City of Fairfax, Virginia

Transcription

1 City of Fairfax, Virginia 44 r% City Council Work Session Meeting 4. 4 Agenda Item# I" City Council Meetin it TO: Honorable Mayor and Members f City Council FROM: SUBJECT: Robert Sisson, City Manager Discussion of options for increasing housing affordability in the City of Fairfax as recommended by the Housing Affordability Work Group. ISSUE( S): SUMMARY: A review of options for increasing Housing Affordability in the City of Fairfax promulgated by the Housing Affordability Work Group. In May and June of 2013, the City Council and Planning Commission held work sessions to explore issues related to housing affordability. In response, staff was directed to identify options for Council consideration to include policy recommendations to advance this issue. The enclosed materials summarize actions that could be undertaken in the short term ( in response to expected multifamily residential development applications), and long term options for an overall housing affordability strategy. FISCAL IMPACT: RECOMMENDATION: ALTERNATIVE: None at this time. Any costs to the City that would be incurred as part of these actions would be detailed at the appropriate time. City Council is requested to review the enclosed draft Voluntary Development Condition/ Proffer, and initiate a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to include goals and strategies that pertain to increasing housing affordability. Further, the City Council may elect to continue to evaluate longer-term options for housing affordability. Do not proceed with further analysis regarding housing affordability. RESPONSIBLE STAFF/ Louise Armitage, Human Services Coordinator POC: COORDINATION: Eric Forman, Planner Community Development& Planning, Planning Commission, Human Services Coordinator, City Attorney, Housing Affordability Work Group ATTACHMENTS: Housing Affordability Memorandum Attachment A: Draft Voluntary Development Condition/ Proffer 3. Attachment B: Housing Affordability Options Area Median Income/ Rental rates 5. Members of the Housing Affordability Work Group

2 V MEMORANDUM A 440: 0 k_ September 24, 2013 T, J TO: Robert Sisson, City Manager FROM: Louise Armitage, Human Services Coordinator j f SUBJECT: Eric Forman, Planner Recommendations for Housing Affordability Actions AAA In May and June of 2013, the City Council and Planning Commission held work sessions with staff to explore issues relating to housing affordability within the City of Fairfax. In response, the Planning Commission was requested to report back to City Council with policy recommendations and options for addressing this issue. The enclosed materials summarize actions that can be undertaken in the short term (in response to expected multifamily residential development applications) and long term options for an overall housing affordability strategy. In order to develop a set of recommendations for Council' s consideration, the Planning Commission appointed two of its members to engage a group of individuals with expertise in various aspects of housing affordability to form a work group to evaluate various policy options in detail. This group, composed of representatives from the public, private and non-profit sectors, convened three times over the summer months to develop the materials and recommendations contained in this report. Recommendations are separated into those that can be considered immediately and those that would benefit from a comprehensive analysis. The recommendations are as follows: Review Draft Voluntary Development Condition/Proffer: A development condition or proffer, voluntarily submitted by a development applicant, is the most effective way to include components of housing affordability in new developments in the immediate future. Due to the structure of the City' s current Zoning Ordinance and its discretionary land-use approval process, a formal zoning amendment (such as an affordable dwelling unit requirement) is not practical in the short term. Such an amendment may be possible in conjunction with a rewrite of the Zoning Ordinance, but until that time, affordable dwelling units would need to be provided voluntarily. I

3 A draft development condition/proffer is included as Attachment A. Because affordable housing commitments are complex, it is helpful for the City' s policy bodies to review and become familiar with the main issues prior to receiving such a commitment in an active development application. Unlike a zoning amendment, voluntary development conditions may differ among development applications, and no formal action from City Council is needed. This draft condition is focused on new multifamily rental developments which are the most likely type of new residential development in the current economic environment and includes recommendations such as: the percentage of affordable units, income ranges, timeframe of affordable commitments, and other details as endorsed by the work group. Beginning a dialogue now on the major issues associated with development conditions for housing affordability will streamline the process once an application containing such a condition is received. Initiate Comprehensive Plan Amendment: The City' s current Comprehensive Plan contains limited guidance on the development of new affordable housing, relying instead on the presence of existing lower-cost housing units as the mainstay of the City' s affordable housing stock. If the City Council wishes to pursue other options such as the acceptance of voluntarily-offered affordable dwelling units, the Comprehensive Plan should be amended to include goals and strategies that correspond to the City' s intended actions. Such an amendment can occur quickly. With several large multifamily development applications possible within the next year, it is likely that the City could include affordable housing as part of one or more of those projects. In that event, the City' s goals can be buttressed from a practical and legal standpoint by corresponding guidance from the Comprehensive Plan. Staff recommends that Council request that the Planning Commission prepare a Comprehensive Plan amendment so that these changes can be incorporated into the Plan during the fall of Consider Options for Long-Term Housing Affordability Strategy: There are many more options that may be suitable for a long- term housing affordability strategy encompassing topics beyond those present in the immediately foreseen development opportunities. Such options were discussed by the work group, and are summarized in Attachment B. Z.-.

