Affordable Housing Managed Pipeline St akeholders Meet ing - Wednesday, February 10, 2021
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
Af f ordable Housing Managed Pipeline
St akeholders Meet ing
Wednesday, February 10 , 20 21
AHMP 2-10-2021A GEN D A
1. Assist a n t Ge n e ra l Ma n a ge r Re m a rks
2. In t rod uct ion t o Hou sin g De v e lop m e n t & Fin a n ce Te a m
3. Ma jor Ch a n ge s in AHMP Re gu la t ion s
4. Scorin g Ru bric
5. Tim e lin e
6. Qu e st ion s & An sw e rs
2
AHMP 2-10-2021Assist a n t Ge n e ra l Ma n a ge r Re m a rks
• Housing Product ion Updat e
• Int roduct ion t o Team
3
AHMP 2-10-2021De v e lop m e n t & Fin a n ce P rod u ct ion
Predevelopment In-Construction In-Service
• AHMP/ 122 Units • AHMP/ 103 Units
• AHMP/ 791 Units
• Prop HHH / 4,184 • Prop HHH/ 489 Units
• Prop HHH/ 2,632 Units
Units • Prop HHH
• Prop HHH Challenge/
• Prop HHH Challenge Challenge/
49 Units
/ 612 Units • Bond Only / 366
• Bond Only /406 Units
• Bond Only/ 336 Units Units
• TOTAL 3,878
• TOTAL 5,254 • TOTAL 958
4
AHMP 2-10-2021HOUSING DEVELOPMENT BUREAU
Ed Gipson Doug Swoger Helmi Hisserich
DEVELOPMENT & ASSET MANAGEMENT HOUSING STRATEGIES &
FINANCE DIVISION DIVISION SERVICES DIVISION
• Affordable Housing • Loan Portfolio • Housing Strategies
Managed Pipeline • Healthy Homes
• Proposition HHH • Occupancy • Specialized
• Municipal Bonds Monitoring & Homeownership
• Preservation (At-Risk) Covenants
• Planning & Land Use
• Technical Services • AcHP Policy
• Environmental Review
5
AHMP 2-10-2021AFFORDABLE HOUSING MANAGED PIPELINE TEAM
Tim Elliott
Manager
Yaneli Ruiz Georgina Tamayo Danielle Thompson
AHMP Programs AHMP Projects Preservation/At-risk
6
AHMP 2-10-2021Summary of Major Changes
❏ Production Goals
❏ Accessibility Requirements
❏ Average Targeting
❏ Geographic Distribution
❏ Maximum HCIDLA Subsidy Limits
❏ Pet Policies
❏ Maximum Number of Projects Per Developer
❏ Term of Funding Rounds
❏ New/Additional Threshold Requirements
❏ Revised Scoring Rubric
7
AHMP 2-10-2021Production Goals
Projects that pass threshold will be ranked according to total score, and then be selected in
the following order, subject to available funds and 9% LIHTCs that are available from two
TCAC rounds:
i. Highest scoring supportive housing projects, up to 250 units;
ii. Highest scoring large family projects, up to 400 units;
iii. Highest scoring seniors projects, up to 50 units;
iv. Highest scoring at-risk/ preservation projects, up to 100 units;
v. Once goals are met, and if HCIDLA funds are still available, HCIDLA will continue to select
the highest scoring project in each category above, including 4%/ bond projects, until
available funds have been exhausted. If not enough demand for the above goals, HCIDLA
will consider other types of applications based on score. 8
AHMP 2-10-2021Accessibility Requirements
Updated requirement: 4% of the total units must be accessible to persons with sensory
impairments and 11% to persons with mobility impairments; If other funding sources have
different requirements, HCIDLA shall use the most restrictive;
Projects with supportive housing units shall have supportive service plans with detailed
outreach plans for each proposed population, a staffing plan, and budget. For AcHP units, a
plan to incorporate the Coordinated Entry System, and the HCIDLA’s Affordable and
Accessible Housing Registry in leasing to persons needing accessibility improvements;
Addition of a new scoring category to incorporate the new Enhanced Accessibility Program.
