Entity Staff Report - 11/24/2021CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY
451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 304
P.O. BOX 145476, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5476
SLCCOUNCIL.COM
TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651
BOARD STAFF REPORT
THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY of SALT LAKE CITY
TO:RDA Board Members
FROM:Allison Rowland
Budget & Policy Analyst
DATE:December 14, 2021
RE: RESOLUTION: HOUSING DEVELOPMENT LOAN FUNDING ALLOCATIONS
FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING
ISSUE-AT-A-GLANCE
The Board will review and potentially approve recommendations for allocating $5.3 million in affordable
housing funds offered through a Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA). This competitive process was
administered under the RDA’s Housing Development Loan Program (HDLP) using the extensive new
framework adopted by the RDA Board in several stages over the past year.
The eight applications received included requests for a total of nearly $11.5 million. This year, all eight
applications were for projects located outside “high opportunity areas,” where residents have greater chances at
upward mobility. This means that $2.7 million of the $8 million in available funds, which has been reserved
since 2017 for projects located in these areas, was not awarded. The selection committee’s specific
recommendations for allocating $5.3 million of these funds is presented in the Transmittal’s Attachment C. The
Board makes the final determination of which applications to fund and at what amount.
Board members should also note that an additional $1.8 million from the HDLP fund’s previous balance was
included in the recent NOFA. Approximately $2.0 million was designated by RDA staff as “emergency funds”
(note: RDA staff later clarified that the transmittal should have read “emergency gap funds”) to be reserved for a
potential second NOFA early in 2022. See Policy Question 1, below.
Goal of the briefing: Discuss and consider adopting the Resolution entitled Affordable Housing – Housing
Development Loan Program (HDLP) Funding Allocations.
Item Schedule:
Briefing: December 14, 2021
Set Date: N/A
Public Hearing: N/A
Potential Action: December 14, 2021
Page | 2
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
A. Background. Over the past year, the RDA Board discussed and adopted the following:
1.Housing Funds Allocation Policy. This policy establishes four housing funds based on fund
source. The revenues, expenditures, interest, and payments for each fund source are separately
accounted for to ensure the control and oversight required by statute.
2.Housing Development Loan Program (HDLP) Policy. The purpose of the HDLP is to
incentivize the development and preservation of affordable housing in Salt Lake City through
low-cost financial assistance. The HDLP provides a centralized application, underwriting, and
approval process regardless of the fund source.
3.Fiscal Year 2022 Affordable Housing Priorities. Under the recently adopted process, the
Board adopts annual priorities to provide policy direction for RDA staff for applications to City
affordable housing development support available through a NOFA (see Attachment C1). The
goal of adopting priorities on an annual basis, according to RDA staff is to “be able to direct
resources to specific policy priorities depending on current resources, community need, and
policy objectives.”
B. Selection Committee. The selection committee was drawn from members of the Housing Trust Fund
Advisory Board, the RDA Finance Committee (a subset of the Redevelopment Advisory Committee), and
City staff from RDA and the Community and Neighborhoods Department, including members of the
Division of Housing Stability.
C. Funding Priorities and Project Evaluation. As part of the application review process, RDA staff
analyzed applications according to the HDLP Policy’s eligibility requirements and funding priorities set by
the Board this year (see Transmittal Attachment B). The Board assigns weights to its annual housing
priorities to encourage development that meets its goals. Applicants also may receive an interest-rate
reduction for Board priorities that are met. See Policy Question #1 below.
RDA staff stated that the Committee considered the Board’s funding priorities along with factors related to
the feasibility and technical qualities of each application. These include developer experience, the
completeness and quality of the application, the amount of requested funding per affordable unit, the unit
mix, community impact, and the financial and regulatory readiness of the proposed project.
D. Approved FY22 Priorities. Also see Policy Question #3 below.
1. Priorities worth three points:
a. Family Housing
b. Target Populations
c. Neighborhood Safety
d. Homeownership
e. Transportation Opportunities
2. Priorities worth two points:
a. Missing Middle and Unique Housing Types
b. Expand Opportunity
c. Neighborhood Impact
d. Commercial Vitality
3. Priorities worth one point:
a. Historic Preservation /Adaptive Re-use
Page | 3
b. Public Art
4. Former Priorities removed from the list, and now considered part of NOFA application
threshold requirements:
a. Fund Leveraging
b. Sustainability
E. Funding Priority Incentives: Projects are eligible for reductions in their base interest rate if they meet
the adopted funding priorities as established annually, according to the RDA Housing Allocation Funds
Policy. For each funding priority met, a project is eligible to receive a 0.5% reduction to the Base Interest
Rate, down to a minimum of 1% (that is, four priority incentives met).
F. FY 2023 Annual Housing Priorities. In future years the process of establishing annual Board priorities
will begin around March so that it can be resolved well before broader budget discussions begin.
