Call to order the government operations committee meeting for Thursday, October 16th, 2025.

Probably just standards.

One nation.

Welcome everyone.

Approval minutes, September 18th, 2025.

Is there a motion?

Move for approval.

Second.

Motion by Councilmember Kazimczek, seconded by Councilmember Russell.

All those in favor.

Motion carries three zero.

First on our agenda today is an MPDU fund recipient update Habitat for Humanity.

This item would presented by Habitat for Humanity.

Welcome.

Thank you.

So we appreciate the chance.

So we're really happy to have a lot of the team here today.

And speaking of being really happy to uh to have the team here today, we're also really happy to get the chance to uh to provide an overview of our West All Saints condos, particularly as it relates to the MPDU funding that we received from the city.

So with that said, we'll tell you a little bit about our West All Saints residential condominiums.

So while 12 condos in the face of several developments here that are producing hundreds of units uh may seem smaller.

Uh for habitat, this is the most ambitious project in our history uh when you factor in that habitat is typically known for single family home builds uh along those lines.

So this was a chance to transition from single family home builds into multifamily condos, uh, and in this case on a community land trust, and we'll talk about that more in just a moment.

Uh and in particular with West All Saints, it's two phases of six condos each.

Uh, when completed, uh this is going to be a dozen permanently affordable homes for low to moderate income families uh that are at or below 80% AMI.

And uh we'll tell you a little bit about the affordable housing land trust.

So the Habitat founded this in 2013 as one of the first community land trusts in the state of Maryland.

Uh, prior to West All Saints, the land trust held seven single family homes throughout Frederick County.

And the Habitat had to work to get the condos into a land trust because uh prior to last year, the you technically couldn't have a you know, have condos on a land trust.

Uh thankfully the state of Maryland, the Senate House passed legislation in October 2024 that allowed for that.

Uh unfortunately for habitat.

Uh we there was a workaround around that, uh, but we had to pay the legal fees to see that through, so we were happy to be a part of uh supporting that legislation uh and hopefully provide a template for the rest of the state.

I'm gonna talk about the sorry, I'm remiss in talking about we were talking about the land trust, but uh also talking about our new homeowners.

So you actually get a view with one of our new homeowners at the community block party uh this year, so they are enjoying the benefits of said land trust.

With that, I'm gonna turn it over to Darby to give a little bit more background on our community land trust.

So that organizations like Habitat can actually be stewards of that property over the long term, but it also allows buyers to purchase a home, use that home and that land while they're living there.

So RCLT holds title to the land that the homes are built on under a 99-year lease and sells the home with all the rights of ownership and all the use of the land to individual home buyers.

They pay a small monthly ground rent to the land trust, and they pledge that when and if they sell that home, they will sell it to a similarly bracketed um income buyer, so 50 to 80 or 30 to 50 or whatever that is.

But there's a formula in the agreement they sign which entitles them to receive back a portion of the equity that they have earned while they have lived there.

So if the value of the home, appraised value of the home is increased by say 100,000, they will earn back 40 percent of that as in the new price.

So they would don't get 100 percent of what they would have gotten, but they're paying it forward for a similar, a similarly situated um low to moderate income buyer.

And just so you know, we've had um we had seven single family land trust homes, and we've actually had two successful resales of those homes um since 2013, one in downtown Frederick and one out in the Yellow Springs area.

I hate to interrupt you here, but this is the part that I'm not sure that I completely understand.

Um I understand the idea of it.

But how do you find those buyers?

How do you find those buyers that are at the 80 percent and below um are the houses priced at an I've just dealt with this before that it's it it's a it's a very odd thing, uh houses priced at that point in time the house was priced at like in the high 300s, but they really could only somebody who could afford right around 220 was who was permitted to buy the house.

So the they stayed on the market literally for years because of that issue.

So how do you do that that part?

I will say that for us that hasn't happened.

Um there may be other um control some controlled sales where that's happened, but I know that didn't happen um with either of our resales, although I think it's a little bit of a chicken and an egg for a first purchase, to be honest.

Um we set the price initial pricing for West All Saints kind of based on what we saw in the people that had said they were interested in it.

So it it we price it so that we as Habitat and the Land Trust can get something back in terms of the cost that we've put into it, but we also want to make sure that it's affordable for somebody within that income range.

So with this particular project, because of being downtown and taxes and all of the other costs associated with basically continuing to live in the property, we priced it such that um the full monthly all-in is still at 30 percent of the person's income.

But it is a little, it's a bit of a chicken and an egg in terms of the kind of mortgaging that mortgage financing that we can get.

We find this is way more detailed than I anticipated going into, so I apologize um if I'm not pre fully prepared for it.

Um but the two units that we've sold, we were able to offer a zero percent mortgage.

So even though the listed price was say two hundred and eighty-five thousand, they're not paying interest, they're not paying EMI, PMI.

So it the affordability for the first time.

So they're actually taking the loan out from this where I'm not understanding.

The two loans that we've done for this property, we started the initial underwriting and then were able to get a bank to purchase them at a discount so that we could offer the zero percent loan, and we wouldn't we didn't make what we would have made with a commercial mortgage, but a commercial mortgage would also have been um unsustainable for somebody at that income bracket.

So it's finding organizations that can help us extend those zero percent loans that makes that possible.

If we're going into the sort of public mortgage market, then we may adjust the price down.

So that's just two though of those 12 homes.

What about the other 10?

Are the plans to do the same thing for the other 10?

We'd very much like to.

But we need a partner to do that.

The plans would be ideal to do that, but the arrangement that we had was um was changed because what the bank that we were working with is now being taken over by another bank.

And so we are looking for partners in the community, and you'll you'll hear me refer later to uh we uh to a homeowner that we have that's already been approved by our family services committee, uh, and then we'll say pending mortgage arrangements, and it is working to try to find something that um works for the homeowner works for habitat because the difference between a zero interest loan at the higher amount and a conventional rate mortgage at the lower amount is in this case for a homeowner, it's about five hundred dollars a month, which is not insubstantial when it comes to them not only meeting that 30 percent but also just their own budget.