9
AHMP 2-10-2021Average Income Targeting
9%-LIHTC projects that include units at greater than 60% of AMI shall have an average
targeting that does not exceed 50% of AMI;
4%-LIHTC projects that include units at greater than 60% of AMI shall have an average
targeting that does not exceed 60% of AMI;
Units funded by HOME Funds shall be at 60% of AMI or below;
Units funded by Linkage Fee Funds shall be no greater than 80% of AMI.
10
AHMP 2-10-2021Geographic Distribution
HCIDLA will eliminate the “non-TOD” goal;
Instead, new scoring will award points to projects located within either the City’s Transit
Oriented Communities program or TCAC’s Highest and High Opportunity Area;
Extra point if located within both.
11
AHMP 2-10-2021Maximum HCIDLA Subsidy Limits
9% - Fam/ Sr 9% ELI* 4%
0 Bedroom 87,843 105,000 $140,000
1 Bedroom 96,978 112,875 $140,000
2 Bedroom 107,478 120,750 $140,000
3+ Bedroom 112,728 126,800 $140,000
* Available only to Incentivized ELI units, see Scoring rubric;
Maximum loan per project is the lesser of $14M or 50% of TDC at loan closing.
12
AHMP 2-10-2021Pet Policies
Pursuant to LA Ordinance No 186228, pet policies have been drafted in coordination with
the Los Angeles Animal Services, Los Angeles County Development Authority and Los
Angeles County Department of Animal Service;
See Exhibit 09 of 2021 AHMP Regulations (currently published in draft form on HCIDLA
website)
13
AHMP 2-10-2021Maximum Number of Projects Per Developer
The maximum number of developments one entity, or its subsidiary(ies) can participate
in as a developer / owner / general partner at any one time is: seven (7), throughout
any/all of the HCIDLA financing programs;
Of the 7 projects, a maximum of four (4) can be in pre-construction and maximum of
five (5) can be in construction and/or processing permanent conversion.
14
AHMP 2-10-2021Term of Funding Rounds
Projects will be selected into the AHMP until sufficient number of high-scoring applications
will use all tax credits that are available from two (2) CTCAC consecutive rounds,
i.e. TCAC 2021 Round 2 and TCAC 2022 Round 1;
HCIDLA will request authority to conduct up to one additional funding round in order to
allow admittance of new projects if an outside leverage funding source announces
additional emergency-related financing;
15
AHMP 2-10-2021New / Additional Threshold Requirements
Minimum equity requirements - for all projects shall be: 50% of TDC for 9% LIHTC; 30% of
TDC for 4% LIHTC; 20% of TDC for non-LIHTC;
Compliance with Accessible Housing Program - Covered Housing Projects of the Accessible
Housing Program that are owned by the applicants, the applicants’ partners, or in which the
applicants’ principals have a vested interest must be in certified or substantial compliance
with the Accessible Housing Program;
Cost Estimating Requirements on Construction Costs - All construction cost estimates shall
be prepared by an independent third-party construction cost estimating firm; Cost
estimator must be certified by the Construction Specifications Institute or the American
Society of Cost Estimators. 16
AHMP 2-10-2021OVERALL - Revised Scoring Rubric
(Summary)
17
AHMP 2-10-2021Revised Scoring Rubric
FINANCIAL EFFICIENCY – maximum 25 points
Readiness – maximum 10 points
A. Entitlements:
i. Projects that have evidence from LADCP or LADBS that all necessary applications have been approved;
and no additional discretionary approvals are required and project will secure required entitlements by the
proposed TCAC application date = 4 points; or
ii. Evidence from LADCP that the Affordable Housing Referral Form has been submitted or evidence from LADBS
that the Affordable Housing Section Approval Process application has been submitted = 2 points;
B. Competitiveness:
Submitted proof that the project will attain maximum points under TCAC
scoring system, which includes site amenities, service amenities and affordability matrix = 2 points;
C. No Relocation: The project will not require permanent relocation of residential tenants = 4 points
18
AHMP 2-10-2021Revised Scoring Rubric, continued
FINANCIAL EFFICIENCY – maximum 25 points
Leverage - Committed Funds: maximum 15 points
Points shall be awarded based on ratio of the Total Committed Soft and/or Private Funds (Total Committed Funds) to
the project’s Total Development Costs. Public funds shall not include City-owned land or other HCIDLA funding. Private
funds shall not include amortized permanent loans from conventional lenders. Tranche B loans without committed
Section 8 vouchers or operating subsidies shall not be considered for awarding points.