4 ATTACHMENT A: Draft Voluntary Development Condition/ Proffer In order to address the need for housing affordability for City of Fairfax residents at various income levels, the Applicant shall lease a certain number of units constructed on the Application Property as affordable units in accordance with the following conditions: A. Five ( 5) percent of units shall be affordable to households with an income of up to sixty 60) percent of the median income (AMI) for the Washington Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area as specified annually by HUD, with adjustments for household size as specified by HUD. Maximum rental rates are to be determined according to the following formula: The base income figure (60 percent of AMI) shall be adjusted for different dwelling unit sizes based on the number of bedrooms in the dwelling unit: Number of Bedrooms Adjustment Studio/ Efficiency 70% 1- bedroom 80% 2- bedroom 90% 3- bedroom 100% The result of this calculation for each size dwelling unit shall then be divided by twelve 12), then multiplied by twenty- five percent ( 25%) and rounded to the nearest whole number to establish the monthly rent for the unit, excluding utilities. The maximum rental rate must include rent plus all fees that are charged to market-rate units in the same complex. B. Seven( 7) percent of units shall be affordable to households with an income of up to eighty ( 80) percent of the median income ( AMI) for the Washington Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area as specified annually by HUD, with adjustments for household size as specified by HUD. Maximum rental rates are to be determined according to the following formula: The base income figure ( 80 percent of AMI) shall be adjusted for different dwelling unit sizes based on the number of bedrooms in the dwelling unit: Number of Bedrooms Adjustment Studio/ Efficiency 70% 1- bedroom 80% 2- bedroom 90% 3- bedroom 100% The result of this calculation for each size dwelling unit shall then be divided by twelve 12), then multiplied by twenty- five percent (25%) and rounded to the nearest whole number to establish the monthly rent for the unit, excluding utilities. The maximum rental A- 1

5 rate must include rent plus all fees that are charged to market-rate units in the same complex. C. The units shall be integrated into and dispersed throughout the development to the extent feasible, and constructed of comparable materials and fixtures. The units shall be integrated and dispersed through all phases and/ or buildings in a multi-phase or multibuilding development. D. The number of bedrooms per unit made available to tenants under each of the two income categories ( Subsections A and B) shall be proportional to the ratio of bedrooms per unit in the market units. No bedroom in any affordable unit as provided through this condition shall measure any less than 100 square feet. E. The Leasing Manager of the Application Property shall provide quarterly statements to the City Manager specifying each Affordable Dwelling Unit contained on the property, its size and number of bedrooms, and each unit' s occupancy/ vacancy status, and tenant eligibility information, including the following information: 1. The tenant' s name and household size; 2. The effective date of the lease; 3. Verification of the tenant's ( household) income as of the date of the lease; 4. The unit's monthly rent. F. Should a tenant leasing a unit, at the time of a lease renewal or recertification, no longer qualify under the income eligibility criteria identified herein, the Leasing Manager, within his sole discretion, shall either allow the tenant to continue occupancy at market rates and designate another unit of the same type within the development as affordable, as soon as such a unit is available, or relocate the tenant to a market rate unit and continue to lease the previously designated affordable unit in accordance with the income eligibility criteria. G. The affordability restriction described herein shall remain in place for thirty (30) years after the issuance of the first occupancy permit for an affordable unit on the Application Property, at which time this proffer shall be null and void and of no further force and effect. In the case of a multi-phase or multi-building development, the affordability restriction described herein shall remain in place for thirty (30) years after the issuance of the first occupancy permit for an affordable unit within any specific phase or building, at which time this proffer shall be null and void and of no further force and effect. At the conclusion of the thirty (30) year period described above, the leasing manager shall provide relocation assistance to tenants of the affordable units who are leasing units at the time of the expiration of the affordability restrictions. A-2 L

