Loading...
05-16-94 agendaCITY OF RICHFIELD HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MONDAY, MAY 16, 1994 COUNCIL CHAMBERS 7:00 P.M. AGENDA CALL TO ORDER APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF (1) SPECIAL HRA MEETING HELD CONCURRENTLY WITH CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF APRIL 11, 1994 AND (2) HRA MEETING OF APRIL 18, 1994 1. OPPORTUNITY FOR CITIZENS TO ADDRESS THE HRA ON ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA 2. CONSIDERATION OF STATUS REPORT ON COMMUNITY APARTMENT PROGRAM HRA LETTER NO. 40 3. CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ISSUANCE OF COMPLETION CERTIFICATES TO TWIN CITIES HABITAT FOR HUMANITY INC. FOR 6225 14TH AND 6310 15TH AVENUES HRA LETTER NO. 41 4. PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SALE OF RICHFIELD REDISCOVERED PROPERTY AT 6926 CHICAGO AVENUE TO QUAM, SUMNICHT AND ASSOCIATES IN ACCORDANCE WITH DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (CONTINUED FROM APRIL 18, 1994) HRA LETTER NO. 42 5. CONSIDERATION OF ALTERNATIVES FOR DEVELOPMENT OF RICHFIELD REDISCOVERED PROPERTY AT 6625 STEVENS AVENUE HRA LETTER NO. 43 6. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR REPORT 7. CLAIMS AND PAYROLL ADJOURNMENT AUXILIARY AIDS FOR INDIVIDUALS WITH DISABILITIES ARE AVAILABLE UPON REQUEST. REQUESTS MUST BE MADE AT LEAST 96 HOURS IN ADVANCE • TO THE ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DIRECTOR AT 861-9702. HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY HRA Letter No. 43 Agenda May 16, 1994 Issue Statement: Consideration of alternatives for the development of the Richfield Rediscovered property at 6625 Stevens Avenue. Background: The HRA authorized the purchase of 6625 Stevens Avenue on December 20, 1993, for the Richfield Rediscovered Program. The site was marketed in search of a builder/buyer team upon which to sell the site after HRA acquisition. The HRA acquired the site on February 15, 1994. At about the same time, a realtor was in contact with staff and inquired about the availability of all sites. The Stevens Avenue site was available. The realtor, acting on behalf of the developer "Home Associates," submitted a reservation March 1, 1994. The site was reserved with a $500 fee and by providing an executed "Participation Agreement." When staff receives a reservation, a period of time follows for approximately 60 days while the developer prepares plans and finalizes a sale to an end buyer. Then negotiations for a development agreement with the HRA can begin. During this time period, staff must also work with the developer to determine their experience and financial capability. • Staff met with Home Associates for the first time on April 28, 1994. At that meeting the developer indicated the intended use to be for an unlicensed adult care facility for four adults. It was pointed out that the described use might require a conditional use permit in a residential area. It was also noted that this wasn't a typical type of Richfield Rediscovered project. At a follow-up meeting with the developer on May 3, 1994, the developer clarified the proposed use to be for licensed adult foster care. If so, a conditional use permit is not required to house up to six adults. According to state statute, a city may not impose restrictions on this use. However, staff objected to further considering the sale to Home Associates because the guidelines for the HRH's Richfield Rediscovered program require owner occupied housing. The respective positions of the parties are provided in more detail in the attachments. Letters between the parties are dated May 3 (Nordquist to Home Associates), May 6 (HRA Counsel, Ron Batty to Attorney General), May 10 (from Attorney General's office) and May 12 (Batty to Attorney General). Home Associates is represented by the Minnesota Department of Human Services (DHS) and the Attorney General's office. Ron Batty will attend the HRA meeting to explain the positions further. The developer has been invited to attend the HRA meeting and present information about the project. Staff continues to work with the developer through the Attorney General's office. As this letter was prepared, staff provided a list of privately held vacant lots and substandard home opportunities. The developer is evaluating their options. The HRA has three options to consider: 1. Authorize a sale to Home Associates for the $45,000 fair market value of the present improved property; removing the site from the Richfield Rediscovered Program and recovering all acquisition expenditures except administrative costs. 2. Do not negotiate a development agreement to sell on the .basis that the intended use of the property will not provide owner occupied housing in accordance with the HRA's Richfield Rediscovered Program Guidelines. 3. Authorize a sale to Home Associates for the $27,500 vacant lot price; waiving the owner occupancy requirement of the Richfield Rediscovered Guidelines. Taking the cost of demolition into account, the HRA will be providing a $22,500 subsidy for the development of this facility. Recommended Motion: Option one; sell to Home Associates for $45,000 and remove 6625 Stevens from the Richfield Rediscovered program. Basis of Recommendation: 1. The proposed use of the property is not consistent with the HRA's Richfield Rediscovered Program Guidelines. 2. Legal Counsel has reviewed the matter and is confidant that the proposed HRA recommendation is a reasonable position given state statute and HRA program objectives. Staff actions have also been reasonable and no basis can be found for the willful discrimination that the Assistant Attorney General has charged. 