210 Hancock Construction Update, 10/2017

17 10 2017

One last walk around the block. It looks like only minor exterior finishes and landscaping/playground and basketball hoop installations left. TCAction’s daycare center has been dedicated the “Sally G. Dullea Childcare Center”, in honor of Sally Dullea, a longtime Ithacan and retired M&T Vice President who led TCAction’s Board of Trustees. Next door, The balance of the first-floor commercial space for a “Free Science Workshop”, which is a part of the Ithaca Branch of the Physics Factory, non-profit exhibition program that engages children with science. The “Physics Bus” in the parking lot is the mobile exhibit.

It also appears that either the multi-use path or the project itself has been dedicated to outgoing INHS Executive Director Paul Mazzarella. Not a bad way to say thanks after 27 years of service. As for his replacement, Johanna Anderson, best of luck, and I look forward to being a constructive nuisance.

It’s never been a secret that I was an advocate for this project, given the clear need for affordable housing, and the transparency and responsiveness of the project team during early planning. I continue to hold the project in high regard. It is a real improvement over the vacant Neighborhood Pride grocery store that was once here. It helps to fill a crucial deficit in a well-thought out, contextual, urban-friendly package. While walking around, I saw a young woman moving furniture into an apartment, a man and his son heading into one of the homes, and an older gentleman walking a dog. I think that, as the dust settles, it’ll blend seamlessly into Northside’s urban fabric, and be a worthy asset of the Ithaca community.

Before (image courtesy of Jason Henderson of Ithaca Builds):

After:






210 Hancock Construction Update, 8/2017

22 08 2017

210 Hancock is nearly complete from the outside. On the apartment buildings, the brick veneer has been attached over the Blueskin, as have most of the Alpolic aluminum pearls (dark-grey “charcoal”, off-white “pearl”, and intensely bright “EYL Yellow”). Early drawings also had lime green panels in the mix, but this was later deleted. The finalized elevation drawings suggests some more yellow panels will be attached between the ground-floor windows under the awning. In fact, it’s mostly the EYL yellow panels that have yet to be installed on Building “A” and Building “B”, the southernmost pair (and the first buildings shown in the parade of pics below). The northern buildings, which are built over a ground-floor garage, are partially faced with Barnes & Cone architectural masonry – upscale and arguably more attractive versions of concrete masonry units (CMUs).

The large expense currently being paneled on Building “D” (the northern end of the building string) will be more EYL Yellow, although this will be Morin corrugated metal panels, custom painted to match. The corrugated metal, which is used elsewhere (ex. top of building “B”) in blue-grey color, will add a little more visual interest to an otherwise featureless wall. According to the 210 Hancock website, occupancy is slated for September 1st. It looks like they have a one-bedroom available, which seems odd given the lottery, but the price tag suggests this one-bedroom is one of the moderate-income units (those with annual income in the $41,000 – $60,500 range). Offhand, 11 of the 54 units were designated moderate-income, in order to provide a mixed-income development. Similarly, the handicap-accessible three-bedroom townhouse (the one-story red one) is still for rent, but the other four rental townhomes are spoken for.

The townhouses are mostly finished, and marketing has started for the seven for-sale units. Three are already under contract. The cutoff for maximum annual income is 80% of Tompkins County’s area median income or less – $42,380 for a 1-person household, $48,400 for a 2-person household, $54,450 for a 3-person household, and so on. The wood lattice screening below the porches will be painted to match the trimboards, which come in three shades of Certainteed vinyl – “Natural Clay”, “Sandstone Beige” and “Flagstone”, or to the layman, dark tan, tan and light grey.

Outside of the building, the new lightpoles are in. RGL Inc. of Binghamton, a subcontractor for Lecesse, is laying down the new curbing and sidewalks, with road paving/striping, landscaping and the new playground to follow. For the record, the playground will be open to all neighborhood children regardless of whether their families live in the Hancock complex. As a plus, the play area connects directly with Conley Park without the need to cross any streets. Personal aside, in the affordable apartment complex I grew up in, June 25, 1997 was one of the most memorable days of my childhood because that was when they replaced a field dumpster pad with a playground — and I can remember how absolutely packed it was for weeks afterward.