But it sounds to me like habitat covered the percentage anyway, covered that anyway.

So why would habitat not just lower the price on the house for that person and allow them just to get a conventional loan?

Um it depends on the interest, it's because of the interest rate.

Um where they are now is pretty is high, higher than they have been for the last I don't know the exact years.

But if we we want to make it affordable for them and have us get something back from the money that's been put in.

But for example, a 200,000 dollar mortgage loan at six percent is still gonna be eighteen to nineteen hundred dollars a month all in for these condos.

Right.

So we will lower the price if we have to go to the commercial mortgage, but we're trying as much as we can to find a way to not let that happen.

But it's it's I just don't know what's tricky.

That I don't see any way of of having that not happen.

Well, and that's what the the other piece because the we want to make it affordable for the home buyer, but we want to try as much as possible to make it sustainable for habitat, and habitat is already going to come out of phase one with a gap in we're basically having to subsidize with what we have, and so if we start lowering the price, it just widens that gap.

So we're trying to keep that minimized.

But let's be honest, the the the money that comes to habitat, for instance, the 200,000 that came to have a hat from the city of Frederick, that's kind of the purpose of that money.

Correct.

Right?

The purpose of that money is for you to be able to lower or or offer something at a lower price so that people can buy it.

Or am I misunderstanding what we did?

So that is part of it, but we also want to like the for instance the construction costs that we put into it, we want to be able to um we we ideally want to be able to break even.

And the so in doing like as you'll see later in the presentation, like your the MPDU funds made a significant impact in construction costs that we had at the time, but at the um the while while we are a nonprofit, uh we are trying our best to not lose a lot of money so that we have funds to look towards future projects.

So yeah.

Understood completely.

And and and my hopes is that the funds from the city that are meant for uh affordable housing um purposes will continue to come to places like habitat and hopefully even in higher amounts.

Um certainly for me to be able to get behind something like that, and you know, I mean, I would be speaking as a a member of the public at that point in time, but I would certainly be able to support you if I saw that you were using the money that came from whether it be the city, the county, whoever um toward those construction costs, and then take that what's left, then that's what you want to come even under, right?

Um I I'll try and have a uh uh like set an appointment and talk to you about the way that that that all works because that's really interesting to me.

First of all, finding the the people to buy, because chicken and egg as as has been said, um and to me, this is the missing middle.

Like this is the piece that I personally am truly, truly interested in.

So I'd like to understand it better, but I'll I'll set that with you at a different time.

I I don't think my colleagues are nearly as interested in that part as I am.

Okay.

Thank you.

If you want to explain that well, it's uh I I think I'm good for now.

Um they're not sure how this is gonna work, and they say that there's more information coming.

So let's see what we have.

And and but thank you.

I appreciate it, Chair.

So that's a general overview of how a community land trust can work.

Um, but now to the actual uh West All Saints property.

As you all know, I'm sure know um this corner was owned by Asbury United Methodist Church at 101 West All Saints for many years.

Um the church used the corner building 100 as classrooms as meeting space, and um the congregation definitely used the parking lots on Sundays, and the congregation had really hoped to redevelop the property themselves, but over the years it had really become a drain on finances.

And so um, next slide in consultation with um the Reverend Mark Grover, their pastor, the church actually issued a general RFP in 2018 looking for possibilities uh to redevelop the property or have someone redevelop the property.

I don't know how big a response they got at the time, but by late the following year, they were deep in discussions with Habitat for Humanity and the Frederick County Affordable Housing Land Trust.

And at the end of 2019 signed an MOU with us.

The actual purchase of the property took place in November of 2020.

So that's when we formally took took over.

And I just want to say that the Asbury Trust, which is what the church had set up for this property, made a real commitment to lasting affordability.

Um they went with the land trust um in this historic black community of Frederick.

And Habitat and R CLT with our partners also made a pretty significant investment in rehabilitating a historic property that would require um major rehab.

And this is um I can't remember when this picture is from.

I think it's from two sometime in um mid-2023.

This is a rendering before Eric gets into some of the uh construction challenges of a rendering of the final streetscape of West All Saints, which these units are all the ones that are in part of phase one.

At the far left, the building on the corner, 100 is sort of the most um significant landmark.

That one has been sold, and the building at the other end at 108 West All Saints, which was also an existing structure, was sold early this year.

The two remaining buildings, 104 was an existing structure and has two units, uh one upstairs, one downstairs, and 106, which was actually built on um that it wasn't really a vacant lot because there had been a building there, but it had long since been torn down.

So that was all that was infill and is all new construction.

Also has two units upstairs and downstairs, and the downstairs um unit A is an ADA compliant unit.

So we're hoping to get somebody in there with mobility needs who can take advantage of it.

And um, so that's where we're going.

And Eric's gonna talk a little bit more about how we get there or how we've gotten there.

Yeah, so this council and uh uh other leaders in Frederick have uh not just heard from us but from uh other nonprofits and developers about construction challenges that have come up in the last several years.

Uh the uh the the pandemic gets pointed to a lot.

Uh there definitely were uh delayed construction schedules and increased costs that came uh because of that, uh as well as there was supply chain interruptions, and so with the demand for materials prices spiked that affected that was uh uh affected the cost that uh that we faced.

Uh there was fairly significant upfront expenses.

I mentioned some of the legal fees for the uh for the land trust and the condos uh in phase one alone, uh impact fees created an impact.

Uh was they exceeded 166,000 dollars uh for that for phase one.

Uh and then as you'll see in the photo here, uh challenges like we encountered a significant vein of rock when we were preparing to dig the foundation for the infill uh condo.

Uh so this this all contributed to delays and expense to the project, and while it was not a construction expense per se, during that time, interest rates also went up, and so those interest rates affected affordability for prospective homeowners uh as well as uh some of the uh some of the formulas that we can use for uh you know achieving those those sales.

So these are all challenges that have been encountered, but not all of them are unique just to habitat.

So talking through the timeline for the project, and Darby's talked about the the progression uh in 2018 to 2020 from the RFP to the property purchase.