3. The HRA has emphasized the importance of providing higher value owner occupied housing opportunities as a way of maintaining and improving the City. 4. No agreements have been negotiated or entered into which define the conditions of the sale of the property to the developer. No contracts presently exist. 5. This is an important policy matter for the HRA to consider. By the time Home Associates had expressed interest in available Richfield lots, the Stevens site was the only one of five still available and uncommitted. Slightly different timing could have resulted in all five Richfield Rediscovered properties being committed to an adult foster care program rather then the HRA's redevelopment program. Alternative Recommendation: Do not sell the property to Home Associates. Modify Richfield Rediscovered Program Guidelines. Discussion/Decision Mode: An Assistant Attorney General has demanded the Richfield HRA take immediate action to sell the Stevens site to the developer. However, late on May 12 they also expressed an interest, with HRD staff assistance, in finding alternative sites which would allow the developer to achieve its objectives at a lessor cost than the Stevens Avenue site. As a practical matter, the HRA does not have sufficient time to schedule and conduct a public hearing to sell the site to the developer prior to June 20, 1994. An analysis of builder and financing capability and the design review are required prior to a public hearing. Respe u y submitted, James D Prosser Execu iv Director JDP:ds U HoLMEs & GRAVEN CHARTMD AU1 p at Law ROURT A. ALMOP ONALD S. BATTY J. 1N UIUL osN L DM6AN KaY Q DOMMID4M RWAM A). GAL[Y coiRDls A. 1=5 JAMB L HOLM DAM J. KWWT JM L LAWN WSUMO +MN LL trw CNARLP L. Larzym Jm M. LIPPA& JR. Room J. LNWAU 470 NW WY COMW, M(MMnpdih MIRM00ta U4U (612) U7-UW !RmWm& (612) 327-NIO WRMRI DMWT DUL (812) 337-9262 noun C. LMO LAURA L NQUV OARMRA L P017WOOD ADM M. MOMMCN JAM J. T MMMON, JR. LA=Y M. WulszuM •OM L WBA M GARY P. WD= DAM L. OU M11(1MfM U01) OR coins= NOWT C. CARL" RQMLR! L DAYM MOM T. JAY •ALM>iN May 12, 1994 Us. Theresa M. Couri Assistant Attorney General Office of the Attorney General Suits 200, 820 Lafayette Road St. Paul, MN 38158 RE: Richfield Rediscovered Program Dear Ms. Couri : • This is in response to your letter dated May 10, 1994 regarding the captioned matter. The letter deals extensively with your belief that it is illegal to refuse to sell the property at 8825 Stevens Avenue to America's Rome Team, Inc. /Home Associates (Developer). I continue to disagree with your contention that the Richfield HRA must sell the lot to the Developer under the Richfield Rediscovered program. I was also surprised by the fact that in 2-1 / 2 pages there was no acknowledgement that the HRA may be willing to sell the lot to the Developer outside of the program. I stated in both my telephone conversation with Mr. Paul Landskroener on May Sth and in my letter of the following day that the staff was willing to recommend selling the property to the Developer at market rate. The HRA has been and remains prepared to sell properties under the Richfield Rediscovered program to any buyer willing to comply with program gWdelines. Owner occupancy has been a key requirement since the program was initiated four years ago. The HRA has made no exceptions to that policy since that time, despite several requests. Although almost all the attention to date has centered on owner occupancy, the program has a number of other requirements. For example, participants must sign a development agreement which specifies in detail the terms of the sale, including the price of the band. Participants must also gain approval of the architecture and design of the proposed structure. This goes well beyond the need to comply with building and other standard codes. The review involves interior house features, exterior aesthetics and the structure's architecture relationship with neighboring properties. Since none of the above issues was reached in the brief contact between the Developer and Mr. Nordquist of the HRA, I do not know whether there are other =112MIla 80196-t1 Us. Theresa Couri May 12, 1994 Page 2 program requirements which will present a problem for the Developer. If so, do you believe the Developer must comply with theta or is there grounds for another exemption? It is difficult to understand how the Developer can be allowed to pick and choose among program requirements. On the other hand, exemptions would add up very quickly to a sort of special status enjoyed by the Developer. You have cited me to no provision in state law to support such a status, nor am I aware of any. I believe the purpose of the statutory provisions. we have discussed is to protect licensed residential facilities from discrimination, but not to confer upon them special privileges not available to others. I have a sense that the Developer believes it is experiencing what might be characterized as typical suburban opposition to residential facilities and that perhaps your office has drawn a similar conclusion. There is nothing about this case or Richfield which suggests that is true. Richfield has no history of opposition or harassment of licensed residential facilities. Staff is aware of numerous such facilities in the city and there are probably many more which have never come to the attention of the city. In fact, this very developer has purchased and is pursuing the location of a similar facility at 6637 Fourth Avenue in Richfield outside of the Richfield Rediscovered program. The Developer was referred to the owner of the Fourth Avenue property by Mr. Nordquist. I continue to see this matter as one in which the HRA is acting in a completely .even- handed manner. The HRA has been and remains prepared to allow any entity who will agree to comply with program guidelines to participate in the Richfield Rediscovered program. All those who are not willing have been turned down. Suggesting that the HRA must make an exception in this instance for a buyer who refuses to be bound by program requirements is to say that this Developer enjoys an extraordinary status which I believe has no basis in law. Ultimately, only the commissioners of the HRA may make decisions and spear for that entity. My opinion as legal counsel is that the HRA is not compelled to allow the Developer to participate in the Richfield Rediscovered program. Your letter of May 10 has not changed my opinion. Mr. Nordquist has expressed staffs' policy recommendation against making an exception for the Developer, but suggesting that the HRA sell the property at market value. This matter will be discussed by the HRA at its May 16, 1994 meeting. I suggest that the Developer attend that meeting and be prepared to make a presentation to the HRA. ly iHRA d at Attorney RHB : ckr 0 =69936 MUS-a1 . 0 tWl •10-19W 12136 FROM A.a. SM LAFAYETTE TO NiJi,LitT Ft1I U OVALJI III 93-TWIO P. 02/04 svwc R:rouHU SCnnom NUM X00 SOLMAM I7 ROAD ST. RAWL M Ul"* STATE OF MWNUOTA oMas of nm "MOMY GIMU , may 10,19% Ronald H. Batty Holm" A Graveu 470 pitlOM Gntor Minnespolis, UN 5"M Re: RWeld MA Redisoo?vwed PMgn= Dear Mr. Aatgr. 0 The above-:efo renced matter has been transferred to sae by Mr. Landitmer. 1 would appreciate it if you forward any communications to me from now on. Thank you IN your letter dated May 6, 1994 which sets forth the Richfield K RA's position regarding the sale of the property at 6625 Stevens ("Stevens property'), Richfield Upon review of your letter, and, the relevant statutes, the Minnesota De artmaat of Human Services ("DR$) continues to di"Sree with your position. The follow is a s=ummry of VHS' potitiom When DRS was creating its plan to downsize lon# term we facilities and purchase residential properties located is neighborhoods, the impetus of this plan was to deisud tution-Mu individuals in need of special cars pad to permit them to live in the least restrictive environment that most resembles normal family life. The process of choosing sites for this purpose is cumbersome sine it must involve in put from medical stag sue managers, farWly members and the residents themselves. The site must be located close enough to services to meet the residents' special needs, yet still have the characteristics of a norms I neighborhood Ill rigorous site evaluation process was Implemented in choosing to purchase the Stevens property. Considerable time and energy has been devoted to aoquiring that site. DHS objects to the validity of the land tae restrictions Richfield has attempted to impose In an apparent effort. to block the sate of the Stevens property to DHS. DHS anticipate=d that such restrictions would be imposed to limit the development of neighborhood homes for devslopmentaliy+ disabled individuals. Therefore, I3HS proposed legi'sladon to protect such development from the exact type of opposition it is facing against Richhold. Mitrt. Star, S 245A.11 states as follows: Subdivision 1. Policy matmem it is the policy of the state that persons sbiall not be excluded by municipal zo ordinances or other land use reSulatiors from the benefits of normal nizeentiol surroundb4s. 0 ftcWWJ a (411) 3!»159 • Toth (611) 06-M 0 TO Fret 1M (100) 004717 MW W VWW Ar ZRI :v oppert PAY rbmpk" who Ydw. DIV"W ttlAgd eR s rNy" ispr (11% psi oeOMW "WAM) • t 1A1 •10? 193?i l i'. = 39 FROM A.G. 520 LAFAYETYE TO Ronald H. Betty May 109 1994 • Page 2 5ubd. 2. Permitted s1We fa * resident lal use,. Residential programs with a licensed capacity of six or fewer persons shall be considered a permitted side-family residential use of property fox thepurposes Hof xonning and other land use regulations. Programs otherwise allowed under this subdivision shall not be prohibited by operation of restrictive covenants Or regardless of when entered into, which cannot be met because of the nature of the licensed Program, indufflus ngbt= (emphasis added). You indicated in your letter that because the Richfield HM is not authorized to pass zoning ordinances or other lead use regulations, the foregoing statute does not apply to the "owncar occupied" requirement of development. Upon reviewing the HRA statute, Minn. Stat. S 469.001 at. seq., f agree with your analysis that HRAs are not authottsed to pass zoning ordinances or other land use regulations. Minn. Stat. 6 469.012 sets forth the HRA's powers and duties which do not include the power to pass zoning or other land use regulations. In fact 1i= Stat. 1469.012 subd. 4 states that "all projects shall be subject to the p1,11 using, zoning, sanitary, and building laws, ordinances, and regulations applicable to the to aliry in which the project is situated. Therefore, any land use regulations that affect the development can only be passed by the municipality in which the development is located. The fact remains, however, that Richfield is neq that the property be "owner rragsu led." Such a limitation is a traditional land use to on. The "owner occupied" Fatioa is so common and traditional, that Minn.. Stat. V245A.11 which protects the development of six person residential programs specii'leally lists "owner occupamW as the type of land use restriction that ca=ot be imposed to limit their development. Your analysis that, because the ERA cannot pass land use or zoning regulations, then 245A does not apply can only lead to two possible conclusions. First, either the HM has passed tb.