News Tidbits 7/15/17: Ess Ess, Dee Dee

15 07 2017

1. Hamilton Square. There’s a lot to say here.

First, the neutral segment. The website is up, www.southstreetproject.org. Plenty of renders (definitely not cookie-cutter), site plans, housing prices, everything one needs for a fair assessment. The units are no more than 2 floors, mostly townhouse format. 47 affordable rentals units, 11 affordable for-sale units, and 15 market-rate for-sale units for a total of 73 on a 19 acre site. That’s less than 4 units per acre (0.26 acres/unit, comparable to the older 0.25-0.5 acre lots on Pennsylvania and South Streets), and fits zoning. The units are interspersed throughout the property. Parking ratio is 2 spaces per units, units are a mix of 1-3 bedrooms. There will be aging-in-place and energy efficient home options for sale, as well as in the rentals. The project will host a playground and nursery/daycare facility geared towards low and moderate-income households. Much of this comes from the result of constructive community feedback.

But what started off on a polite note is getting really ugly, really quickly. It is not a good sign when my editor calls me and tells me that, as a person of color, she felt uncomfortable at the latest meeting.

Given the transparency of this process, which still hasn’t even been submitted for formal planning board review, I find comments about this being “hidden” or rushed through to be a stretch. The project hasn’t submitted anything for formal review yet. Nothing but a sketch plan has been done, and multiple community meetings, and 30-minute small group listening sessions. It really does not get much more personal than that.

One of the questions that was raised was that people are unable there are many more affordable rentals than for-sale units. There are two reasons why that is. For one, funding for purchasable units is more difficult to get. The government is more likely to disburse a grant if it knows there are buyers waiting in the wings. That’s why the buildout for the for-sale units is 2-8 years. For two, for low and moderate-income households often don’t have much money saved for a big expense such as down-payment, and far more are capable of renting versus buying.

There are valid concerns that need to be addressed. For example, traffic. A study is being conducted with a third party. The typical thing I hear, affordable housing, or any project really, is that “they’ll lie, they’re in XYZ’s pocket”. If no one trusts you to do your job properly, no municipal board will sign off on accepting your study, and you’re finished as a firm. Likewise with stormwater analysis and civil engineering. School system capacity is checked with the district, which basically just sends a letter saying “yes, we have room” or “no, we don’t have room”. The study is being conducted and will be made public long before any approvals are granted, people can weigh in after reading it to say whether it’s comprehensive and adequate, and feel free to say something and explain why it may not be. That’s the purpose of SEQR, to determine impacts and mitigate unavoidable impacts.

On a related note, a board’s job is to review the objective components of a project. It is not appropriate, or legal, to decide on a subjective trait like whether the people who will live there fit the “Trumansburg way of life” or that the project is “too Ithacan”. Who decides what those things are? Because too quickly, it degenerates into a look or an image, and a train of thought that should never be a part of any development conversation. Because it’s subjective, those terms meant something quite different in 1997, and something quite different in 1977.

Also, there seems to be this idea that poor people in urban neighborhoods will be forced out here, and they will be a burden on TrumansburgThere are plenty of people who live and work in Trumansburg who need affordable options in a rapidly-appreciating real estate market. The one bedrooms will be rented to individuals making $22k-$48k. That could be a store manager, a barista, a school teacher or a retiree. Tenants are screened, visited at their current home and interviewed before being offered a unit. Qualified affordable home buyers will mostly be in the $42k-$64k range (80-120% AMI). Think nurses, office workers, tradespeople (following INHS’s sales deeds, I actually see a lot of ICSD teachers). The market rate units will offer whatever the market allows price-wise; new townhouse-style housing in Trumansburg would likely fetch $250k+, so think upper-middle income.

