Posted Feb 12, 2016, 3:27 AM
|
 |
COGSADCAJA, VP and CGO
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Frozen Swamps of Ohio
Posts: 1,369
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by ILUVSAT
I don't think he/she meant it in that manner. I believe the thought was that this development could get tied up (at least a bit) in the approval process since the developer is seeking incentives and the city wants affordable housing.
More affordable housing is a good thing. However, unless incentives completely offset the potential revenue, the more units of affordable housing included in a project could affect the cost of the "market rate" units (i.e., increasing their cost). The project has to be economically viable for the developer and his/her equity partners.
Another area in which the developer could cut costs and still remain economically viable is in overall design (this assumes the developer did not receive enough incentives while still including affordable units and keeping the cost of market rate units down).
|
*nodding profusely*
this might be the explanatory post of the year.
__________________
PAVE PARADISE, PUT UP A (HIGH-RISE ON A) PARKING LOT...
Kyle on Twitter
|
Threaded Mode