- "owner occrupancy" regulation which is invalid because HRAs do not have the power to ass such regulations; or alternatively, the restriction was imposed by the municipalit of Richfield, in which case, Minn. Stet. 5245A.11 would invalidate the operation of the "owner ompied" regtilation. Therefore, the regulation is either invalidly passed, or overridden by Minn. Stat.11245A.11. In either case, it cannot operate to block the sale and use of the Stevens property by DHS for a six person residential eility. Finally, I draw your attention to the Fair Housing Act, Mira. Stat. 0 363.03 sabd. 2, .' 11 and 2a. which prohibits unfair, discriminatory bousinS praeticas. Specifict vv, those subdivisions prohibit a property owner from re to sell to any person, or M ?S to snake reasonable accommodations in rules, policies, or practices based upon severs protected classes including disability or familial status. Based upon DHS'dea th Richfield personnel, it has become apparent that Mchfsld is not dde and that their actions may have discrimiuatory motives, and effect. DHS' developer has encountered much opposition in both securing Information about lots' and in negotiating the sale. For example, when DHS developer, £00 900'ON N3(1U69 T SHW70H OZ:£I 176/TT/SO Ronald H. Batty ` May 3 1994 Paul Thomppssoon called the HRA indicating that be was seeking a bome for four adults, he recereed information that that it did not have any lots awdlable. However, when he asked an associate to call back and she identified herself as a developer with a silt client" *asking a new home, she was received with great enthusiasm and reeei a faxed list of available lots that acme day. Additionally, DHS' developer met with objection after objection regarding the development of the home. After an initial set of objections was raised by the HRA and resolved by DHS, the HRA would raise new o0jections regarding fact= that had been available from the start of negotiations. This Mpg of dealing has served to delay the development of the Site. Finally, tba attitude of tbe tEltA became even more apparent at a meeting where Bruce Nordquist, the Housing Supervisor of the Richfield HRA told DHS' m " The foregoing course of developer that the 11RA lag w" to Chbld mots i? dealing indicates to DHS that the HRA is opposing th4 sae of the Stevens property to DHS for story reasons. In sunny the "owner oompisd" llmitatico is clearly a land use regulation that Cannot be applied to DHS' six person residential home. Additionally, DHS believes that there is ample miden.ce to indicate that the Richfield HRA has 0000s4d this sale to DHS for discrimir?atory Masons. Toorefors, DHS demands that the RieMeld HRA immediately take action to sell the Stevens it to it for the price y agreed upon. H tbb Richfield HRA refuses to comply wii this demand, DHS?foroed to take er legal acdon. a M. COURT Assistant Attorney 04316111 (612) 296.6726 cc: Mike Tessnesr, DHS =&.A* • 1700 900'ON NBNl 69 B 59W1OH Te:ZT 176/TT/90 HOLMES & GRAVEN CHARTERED Attomys at LAW 170 Pillsbury Center. Minneapol4, Minnesota 55102 ROBERT C. LONG OBERT A. ALSOF (612) 337-9300 LAURA K. MOLLLT NALD H. BATTY IWO BARBARA PO EFHEN J. BUSUL Faaimlle (612) 337-9310 MEN LAMES M. S TROMMEN JOHN B. DEAN DOBBINB MARY MARY G. B INS JAMES J. THOMSON, JR. STEVANEE N. GALEY LARRY M. WERTHEIM CORRDtE A. HEINE BONNIE L RIxs JAMES S. HOLMES WRITER'S DMECT DIAL GARY P. WINTER DAVID J. KENNEDY RSON (612) 337-9262 R L DAVID L GRAVEN (1929-1991) - JOHN . A OF COUNSEL WELLINGTON H. LAW H. LA ROBERT C. CARLSON RE L. CHARLES 1994 May 6 LZFE . ROBERT L DAVIDSON , JR. L JOHN T. JAY SALMEN T ROBERT I. L[NDALL Mr. Paul Landskroener Assistant Attorney General Minnesota Attorney General's Office 520 Lafayette Road, Suite 200 St. Paul, MN 55155 RE: Richfield HRA Richfield Rediscovered Program Dear Mr. Landskroener: This letter is written to summarize the position of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Richfield (HRA) with regard to the application by America's Home Team, Inc. /Home Associates (Developer) to purchase the property at 6625 Stevens Avenue. The HRA staff has declined to sell the property to the Developer because the property will not be owner occupied as required by the conditions of the HRA's Richfield Rediscovered program. You have cited Minnesota Statutes, 1245A.11 as requiring the HRA to sell the property to the Developer for use by a licensed residential facility. I do not believe that the statutory provision you have cited requires this conclusion. The HRA's program is not a zoning or land use regulation nor is it a restrictive covenant, which is a private land use regulation. Minnesota Statutes, 1462.357, subd. 7 also contains a reference to zoning and other land use regulations. Land use regulations, including zoning ordinances, are authorized by Minnesota Statutes, 1462.351 et seg. The statute specifically authorizes "municipalities" to enact zoning and land use controls. Section 462.352, subd. 2 defines a municipality as a statutory or home rule charter city or town. Significantly, other units of local government, including school districts, HRAs and EDAs, are not included within the definition. Thus, an HRA has no authority to enact a zoning ordinance or other land use control. The HRA operates under the authority of Minnesota Statutes, 1 469.001 through 469.047. In general, HRAs are authorized to enact programs and create projects designed to combat the spread of blight and to provide housing opportunities. Pursuant to that authority, the HRA created the Richfield Rediscovered program in 1990. The purpose of the program is to identify substandard single family houses for removal and replacement by higher value