It would be nonsensical to make people in Ithaca move into housing in Trumansburg that they don’t want and would drive up their costs; however, those who want to live there, whether because they admire Trumansburg, work there, or both, will seek the opportunities it provides.

For a county that seems keenly aware of its housing issues, there tends to be an uncomfortable amount of pushback against affordable housing, whether it be Fall Creek, South Hill, Lansing or Trumansburg. Does that qualify as being “too Ithacan”?

2. Taking a look at the county’s records this week, it looks like 210 Linden Avenue’s construction loan has been filed. Elmira Savings Bank is lending Visum Development (Todd Fox and associates) $3.15 million, with $2,358,783 towards the hard costs (materials/labor) of replacing the existing 12-bedroom student apartment house with a 9-unit, 36-bedroom apartment building. Elmira Savings Bank is one of the biggest single-family construction loan lenders in Tompkins, but they have only been the lender for a few multi-family projects. The only other multi-million project in the past few years was the 18-unit Rabco Apartments at 312 Thurston Avenue in Cornell Heights – a project that, along with the cancelled 1 Ridgewood, so incensed deep-pocketed permanent residents nearby that they petitioned and succeeded in getting the city to downgrade the zoning.

Also filed this week was a $415,000 construction loan from Tompkins Trust to the owner of Hancock Plaza on the 300 Block of Third Street in Ithaca’s Northside neighborhood. The 19,584 SF shopping plaza, built in 1985, is assessed at $1.485 million and has been under its current ownership since 2002. Most might know it for the DMV, but it also hosts Istanbul restaurant, a bookkeeping service, and a gas station and convenience store that opened in renovated space in 2015. There’s no indication in the loan as to what kind of work will be performed, about $363,000 has been set aside for hard costs like materials and labor, and the work is required to be finished by March 2018.

3. Also filed in both sales and construction loans this week was paperwork for 306 North Cayuga Street, right next to DeWitt Park on the edge of Ithaca’s downtown. Also known as the C. R. Williams House, the 8,798 SF, ca. 1898 property was assessed at $900,000 and on the market for $1.4 million last year. The sale price was $1.3 million.

I was privy to an email chain that engaged an out-of-state condo developer to look at the property, but that person was not the buyer.  The LLC traces back to Travis Hyde Properties, just a few blocks away.

According to Frost Travis of THP, the plan is to renovate the live/work space to allow for more space for THP, which is outgrowing its North Tioga Street location, and four apartment units. Exterior changes will only be cosmetic, but any substantial changes will be subject to ILPC approval, as the property sits in the DeWitt Park Historic District. Elmira Savings Bank is lending $1.24 million for the renovation, of which $1,204,752 is going towards the actual construction (so apparently, this was a big week for ESB). The project is expected to be complete by next summer, according to the loan filing.

4. For the aspiring homebuilder or developer – new to the market this week, a run-down though salvageable 1830 home at 1975 Dryden Road just east of Dryden village, and 101 acres of developable vacant land currently rented out for agricultural use. The sale price is $795,000. The county GIS lists the property at 112.4 acres, but without a map in the listing, it’s hard to tell if there’s a typo or if there might be a subdivision somewhere. The assessment is for $531,900, $401,300 of which is the land. It appears the property has been in the ownership of the same family since 1968. The property is listed as a rural agricultural district, which is geared towards ag uses, but permits office, one-family and two-family homes as-of-right; multi-family and box retail require special use permits. Zoning is one unit per two acres, but in the case of a conservation subdivision that preserves open/natural space, it’s one unit per acre – either way, only about 50 units allowed here. Technically, a PUD (aka DIY zoning) is also an option, but would need adequate justification. Kinda hoping it doesn’t become conventional suburban sprawl, but will reserve judgement for when this sells.