6 rate must include rent plus all fees that are charged to market-rate units in the same complex. C. The units shall be integrated into and dispersed throughout the development to the extent feasible, and constructed of comparable materials and fixtures. The units shall be integrated and dispersed through all phases and/ or buildings in a multi- phase or multibuilding development. D. The number of bedrooms per unit made available to tenants under each of the two income categories ( Subsections A and B) shall be proportional to the ratio of bedrooms per unit in the market units. No bedroom in any affordable unit as provided through this condition shall measure any less than 100 square feet. E. The Leasing Manager of the Application Property shall provide quarterly statements to the City Manager specifying each Affordable Dwelling Unit contained on the property, its size and number of bedrooms, and each unit' s occupancy/ vacancy status, and tenant eligibility information, including the following information: 1. The tenant' s name and household size; 2. The effective date of the lease; 3. Verification of the tenant's ( household) income as of the date of the lease; 4. The unit's monthly rent. F. Should a tenant leasing a unit, at the time of a lease renewal or recertification, no longer qualify under the income eligibility criteria identified herein, the Leasing Manager, within his sole discretion, shall either allow the tenant to continue occupancy at market rates and designate another unit of the same type within the development as affordable, as soon as such a unit is available, or relocate the tenant to a market rate unit and continue to lease the previously designated affordable unit in accordance with the income eligibility criteria. G. The affordability restriction described herein shall remain in place for thirty (30) years after the issuance of the first occupancy permit for an affordable unit on the Application Property, at which time this proffer shall be null and void and of no further force and effect. In the case of a multi- phase or multi- building development, the affordability restriction described herein shall remain in place for thirty (30) years after the issuance of the first occupancy permit for an affordable unit within any specific phase or building, at which time this proffer shall be null and void and of no further force and effect. At the conclusion of the thirty (30) year period described above, the leasing manager shall provide relocation assistance to tenants of the affordable units who are leasing units at the time of the expiration of the affordability restrictions. A-2 5

7 H. If the Application Property should convert to a condominium prior to initial occupancy or during the thirty (30) year period described in Subsection G, then the following procedure shall be followed: 1. Any existing tenant( s) renting any Affordable Dwelling Unit at the time of the Application Property' s conversion to condominium status must be afforded the opportunity to remain as a rental tenant in his existing unit at rental rates equivalent to those specified in Subsections A and B. 2. An equivalent number and variation of units as specified in Subsections A and B shall be made available as Affordable Dwelling Units for the duration of the thirty 30) year period. These units may be of either ownership or rental units, or any combination thereof, as specified below. a. Ownership Units: A plan for the sale of affordable dwelling units shall be submitted to and approved by the City Manager or his designee prior to any units within the Application Property converting to a condominium form of ownership. Such a plan must keep to the intent of this Subsection. The City may establish reasonable rules and regulations to assist in the monitoring of the sale and resale of affordable dwelling units. 1) For any affordable dwelling units being converted to for-sale units: The sale price for such dwelling units must be set in order to be affordable to households with income as detailed in Subsections A and B. The total proportion of for-sale affordable dwelling units must be kept to the same proportion of income restriction as detailed in Subsections A and B. a) The term of sales price control for affordable dwelling units located within the Application Property shall be for the full remainder of the thirty (30) year period as specified in Subsection G. All sales prices during this period must be set to the satisfaction of the City Manager or his designee. b) The affordable dwelling units offered for sale shall be integrated into and dispersed throughout the development to the extent feasible, constructed of comparable materials and fixtures, and provided similar improvements or renovations as provided the market rate units prior to sale. c) Upon any subsequent resale and/or transfer to a new owner of such affordable dwelling unit within the duration of the affordability period, the sales price must be set in order to be affordable to households with income as detailed in either Subsection A or B ( whichever formula was used for the unit' s prior affordable housing sale price). b. Rental Units: A plan for the continued rental of affordable dwelling units shall be submitted and approved by the City Manager or his designee prior A-3 cc,

8 to any units in the development converting to a condominium form of ownership. Such a plan must keep to the intent of this Subsection. The City may establish reasonable rules and regulations to assist in the monitoring of the lease and re- lease of affordable dwelling units. a) The term of rental price control for affordable dwelling units located within the Application Property shall be for the full remainder of the thirty ( 30) year period as specified in Subsection G. b) Units may be sold to any purchaser who agrees to abide by the rental price controls stated in this Proffer Condition for the full remainder of the thirty (30) year period as specified in Subsection G. c) Rental prices must be set in accordance with the conditions and calculations set forth in Subsections A or B ( whichever formula was used for the unit's prior affordable housing rental price). d) All conditions in Subsections E and F shall apply fully for the duration of the remainder of the thirty (30) year period as specified in Subsection G. A-4