housing. The program is designed to accomplish two goals. By removing substandard or obsolete housing, the program combats blight. By replacing that housing with larger units containing three or four bedrooms, two baths, a two-car garage and other amenities, the HRA hopes to • provide opportunities for "move-up" housing to the residents of Richfield. RBB69777 RC125-11 Mr. Paul Landskroener May 6, 1994 Page 2 As is the case in other cities with similar programs, the private housing market in Richfield simply does not respond to such challenges. The cost of acquiring substandard single family units, clearing the site and constructing a new dwelling is prohibitive. Recognizing this fact, the HRA designed a program to subsidize such redevelopment. Using only local monies, the HRA purchases a property for something in the range of $45, 000 to $50, 000, spends an additional several thousand to demolish the building and clear the site and sells the vacant property for $25,000 to $30, 000. A developer is required to build a replacement structure meeting certain characteristics, including a specified minimum market value. All lots in the Richfield Rediscovered program are in a tax increment financing district. The HRA intends to recover its subsidy on each lot (the difference between its investment in the property and the price at which it sells the lot) through the increased taxes paid by the property over the next 25 years. Since 1990, approximately 27 houses have been constructed under this program. All have been owner occupied. I have included for your review a copy of the program requirements entitled "Richfield Rediscovered Procedural Guidelines" This document gives a complete description of the process of acquiring and disposing of property as well as the criteria which must be met by program participants. The restriction of program participants to owner-occupants is one which the HRA feels is essential to accomplish its statutory mission. That regulation is not and cannot be a zoning or other land use control because the HRA has no authority to enact such provisions. The HRA, like all other property owners, is subject to the land use regulations of the city. More broadly, I believe the purpose of the language in both chapters 462 and 245 is to protect licensed residential programs from discrimination in land use matters. There is nothing in either section nor anywhere else in state law to suggest that such programs should be exempt from other legitimate regulations. Legal arguments aside, the HRA staff would be happy to explore the possiblity of excluding the subject property from the Richfield Rediscovered program and selling the lot directly to the Developer. Such a sale would, of course, have to be at fair market value. In the case of 6625 Stevens, fair market value is in the range of $45, 000. The Developer could then pursue whatever permits or approvals might be necessary from the city to develop the facility just as the Developer is pursuing a second lot in Richfield which was purchased outside of the program. If the Developer is interested in this option, I suggest that they contact the HRA staff immediately. The next HRA meeting is scheduled for Monday, May 16, 1994. Staff reports are due about a week before the date of the HRA meeting. That gives the parties a very short period of time in which to have staff formulate a recommendation to the HRA to delete this property from the Richfield Rediscovered program. I suggest the Developer contact Mr. Bruce Nordquist at 861-9777 immediately if they are interested in purchasing the lot outside of the program. ince ly, lRonald H. Batty HRA Attorney PM69777 RC125-41 J t0 6700 Portland Avenue - Richfield, Minnesota 55423-2599 City Manager Mayor James D. Prosser Martin Kirsch May 3, 1994 Mr. Paul Thompson, Director of Development Home Associates 4600 W. 77th Street, Suite 275 Minneapolis, MN 55435 CERTIFIED MAIL Subject: Housing Development, 6625 Stevens Avenue Dear Mr. Thompson: Council Don Priebe Michael Sandahl Susan Rosenberg Russ Susag • Enclosed is America's Home Team, Inc./Home Associates check 45014 for $500.00. This deposit and the accompanying "participation agreement" form which was executed by you, was received from your firm for the right to participate in redevelopment of the above referenced property in accordance with the guidelines of the Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authorities "Richfield Rediscovered Program". As indicated. in our meeting today, May 3, the proposed development does not meet program guidelines. A copy of the guidelines approved in July, 1991, is enclosed. The "Housing Design and Site Development Criteria", Section I a, page 8, states: "Each home shall be single-family, owner occupied". The meetings we had on April 28 and May 3, 1994 have helped to clarify the use of the site for a developmentally disabled adult care facility. My initial contacts in February and March, 1994, through your realtor representative, Jason Ginsbach, were not sufficiently complete. I interpreted America's Home Team/Home Associates to be building several homes in the metropolitan area in cooperation with the State of Minnesota. I inadvertently drew the conclusion that it was a home ownership program in cooperation with the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency. I apologize for any inconvenience this may have caused. • The Urban Hometown Telephone (612) 861-9700 Fax 861=9749 An Equal Opportunity Employer As indicated on May 3, 1994, I would be happy to assist in identifying alternative sites that are not already part of the Richfield Rediscovered Program. These sites will probably have a substandard home that requires clearance to provide a vacant lot opportunity. I would estimate the acquisition cost to be $45,000 to $55,000. The actual cost would be determined by negotiation between you and a willing seller. A list of potential sites is anticipated to be available by the end of May, 1994. The actual timing of availability will probably be negotiated between you and the seller. If you have any questions or want to discuss development opportunities in Richfield further, please call me at 861-9777. Sincerely, Bruce Nordquist, Housing Supervisor Housing and Redevelopment BN:smv Enclosure • 0 MAR- 1-94 TUE 11149 SURNET REALTY LAKES .6129204706 P'.02 R1C8tIZLD-j=j=VZR= ' PARTICIPATI= IGREFptT TzX4 AGIZEKxNT is made and entered into this C:?