 

5. Ithaca is once again competing for $10 million in state funds as part of the regional Downtown Redevelopment Initiative. The funds are intended to spark investment in urban cores and improve infrastructure for communities throughout the state, ten cities selected each year, one in each region. Readers may recall Elmira won last year. This year, Ithaca is competing against two of its Southern Tier peers – Watkins Glen, with which it competing with last year as well, and Endicott, a struggling satellite city over by Binghamton, that is entering the competition for the first time. Reports suggest the Ithaca submission is largely the same as last year’s. Winners will be announced in the fall.

 

 

 





210 Hancock Construction Update, 6/2017

18 06 2017

210 Hancock is chugging towards completion later this summer. Lecesse Construction has all four sub-components of the apartment building have been framed and sheathed. Building A is almost finished from the outside, with some exterior finished and trim still on the to-do list. The Blueskin will be faced with Alpolic aluminum panels, some of which have already been installed. Masonry work is underway on Building C, using Redland Whitehall Brick (it’s not often one sees unpainted white brick). More information on the exterior materials can be found in April’s post.

Note that the buildings are all elevated at least a few feet from ground level, and it’s particular noticeable with the five rental townhouses on the northeast corner. This is because of floodplain restrictions – several blocks of Fall Creek and Northside have the unfortunate luck of being in the 100-year floodplain, and most of Northside except for few blocks around Lewis and Jay Streets are in the 500-year floodplain. This approximated frequency is at risk of decreasing as the inlet gets clogged and layered with fresh silt, and with less volume and capacity, the un-dredged inlet would be more likely to have a high water event overflow its banks. It’s one of many reasons why the city is pressing for state dredging of the inlet before disaster strikes.

WHCU reported a few weeks ago that INHS has had no shortage of applicants for the 210 Hancock rentals. After receiving over 200 applications, they set up a lottery in which 122 “made it through” , and then selected the top 60 (there are 59 rental units though…might be a just in case there’s a drop-out, or it could just be conversational rounding). If it’s anything like New York City’s lottery, what happens is that each application is validated, sorted for requested unit type, and is assigned a randomized log number – those who get 1-48 for the one-bedroom subset, and 1-11 for the two-bedrooms subset, are awarded dibs on a unit, so long as they pass the income check and background check. In previous measures, about 86% of rental applicants, six out of every seven, came from inside Tompkins County, with just under half from other parts of the city of Ithaca.

The seven for-sale units are also just beginning sales marketing. The three on Hancock are, from east to west, 204, 206 and 208 Hancock Street, and the four for-sale units on Lake Street going south to north are 406, 408, 410 and 412 Lake Street. 206 Hancock, 408 Lake and 410 Lake will be 910 SF 2 bedroom, 1.5 bath units that will sell for $112,000 to qualified buyers. 406 Lake and 412 are 1088 SF, 2 bed 1.5 bath units priced at $129,000. The largest units, 204 Hancock and 208 Hancock, are 1300 SF, 3 bed 1.5 bath units that will sell for $145,000. The plan is to have buyers lined up for all seven units by the end of the year.





News Tidbits 6/10/17: In High Demand

10 06 2017

1. Start off this week with some eye candy. Here are the latest renders for Visum Development’s 191-bed, 60-unit project at 232-236 Dryden Road. The biggest change here is the Dryden Road facade – revised fenestration, and the addition of shingle-style balconies. STREAM Collaborative’s intent is to give the south building a little more historical sensitivity – when the Cascadilla school still had a dorm in the late 1800s and early 1900s, it included a 4-story shingle-style dormitory complete with dining room and gym. The balconies are throwbacks to the dormitory’s balconies.

However, given that this building will date open in 2018 and not 1898, instead of wood shingle, the balconies will use Allura “Redwood” fiber cement shinglewood pulp mixed with sand and cement, shaped for a wood-like appearance, but with the durability of concrete. Fiber cement is also more expensive to buy and install vs. materials like vinyl, which is why only more expensive or visible structures tend to use it. Other planned materials include Endicott manganese ironspot velour brick veneer, fiber cement panels with LP smart trim painted in Sherwin-Williams Pure White and Anonymous (actual name), lap siding in SW Pure White and Marigold, granite grey stucco (*real* stucco, not DryVit), a metal canopy and Andersen windows.

