Officials seek compromise on affordable housing
As 311 Mapleton Ave. continues to hum with construction in preparation for tenant move- in this summer, another site just a few miles away — which for many was the reason the up-and- coming apartments are up-and- coming — remains untouched.
The lot, which formerly housed Fruehauf’s Patio, was promised by a group of local developers to be transformed into 100 affordable senior apartments if the then-boulder City Council allowed them to build 91 market-rate senior residential units, plus memory care and rehab facilities, at 311 Mapleton Ave.
But in the years since the City Council green-lit that request, the high-end apartments are nearing completion at the base of the Flatirons, but the deadline for the developers to apply for federal tax credits for the affordable housing project — the glue that held the deal together — has come and gone.
With the disintegration of the deal, some city officials have expressed disappointment or anger with the developers, while others remain hopeful it will work out. As for the developers, they still plan to provide something to the community as Boulder continues to fall short of the burgeoning demand for not just affordable housing but affordable senior housing.
“We’re still collaborating to try to make that happen, and we think we’re going to see a little bit of a break in constraints and/ or construction costs,” said Gary Berg, one of the five local developers involved and owner of The Academy Boulder.
The units at what will be known as the Academy Mapleton Hill will range from about 1,200 square feet to 3,000-plus and require tenants to pay 85% of a nonrefundable deposit anywhere from $1.4 million to more than $3 million. Additionally, monthly rent is about $9,000.
“It’s high- end. It’s going to the rich, but (we thought) at least we’re getting this in exchange,” said Mayor Pro Tem Mark Wallach, referring to the Fruehauf’s site. “We got nothing in exchange. We ought to be looking at this in a different way. Maybe (the developers) had a good faith change of heart because market conditions changed, but that’s not how it appears to me and not how it appears to most of the community.”
At the time of the proposal, the developers pitched the idea of going above and beyond what the city’s inclusionary housing requirement mandates, which stipulates that all new residential development projects with five or more dwelling units provide 25% of the total units as permanently affordable housing, if the City Council granted them building permits for the Mapleton site. Rather than sticking with just 25%, or 18 units required, the developers said they would build 100 affordable units for senior residents at Fruehauf’s as well as eight affordable units at the Mapleton site.
The deal also had a clause requiring the developers to apply for federal tax credits in 2019. That deadline has expired. Additionally, the site review plan for the project expires next month. For the project to move forward, developers will have to go through the entire process with the city again.
Berg said financially, 311 Mapleton project had to come first in order to pay for the affordable housing at Fruehauf’s. But before that began, the coronavirus pandemic hit.
“Fruehauf’s can’t work without Mapleton,” he said. “We had to do that first. The only way to get that done was Mapleton first, and then unfortunately the pandemic hits. At first construction was dead in the water and then it came roaring back, but costs for construction were very, very different.”
Moving forward, Wallach said he wants the city to look at ways to prevent this from happening again. He wants to have the developers’ plans locked in from the start.
“They had a contingent document,” Wallach said. “Everybody went home and said this is good. They’ll develop Fruehauf’s and add affordable senior living, and none of it happened. They didn’t even get the eight senior units on the 311 Mapleton site. This was kind of a nightmare scenario. I have asked the council’s office to take a look at it to figure out how we do this in a way where we don’t have this happen again.”
Kurt Firnhaber, Boulder director of housing and human services, said the answer is simple: Stick with the ordinance.
“A developer can commit to going in one direction, but when they get the building permit, they can do whatever they want,” he said. “We have a very good and effective affordable housing ordinance, and the City Council should just rely on that ordinance instead of trying to negotiate it.”
Firnhaber said instead of agreeing to the deal developers proposed, councilmembers should have stuck to the code, which requires that they either provide the housing at the proposed development site, at another location, dedicate vacant land for affordable unit development or make a cash contribution to Boulder’s affordable housing fund in lieu of providing units.