/ day of 1NAMD.FOR by and between MM HOUSING AND REDEVEU FhtgNT UTHORTY THE CITY OF uCEFzELD, a body corporate and politio under the 14w$ Of the stata Of Kinnesota, having its principal office at 6700 and Avenue, Richfield, Minnesota 35423 (HRA) . and . . a' MIM"ota ?- wing its pr pal, office dt i (Developer). . in consideration of the mutual covenants'and obligetiona of the XM and the Developer, the Parties do heraby Covenant and agree as follows: 1. The Developer agrees to at 8300 to the ARA for the right to garticignte Ift rsd41va10pment Of a Probe Vy Owned by the RM in accordance with the guid'eliaes of the jM o s Richfield-Rediscovered Program. 2. In raturn got $360,-the raoatpt of Whig from the cw•ioper is hereby actmowledged by the ffi3A, the HRA grunts to the Developer the e=lusive right to sent into a contract to redevelop the property loeated..at L06 a2 $ ?Vev"s E. and legally das=ibed as1ot, NO#h i in accordance with the ERA s Ri d-R iscover W4 M ,M,nenKi6 Program. This right will sxpirs on tLi4 ZO tq 4 1993, unless, prior thereto, the Daveloper and a HR# ' have executed a Contract for Private Development with regard • to the property. . 3, The M agrees to negati4te in good f ith with the Dervsloper regarding redevslopment of -the property but nothing captained in tht• Agreement shall require the RRA to enter into a Contract for, Private Dtvaloyment it, at tha H'RAts Bole dibcretion, it deems such not to be in its beat ii?tvrests. 4. The fee paid by the Developer to the BRA in Connection with -This Agreement for participation in the * M l s Richfield-- acooortrar prop" or nsita ftnAa le end um-tramsfecsbto by the NvA. TBE NOMING VM R EnLopmrUr At1THORZTY IN AND FOR THR CITY • OF RICHYXILD, MMZSOTA P.- - a-- 40? DMEMPER Its tine Director its Sys Its THIS DOCUMENT DRAFTED BY: W mas & Graven, Chartered ' n? band mitten memo 470 Pillsbury canter _ i Minneapolis, Minnesota 56402 r t/ 13 " 17A HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY HRA Letter No. 42 Agenda May 16, 1994 Issue Statement: Public hearing and authorization of the sale of Richfield Rediscovered property at 6926 Chicago Avenue to Quam, Sumnicht and Associates (continued from April 18, 1994). Background: A public hearing to consider the above referenced sale was scheduled for the April 18, 1994 HRA meeting and continued to the May 16 meeting. Some house plan and project cost concerns had to be reworked and are now finalized according to Steve Quam. The HRA authorized the sale of 6926 Chicago Avenue to Newman Berger in October 1993. Shortly thereafter, Mr. Berger found his proposed project was over budget. Staff remarketed the site. Quam, Sumnicht, and Associates (QSA) has identified a buyer and proposes to build a three bedroom ($128,000) home in accordance with the attached plan. The development agreement requires: ? A cash deposit of $25,000 to the HRA as performance security. This is an acceptable alternative to a Letter of Credit. ? Completion by October 31, 1994. ? Construction financing and insurance requirements that other Richfield Rediscovered builders have provided. The HRA has already demolished the home in preparation for development. Recommended Motion: Following the public hearing, adopt the attached resolution which authorizes the Chair and Executive Director to execute an agreement to sell 6926 Chicago Avenue to Quam, Sumnicht and Associates for the development of a new single family home. Basis of Recommendation: 1. Experience with QSA to date indicates they are a responsible contractor. This will be their first new construction project in Richfield. 2. The HRA owns the site and is prepared to sell. 3. A development agreement has been negotiated and is in conformance with program guidelines. 4. Notice of public hearing was published in the Sun-Current on April 6, 1994. Proper procedures were followed to continue the hearing to May 16, 1994. 5. Previously, the Planning Commission found the sale of this lot for development of a new single family home to be in conformance with the City's Comprehensive Plan. • Alternative Recommendation: Do not proceed with the development agreement with Quam, Sumnicht and Associate and direct staff to find another buyer. Discussion/Decision Mode: A closing is anticipated to occur in early June with construction starting shortly thereafter. Respectfu y submitted, James f'e osser Execu Director • JDP:ds 0 • HRA RESOLUTION NO. THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SALE OF REAL PROPERTY LOCATED AT 6926 CHICAGO AVENUE TO QUAM, SUMNICHT AND ASSOCIATES IN ACCORDANCE WITH A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WHEREAS, the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Richfield, Minnesota (HRA) desires to develop certain real property pursuant to and in furtherance of the Richfield Rediscovered Program Redevelopment Project (Project) heretofore adopted by the City of Richfield (City) and the HRA, said real property being