Uh in 2021, uh we began gathering interest forms from potential buyers.

Uh was also when we started to ramp up our fundraising efforts, both with uh uh grants uh and uh funding from city uh county state uh as well as private donors.

Uh and we also began the initial site work and cleanup at the at the site for the property.

Um 2022 is when Habitat saw more significant staff development with our family services team, our construction director, uh, and then also began outreaching to some of those interested parties and establishing eligibility you know criteria that we would use for for this.

Um in 2023, uh I know some members of the council were at the official groundbreaking in January of that year.

Uh we also started to stabilize some of the existing structures, um one of which was pretty dangerous, um, and so required uh a significant um partial teardown of that structure while still meeting uh historic preservation standards.

Um we had foundation and infill work for our new unit at uh 106 West All Saints, uh, and then some of the substructure and utility work for making you know water and sewer connections.

Um so there was that.

And then 2024 was when the really substantial construction progress uh was you know was moving forward, uh, and that's in that timeline where we received the MPDU funds from the city, and so in spring of that year, we had uh significant steps forward in framing in HVAC and electrical installation, uh, as well as masonry and roofing.

Uh and then uh 2024 was also a milestone because our family services committee chose uh the first home buyer for the project uh at uh 108 West All Saints.

And so earlier this year uh we were pleased to welcome um the uh that home buyer uh as well as in July of uh of this year we had our second home buyers at 100 West All Saints.

So I mentioned habitat expenses around the time of the MPDU funds award, and we know that those funds there were um things that the funds could have been used for, some of that could at the MOU indicated could have considered the impact fees, we could have uh there's there's a number of different uh considerations.

Uh Habitat chose to apply that towards uh some of the immediate expenses that threatened to delay the project.

So uh mentioned a lot of those critical trades with the masonry roofing, electric, uh, some of the the painting.

Um you'll see here that in just the uh in the three-month period, April through June of 2024, uh there was a little over 430,000 in expenses that habitat was facing.

Uh and here's a more detailed breakdown of some of those expenses in that time.

Um the majority of which is the electric and the HVAC um rough ends, but even some of the other expenses, uh, none of them are insignificant.

Uh so habitat, real quick, with that being said, how's warranties work on this in terms of like HVAC?

All these things we're talking about for a homeowner in this case.

So the the warranty because for instance the appliances that come in or the HVAC, it would be they because they're brand new units, they would be you know it's subject to the same warranties that somebody would get with purchasing uh you know the um uh the um purchasing what comes along with that as far as the you know the built-in warranties.

Okay.

Anything that anything you want to add to that?

No.

Okay.

So we'll see the city's funds for MPDU helped us to cover nearly half of those obligations.

It it had a secondary positive impact in that we could have put those expenses onto our construction line of credit, but we're paying interest on that line of credit.

So that helped to reduce uh some of the reliance on those credit lines.

And more importantly, helped us to continue project momentum at a critical stage in the process.

If we hadn't done that at the time, we would have been hard pressed to get those two homeowners in uh and and be you know to the point that we are at in the you know in the development.

Sorry.

I I just want to make sure that I'm understanding costs here.

So the original the the impact fees themselves that was 166,000.

Correct.

And then the um the build was 430,000.

That's not including site work, or is that including site work?

That's not this is that that three-month snapshot in time just from April through June of 2024.

So site work that occurred before there was framing that had occurred before.

So this is um this is really the window in time when we encountered sort of the most significant set of construction expenses, but that's not inclusive of expenses that had been accrued until then at the time.

And and and maybe I missed it.

But I uh you don't have anywhere here the total amount, do you?

So the the total amount is approximately two and a half million dollars uh if you add up the expenses for the 12 units for the six units for the six, yes.

Two and a half million dollars for six units.

Correct.

And that comes back to your earlier question of like the so habitat is between uh what we sell the mortgages for, between the some of the funding that we've received, it's trying to keep those expenses uh to a point where we can sell at uh at a cost that's fair to the homeowners that meets those guidelines, but also not uh encumbering habitat extensively.

So my brain's not allowing me to do this immediately, but we're talking about 400,000 dollars of 416,000 dollars.

416,000 for an affordable house.

Right, then habitat then basically if you're looking at uh a sale of let's say 200 to 285,000 dollars, so that's how much did you originally think it was going to cost to the original estimate for the whole project was 3.1 million and clear from the beginning.

You knew that it was gonna cost 3.1 million to build six houses.

The three that was for the whole that was for the entire project.

So clear from the beginning of the project, you knew it was going to cost you over five hundred thousand dollars a house.

So to be fair.

I'm missing something here on the other.

Darby and I did not know that uh when we came to habitat.

Uh we um we we were at a certain stage in the process of in the project development, and as we went through some of these challenges and realized that uh some of the initial estimates for the project were down.

I'm gonna ask the original, I'm gonna ask the question again, and maybe I'm pretty sure I said it right, but let me make sure that I say it properly this time.

What was the original budget for the project?

3.1 million.

No, that no.

Scott Scott, for the record, can you introduce yourself, please?

I just want to clarify so the 3.1 million useful.

Thank you.

There you go.

I I knew that something was missing there.

Okay.

So 3.1 million for 12 units.

258.

258, thank you.

Much, much more affordable.

Thank you.

I was just trying to figure out in my head you could possibly be thinking $500,000 was an affordable house.

Okay.

$258.

Thank you.

That answers.

But everything.

Then you just mentioned that six.

But it ended up costing twice as much.

Correct.

Okay.

Now the affordability question we have was we don't sell the homeowners to the property for 400,000.

What we're able to do through use of the MPU funds, use of the land trust, use of donations, we're essentially selling the homes to the homeowners for 250,000.

Now, for many homeowners, though, even a conventional mortgage of 250 at 6 or 7% is unaffordable.

So what we were able to do is partner with the bank to say we can get you a 250,000 mortgage at a 0% interest rate, which brings them down to that affordability level.

So that's how we were able to get the first two homeowners into the project.

Understood.