G. Breakdown of HDLF Funding. Council staff has asked RDA staff to provide the Board a breakdown of
the current balances for all elements of HDLF funding, including any amounts left over from previous years.
That information should be available in time for Tuesday’s discussion.
POLICY QUESTIONS
1. The Board may wish to ask for additional information on the advantages and disadvantages of RDA staff’s
decision to reserve approximately $2 million in “emergency gap funds” for a second competitive, time-
limited NOFA in early 2022. RDA staff stated that this may be helpful for projects that did not find
themselves at an advantageous stage for competing in the most recent NOFA (for example, availability of tax
credits might not yet have been confirmed). Other options for the Board could include:
a. Making these funds available to affordable housing projects currently under construction that
encounter funding shortfalls due to current economic and market conditions.
b. Allocating these funds immediately, by funding the full requests for The Nest and the Schmidt
Apartments projects, which is another alternative suggested by RDA staff. This would leave
approximately $775,000 for the next round of the NOFA
c. Re-allocating these funds to different affordable housing programs, like Strategic Acquisition, or to
completely different uses.
2. The Board might also wish to ask RDA staff for its views on the potential advantages and disadvantages for a
competitive, time-limited NOFA in 2022, versus an open-ended one offered on a first-come first served
basis.
3. The Board may wish to request information about how RDA staff and the selection committee balanced the
Board’s annual priorities with the feasibility and technical qualities mentioned in item C. Funding Priorities
and Project Evaluation, above. Council staff has asked RDA staff to identify in a single chart the priorities
that each project would meet, if funded as proposed. That information should be available for Tuesday’s
discussion.
4. The Board may wish to consider the costs and benefits of continuing to reserve $2.7 million of affordable
housing funds for projects in areas of high opportunity. An initial amount of $4,500,000 was reserved for a
high opportunity area NOFA in December 2017. Two years later, the Board approved an $1,800,000 loan to
Community Development Corporation of Utah (CDCU) in a high opportunity area for its Richmond Flats
development.
Page | 4
5. The Board may wish request that RDA staff update the map of high opportunity areas to the extent new data
is available in time for the next NOFA process.
ATTACHMENT
Attachment C1. Resolution 14 of 2021 Housing Development Funding Priorities FY22.
RDA BOARD MEETING –DECEMBER 14, 2021
AFFORDABLE HOUSING
2021 NOTICE OF FUNDING AVAILABILITY (NOFA)
FUNDS AVAILABLE
•Total: ~$8 million
o Citywide: $5.3 million
o High Opportunity: $2.7 million
APPLICATION PROCESS
•Competitive Application Process
•Applications Released: September 8, 2021
•Information Session: September 24, 2021
•Applications Due:
o Citywide Projects: October 29, 2021
o High Opportunity Projects: Remains open until expended
APPLICATION SUMMARY
•8 Applications
•All for Citywide Projects
•$11,476,375 Total Funding Request
BACKGROUND & OVERVIEW
FUNDING PRIORITIES
CATEGORY POLICY OBJECTIVE NOFA RANKING
WEIGHT
0.5% INTEREST RATE
REDUCTION
1. Fund Leveraging Maximize impact by leveraging funds with the private market and with other available public
resources.
Threshold N/A
2. Sustainability Achieve green building and energy conservation standards to lower housing expenses, conserve
resources, and promote resiliency.
Threshold X
3. Family Housing Provide opportunities for families to enjoy the many benefits of urban living by encouraging the
development of housing that is more conducive to larger household sizes.
3 X
4. Target Populations Expand the availability of units for extremely low-income households and special populations,
thereby providing housing options for individuals or families that are homeless or at risk of
homelessness.
3 X
5. Neighborhood Safety Utilize the development of housing as a method to remove blight, reduce crime, revitalize
neighborhoods, and stabilize communities.
3 X
6. Homeownership Create opportunities for those who have historically rented in the community to build wealth and
establish permanent roots through homeownership.
3 X
7. Transportation
Opportunities
Promote a multimodal transportation network and ensure convenient and equitable access to a
variety of transportation options.
3 X
8. Missing Middle & Unique
Housing Types
Promote an array of scale of project types to diversify the City’s housing stock/forms and provide
more affordable living options for residents.
2 X
9. Expand Opportunity Provide for Neighborhoods of Opportunity by promoting the economic diversity of the housing
stock within neighborhoods.
2 X
10. Neighborhood Impact Encourage housing that is high-quality, enduring, and that contributes to neighborhood context
and livability through architectural and urban design best practices.
2 X
11. Commercial Vitality Foster a mix of land uses and unique neighborhood business districts that adequately meet the
local community’s needs.
2 X
12. Historic Preservation
/Adaptive Reuse
Encourage the preservation and/or reuse of buildings to preserve the character of neighborhoods.1 X
13. Public Art Promote cultural expression and add to the experience and value of the built environment through
art that is publicly visible or accessible for all to experience.