described as follows: 6926 Chicago Avenue, "Chicago Avenue Acres" , the east 1/2 of Lot 1, except south 50 feet thereof, Hennepin County; and WHEREAS, the HRA is authorized to sell real property within its area of operation after public hearing; and • WHEREAS, a developer Quam, Sumnicht and Associates has been identified as the purchaser of the described property, in accordance with a development agreement; and WHEREAS, the development agreement between the HRA and Quam, Sumnicht and Associates requires: 1. A certified check in the amount of $25,000 as performance security; 2. A construction completion date of October 31, 1994; and 3. Evidence of construction financing and insurance. WHEREAS, a public hearing has been held to authorize the sale after proper public notice; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has made a finding that the disposition of the property for residential purposes is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority: 1. A public hearing has been held and 6926 Chicago Avenue is authorized to be sold to Quam, Sumnicht and Associates in accordance with a development agreement with the HRA. 0 2. The purchase price for 6926 Chicago is $25,000. 0 3. The Chairperson and Executive Director are authorized to execute the Development Agreement and other agreements as required to effectuate the sale to Quam, Sumnicht and Associates. Adopted by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 16th day of May 1994. Thomas E. Harms, Chair ATTEST: Vern Luettinger, Secretary 0 0 • • (D W = W ? O V V V I 1 I I I i I 1 I I I I I 1 .? I 1 L I I r I I C I I I 1 F I 1 F(y I 1 YXI J I I Q I I I I ,^ I I V, I I w I 1 I 1 ?/ I 1 I I I I O I 1 .r I I V II Q " U N I I YxXU I I T I I U I 1 .r I 1 I I a ' ' Q I I I I W I I J LU I I y I I II W I 1 I I I 1 I I 1 , , „ 11 11 , „ „ „ „ „ „ „ „ Q „ Q „ „ d " 1 „ „ I- I j Ill,,,li,' li'il Ili I ? I??IIIII I?I??; ?III? ! C ,II'I Ilnii I•II I'I'I Ilj!i llll'I?Ij I I II jlilll'li , i III IIjI jI Iiil ijljl?ilf I II 'I,,'!; ' i .'Illll,? I VIII:. '?I !ill, ICI , I (I .li. !I:.. [, I Ij II i ii, I IIII I IIII I I I I IIII at , I f jll;i I? . ,IIII I I II?.'II I'I IIII II ! I;II I?• I ' II•. •?i? I I•i; ???Ij'I I i I I'I ? i „ , , „ , I; „ i? „ „ , S "? Q I I VIII I ! I' '! I! I I? '???III'I IIII j' I'? I I Ilj?, ?) III III II Ii'II lil! (I; iI i III I'Ii'li',iiill IIIII?(I j;ll.lll j I II ! I i ,!I ::III;!! III I??I;.. II Ij I ,I , I I II II`j Ii I,, I ,?Ii?IIIIjI!Ijlj?li IIII I I' j,I I III :VIII I Ij?' _? i,, IIII illj l1 j IIII! I'lil II Ijll (i Il ll?llli I I ,I?III?II !i .I 1 ? I!i ? ? (IIII Ili ..!I I I 'III! ' ?I ? I I IIII ! . I IIII I I?iiil j I'' lillj III ' 'Il??li!II ! ,.lilt' I ? I!.?I',I, ;Ili I'I,:: I..?IIi ? ,I•;,i: l? I Ii.l 'i I I t;!! Id , „ „ „ „ „ „ „ „ „ „ „ , „ , „ „ „ „ „ „ Q? , 11 W " d , „ WI06 WI 5 101 ? '•'11/r 7-?• rN7N_G FAM. LIVING ?4 10? 102 1 ; A9 BATH 104 n 2xi ALL 101 U 11-10' 4'-T '-I' 4'4V 5'-0' V-7 I O L Rr GHiJTE l'-0' HIGH 5' x 12• sn _ E) e i'-10' _ WALL 2.3- r[ ?' it J DOW '2172T 11 P > F e 0 I Tnl , i- Z'1 " t*5_=:K7T_C_WE::N:: i 1a IR et 105 20 Mm. J r ? ? A6 > •, ? 6 WALL u 0 i I n All 4' GONG. SLAB vV ixi 10/10 HHM GARAGE LIVING RM. I ON 6-MIL POLY 105 100 VAPOR BARTER ' ON 6' GRANULAR ENTRY FILL. SLOPE FLOOR TO ON. DOOR (MAX 3_ DROP TOTAj _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ CLOSET 9 ? ? , 10244 ; i I I s. I ? . JT. ,? ? I Ar ? ?, . i ? ? p ? i, I . ? I cr ? ? v` I Y ? 10: 9 5'-0' OVERHEAD 2'-V d Q GARAGE DOOR ?' . I MAIN LEVEL PLAN m '?• ;?0 1 A2 5/1w-1'-0' 914.11 NET LIVING 10'-0• Al ADD.-1 1510.33 SF GR FT'PRINT ADD /1A NEW CONCRETE WALK !V ROOF OVERHANG ABOVE 05106194 LANDSCAPED RANTING I crypi AREA GRASS BITUMINOUS A10 • >r • 6926 CHICAGO AVE SOUTH 1-0' I 2-10' 'r-b•?1-0- A8 W204? w20s I I r ( M. BEDROOM i BEDROOM '? - 202 I 205 - 3 ? 3 i I I A9 s4V I Q I .?0? ? r 208 A6 13 - .h ? ? ? ? r 1eoD t Sr?LP •6 1/7 7-1 I i'??? ?? l SHELF 4 LAUNDRY CNJTE • - - - - - - - - - 'S'-x 12 d a L U 2048 I h }} 24' X S0• i DOw I 1. 5 Z ATTIC ACCESS I O 0 I t 0' h II II 12 _ GO D BEDROOM 200 ? O 20! BAT 201 '-6• 16'•T I A11 I SECOND LEVEL PLAN I A5 +?/16?1-m 114.52 SF A? ADD '1 04106114 ADD!2 05/06/14 AI0 • 6926 CHICAGO AVE. SOUTH 9l'-4• - - - - - - - - - - - - - ,-- -------- ----- , It 0 b' m' ' '• ' ' • t 2 b 6 I1 -b 2xb WgLI?-? - - - `S- - -? . _ - Ll L WASTE. LAUNDRY (ria) NO LAUNDRY SIDEWALL n L VENT GAS FINK r b'•10' ?('•?• WATER NTR ? I ? FL? R O DRAIN Z EFF RN Wu FURN GAS FIRED L RJRNACE i i i 1 Et 1. 8' I ? - J L -? ? I 1 Im IY UP h I STEP r - - - - - - - - - ? FTG. • m• Z'b• 4_C• 7 m' ~ I CRS '2 CRS I u i I I I WJGN A= OPNG 55 NIGH ACGE OPNG • t I I I I I I ? I I i All b, GARAGE SLAB ON G RADE ABOVE I I I I CRAWL SPACE I I I l ?. 4 CRS I ' CP7U I I r- 2 CRS B' Gh1U SEE I/AII / L - - - - - - - - - :J d? s' o Ib'-m' 7•5• I'-II' S'•m' se••r BASEMENT (FTC / FDN) PLAN AI 3/16'?I'-0' ADD!I 04/06/94 A L . 6926 CHICAGO AVE SOUTH . HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT.AUTHORITY HRA Letter No.41 Agenda May 16, 1994 Issue Statement: Authorization to issue completion certificates to Twin Cities Habitat for Humanity Inc. (TCHFH) for properties at 6225-14th and 6310-15th Avenues. Background: The HRA authorized development of the above referenced properties in 1993. The development agreements provide for the issuance of a certificate of completion when construction is completed. (A sample certificate is attached.) The homes have been completed and occupied. Staff is anticipating the builder will request the release of the liens plus completion certificates when the landscaping is installed by May 31, 1994. Recommended'Motion: Authorize the Chair and Executive Director to execute completion certificates in accordance with the attached resolution subject to visual verification by staff. Basis of Recommendation: 1. Construction has been completed and a certificate of . occupancy issued by the Inspection Division. Landscaping 'work-will-be completed shortly subject to acceptable weather. 