To calculate the points, HCIDLA shall divide the Total Committed Funds by the Total Development Costs and award half
(1/2) point for every One percent (1%) of Total Committed Funds versus the Total Development Costs.
Example: Total Committed Funds (TCF) = $5,000,000
Total Development Costs (TDC) = $31,250,000
TCF ÷ TDC = 5,000,000/31,250,000 = 16%
16 x 0.5 point = 8 points 19
AHMP 2-10-2021Revised Scoring Rubric
EXPERIENCE – maximum 25 points
General Partner Experience – maximum 10 points
The projects in operation which are used to garner points under this subsection must be compliant under
the HCIDLA Business Policy, within the last ten (10) years from the AHMP NOFA deadline.
3-4 projects in service more than 3 years, of which 1 shall be in service more than 5 years and 2 shall be
California LIHTC projects = 5 points
5 or more projects in service more than 3 years, of which 1 shall be in service more than 5 years and 2 shall
be California LIHTC projects = 10 points
20
AHMP 2-10-2021Revised Scoring Rubric
EXPERIENCE – maximum 25 points
General Partner Experience – maximum 10 points, continued
For special needs housing type projects only applying through the Nonprofit set-aside or Special Needs set-
aside only, points are available as described above or as follows:
3 Special Needs projects in service more than 3 years and one California LIHTC project which may or may
not be one of the 3 special needs projects = 5 points
4 or more Special Needs projects in service more than 3 years and one California LIHTC project which may
or may not be one of the 4 special needs projects = 10 points
21
AHMP 2-10-2021Revised Scoring Rubric
EXPERIENCE – maximum 25 points
22
Management Company Experience – maximum 5 points
The projects in operation which are used to garner points under this subsection must be compliant under
the HCIDLA Business Policy, within the last ten (10) years from the AHMP NOFA deadline.
• 6-10 projects managed over 3 years, of which 2 shall be California LIHTC projects = 3 points
• 11 or more projects managed over 3 years, of which 2 shall be California LIHTC projects = 5 points
For special needs housing type projects only applying through the Nonprofit set-aside or Special Needs set-aside only,
points are available as described above or as follows:
• 2-3 Special Needs projects managed over 3 years and one California LIHTC project which may or may not be one of
the special needs projects = 3 points
• 4 or more Special Needs projects managed over 3 years and one California LIHTC project which may or may not
AHMP be
2-10-2021
one of the special needs projects = 5 pointsRevised Scoring Rubric
EXPERIENCE – maximum 25 points
Certified Community Housing Development Organization (CHDO) – maximum 10 points
To be awarded 10 points under this criterion, the General Partner in the partnership and the developer,
both, must be certified as a CHDO by the HCIDLA; if application for CHDO certification has been submitted,
but is pending approval, HCID will allow 60 days post AHMP NOFA application for an entity to get certified.
23
AHMP 2-10-2021Revised Scoring Rubric
OTHER POLICY OBJECTIVES – maximum 40 points
Geographic Distribution – maximum 10 points
Projects will be awarded maximum of ten (10) points based on one of the following two categories:
A. Project sites that are within the Transit Oriented Communities (TOC) as verified in the Los Angeles
City’s Zone Information Map Access System (ZIMAS) or through a verification by the Los Angeles
Department of City Planning, shall receive the following points. HCIDLA shall consider the project’s
TOC designation/verification as of the date of the application deadline:
TOC Tier 4 / TOC Tier 3 = 9 points;
TOC Tier 2 / TOC Tier 1 = 5 points;
or 24
AHMP 2-10-2021Revised Scoring Rubric
OTHER POLICY OBJECTIVES – maximum 40 points
Geographic Distribution – maximum 10 points, continued
B. Project sites that are within a CTCAC’s Highest or High Resource Area shall receive the following
points:
Highest Resource Area = 9 points;
High Resource Area = 5 points.