2. Business is good for STREAM Collaborative. So good that they’re expanding both in staff and space. The young, prolific architecture firm led by Noah Demarest will be moving out from its location in the City Hall Annex at 123 Sough Cayuga Street, and into a larger downtown space in the ca. 1872 Gregg Block at 108-112 West State Street, across from the State Theatre. The new digs are being renovated now, and are expected to be ready for occupancy by July 1st.

On another note, the owner of the city hall annex has taken to advertising the office space on Cragislist, which seems like the wrong choice to me. An apartment, sure. A house for sale or offices to rent? My impression is that folks prefer a more professional medium than what Craigslist offers. Kinda the same with jobs – servers or dog-sitters, sure. Accountants or architects? Ehh.

Maybe I’m just behind the times. Here’s the posting for the former Hal’s Deli on the 100 Block North Aurora Street. $5500/month.

3. WHCU is reporting that INHS has had no shortage of applicants for the 210 Hancock rentals. After receiving over 200 applications, they set up a lottery in which 122 “made it through” , and then selected the top 60 (there are 59 rental units though…might be a just in case there’s a drop-out, or it could just be conversational rounding). If it’s anything like New York City’s lottery, what happens is that each application is validated, sorted for requested unit type, and is assigned a randomized log number – those who get 1-48 for the one-bedroom subset, and 1-11 for the two-bedrooms subset, are awarded dibs on a unit, so long as they pass the income check and background check. Unit occupancy is expected late this summer, and marketing for the seven for-sale units will start…

4. …pretty much now. The three units in the first image are 204, 206 and 208 Hancock Street, the four for-sales in image two are from L to R, 406, 408, 410 and 412 Lake Street. 206 Hancock, 408 Lake and 410 Lake will be 910 SF 2 bedroom, 1.5 bath units that will sell for $112,000 to qualified buyers. 406 Lake and 412 are 1088 SF, 2 bed 1.5 bath units priced at $129,000. The largest units, 204 Hancock and 208 Hancock, are 1300 SF, 3 bed 1.5 bath units that will sell for $145,000. The plan is to have buyers lined up for all seven units by the end of the year.

5. The county legislature has approved the Heritage Center acquisition. The county will pay $2 million for the 18,500 SF property, about $400,000 below assessment. Tompkins Financial Corporation is parting with its former offices next spring as it moves into a new HQ a block away. The plan is to have the heritage center, which will host tourism and history-focused non-profits, open for occupancy by the end of 2018, just as The History Center’s lease at 406 E. State runs out.

6. Seems like Lakeview is serious about their West End mixed-use project. The mental health services organization just purchased three properties on Thursday the 8th – 326 North Meadow for $150,000, 711-13 West Court Street for $525,000, and 329 North Meadow and 709 West Court (same owner) for $550,000.

Lakeview is planning a mixed-use 5-story building with a small amount of first-floor retail and 50 apartment units, all of which would be affordable, and half of which would be set aside for those with mental health ailments who are generally independent, but will have Lakeview staff to turn to in times of need. The project team requested $250,000 from the city IURA to help finance the $20.1 million project, but were only awarded $50,000 since it’s still at a relatively stage without detailed plans. The project team expects to submit their project for review later this year, with a 2018 construction start.

7. Tiny Timbers is doing well. In an update to their website, they note the completion of their first house, a “lofted L” model just over the county line in Hector, and a new house planned in Enfield (given that Enfield permitted just one new house last year, there’s probably a joke in there somewhere). There is another home just getting underway in Lansing’s Farm Pond Circle development, and a fourth will start soon on Grandview Drive in the city of Ithaca’s portion of South Hill. All the new units will be “big cubes” like the render shown above.

