california tax credit allocation committee update
Download
Skip this Video
Download Presentation
California Tax Credit Allocation Committee Update

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 37

California Tax Credit Allocation Committee Update - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 131 Views
  • Uploaded on

California Tax Credit Allocation Committee Update. William Pavão Executive Director Lisa Vergolini Deputy Director DC Navarrette Regional Analyst. Topics. Update of 2014 Results and Trends New Construction vs. Rehab Trends Updated Credit Pricing

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about ' California Tax Credit Allocation Committee Update' - germane-craft


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
california tax credit allocation committee update
California Tax Credit Allocation Committee Update

William Pavão

Executive Director

Lisa Vergolini

Deputy Director

DC Navarrette

Regional Analyst

topics
Topics
  • Update of 2014 Results and Trends
  • New Construction vs. Rehab Trends
  • Updated Credit Pricing
  • 2015 Regulation Changes and Proposals
  • Cost Study
slide3

2014 Results

  • Total awards: 80 after Round 2, plus 4-5 more likely from a waiting list
    • 49% of applicants (84 awards in 2013)
    • ~ $91 million in annual federal credit ($89M in 2013)
    • ~$101 million in total state credit ($77.7M in 2013)
2014 awards and waiting list cont
2014 Awards and Waiting List cont.
  • Average project size: 58 units (62 in 2013) A
  • Average TDC: $19.5M ($18.5M in 2013)
  • Average federal credit award: $1.1M ($1M in 2013)
  • Average public contribution: $5.7M ($5.7M in 2013)
    • 29.7% of TDC (30.7% in 2013)
slide8

2014 State Credits

  • Available: $105.1 million*
    • 9% projects: $88.3 million
    • 4% projects: $15.6 million
  • Awarded: $115.5 million
    • 9% projects: $101 million
    • 4% projects: $14.5 million
  • Reaching into 2015: $10.4 million
slide9

2014 State and 9% Credits

  • 2014: 30 awards, $101 million in State credit
    • No state credit exchange (SCE)
  • 2013: 23 awards, $63 million
    • 7 SCE, $18.7 million
    • $77.7 million total
  • Average per project award
    • 2014: $3.3 million (24% increase over 2013 - $2.7 million)
slide10

2014 Special Needs Projects with State Credits

  • Nine of 30 State credit awards are Special Needs housing type projects
  • In 2013, only one of 29 were Special Needs projects
slide11

2014 Special Needs Projects with State Credits cont.

  • Twelve Special Needs awards total
  • Nine requested State credits
    • Six DDA/QCT projects also requested State credits
    • Three non-DDA/QCT projects received 130% federal basis boost along with State credits
slide12

2014 4% plus State Credits

  • 21 four percent-plus-State applications (8 in 2013)
    • $15.6 million available for 2014
  • 8 awards (7 in 2013)
    • $14.5 million in State credit ($9 million in 2013)
slide13

2014 Native American Apportionment

  • Three applicants (Bishop, Hoopa, and Washoe tribes)
  • Two awards
    • R1: Bishop Paiute (New Construction, Large Family)
    • R2: Trinity River Elder’s Village (New Construction, Seniors)
  • Points scores: 148, 140 respectively
slide14

2014 Native American Apportionment

  • TDC: $11.9M (30 units) and $4.1M (12 units)
  • Public funds: NAHASDA ($1.7M and $915K)
  • Federal Credit: $885K and $388K
  • State Credit: $3.5M (R1 Bishop Paiute Project)
credit pricing first round 2014 letters of intent september 2014 46 projects total 9 and 4 state
Credit PricingFirst Round 2014 Letters of Intent (September 2014)46 projects total - 9% and 4% + State
  • $1.10 - $1.17

14 projects (31%)

  • $1.05 - $1.09

6 projects (13%)

  • $1 - $1.04

8projects (18%)

  • $0.95 - $0.99

11 projects (25%)

  • $0.90 - $0.94

5projects (11%)

  • $0.89*

1 project (2%)

*San Jacinto, CA

2014 regulations changes for 2015
2014 Regulations Changes for 2015

Accessibility Thresholds

  • CBC Chapter 11(B) applicable in 2014
    • 5% with mobility features, 2% with sensory features
    • 2015: 10% with mobility features, 4% with sensory features
  • Lease up priority for accessible units to households who need them
2014 regulations changes for 20151
2014 Regulations Changes for 2015

Senior Housing Type

  • 62+ age standard
  • 50 percent of all units on an accessible path must be developed to California Building Code Chapter 11(B) standards
2015 regulation change proposals
2015 Regulation Change Proposals
  • Retain 2008 California Building Code, Title 24, Part 6 calibration
  • Add Zero Net Energy (ZNE) option for scoring and threshold
  • Permit larger maximum developer fee in project cost and basis for 4% new construction projects of 150 units or more
key points
Key Points
  • 2011: Only two projects
  • Constant dollar expression
  • 2002-2009: + $108K per unit increase
  • 2002-2005: + $87K per unit increase
key findings 1 local factors
Key Findings: 1. Local Factors
  • Local reviews and sources added costs:
    • Community opposition (5 percent)
    • Design review changes (6 percent)
    • Redevelopment projects (7 percent)
2 parking
2. Parking
  • Podium or subterranean parking (6 percent)
  • Relative to surface or other parking
3 developer factors
3. Developer Factors
  • Larger developers may correlate with cost efficiency
  • Developers with licensed general contractor on staff may correlate with cost efficiency
  • Quality/durability correlate with cost (15%)
measuring quality
Measuring Quality
  • Roofing: 10-; 15-; or 20-year warranty
    • 92% reported 20-year
  • Exteriors: Stained plywood; fiber cement siding; or stucco
    • 80% reported stucco
quality cont
Quality cont.
  • Windows: Aluminum sliders; vinyl, PVC, or casement; or wood clad casement
    • 91% reported vinyl, PVC, or casement
  • Flooring: vinyl tile; sheet linoleum; or ceramic tile
    • 73% reported sheet linoleum
quality cont1
Quality cont.
  • Bath tubs: fiberglass; enameled steel; or enameled cast iron
    • 92% reported fiberglass
  • Counter tops: plastic laminate; synthetic or ceramic tile; stone
    • 70% reported plastic laminate
4 economies of scale
4. Economies of Scale
  • 10% increase in unit count correlates with a 1.7% decrease in per-unit cost
  • Example: Taking 60 units to 66 units could reduce $300,000 units to $295,000
    • $18M becomes a $19.5M cost
5 unit type
5. Unit Type
  • Smaller units cost less
    • Example: SRO units cost 31% less than large family units
  • Senior units cost 18% less than large family units
  • Taller (4+ floors) cost 10% more
    • $28K more per unit than 1-3 floor bldgs.
6 land costs
6. Land Costs
  • Land features affect building height, parking configurations, staging, as well as acquisition costs
  • Podium parking 6% more expensive per unit than projects without podium parking
    • Approximately $17K/unit additional cost
ad