Proposed Affordable Housing Project Gets Extension
July 16, 2020
By Mike Kruzman / news@whmi.com
Howell Township officials have granted the developers of a potential affordable-housing apartment complex an extension on their deposit for purchasing the land.
Union Development Holdings LLC is aiming to develop a 220-unit apartment complex at Oak Grove behind the Kroger store in Howell Township. It would be an affordable housing project in accordance with Michigan State Housing Development Authority (MSHDA) guidelines. At Monday night’s meeting of the Board of Trustees, one resident who lives in a neighboring area expressed his concerns to the board. He was worried about the amount of traffic that it was going to bring to their neighborhood, claiming to already have an issue with people not obeying the speed limits and a lack of law enforcement patrolling the area.
Concern was also raised about the income level requirements for these units. Treasurer Jonathon Hohenstein said a number of the units will be market-based, and some will not. Trustee Jeff Smith estimated that 60% would be affordable, and Clerk Jean Graham noted it would not be Section 8 housing. Hohenstein said it could be based up to the average median income of the area. He said there is a very strong need for affordable housing in Livingston County and not a lot of it. Hohenstein said this could give people that would typically struggle to get into a $200-$300,000 house an easier time.
During the reports section of the Board meeting, members considered a request from Union Development for a 60-day extension on their next earned money deposit for the property. This request was made because they did not believe they would have had MSHDA approval by the original due date. The Board approved the request unanimously. Hohenstein said following the meeting that once Union gets through the MSHDA process, he thinks closing will happen pretty quickly.
Money deposited is non-refundable to Union Development. The development additionally stands to gain a tax abatement to allow to Union offset the money lost from the rent.
In the minutes from the Board’s May11th meeting, board members discussed this and determined that the impact to the schools would be better put into this project than into a manufacturing project. And while tax money coming in may be cut, they felt it was still far better than having the property sit empty for years to come.
Picture - Google Street View