1 X
THRESHOLDS
FUND LEVERAGING: Maximize impact by leveraging funds with the private
market and with other available public resources.
SUSTAINABILITY: Projects required to be designed to achieve a “Designed
to Earn Energy Star” Score of 80 or higher and participate in the City’s
Elevate Buildings program once the building is operating.
OPPORTUNITY LAND USE ASSESMENT MAP
APPLICATION CONSIDERATIONS:
•Funding priorities
•Project readiness
•Content and quality of application
•Qualifications and experience of applicant and development team
•Content, effectiveness and appropriateness of financial details
•Building and site design
HDLP REVIEW COMMITTEE
APPLICATIONS RECOMMENDED FOR FUNDING:
•Meet threshold requirements and funding priorities
•Have secured financing and tax credits
•Ready to be built soon
•Cost per affordable unit
HDLP REVIEW COMMITTEE
Projects Recommended for Funding
1 -Silos
425 West 500 South
2 -144 S 500 E
144 S 500 E
3 -The Nest
382 Rio Grande
3 -Schmidt Apts
1265 S 300 W
Funding Recommendation $2,360,000 $775,000 $1,082,000 $1,082,000
Request Amount $2,360,000 $775,000 $1,800,000 $1,590,000
Project Cost $23,639,510 $32,546,991 $52,685,701 $40,926,969
RDA % of Total Project Cost 9.98%2.38%3.42%3.88%
RDA Funds per Affordable Unit $22,264 $7,045 $8,182 $10,000
Tax Credits?Yes, 9%Yes, 4%Yes, 4%Yes, 4%
Affordable Units and Breakdown
40% AMI and below 22 10
41-60% AMI 84 110 220 149
>61% AMI to 80%
Market units
Total units 106 110 220 159
Percent affordable (60% AMI and below)100%100%100%100%
Unit Mix
Studios 53 140 40
1BR 88 57 80 103
2BR 16
3BR 18
RECOMMENDATIONS
PROJECT/APPLICANT ADDRESS
FUNDING
REQUEST
FUNDING
RECOMMENDATION
FUNDING
RANKING
AMOUNT NOT
FUNDED
Silos on 5th 425 W. 500 South $2,360,000 $2,360,000 1 $0
Giv Communities
144 S. 500 East 144 S. 500 East $775,000 $775,000 2 $0
Red Gate
The Nest 382 Rio Grande $1,800,000 $1,082,500 3 $717,500
W3 Partners
Schmidt Apartments 1265 S. 300 West $1,590,000 $1,082,500 3 $507,500
Westates
University Heights 1060 E. 100 South $2,000,000 $0 $2,000,000
BCG
915 W. North Temple 915 W. North Temple $1,000,000 $0 $1,000,000
JF Development Group
Cleveland Court 375 E. Cleveland
Street
$1,451,375 $0 $1,451,375
Sentry Financial
ADU Financing Program Citywide $500,000 $0 $500,000
CDCU
TOTAL $11,476,375 $5,300,000 $6,176,375
Funds Available Funds Recommended
Citywide $5,300,000 $ 5,300,000 Recommended
High Opportunity $2,700,000 $0 Funds Remaining -Citywide
$8,000,000 $2,700,000 Funds Remaining –High Opportunity
Housing Development Funding
Strategy and Annual Budget
•Citywide NOFA
•Emergency NOFA
•High Opportunity NOFA
HDLP Review Committee
Recommendation if additional funds
available:
•Fund full request for The Nest and
Schmidt Apts
RDA Board Considerations:
•Approve Review Committee
Recommendation of funding the
$5.3M
•Allocate some emergency funds
towards this round of applications
CONSIDERATIONS
PROJECT/APPLICANT ADDRESS
FUNDING
REQUEST
FUNDING
RECOMMENDATION
FUNDING
RANKING
AMOUNT NOT
FUNDED
Silos on 5th 425 W. 500 South $2,360,000 $2,360,000 1 $0
Giv Communities
144 S. 500 East 144 S. 500 East $775,000 $775,000 2 $0
Red Gate
The Nest 382 Rio Grande $1,800,000 $1,082,500 3 $717,500
W3 Partners
Schmidt Apartments 1265 S. 300 West $1,590,000 $1,082,500 3 $507,500
Westates
University Heights 1060 E. 100 South $2,000,000 $0 $2,000,000
BCG
915 W. North Temple 915 W. North Temple $1,000,000 $0 $1,000,000
JF Development Group
Cleveland Court 375 E. Cleveland
Street
$1,451,375 $0 $1,451,375
Sentry Financial
ADU Financing Program Citywide $500,000 $0 $500,000
CDCU
TOTAL $11,476,375 $5,300,000 $6,176,375
$1,225,000