8. Looking at the city of Ithaca’s planning department memo this month, there’s nothing new to note for June. Smaller projects tend to show up in the memo, since the sketch plan for feedback isn’t as big of a deal for a small proposal, like a new store or a modest apartment building. Finger Lakes ReUse’s 22 studio units for vulnerable/formerly homeless populations will have its public hearing and Determination of Environmental Significant (step before prelim approval), the McDonald’s rebuild will have Declaration of Lead Agency, public hearing, BZA recs and DoES, 232-236 Dryden will have its DoES vote, and the Old Library redevelopment and 238 Linden will be up for approval.

9. Finishing off this week with a word of approval – the Dryden town board gave approval to Gary Sloan’s 36-unit Evergreen Townhouses at 1061 Dryden Road, per Cassie Negley at the Ithaca Times. At the boards’ (both planning and town) encouragement, the solar panels were replaced with electric heat pumps, which could utilize off-site solar and open up the possibility of a more environmentally sustainable project overall, given the proliferation of solar arrays underway in Tompkins and the region (my off the cuff estimate has at least enough solar arrays planned in Tompkins in the next 18 months to power over 10,000 homes). A play structure and 11 more parking spaces were also added.





210 Hancock Construction Update, 4/2017

23 04 2017

There is so much going on at INHS’s 210 Hancock site, this might be the record for most photos in a single construction update. Let’s go counterclockwise from the southwest corner, since that’s the order these photos were taken.

With the apartment building string, Section “A”‘s Blueskin has been mostly bricked over with Redland Heritage Brick. Some Blueskin remains exposed in areas that will be faced with Alpolic exterior metal panels. Fingers crossed that the mustard yellow shown in the elevations looks less jarring in person. It looks like an additional layer of thermal insulation was installed above the windows to go between the Blueskin and the metal panels (mostly dark grey, a few yellow…technically they’re called Alpolic Charcoal and EYL Yellow. the armchair architect in me really wants to harp on the yellow metal panels. I remember a Noah Demarest quote about yellow being a really hard exterior color to pull off. Why not a red or an orange-brown?). The roof is finished and interior fixtures and flooring are being installed.

Then we get to the first string of three for-sale townhouses, which will have addresses for the 200 Block of Hancock (apart from 202, I’m forgetting the exact numbers). They look nothing like the elevations submitted for IURA review, and that is not a bad thing. INHS is using Certainteed clapboard siding on the exterior. The one on the west (left) is “Autumn Red”, and the one on the east (right) is “Mountain Cedar”, both of which were used on the Stone Quarry project. The shades of brown and grey are so similar it’s hard to tell what the middle one is, maybe “Hearthstone”. It looks like a mixture of sizes as well, maybe 4″ on the left and middle, and 7″ Mountain Cedar on the right. The trim pieces are Certainteed vinyl and vary slightly in color, neutral whitish or tannish shades like “Sandstone Beige”, “Natural Clay” and “Desert Tan”.

Circling around to the 400 Block of Lake Avenue highlights a construction contrast between the for-sale units and the five for-rent units further north. The for-sale units are wood-frame, plywood Huber ZIP sheathing, and exterior finishes. The for-rent units are wood-frame, standard plywood sheets, Tyvek Housewrap, and exterior finishes. The difference between the two is really a matter of preference – both are effective water-resistive barriers if installed properly. ZIP panels tend to be easier to install (lower labor cost), but more expensive as a product.

The Certainteed colors on the rentals are “Spruce”, “Sable Brown”, a split-level “Autumn Red/Hearthstone”, “Flagstone” and another “Autumn Red”. Some of these will be 4″ clapboard, others 7″ shingles – all Certainteed, all to give the impression of individual units so they play well with their older, detached neighbors. The Spruce Green unit looks a little odd with that big blank wall above the porch, and in the renders and elevation it appears to be bigger than the final product.

