recruited developers and also facilitated other interests (such as a charter school). One charter school had a purchase agreement, but the group evaporated. Other developers were interested, but said the building was overpriced. Good Sam finally woke up to economic reality late last year and dropped the price to $890,000. There were two developers whom the board had talked to who were very interested and very committed to affordable housing. But fairly quickly, Good Sam picked Ned Abdul. We think his money is more ready; he's prepared to do market-rate, so Good Sam can get their money more quickly. I only met him last week, but Ned Abdul is the source of some controversy. He lost his landlord license over the poor management of a place at 18th Chicago some years back, was mixed up in some mortgage-flipping stories Steve Brandt chronicled, had a role in an overpriced, flipping-like scheme on the north side that the school district got mixed up in, and apparently was involved in a Whittier project where he had to be removed from the rehab. That said, the guy has apparently done a lot of other projects successfully. He's currently renovating the old Latham's Table/Blue Nile in Lyn-Lake, as well as lots of other small and large projects. He said the mortgage-flipping stuff was a business disagreement and has since done business with the plaintiffs again; as for Chicago Ave., he said he no longer manages properties, he just develops them, hiring a company called Matcom manage them. (Anyone know anything about their record?) Ned has been pretty clear he doesn't plan to own the building long-term. He wants to sell it quickly to an institutional investor. He has long said he has a purchase agreement, though we can't confirm that, and now says he will close on the building in early April. The real estate agents won't return our calls for confirmation, after being very available when the building was on the market. Ned is requesting a 20-percent zoning variance from the city; his hearing is April 1. The property is currently zoned R-4, meaning it's limited to 24 units. Ned wants to build 29, and he needs the neighborhood's recommendation. As you can imagine, the neighborhood board is highly skittish about his track record, and there's some hope that if we recommend against the variance, perhaps the deal isn't doable and a better developer emerges. Then again, Ned says he will own the building whether there are 24 or 29 units. He said it's in the neighborhood's best interest to recommend for the variance, because a 29-unit rehab will have a better mix of 1-, 2-, and 3-bedroom units, where a 24-unit building will have more 3- and 4-bedroom units. The barely-spoken threat is that fewer, larger units, a Good Sam project will more single moms with tons of welfare kids. Go with more units, Ned seems to be saying, and you get a better mix. However, some board members think Ned needs 29 units to do the deal at all. Will any of it be affordable? Ay, there's another rub. In one breath, there's the welfare mom threat, but at the same time, Ned says the project will be market rate for now, since he has to close on the building before he can even try to get subsidy to add affordable units. He did say he would be applying to the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency and others for subsidy. However, there is no commitment to affordability and little trust on our part right now. Anyway, at the meeting, Ned promised to make 20 percent of the units affordable at 50 percent of the metro-median income (MMI) if we recommended for the 29 units. He acknowledged that it would be hard to keep that 20 percent promise if he sold the building, but pledged to explore tying up the title or some other more permanent way to guarantee 20 percent long-term. Our neighborhood board has housing guidelines requiring 30 percent of any new more-than-duplex development be rentable at 30% of MMI, 30 percent at 50% MMI, and the rest market rate. Otherwise, we don't recommend upzoning, variances, or offer our meager potential NRP financing. That isn't to say the neighborhood is always with us. At the meeting, there was surprisingly
Re: [Mpls] Affordable housing: another real-world Kingfield problem
List Members, I used to live in Kingfield, and was their former NRP rep many moons ago. I would like to comment on the veiled threat about welfare moms. I did not grow up on welfare, but due to life circumstances I became a welfare mom (W.M.) and I did a darn good job raising my kids. I got off the system and eventually became a homeowner, but while being a W.M. I can proudly say that I IMPROVED the properties that I lived in, as did numerous others I know. And, along the way, I sent clear messages in court to some of those property owners who expected W.M. to live under less than ideal conditions. W.M. are not saints, but we can be some of your best tenants if treated like human beings. Homeowners are not always the best neighbors, nor keepers of property maintenance, so please think twice about how you refer to us. We watch, we listen, we matter and we VOTE too. Pamela Taylor (A proud former W.M. now living in Tampa) --- David Brauer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The barely-spoken threat is that fewer, larger units, a Good Sam project will more single moms with tons of welfare kids. Go with more units, Ned seems to be saying, and you get a better mix. However, some board members think Ned needs 29 units to do the deal at all. Will any of it be affordable? Ay, there's another rub. In one breath, there's the welfare mom threat, but at the same time, However, there was clearly a lot of unease about the potential for big, poor families. So someone suggested, why not make it senior affordable housing? My personal take is that these folks want affordable housing only if the people in it are older and can't cause much trouble, even if the real need is among younger singles and families. Personally, I think the need is greater for the latter - but I'd like info from those who know. Ned is open but skeptical about the market for senior-affordable. __ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Movies - coverage of the 74th Academy Awards® http://movies.yahoo.com/ ___ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A Civil City Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
RE- [Mpls] Affordable housing: another real-world Kingfield problem
Hello David and Kingfield folks. Here is my take on your question. "Is there a greater need for affordable family housing or affordable senior housing, or is either meeting an important city-wide need?" While our population is growing older, I beleive that many neighborhoods are contemplating adding senior housing units. From my experience on my block (which has 60 apartment units) there is a very great need for affordable family housing, especially, 2 to 3 bedroom apartments. This is especially true for immigrant families that often have more kids and elders living at home. If you are granting a variance to allow for more units, perhaps you can use that as a variance to get an agreement for more affordable units. You might also want to consider getting the parcel put into a land trust. Foundation money could be used to subsidize this part of the land cost and build in long-term affordability into the development. Sean Gosiewski, Corcoran Neighborhood