Why would a bank want to do that?

Why would a bank be willing to do that?

Great question.

Financial guy.

So what we do in that case is if we do a mortgage in that case at 250,000, habitat actually writes that mortgage at 0%.

We then take the mortgage to the bank in this case, it was a local lender.

73 cents on the dollar.

So that 250,000 mortgage, we're really selling it to them for 150,000 or 170,000.

So habitat is eating that difference in order to put the homeowner into a home at a 0% mortgage.

Because even if we did the mortgage at $170,000 at a 6 or 7%, it still puts them at that $1,500, $16,000, $1,700 a month payment that's not affordable to them.

And this is just the math part, whereas a 0% mortgage at the $250 gets them much lower than that.

So that is kind of the I know it's a complicated mathematical formula, but that's how we get them into the affordability part.

It it is a complicated math, but I just want to be sure that's actual partnering going on like the whole way through this, right?

Um and that habitat, which I sure I mean, two 258 is uh for right now in Frederick, yeah, that's affordable, right?

It's not really affordable, but for right now in Frederick it is.

Um I'll just add, we do look at it as a good partnership with the local lenders and banks because if you think about it from their perspective, sure they're buying a mortgage at 73 cents at a dollar, so the 27% discount, but that homeowner could potentially be there for the next 30 years.

So their profit margins on that, I think we worked it out to be like one and one point four percent.

1.4% per year in interest that they're essentially by getting paid back over the next 30 years.

So it's by no means a moneymaker for them either.

It's they're just doing that to help support the community.

Gotcha.

Okay.

That's that makes so much more sense.

I guess I'm just trying to figure out if there's any way to actually build homes for less than 258,000.

That's the question.

Yeah.

And to answer to answer your earlier question too.

Now with this bank that we are working with that's been acquired by another bank, that zero percent lending program for at least for now has been hasn't gone away, but it's been put on pause, and we're working with them to try to work through that.

So what we are exploring is saying, okay, can we discount the property down like you were describing down to a lower amount, get them a conventional mortgage, still keep them in that affordability range.

So that's what we're looking at as kind of a backup right now.

Now we are speaking to other local lenders.

We had a meeting this morning with a credit union to see can we create a similar type of lending program to get them back to that affordability range, or does it just get to the point where habitat discounts it down, we eat the difference and we move forward kind of thing.

Gotcha.

So it's it's in process, we are working on it.

Yeah, it's uh it's uh a heck of a lot of moving pieces.

Thank you.

Some of the aforementioned.

Well, uh all I was I was gonna say that some of these aforementioned construction challenges and some of those the the cost increases.

Um there have been the the uh we have been um learning best practices uh the throughout this project because we would ideally like to do something more scalable and uh you know more more significant than you know even a dozen homes, but there are um you know the factors as to where we would do that, uh location-wise, um ways to create more efficiency.

Some of the costs have come from um they're not they're definitely not cookie-cutter homes.

Um there's a lot of unique uh perspective, you know, uh unique um features of those homes that come from being in an historic neighborhood and having to work through that.

So um a lot of things that we our new project steering committee would be looking at uh through a different lens when selecting future projects.

I I actually love the fact that they're not cookie cutter homes.

Um, you know, I've I've I say all the time when you concentrate poverty, that's what causes problems, right?

So not that 80 percent of the local AMI is poverty because it's nowhere near.

Right.

Nowhere near.

And are you using Frederick County numbers on that or are you using um for the AMI?

The AMI is tied to the Washington region as far as what but because of the Trevor Burrus, and so what is 80 percent of AMI?

What was the question?

What is 80 percent of AMI?

Um right now for a household of a two-person household, it's eighty-five thousand four hundred and fifty per year.

Okay.

But one of those, if that's a single, if that's well, they still have to qualify for a mortgage, depending on who's actually applying, because that's the household size.

For a family of four, it's 106,800, and that's FY25, which is the most recent publication.

Gotcha.

Thank you very much.

And just one question.

The the land trust, is that is that fully owned by Habitat?

Is it or is there are there payments that go toward that present piece?

The land trust properties are fully that's fully owned by Habitat.

Great, thank you.

Oh, oh while we're while we're land trust discussions of land trust.

What happens when we get up close to the 99 years?

What happens when we get close to do you say the 99 years?

Yeah.

So the the property is um rented for 99 years.

It I mean, it isn't rented, it's uh it's owned, but the agreement that folks sign is basically a 99-year agreement.

So as soon as it resells, that will reset at another 99 years.

But you can't 99.

You can't really say that.

So resets it 99 years every time it sells.

Yes.

That's correct.

Thank you.

And you were talking about the unique features of the property, which is a great segue into Darby describing some of the progress that has uh taken place.

I'm just gonna briefly go through there's one slide per building.

Um we have some before pictures.

We have pictures that were taken during the time that this work was being done.

This is 100 West All Saints, the first um picture on the top row to the left.

That's like the complete demo demolition inside of that downstairs corner.

The next one is the framing.

Um the one with the gray paint, actually, that was the primer coat um that went on in May of 2024.

It was put up for less than 12 hours before apparently there were a number of angry comments and questions on a neighborhood uh Facebook group questioning the wisdom and um sanity of painting the entire corner of the block gray.

It is not gray, it is red.

That is a primer coat.

Um anyway, so that was kind of funny.

Um the three pictures uh at the bottom are pretty much just before folks moved in.

Um the kitchen, obviously, a view out the front door with you can see Asbury um church across the street, and then I think that the picture Eric showed of um Philip looking out the upstairs window is what that um bedroom picture is all the way to all the way to the right.

Two and three bedrooms?

Three bedroom, two and a half bath that unit by far the largest.

The other ones are all two bedrooms.

Yeah.

Square footage is that, Eric.

For uh unit 100 square footage in that issue.

1200.

Or maybe 1100.

Yes.

Okay.

The other and the others are very between 700 and 900 square feet.

Okay.

I'm sorry.

I'm sorry, you said 1200?

Actually, 1500.

I just looked at my notes.

Okay.

That sounds 100.