9 ATTACHMENT B: Housing Affordability Options In order to ensure that the City' s supply of housing is aligned with the community' s expectations, it is recommended that the City develop a long-term housing strategy, particularly focusing on housing affordability. While there is no single strategy that alone can solve the region' s housing affordability dilemma, many individual options exist that can individually, or in conjunction with other strategies, positively influence the City' s supply of affordably-priced housing options. Following are several options that can be considered for such a strategy for the City of Fairfax. Some of these options can be implemented quickly, while others would entail a lengthy process of evaluation. All have advantages and disadvantages, as are summarized in the following pages. It is the opinion of the Housing Affordability Work Group that all of these options receive consideration as part of a comprehensive housing affordability strategy. B- 1

10 Expand Rent Relief Program from $420 to $ 1, 680 per Year Advantages: Provide qualifying households an additional $105 per month to offset increasing rents. Align benefits with City' s real estate tax relief program. Benefit more households, particularly in conjunction with better advertising. Disadvantage: Increase in General Fund allocation. With a nine-year waiting list for Housing Choice Vouchers ( Section 8), closure of the waiting list to new applicants, and a potential narrowing availability of market rate affordable units due to redevelopment in the City, there is little respite to offset increasing rental costs. Currently, the City of Fairfax provides rent relief in the amount of$420 per year to seniors and persons with disabilities. The Housing Affordability Work Group recommends expanding the Rent Relief Program to $ 1, 680 per year, keeping the existing eligibility requirements: Annual income under $40, 000; Limited assets ( net worth under $ 150, 000); Elderly ( 65+) or with permanent and total disability. Expansion of this program' s rent benefit has not occurred in many years, while the similar real estate tax relief benefit has grown significantly. Currently, only six City households utilize this program. The work group anticipates greater utilization with an increased benefit amount, and further recommends increased advertising of this program which would inform residents of rent relief benefits. The amount of the proposed rent relief is consistent with that of the City of Falls Church. The larger local jurisdictions have additional rent relief programs. B- 2

11 A Establish a Housing Trust Fund Advantage: Provides a revenue stream to develop and preserve housing affordability. Disadvantage: Substantial annual revenue allocation is required. Most Northern Virginia jurisdictions have established housing trust funds through a combination of: Voluntary proffers; Cash in lieu of creating affordable dwelling units; General fund revenue; State and federal grants; Non-residential, commercial development impact contributions; Repayment of loans. A Housing Trust Fund can be drawn down to: Purchase or develop affordable dwelling units, often in partnership with non-profits and other agencies; Offset the rental costs for eligible residents; Provide support to eligible first time home buyers ( preference for these programs is often given to municipal employees, seniors, and persons with disabilities). The work group recommends exploring opportunities with George Mason University to support housing affordability options through potential contributions to a Housing Trust Fund. The group further recommends exploring subordinate gap financing, which Counsel states the City currently does not have enabling legislation to pursue. Another avenue for exploration would include reallocating existing housing related funds Neighborhood Renaissance and Home Pride) to a single Housing Trust Fund. Furthermore, the Commonwealth of Virginia has recently begun a Housing Trust Fund capitalized by the national mortgage settlement this idea could be explored as well. B- 3

12 Enact Affordable Dwelling Unit Ordinance (ADU) Advantages: Significantly increases the supply of affordable housing units. Helps enable moderate income households to pursue homeownership. Consistent with other Northern Virginia jurisdictions Disadvantages: Costs for City administration/ management. Yields relatively few units per development compared to some other actions. Increase costs to private developers. Reduces case- by- case negotiating capacity of City Council. The majority of Northern Virginia jurisdictions have long-standing ordinances to require the creation of affordable housing, both for rental and home ownership units. These ordinances require: Twelve percent of all new residential construction in Fairfax and Loudoun Counties must be affordable to households at 80% of the area median income ( AMI); Six and a quarter percent of multifamily housing must be affordable to households, on average, at 60% AMI; Arlington County and Alexandria have differing formulas but equally aggressive requirements; The City of Falls Church recently amended its ADU, reducing the requirement to six percent. Often ADU development is dependent upon zoning provisions of increased density or bonus density, though site plan modifications might also trigger the requirements. Enabling legislation for an ADU ordinance in the City exists through the Code of Virginia An Affordable Dwelling Unit ordinance would need to be woven into the City' s Zoning Ordinance; it is therefore timely to consider this option due to the incipient rewriting of the Ordinance. B- 4 I I l 1