2. The builder has performed in accordance with construction agreements and will seek the issuance of completion certificates and the release of performance liens in the following amounts: Builder Property Address Lien Amount TCHFH 6225-14th $20,000 6310-15th $20,000 Alternative Recommendation: Do not issue certificates of completion at this time. Discussion/Decision Mode: Under terms of the development agreements, the HRA may not unreasonably withhold the completion certificates. Res u ly submitted, Jame . Prosser Exec ve Director JDP:cak 0 HRA RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION RELATING TO THE ISSUANCE OF COMPLETION CERTIFICATES FOR PROPERTIES AT 6225-14TH AND 6310-15TH AVENUES WHEREAS, in 1993, the Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) entered into contracts with Twin Cities Habitat for Humanity Inc. for the construction of single family homes; and WHEREAS, the new home locations are as follows 6225-14th and 6310-15th Avenues; and WHEREAS, the construction agreements require the construction of homes and upon completion, the issuance of a Completion Certificate and the release of performance liens; and WHEREAS, staff will verify by visual inspection that construction is completed and that the performance liens security in the amount of $20,000 for each property will be released from Twin Cities Habitat for Humanity Inc. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Richfield, ..Minnesota that: 1. Upon verification of completion by staff, completion certificates shall be issued for 6225-14th and 6310- 15th Avenues. 2. The performance liens be released. Passed by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of Richfield this 16th day of May, 1994. Thomas E. Harms, Chair ATTEST: Vern Luettinger, Secretary • EXHIBIT A FORM OF CERTIFICATE OF COMPLETION By 0 The undersigned hereby certifies that has fully and completely complied with its obligations under Article IV of those documents entitled "Contract for Private Development", between the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Richfield, Minnesota and dated , filed as Document No. with respect to construction of the Improvements at , legally described as , in accordance with the approved construction plans and is released and forever discharged from its obligations to construct under such above-referenced Article. Dated: By THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE CITY OF RICHFIELD Its Chairperson Its Executive Director STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) SS COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of 19 , by and the Chairperson and Executive Director of The Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Richfield, a public body corporate and politic under the laws of the State of Minnesota on behalf of the public body corporate and politic. Notary Public This instrument was drafted by: Holmes & Graven, Chartered 470 Pillsbury Center Minneapolis, MN 55402 0 • HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY HRA Letter No. 4 0 Agenda May 16, 1994 Issue Statement: Status report on Community Apartment Program. Background: On August 16, 1994 the HRA selected Project For Pride In Living (PPL) and Affordable Suburban Housing (ASH) to implement the Community Apartment Program. Shortly after PPL/ASH initiated their work, the HRA requested that a status report be presented at the February meeting. The regular February meeting was not held and because of the press of CSM matters, the status report was not scheduled in March or presented in April. Ms. Laura Klein and Mr. Bill Schatzlein will present the report. The report will relate to the five program outcomes identified in the contract: OUTCOME ONE: A profile of the current population of apartment residents in Richfield will be developed that will aid in directing plans to achieve our goal (duplication of efforts will be avoided). OUTCOME TWO: An organization of apartment owners/managers will be established that will support efforts to maintain decent low- cost housing that is financially viable. OUTCOME THREE: A model for a multi-unit dwelling resident organization will be developed. OUTCOME FOUR: A directory of Richfield Human Services and Educational Opportunities will be developed that includes: a description of services/programs offered; eligible participants; location; hours; cost; and available transportation. To the extent possible, existing information will be utilized. OUTCOME FIVE: A Community Services Group will be formed to link the City of Richfield, apartment owners/managers association, human service organizations, educational institutions, and resident groups in order to relate networks for community building through communication, promote positive working relationships, improve the delivery of services to residents, and improve the livability of Richfield apartments. A determination will be made about which services/programs could be brought to housing sites or neighborhood locations. Recommended Motion: Accept and discuss the status report. 0 0 Basis of Recommendation: 1. The HRA initiated this program. 2. A status report was requested by the HRA. Alternative Recommendation: Delay presentation of report. Discussion/Decision Mode: The program is approximately three-quarters of the way through its first year. Respe f ly submitted, James Prosser Execu ve Director JDP:cak • 0