For a three-bedroom 1500.

Okay.

That's 1500.

Um this is uh 104, Eric referred earlier to the building that was pretty much falling down, falling apart.

Um this we've called it our problem child.

But the good news on it is that even though it's rehab, it's been so re-engineered that it's probably the safest and the sturdiest of of all of the buildings.

Um here you can see um some of the brickwork that was being done on the outside.

You can see at the back the red ultimately red paint color, which is also on the front, um, folks installing the new roof, and then at the bottom right, that's a much more recent picture that shows completed uh concrete work at the back along with railings and the ramp that goes down to West All Saints.

This is 106.

This is the new building, the infill building.

Um at the far left on the top is the brickwork that was being done at the front below the stairs.

You have the back and the front that were being done with siding and painting at this time, and then some more interior pictures, uh bathroom, kitchen, and some more concrete work outside, which is gonna lead down to the handicapped parking space that is at the foot of this concrete, and then another bedroom.

As you can see, um the units themselves have a lot of um peculiarities, but the fixtures are basically the same in all of them.

Obviously, the ADA compliant unit is a little bit different, but um appliances and fixtures and so forth are pretty much pretty much the same.

Uh 108, um again, um some framing um ductwork at the far left, the back entrance of that unit.

You will notice the two doors on the second floor.

Those are historic, so they needed to stay.

They are completely blocked off from the inside and not usable in any way.

I think um there was originally a port through a balcony up there.

And then um you can't really see, but this building had had um an extensive fire, but still has supporting beams that were perfectly intact.

You can see a little bit of that in there, and then foundation work in the front.

Again, um kitchen um stairs and carpet in the back.

So those are the homes.

Who's gonna be living there?

We've already talked about this um a little bit, so I won't um sort of beat it to death unless you have questions.

Um folks need to live already live in or work in Frederick County for at least a year.

They need to be able to qualify for a mortgage.

Um we need decent credit, low debt to income, and uh a stable income.

That income can come from any source, but it needs to be stable enough to qualify for a mortgage.

As we said, um area median income for these units is 50 to 80 because of the auxiliary costs of living in downtown Frederick.

And home buyers also need to be willing to partner with habitat.

We call it sweat equity.

And in the classic single-family home build approach, that's actually helping to build their own house.

Because of the need to do extensive contractor work for these properties, it was more like painting your neighbor's house or you know, painting a couple rooms in in my house.

But they can also folks can also attend homeowner and financial um sessions and participate in other habitat for humanity programs like volunteering at our restore.

And in fact, this is our um this is February.

This is our first homeowner, Sharon, um, with Eric and assorted others as we came out of the closing over on the corner of uh Church Street, as a matter of fact.

So speaking of that particular closing, because Darby and I were sort of blessed to be in the room at the settlement, uh, and that particular homeowner um is usually you know fairly reserved, and so we were kind of surprised that uh she had um tears in her eyes, and she said, I just realized I can't believe I'm actually a homeowner.

And um, so that was it's one of those moments where you realize what you're doing and why you're doing it.

Um so she moved in in February with her son, uh Ryan and Philip, our second family, they moved in uh to 100 West All Saints in July.

As we mentioned earlier, we've got uh third homeowner that's been approved by her family services, but the difference as we mentioned between the two potential mortgage uh options is in this case the difference that could mean having a homeowner or not having a homeowner.

Um then we also have additional candidates still in review.

Um we will say if those that there are folks that are out there, we welcome them to inquire because um we all know about the affordable housing inventory shortage that's out there.

Um the one of the things because we focus solely on homeownership uh and we work to um work through ways to make mortgages affordable.

Uh what um even at conventional rates uh are the um mortgages all in with uh with taxes and with the condo association and and such uh are competitive with uh a lot of the rental rates that are uh that are taking place in Frederick, and it gives uh somebody the ability to build equity, build some of that generational wealth and stability that that we're talking about.

So we would we would like to see more of uh more of that.

Um this all comes at a time as we as you all know that you know when Frederick is facing a growing deficit in affordable homeownership opportunities, uh, and um it's certainly been uh the uh um a heavy political topic for those of us that are in the uh in the business of uh creating affordable workforce housing, uh it it it remains a challenge.

So um this is your investment in us.

Uh we are grateful because that has in turn you know created more opportunities.

So just to to recap, um the through the land trust, you know, affordability is preserved in perpetuity uh and it ensures that uh not just these first-time buyers now but future generations of buyers are are positively uh impacted uh through the land trust.

Um so we mentioned that the West All Saints project, we are hoping serves as a model, hopefully a model with best practice improvements that uh can uh be a model for scalable permanent affordability uh as we look to public and private partnerships that could uh could make sense.

One of the I know that there's been some discussions about West Side Regional Park.

The county has the Himes Avenue redevelopment.

Uh there's some ongoing faith initiatives where there's the uh the potential to uh partner both privately and publicly to uh you know to work together to address housing needs.

Uh we know our counterparts in Montgomery County uh have worked to there is a uh uh 195 unit development that is 27 affordable homes and uh 168 uh rental units.

So there's the ability to to do you know to uh partner in that way.

So we're looking at that uh as a possibility for Frederick as well.

So with that, we thank you for your time and the uh in addition to the questions we've already received, are there additional questions that uh um that the committee has?

Any questions perhaps for humanity?

And I I I just appreciate your willingness to answer everything and help figure me out all at the same time.

Um as you look for other properties, and maybe you're not ready to do that just yet, I I thought that we had um there was a certain number that we had talked about earlier this year that you were going to be attempting to hit, um, which was higher than in the past.

The uh a certain number that we were attempting to hit the in relation to in the relation to the amount of homes that you have sold in the past.

Oh home repairs program.

And right in the I want to say fifty.

So that so the the home repairs program, which has definitely been a growing part of Habitat for the last three years, where we have um been trending upwards towards we'll say an average of 46 home repairs projects per year, right?

Um, which we are um greatly intending to grow as we as we move forward.