Apartment sections “C” and “D” are still being framed, and “B” has been fully skinned and fitted out with windows. “B” will be faced with will use Carolina Ceramics Teakwood Brick and Morin blue-grey corrugated steel with pearl, EYL yellow and charcoal Alpolic metal panels, “C” will use Redland Whitehall Brick (white brick) as well as Alpolic panels, and “D” will use the same Heritage Red brick as “A” but, with some corrugated steel on the stairwell. “C” and “D” also have a first-floor covered parking garage. The garage will be face in Barnes and Cone Masonry, but the city’s November 2015 filing makes reference to a product that doesn’t appear in their brochures.

The apartment will be ready by August 1st, and the for-sale units will be on the market by the fall. Lecesse Construction is the general contractor.





210 Hancock Construction Update, 2/2017

20 02 2017

Normally construction sites get updates every two months. But at the INHS Hancock project site, things are getting really interesting in a short time.

First, the main apartment building. In just the past month, section “A”, the southernmost wing, has been wrapped in Blueskin, roofed, and the windows have been fitted. Answering a question from a few months back, it looks like the Blueskin’s purpose is to be the water/vapor membrane under the brick. The section of “A” under the weatherproof plastic tenting is being bricked – a few loose bricks can be seen in the last photos through holes in the plastic. Not only do the workers appreciate some protection from the elements, brickwork requires temperatures to be kept above freezing so that the water in the mortar doesn’t freeze out, so not only is there plastic wrap, Lecesse has also deployed portable heaters. Section “B” will follow with the Blueskin sheathing, roofing and window-fitting, and then “C” and “D”, which host the indoor garage (hence the CMUs) and are still being framed out.

The five rental townhouses have a typical wood-frame build-out – first comes wood framing and roofing, then tar papered and shingling, housewrapping and window fitting. Interestingly, the seven for-sale townhouses (collectively referred to as “202 Hancock”) are using Huber ZIP sheathing panels, which the rentals did not. The Hancock street trio of homes have been framed but not roofed, while the Lake Avenue quartet are still being framed out, awaiting the rest of their roof trusses. The insides of the for-sale homes are still just bare stud walls at this point, while the rentals are probably far enough along that most utility rough ins have been completed, and sheetrock is being hung in the units. All in all, Lecesse Construction and their subcontractors have been moving at a very good clip over the past month or so.

A construction loan filing on January 23rd states Tompkins Trust lent INHS $1,581,796 to finance the 202 Hancock units. The total cost (hard and soft) of the seven for-sale units is estimated at $2.36 million. The five two bedroom units (1,147 SF) will be sold for about $114,000, and two three-bedroom units (1,364 SF) for $136,000, to qualified applicants making 60-80% of local AMI, or $37,000-$49,000/year.

For the sake of comparison, the apartment building and for-sale units are partially financed with a $7,790,511 loan from a Citibank fund – through an LLC, Citibank bought the low-income housing tax credits (LIHTCs) awarded to the project by New York State. The apartment building’s total cost comes to $13.8 million, with the rest financed through INHS’s money, federal tax credits, housing grants and a low-interest loan from the state’s housing division (NYSHCR).

Renters or homeowners interested in obtaining a unit can fill out an inquiry form here. The rentals will be ready for occupancy by August 1st, 2017, and the for-sale units are looking at a November 2017 completion.

20170218_132608 20170218_132630 20170218_132650 20170218_132705 20170218_132720 20170218_132737 20170218_132806 20170218_132824 20170218_132828 20170218_132850 20170218_132905 20170218_132928 20170218_133033 20170218_133051 20170218_133132 20170218_133217 20170218_133245 20170218_133259 20170218_133312 20170218_133355 20170218_133420

inhs_pride_design_v5_3

blueskin-vp100-brick inhs_pride_design_v6_1202_hancock_2 202_hancock_1 202_hancock_3

inhs_pride_design_v6_1