| reported through
the date of Application submission may be requested by staff as part
of the assessment performed under subparagraph (C) of this paragraph.
A written statement from the most qualified person (i.e. Chief of
Police or Sheriff (as applicable) or the police officer/detective
for the police beat or patrol area containing the proposed Development
Site), including a description of efforts by such enforcement agency
addressing issues of crime and the results of their efforts may be
provided, and depending on the data provided by the Applicant, such
written statement may be required, as determined by staff. It is expected
that such written statement would also speak to whether there is a
reasonable expectation that based on the efforts underway there is
crime data that reflects a favorable downward trend in crime rates.
(iii) Evidence of mitigation for each of the schools
in the attendance zone that has a TEA Accountability Rating of "Not
Rated: Senate Bill 1365" for 2022 must meet the requirements of subclauses
(I) and (II) of this clause which will be a requirement of the LURA
for the duration of the Affordability Period and cannot be used to
count for purposes of meeting the threshold requirements under subparagraph
(7)(B)(ii) of this paragraph.
(I) Documentation from a person authorized to speak
on behalf of the school district with oversight of the school in question
that indicates the specific plans in place and current progress towards
meeting the goals and performance objectives identified in the Campus
Improvement Plan and in restoring the school(s) to an acceptable rating
status. The documentation should include actual data from progress
already made under such plan(s) to date demonstrating favorable trends
and should speak to the authorized persons assessment that the plan(s)
and the data supports a reasonable conclusion that the school(s) will
have an acceptable rating by the time the proposed Development places
into service. The letter may, to the extent applicable, identify the
efforts that have been undertaken to increase student performance,
decrease mobility rate, benchmarks for re-evaluation, increased parental
involvement, plans for school expansion, plans to implement early
childhood education, and long- term trends that would point toward
their achieving an A, B, or C Rating by the time the Development is
placed in service. The letter from such education professional could
also speak to why they believe the staff tasked with carrying out
the plan will be successful at making progress towards acceptable
student performance considering that prior Campus Improvement Plans
were unable to do so. Such assessment could include whether the team
involved has employed similar strategies at prior schools and were
successful.
(II) The Applicant has committed that it will operate
an after school learning center that offers at a minimum 15 hours
of weekly, organized, on-site educational services provided to elementary,
middle and high school children by a dedicated service coordinator
or Third-Party entity which includes at a minimum: homework assistance,
tutoring, test preparation, assessment of skill deficiencies and provision
of assistance in remediation of those deficiencies (e.g., if reading
below grade level is identified for a student, tutoring in reading
skills is provided), research and writing skills, providing a consistent
weekly schedule, provides for the ability to tailor assistance to
the age and education levels of those in attendance, and other evidence-based
approaches and activities that are designed to augment classroom performance.
Up to 20% of the activities offered may also include other enrichment
activities such as music, art, or technology.
(F) In order for the Development Site to be found eligible,
including when mitigation described in subparagraph (E) of this paragraph
is not provided in the Application, despite the existence of one or
more Neighborhood Risk Factors, the Applicant must explain how the
use of Department funds at the Development Site is consistent with
the goals in clauses (i) - (iii) of this subparagraph. If the Board
grants an Appeal of staff's determination of Site eligibility, the
Board shall document the reasons for a determination of eligibility.
(i) Preservation of existing occupied affordable housing
units to ensure they are safe and suitable or the new construction
of high quality affordable housing units that are subject to federal
rent or income restrictions.
(ii) Determination that the risk factor(s) that has
been disclosed are not of such a nature or severity that should render
the Development Site ineligible based on the assessment and mitigation
provided under subparagraphs (C) and (D) of this paragraph.
(iii) No mitigation was provided, or in staff's determination
the mitigation was considered unsatisfactory and the Applicant has
requested a waiver of the presence of Neighborhood Risk Factors on
the basis that the Development is necessary to enable the state, a
participating jurisdiction, or an entitlement community to comply
with its obligation to affirmatively further fair housing, a HUD approved
Conciliation Agreement, or a final and non-appealable court order
and such documentation is submitted with the disclosure.
(4) Site and Neighborhood Standards (Direct Loan and
HOME-ARP only). A New Construction Development, as defined by the
applicable federal fund source, requesting federal funds must meet
the Site and Neighborhood Standards in 24 CFR §983.57(e)(2) or
(3). A Development requesting NHTF funds that meets the federal definition
of reconstruction in 24 CFR §93.2 must also meet these standards.
(b) Development Requirements and Restrictions. The
purpose of this subsection is to identify specific restrictions on
a proposed Development requesting multifamily funding by the Department.
(1) Ineligible Developments. A Development shall be
ineligible if any of the criteria in subparagraphs (A) - (C) of this
paragraph apply.
(A) General Ineligibility Criteria include:
(i) Developments such as hospitals, nursing homes,
trailer parks, dormitories (or other buildings that will be predominantly
occupied by students) or other facilities that are usually classified
as transient housing (as provided in Code §42(i)(3)(B)(iii) and
(iv));
(ii) any Development with any building(s) with four
or more stories that does not include an elevator. Developments where
topography or other characteristics of the Site require basement splits
such that a tenant will not have to walk more than two stories to
fully utilize their Unit and all Development amenities, will not require
an elevator;
(iii) a Housing Tax Credit Development that provides
on-site continual or frequent nursing, medical, or psychiatric services.
Refer to IRS Revenue Ruling 98-47 for clarification of assisted living;
(iv) a Development that proposes population limitations
that violate §1.15 of this title (relating to Integrated Housing
Rule);
(v) a Development seeking Housing Tax Credits that
will not meet the general public use requirement under Treasury Regulation, §1.42-9
or a documented exception thereto;
(vi) a Development utilizing a Direct Loan that is
subject to the Housing and Community Development Act, 104(d) requirements
and proposing Rehabilitation or Reconstruction, if the Applicant is
not proposing at least the one-for-one replacement of the existing
Unit mix. Adding additional units would not violate this provision;
or
(vii) any New Construction or Reconstruction proposing
more than 30% efficiency and/or one-Bedroom Units. This requirement
will not apply to Elderly or Supportive Housing Developments. For
Historic Developments, this requirement will not apply to any units
constructed within the Historic structure. For any New Construction
or Reconstruction undertaken as part of a Historic Application, those
newly constructed or reconstructed Units must meet this standard.
The Units that are part of the Historic structure will not be included
in the total when determining if the Application meets this requirement.
(B) Ineligibility of Elderly Developments include:
(i) any Elderly Development of two stories or more
that does not include elevator service for any Units or Common Areas
above the ground floor;
(ii) any Elderly Development with any Units having
more than two Bedrooms with the exception of up to three employee
Units reserved for the use of the manager, maintenance, or security
officer. These employee Units must be specifically designated as such;
or
(iii) any New Construction, Reconstruction, or Adaptive
Reuse Elderly Development (including Elderly in a Rural Area) proposing
more than 70% two-Bedroom Units.
(C) Ineligibility of Developments within Certain School
Attendance Zones. Due to uncertainty linked to the delayed release
of TEA Accountability ratings, this item is suspended. Any Development
that falls within the attendance zone of a school that has a TEA Accountability
Rating of F for 2023 and a rating of "Not Rated: Senate Bill 1365"
for 2022 is ineligible with no opportunity for mitigation. Developments
that are encumbered by a TDHCA LURA on the first day of the Application
Acceptance Period or at the time Cont'd... |