Um so that's been while we're while we're trying to solve the challenge of creating affordable homeownership, we're also trying to work through helping people preserve their homeownership uh in some cases through aging in place or accessibility, or just or financially, uh you know, in some cases all three.

Um so the 200 200 200,000 dollars that came from the city went directly toward this project, was it not able to go toward other possibilities?

It did not go towards the home repairs program.

It was it went directly to the land trust.

Okay.

Good to know.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Eric, you mentioned interest.

How can someone who's watching this, or how can we share information in regards to persons who are interested?

How can someone who's watching this, or how can we share information in regards to persons who are interested in the you mentioned about if persons are interested, how can they so who's watching this, but also so we can share as well.

So it's easy to say, well, you could go to the website, but since I have Darby Swanson sitting right next to me and Corlin Wells in the room, um, the you can go to the website, but you can also reach out.

It's um uh Darby D E Rby.

Swanson, S W A N S O N at Frederickhabitat.org.

And uh certainly happy to take inquiries that way.

Thank you.

Thank you for that.

Thank you.

Yes, I think that's important.

Also, just want to uh thank Asbury as well for being a partner.

Yes.

Um I know we some of us have been on this um since the very beginning, so I do just want to publicly thank them, acknowledge them and their partnership um and the full support that they've been through this project as well.

We've mentioned previously the Asbury UMC could have sold that property at market rate and probably done pretty well for themselves, and instead they wanted something that was mission-based uh that would be in keeping with the congregation's desires, and um and so we we are uh continuing to try to be you know good stewards of that faith that they put in us.

Thank you.

Any other comments?

Thank you.

We certainly appreciate your work in this and this partnership among so many, not just I mean Asbury, but community partners as well.

We thank you for your work.

Thank you very much.

Next on our agenda is an overview of under you last city owned properties with development potential for future city use or lease sale for private development.

This item represented by director of economic development Richard Griffin and COO Zach Kirshner.

Good afternoon, uh Council Vice President.

Shackelford, can you hear us?

Can you hear me?

Okay.

Good afternoon, uh Richard Griffin, director of economic development.

And uh Zach Kirshner, COO.

Thank you.

Thanks for the opportunity to uh to come out and have a a workshop on this this item.

Uh as you mentioned, it's to talk about you know what kind of properties the city owns and what the potential is for the use of those properties, both for government and uh you know, perspective private uses in the future.

Uh I do want to highlight that um Zach and I have worked collaboratively on this and many many projects, and I just wanted to give a shout out to Habitat.

We worked with uh I worked with um Reverend Groover when he was preparing the RFP for the uh to for the for the sale of those properties, and so we were happy to have a little small part of that.

Sounds like a great project.

So the city owns obviously um hundreds of pieces of property.

A list of those is on the city's website.

Um it's in the Department of Public Works, it's under their facilities management tab, so you can look at that at any time, and they uh try to keep that updated uh from time to time so that it reflects uh current leases and current properties that we have out there.

But just to put them in broad categories, obviously we have properties that we use every day that are for our mission for the operations and the administration of the city, uh, and you're sitting in one of them here at City Hall, but of course we have dozens of others, like Department of Public Works, our new police headquarters uh building, which uh we just finished and opened recently.

Um our municipal airport, um the Weinberg Center, um, water treatment plant, uh among many, many others, and parking garages.

Um but additionally, we own land that we uh use for open space uh and for recreation.

So um Zach's uh team put together a list of of the properties we own in parks.

You want to mention those?

Uh yeah.

I'm sorry.

I got it right here.

Uh yeah, so uh we have uh today 77 parks and growing, uh about 800 acres, 70 pavilions, 57 athletic fields, uh multiple playgrounds, basketball courts, uh, and uh 4,500 park trees, uh specific park trees.

We have more than that, and then over 10,000 street trees.

And then in addition, the city owns properties that have either been gifted to the city or that were purchased with very specific purpose.

Um for example, let me just give uh you some examples.

Uh recently, and perhaps one of the most um notable that we uh did a lease on was city owned property in the All Saints parking garage to the soon to come uh Arch uh resource cultural heritage museum uh which will open probably next year.

Um but also other properties that we own and lease for very specific purpose the Dela Plain Arts Center, the National Civil War Medical Museum, the downtown Frederick Partnerships office building at Church Street Garage, uh the National Park Service at the uh at their facility in downtown as well as out at West Side Park, um airport land and buildings, and numerous water towers.

Uh we have communications antennas and cell and cellular and all sorts of things that we lease on those facilities.

Um then we have in a broad category have properties that we own totaling more than 200 acres, um, which have been identified over the years as perhaps underutilized.

Um these are properties that we're not using currently as a park, or we're not using currently for uh an active use, or at least all of it for an active use.

And those um there's a table in your in your background in your backup.

Um and some of those properties have been identified in the past as properties that potentially could be locations for affordable housing or mixed use development, perhaps additional park improvements, shared use path connections, um, a downtown public comfort center, restroom facilities.

Um there are a whole lot of different um activities that the council and the city could um undertake with respect to these properties.

Um but we do have a process that we go through, and the first process is to make sure that we don't have a need for it from public use.

Uh and that determination initially comes out of staff and through the mayor's office, but but has to be approved by you all at the city council level that a piece of property has been been determined to be um you know no longer needed for public use and that it could be put out for some very specific um purpose, and that's either to be leased or to uh to be sold.

And when we do that, we follow the property disposition policy, which is in your backup, uh, and that property disposition policy has both a set of um criteria for how we lease property and then how we sell property uh and um you've been through I think but all three of you have been through a number of those property leases or sales over the years, so you've seen that as we brought those forward to you.

Um but let me mention the ones that are on the on the list, and then we can have a conversation about where they are and what you questions you have for us about um if there's some sense of wanting to see these move forward for for some other purpose.

Um first is the former Trinity School site.

Now, this property is currently in use, obviously, by our uh Department of Housing and Human Services and also by our Department of Recreation.

Apparently, uh on a per hour basis, it's the highest used pickleball spot in the city.

Um but it's a big property, and it has been identified in the past as a very opportune site for mixed-use development.

