2007-07-20 TSamson - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Then the last proposed change would be to Condition P which is in addition to recognize that all past fair share contributions for affordable housing for this project would be credited against the assessments required for housing in Condition P. Historically what had happened is, as indicated, the prior project had proceeded with development, we had arranged for the parks assessment to be calculated out with the Department of Parks and Recreation, we reached a number; and what happened was the developer paid approximately $50,000, which was 50 percent of the approximate $100,000 fee, for 48 of the multi-family units. So we’d be asking for that credit to be applied against the, for the 48 units that were initially approved. So what would happen is the second 50 percent of about $50,000 would be paid by Samson upon receipt of the, before the certificate of occupancy I believe on those 48 units, which would be the first phase. The affordable housing credit arises from the applicant’s prior proceedings before the County Council and the Office of Housing and Community Development in which they received the approval to pay the in-lieu fees for affordable housing for a total of 48 units. So that’s why they are asking for credit for satisfaction of that requirement for the 48 units. We understand that the additional 96 units which are now being proposed would be subject to the current fair share contributions and affordable housing assessments that you currently see today. The 146 multiple family units are intended for sale to the middle market level. Betzel Brothers has a lot of experience in Maui and elsewhere developing this type of product in terms of what we sometimes call workforce housing or housing for the middle market, rather than doing high- end multi-family projects like you might see along the Kona coast here. So we would ask that the Planning Commission support our request for time extensions for Conditions D and E under Ord. No. 95-118 and Conditions B and C for Ord. No. 90 010 to allow the project to restart and commence. Thank you very much. WATANABE:Before I ask the Commissioners if they have any questions, since the applicant has proposed some rather significant changes to the conditions, I’d like to ask the Director for his comments, in particular I’d like to have your comments on the credits that were paid. I understand that they actually put real money down, close to $51,000, I guess. But I’m wondering if that would suffice to satisfy the initial 48 units, especially in light of the increased fair share contributions we’ve been asking for recently. YUEN:Well, right; and I’m not sure what the basis was for the $1,000 a unit. When was that, that was actually paid? LIM:Which is park fees? YUEN:The parks. LIM:Yes, we have correspondence from Department of Parks and Recreation approving our methodology, the calculation of the in-lieu monetary fee as $101,814.62. They used to do a calculation in those days based upon an assessed valuation and a square foot value for the park assessments; and so essentially what happened is an agreement was reached with respect to the first 48 units. So we paid for 24 units and the next 24 units we’ll pay the second half of the approximately $50,000 when the first increment comes up. The rest of the 96 units would be assessed under the current park contribution fee in the Condition P. EXHIBIT B 6