One (1) point for projects which are located in both a City TOC Tier 4 or Tier 3 and a Highest or High
Resource Area.
25
AHMP 2-10-2021Revised Scoring Rubric
OTHER POLICY OBJECTIVES – maximum 40 points
Extremely Low-Income Units – maximum 10 points
Points shall be awarded for projects with ELI units that are above the minimum CTCAC 10% ELI;
HCIDLA shall award One (1) point for each 1% above the initial 10% minimum ELI units, up to maximum
ten (10) points;
Only Large Family and/or Senior projects that do not require Section 8 Vouchers or operating subsidies
shall be considered;
Special Needs/Supportive Housing projects shall not be awarded points.
26
AHMP 2-10-2021Revised Scoring Rubric
OTHER POLICY OBJECTIVES – maximum 40 points
Site Efficiency – maximum 5 points
Affordable new construction housing developments with Sixty (60) or more total units shall receive five
(5) points
27
AHMP 2-10-2021Revised Scoring Rubric
OTHER POLICY OBJECTIVES – maximum 40 points
Cost Efficiency – maximum 15 points
Points shall be awarded to projects whose Adjusted Total Development Cost Per Unit is lower than the Average Total
Development Cost (TDC) Per Unit of the CTCAC 9% L.A. City Geographic projects in the last two rounds;
One point shall be awarded to the project for every 1% that the project’s Adjusted Total Development Cost Per Unit
is below the Average Total Development Cost Per Unit of the 9% L.A. City Geographic projects;
Adjusted Total Development Cost is calculated by subtracting the following from the project’s Total Development
Costs: 1) developer fees, deferred or contributed as equity to the project, that are in excess of respective amounts in
accordance with deferral/contribution thresholds as specified in Sections 10327(c)(2)(A) and (B) of the CTCAC
Regulations, and/or 2) any non-residential costs that are associated with items required by the City, e.g. replacement
parking, etc. 28
AHMP 2-10-2021Revised Scoring Rubric
OTHER POLICY OBJECTIVES – maximum 40 points
Bonus Points under Enhanced Accessibility Program – maximum 10 points
Bonus points will be awarded to projects which elect to participate in the Enhanced Accessibility Program
(EAP). Developers who commit to participating in the EAP receive extra points in the evaluation of their
NOFA application. Architectural plans identifying the EAP design elements will be required at application.
In order to receive the bonus points, which will be awarded in total or not at all, the developer will be
required to incorporate:
• All of the enhanced accessibility design elements identified in Part 1, Table 1A, and
• Table 1B or Table 1C, plus
• Five of the optional design elements identified in Table 2
29
Full copy of the Draft Enhanced Accessibility Program is posted online as part of the Regulations AHMP 2-10-2021Timeline
1/27/2021 - Publish Summary of Major Changes
2/02/2021 - Publish Draft Regulations
2/10/2021 - Stakeholders Meeting
2/16/2021 - Public Comment ends
3/17/2021 - City Council & Mayor approval
3/22/2021 - Open NOFA Application
4/19/2021 - Applications Due
5/24/2021 - Appeals period
6/01/2021 - Final Recommendations published
7/01/2021 - CTCAC Application 2021 Round 2
30
AHMP 2-10-2021Q&A
(To ask a question or to make a comment during the meeting,
please click the “Raise your hand” button in Zoom)
Written questions and comments may also
be submitted to: hcidla.cfp@lacity.org
Deadline to submit is Feb 15, 2021
Final Q & A will be posted online
31
AHMP 2-10-2021THANK YOU!
P l e a s e SUBSCRIBE t o our newslet t ers f or
updat es:
h t t p s: / / h cid la 2 .la cit y.org/ a bout - u s/ su b scrib e - t o- n e w sle t t e rs
32
AHMP 2-10-2021You can also read