Sander Farm, I'm not that familiar with it, but um maybe Zach could talk about Sander Farm.

Sure.

Sander Farm is located um kind of on the northwest side of the city.

It's some property that remains from um property that was purchased to uh build uh the piece of Christopher's crossing through there.

Um so it's a it's adjacent to uh Walter Marts Road and Christopher's Crossing and across from the new school complex that's being built by FCPS.

And also Husky Park, which we previously had put out to an RFP uh and had interest from a um a housing operator that would have come in and done potentially affordable housing, but it is currently being used by the Department of Public Works laydown yard and maybe talk a little bit about where we are with that.

Sure.

So as Richard said, obviously we use that for our day-to-day operations, storage of materials, uh lay down yard um, etc.

Uh if we were to um if we were to dispose of that site, we would clearly obviously need another site similar in size.

We could maybe get away with a little bit smaller depending on the configuration.

Um thus far we've explored um the main site that we've explored is a um uh vacant piece of of underutilized or property that really can't be utilized on um uh Fort Dietrich Area B adjacent to uh Kemp Lane, what will become Christopher's Crossing.

Um we have uh we've uh uh executed an agreement with them to go ahead and conduct a um a uh property valuation, and then from that they would come back with a proposed um lease that we would then bring forward for consideration, and then there would be other steps as well.

Um but if that were to move forward, then we'd also have the project of actually having to construct the yard over there, including fencing and uh you know access and so forth, and then actually relocate everything.

There is a CIP for that project.

Um it's been in the in the CIP book for a while.

Um, so that's kind of where we are with that.

So we're we're kind of waiting for more information from the federal government, which might be a little while at this point.

And I should point out oh, go ahead.

Is there a backup plan?

A backup plan.

Uh not at this time.

We really have not been able to identify other sites.

Um you know, we own Sanner, for instance, but probably not the highest and best use of that property, so we would we would search beyond beyond there.

Husky Park is immediately adjacent to uh Ren Quarter.

Um there is a planned road to be installed through Husky Park along uh the creek area along with it part of the shared use path system over to Highland Street.

Correct, and that and that would make a connection of the shared use path.

That's Bond Street that would be extended out of the new Ren development.

That would make a connection of Bond Street to Highland.

Um, but you know, just as importantly as Richard said, it would provide a point for the shared use path along Carroll Creek to then tie in and continue on through Wren.

In the chart that I have in your backup, I do have the zoning of each of these properties along with the acreage, and uh there are some images that show the basic outline of the properties so that you know where they are from a persp uh just a vicinity perspective.

But uh West side ties through at the back of the fairgrounds, correct?

I mean, where where really does the I'm trying to figure out where the the actual pathway so uh Bond Street aligns with the end of sites J and K where they um J and K where they butt up against uh Highland Street.

You're welcome.

We could just jump to J and K, I think, because they're right there instead of skipping them.

Uh J and K are the properties that run alongside Carroll Creek Park between West Patrick Street, East Patrick Street, and Highland Street.

And it has been long planned for a connecting um shared use path to be built along that park area between the two.

The intent had always been to have a developer construct that.

Um the COVID um uh time, and uh at this time we do not have a developer lined up, and we have not put another RFP out.

That site is an identified brownfield site.

It was a former quarry that was filled in, at least I should say site J is a former quarry that was filled in.

Site K is a former quarry that was filled in.

Site J really runs along the Carroll Creek Park and has potential for development, and there are developers that continue to from time to time express interest.

Can you refresh my memory?

Because I believe that we had some discussions and an MOU or a commitment from a developer some years back that they would improve that property.

Yes.

I will I'll refresh your memory.

So that's the um that was the owner of the REN development, um, Matton at the time.

And there actually is still um a um a letter of agreement or an MOU in effect um for them to add their option to both construct that piece of path as well as to extend Bond Street.

Um but it is not a requirement of them as the developer, it was not a requirement that came out of the approval of the subdivision.

So at some point, uh you know the city could choose to just proceed and you know, obviously, depending on funding, could choose to proceed and construct it.

But right now there is an agreement whereby they could uh construct both of those.

So at their option, I'm I guess it's it's our land, and they said they would like to develop it.

Is there any sort of expiration date or timeline or there are they've renewed, I believe they've renewed each of those once and I'd have to look and see how often the renewal would be.

But there's nothing in there's nothing in the agreement that would prevent the city from deciding to uh fund the project and move forward without them.

It's really just an option for them to construct it.

So unfortunately, there's nothing very binding um in that agreement.

Again, because it was not a requirement of the of the development.

Well, I'm just wondering.

Um sorry, these mics today.

I'm just thinking um it what kind of leverage we might have to spur that developer to want to do that.

I mean, if we're just automatically renewing it over and over again, they kind of have a hold on it, but not really.

Um is there some way to maybe think about in order for them to continually have that right that that should have some sort of a cost associated to it.

Yeah.

Um not sure about that, but um just to kind of add to the add to the complexity of it, of course, uh, as the property owner, they sold um to the current developer, which is four-star.

Um so I'm not aware of what you know private agreements there may be in those contracts or what may be required of that party as well.

So for me, it would be probably worth finding out whether or not the MOU has any value at all, and if it doesn't, we should just terminate it.

Yeah, we can certainly explore that.

Um and then we'd need to have um we need to fund, you know, if we want to then build it, we'd have to obviously fund the CIPs to to do so.

And and maybe in those either terminate it or if the new owner is interested in exercising that option, maybe we can encourage that somehow.

Right.

Uh going back to the prior RFPs though for site J and K, uh uh correct me if I'm wrong, Richard, but I think when those RFPs went out, one of the requirements of anybody that would develop that property is they were going to have to construct the shared use path between Patrick and Highland.

So perhaps that may be another way to get that piece constructed if we were to put those properties back out to RFP.

And because we do attend public meetings on that side of town uh regarding the East Street Corridor and through East Frederick Rising and other community meetings, there are continued conversations occurring over there uh from the community and from the residents that are beginning to uh say that they would like to see that connection made sooner rather than later.