13 Preserve Existing Affordable Units Advantage: Ability to preserve and improve a larger quantity of affordable housing units at a lower cost to the City than would otherwise be possible. Disadvantage: Would need to be reconciled with the City' s redevelopment objectives. The City currently has a significant inventory of affordable places to live. While this inventory is still insufficient to meet the local demand for affordable housing, it is of a noteworthy quantity, and the preservation of this currently- affordable housing stock is a critical element to furthering the goal of housing affordability. Vital to the current supply of affordable housing are the units within existing multifamily complexes. Most of the City' s current apartment stock lies at the affordable end of the region' s price spectrum, largely due to being older buildings often with outdated amenities, fixtures or other site features. These units represent a large stock of housing, much of which can be suitable for families as well as other households due to the unit sizes and site configurations in other words, types of affordable units that are hard to come by otherwise. Below are three tactics that can be undertaken, either independently or together, to encourage the preservation and/or physical improvement of this vital supply of affordable housing. Encourage Preservation: All of the City' s existing affordable multifamily complexes are zoned ` RM' which caps density at 15 dwelling units per acre. Continuation of these complexes can be imperiled by redevelopment which typically seeks to significantly increase density thereby requiring that City Council rezone the properties. Encouraging the continuation of existing RM properties would facilitate the preservation of the existing structures, and although affordability would not necessarily be guaranteed, the structures themselves would remain, and would likely be considerably more affordable than newly constructed units. Designate Specific Redevelopment Priorities in RM Zones: Through its Comprehensive Plan, the City can designate specific existing RM residential complexes that may be suitable for redevelopment under certain circumstances. This could accommodate certain redevelopment goals, if they are agreed upon in advance, while still preserving other areas for affordable housing into the future. Encourage Dedicated Affordable Housing: The City currently has one rental apartment complex (West Wood Oaks) that is dedicated exclusively for low to moderate income households. While market- rate affordable housing complexes are often affordable in part due to their subpar physical and operational condition, dedicated housing is typically B- 5

14 managed by an organization whose purpose is to provide quality housing at affordable rates. In many respects, such dedicated housing is a superior affordable housing product. By supporting and encouraging non-profit affordable housing operators to manage existing complexes, the City could retain a large number of affordable units and increase the quality of those units at the same time. B- 6

15 Development or Renovation to Create New Affordable Housing Advantages: Significantly adds to stock of dedicated affordable housing in a manner that provides long-term affordability. Supported by federal tax credits and other financing options. Disadvantages: Tends to concentrate affordable housing units into individual projects. Potential for neighborhood opposition to nearby lower-income developments. Nonprofit agencies are particularly adept at leveraging and bundling federal, state and local tax credits for construction or rehabilitation of existing housing. With the high cost of land, Northern Virginia localities have often provided surplus publiclyowned land for these types of developments. The City might consider several novel development possibilities as follows: Co- location with Current Municipal Uses: Affordable housing is sometimes located on the same site as a public facility or building. For example, construction of affordable dwelling units over a newly constructed firehouse occurred in the Potomac Yard area of Alexandria. As a new site for the City fire station on Fairfax Boulevard is sought, a co- location of affordable housing could be considered. Unused/Former School Property: Former school sites can also be renovated to provide affordable housing. For example, the former Lewinsville School in McLean was converted many years ago to provide affordable senior housing co- located with a senior center, two child day care centers and an adult day health center. Lewinsville is now being redeveloped by Wesley Housing, a non-profit, and will continue to provide this range of services. Currently, the Green Acres School in the City provides space for recreation programs including a child day care center and senior center, and might once again be considered for a similar multipurpose use. Community Preservation and Development Corporation, which redeveloped the Suburbia Fairfax Apartments ( now called West Wood Oaks), has effectively done a similar conversion of an unused school in Anne Arundel County, Md. The Wiley Bates School was vacant before being converted into a multipurpose senior center with 71 affordable dwelling units for seniors. The Westmore School property in Fairfax could similarly be considered for construction of an affordable housing complex. County Property Yards: Fairfax County owns three property yards in the City of Fairfax, one or more of which might be suitable for the construction of an affordable dwelling complex, if the property were to be made available. B- 7 1 \".