Um Westside Regional Park uh obviously was a very large acquisition by the city and has a park plan.

Um and we won't try to go into the details of the park plan, but over the years there have been conversations about are there pieces of it or are there um that you know could be used for uh harmonious um supportive uses to the including the possibility of having a developer build some of the um some of the park improvements in exchange.

So um that's certainly an option that still is out there.

It has not been executed in terms of push and go on it.

Site C2 is along Carroll Creek Park behind the amphitheater.

We've long gone back and forth between whether it's a development site or whether it's just for city uh uses.

Um it has been identified regardless of what we decide to do with it uh as a location that we need bathrooms and concession permanent concession facilities.

Uh because of the number of events that occur there, the amount of public activity that occurs in that area of the park, it is clear that we need public facilities.

Um we had previously um during the McClement administration put out an RFP, uh I think it was just before the Great Recession actually, and uh had two proposals, um one for housing and the other for a performing arts center.

Uh uh and because of the recession and because of the amount of uh investment they wanted from the city, neither were pursued, but um we certainly know that we need the public restrooms and the concessions, whether or not we do it our ourselves or whether we do it through a an RFP with a developer.

Just to comment about that site.

I mean, we recently have made some improvements to it as well.

If you've been out there, you'll notice that our DPW uh crew current constructed an ADA ramp so that that site from the amphitheater is now ADA accessible to the flat site, which I think is going to receive a little bit of paving over the winter so that the food trucks will be safely parked there and people can traverse it in a much more safe manner.

So I just wanted to throw some appreciation for that project and the fact that I think it's a really useful site for the city as an extension of that um that area there, and I think restrooms would be and concessionary would be a fantastic addition.

And then the final site downtown um that has been talked about over the years as being the possible site of mixed-use development with both parking for uh the multimodal station, but also maybe some above parking uh residential or office um is site E, which is the uh Mark station parking lot.

Currently uh we um hold half of that parking lot open for mark riders, and we have monthly passes on the remaining spec spaces in that lot.

Uh but it is um you know uh right on the gateway corridor coming in downtown, and of course, as we've seen in a lot of communities when you have an urban uh multimodal station, you could have structured parking and you could have uh you know uh residential or office uh combined in that.

Um again, no immediate plans for that development at this time, but we certainly could pursue it at some point.

Just wanted to point out we got an email earlier today from our planner uh planning director that was just mentioned um that we've applied for transit-oriented uh design development definition from the state, which will afford us a lot of benefits there.

So uh, you know, people talk about they want more transit service, we want more mark service, you need to build ridership in order to build ridership, you need to have people living where the transit is.

And so all of these sort of synergistic things work together, and I'm really excited and hopeful uh about our designation.

Yeah, we are too.

We we think that's a great um a great application.

We've been working collaboratively to help support it and and show opportunity.

The state is very anxious to have more of those sites around the state as well.

And if we are ever to get additional service, um we have to show more use.

And uh it's kind of a chicken in the egg, but the more use that we have, the more likely it is we could increase the service levels.

So that's our chart.

It's not uh it's not a wholly inclusive chart of every property that we own that has any potential of doing something with, but these are the main ones.

These are the ones that you all have spoken about in the past and have expressed some interest in.

And I know that as a council you've talked about many needs of the community has, and so we will answer any questions that you have any questions.

Of all of these properties, I guess it really have indicated there there's no active, no active RFP out or for any of these.

Right.

Is there any kind of a prioritization if from staff's perspective we were to look at moving like a piece of property?

What do you think that looks like I mean I'll I'll jump in uh considering that we already had put out sites J and K and C2 to RFP previously, um clearly we've determined that we don't need those for a public purpose other than perhaps retaining on C2 the ability to have public bathrooms and some other facilities.

Um I think those would probably be the the easiest to get out first.

And and then what would you need from us or the executive's office to m move those things?

Site J and K has already been deemed uh excess by by the council uh in its former uh formation, and I don't know that we would need it again.

I think it would just be a matter of uh putting out an RFP and uh put it on the street.

Who who decides who decides to do that?

Well, I'm kind of getting used to the new uh chart setup as well.

But um I I would think probably a request to the mayor's office, and then he would direct us and staff to move forward.

Thank you.

Uh I I'll just say this.

Um is I've been on a record, particularly Westside Regional Park about CEO housing, because we talk about public private partnerships, particularly from the sports amenities um context.

I think it would be rather challenging to have some private partnerships just exclusively about sports amenities alone.

I know we talked about um aquatic center from the community along with other stadium concepts.

Um I think the challenge would from a private partnership would be that alone without some incentivizing.

Uh I'll say that.

And then I know we currently use the Trinity site.

Um I'll say this.

Particularly with the minor league baseball team and his upgrades, I think that would be excellent for some possible mixed use developments.

Um particularly we made a commitment, they made a commitment in terms of that those studying upgrades are going to help immensely, so it would be a very attractive piece of property, I believe.

Agreed.

Yeah, I'm gonna jump back on that one because we did have a proposal some years back uh for sort of a massive redevelopment of that piece of property.

So I'm just wondering if like if there's any remnants of that floating around and and um Yeah, I I can't remember I was the owner of the team as uh council vice president Shackelford has mentioned, you know, continues to have a big vision for for their longtime investment in Frederick.

And um and so they they certainly have expressed some interest in seeing additional uh harmonious kind of uses would come in alongside the stadium at some point.

Uh we have some very important uses that are there now.

Uh and you know, recognizing that, but it takes a long time to get to the point of you know, uh development occurring.

And it you know, and so it doesn't mean that you couldn't be working in that direction at the same time looking for what our long-term plan is for our for our own facilities.

Could be that those facilities could be part of the development.

Absolutely.

Any other questions for Richard and Zach?

Thank you.

Appreciate that.

And Okay, thank you.

Thank you.

Council perspective, we'll do what we need to do in regards to those questions.

Any closing comments from our colleagues today, Councilmember Kazumchak?

Councilman Russell?

Is there any public comments on any of one of these two items?

Nothing before us.