16 Access Funds Received by Fairfax County on Behalf of City Advantage: Increases funding stream for a range of housing affordability. Disadvantage: Considerable administrative requirements associated with funding. As a jurisdiction with population less than 50,000, the City of Fairfax is not eligible to directly receive Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and HOME funds. Fairfax County includes the City of Fairfax in its Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy ( CHAS) and receives the City' s share of those funds. Some of the funds are allocated to the Consolidated Community Funding Pool which provides support to non-profits that serve residents. City In addition, Fairfax County has administered the Home Improvement Loan Program and Home Repair for the Elderly program for the City, though these programs are currently suspended. While the City of Fairfax has been invited to bid for funding of a project to create or preserve affordable housing, Fairfax County has not approved a pass- through funding arrangement with the City such as the one Falls Church has with Arlington County; consequently the City of Fairfax has not derived full benefit of these federal funding streams. B- 8 5

17 MEM Tax Credits as a Means for Acquisition/Renovation of Housing Advantage: Provides low interest loans to homeowners or developers to create or preserve housing affordability. Disadvantage: Acquisition still requires considerable cash flow due to high cost of land. There are considerable federal and state tax credit programs for renovation and construction that help developers, both non-profit and for-profit, to create or preserve affordable housing. In addition, the City of Fairfax is committed to helping residents modernize and improve their own properties. The Neighborhood Renaissance Programs were developed to facilitate the home renovation process for residents. These programs include many exciting new initiatives along with the best of the existing programs to aid homeowners. The Neighborhood Renaissance Services are designed to help homeowners plan and complete their home improvement projects. The Renaissance Housing Program provides 24- month loans at 0% interest to qualified individuals seeking to upgrade their homes. The Home Pride Program offers residents a graduated tax exemption for home renovations that will increase the value of the home by 15%. Furthermore, tax credit projects can also be a component of a mixed-income development (as opposed to a development that is 100% dedicated affordable), as a means to achieving both an increase in the number of affordable units and to avoid a concentration of affordable units in just a few locations. B- 9

18 Incentivize Tax Abatement with Existing Property Owners Advantage: Ability to identify privately-owned housing that could be kept affordable. Disadvantage: Private developers are cultivating these same property owners. The work group recommends working to identify and cultivate relationships with private owners of existing properties, especially those ` at risk' for redevelopment, to garner support for maintaining housing affordability. This may require patience and flexibility for a potentially extended period of time to line up housing financing with tax abatement, tax credits or low- or no- cost rehabilitation loans. Fairfax County has staff allocated to broker these arrangements and the City' s new Economic Development Director could potentially assume this responsibility for the City. Commercial properties should be considered as well for potential housing opportunities. B- 10 1

19 2013 Area Median Income/ Rental rates 2013 Washington, DC Area Median Income ( AMI) calculations Area Median $ 107,300 Income 95% 101, % 96, % 91, % 85, % 80, % 75, % 69, % 64, % 59, % 53, 700 Rental rates based on 60% and 80% of Area Median Income, as calculated by draft voluntary development condition 80% of Area $ 60% of Area 85, , 400 Median Income: RENT Median Income: RENT Adjustment Unit Adj. $ Unit Adjustment Adj. $ Efficiency 70% 45, 100 $ 940 Efficiency 70% 60, 100 $ 1, bedroom 80% 51, 500 $ 1, bedroom 80% 68, 600 $ 1, bedroom 90% 58, 000 $ 1, bedroom 90% 77, 200 $ 1, bedroom 100% 64, 400 $ 1, bedroom 100% 85, 800 $ 1, 788 1

20 aa C C a) c h0 Q-' N a) = E 13 a) CU O O O v Q a) U i' C (0 OO, 1 n C ( a1 O i 0 cv a) C a) a O CU O a CL ' I- c m i O ( CC. Z0 U ' LL Z U Q U Q = U a) c) c co Q a L O U a.., c a) E z E N O E O a) U OZS co a) a) ro a) ( n C C C. 0 E co O O ' Q O ' L. N N O U a) CO N E E >, fl- tan N C aa U O G v ui 0 bo o to v- 16 c a) L' C x U - >- 3 ( 35 a L c :L :L E C EO x to LO LA_ LL. 0 E x t ' U '' E ( E 4-, O O CI) c c L_ > L C E E E + > +_ Q CO CO f6 a) O O O 7 O Q, LL a ' a LL Z J U U N U L/ Y E as L co a) a a ' L CO ' CC C) 3 C 17. W ' E fa C cn E co Y J E tip cp V in N > W 3 Q L N a c -0 ' E T.. s C E O f c LL 3 E ca '> c co u co N L N. 3 U O L 0 Z Q C p U m Q G V m J W