06-20-88 agendaRICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
HRA Letter No. 21
Agenda June 20, 1988
Issue Statement:
Authorization to proceed with a planning study, Penn Avenue and
Sixty-Sixth Street area (PASSS).
Background:
Staff is prepared to proceed with an in-house planning study for
the Penn Avenue/66th Street area. Attached is an eight phase
Scope of Work proposal which will take approximately ten months
to complete. Consultants will be used only on a limited specific
task basis: (1) site assembly cost data relating to relocating
and appraisals; and (2) a brainstorming and evaluation workshop.
Included with the Scope of Work is a resolution creating a 20
member advisory committee and its operating procedure. Members
would be solicited by mail from residents and businesses in an
area bounded by Russell and Newton Avenues and 62nd and 70th
Streets. An interested person would be requested to fill out an
application form for consideration. In addition, three city-wide
positions would be filled from recommendations by the City
Council, HRA and Chamber of Commerce. The selection procedure
would be initiated immediately and a list of proposed members and
a resolution presented to the HRA at the July or August meeting.
The expenditures and revenue budget provides for funding from two
separate sources. At the urging of the HRA, staff requested an
allocation of $10,000 from CDBG monies available to the city.
This was discussed with and approved by Hennepin County and the
City Council. The balance of the funds will be provided from the
HRA Capital Fund. It should be noted that the approved 1988
budget had allocated $74,000 for outside consultant assistance to
accomplish this study.
Recommendation:
Authorize staff to proceed with the study and the solicitation of
members for the advisory committee.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. This is a priority area for the HRA as evidenced by the
previous planning budget approval.
2. Some property owners have expressed an interest in
redevelopment.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. Delay action on this proposal.
2. Not undertake any planning activities.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
Because of interest by property
should be immediately initiated
which to proceed.
owners in redevelopment, a study
to provide a framework within
Respectfully submitted
James Prosser
City anager
JDP:sae
PLANNING STUDY
SCOPE OF MORK
PENN AVENUE AND SIXTY-SIXTH STREET AREA
Housing & Redevelopment Authority
June 20, 1988
-2-
SCOPE OF MORK
The Scope of Work outlined in this proposal is designed to
achieve the completion of a Market Analysis Study, a
Redevelopment Framework Plan, a Design Guideline Manual, and the
formulation of an Integrated Implementation Strategy. --
By incorporating both a Market Analysis and a detailed .context
for design in the Redevelopment Framework Plan, we wilt be placed
in a strengthened position to provide guidance for the
redevelopment of the Penn Avenue/66th study area. A detailed
design framework must be established in order to give a unifying
theme and provide a strong positive image for the study area.
The following task descriptions provide a phase by phase process
leading to the formulation of our Redevelopment Framework Plan
and Implementation Strategy.
I. ORIENTATION
This initial phase is intended to outline city goals
and objectives for the redevelopment framework of the study
area. .The primary tasks in this phase are as follows:
A. CONSOLIDATE TEAM EFFORT
Meeting of team representatives to establish a mutual
understanding of project goals and objectives. Establish
communication and coordination arrangements. Develop
realistic schedule and target dates for key events.
8. COMMUNITY ORIENTATION MEETING
Kickoff meeting with community representatives (AKA the
PASSS Committee) to introduce the study and for the
purposes of understanding issues and obtaining insight
on their attitudes and expectations. At this time we
may elect to hand out a brief questionnaire regarding
their attitudes and expectations for the PASSS area.
PHASE I PRODUCTS: 1) Statement of Team Goals ~ Objectives
2) Memo summarizing key points
of insight from team meeting and
community orientation meeting.
3) Project coordination strategy with
timeframe outlined.
-3-
II. INVENTORY AND ANALYSIS
This is the task of gathering and analyzing the necessary
information that will aid us in the preparation of the Market
Analysis (Phase III) and will be central to the formation of
our Redevelopment Framework Plan. The inventory ari-d analysis
phase of work breaks down into the following format.
A. pATA GATHERING & ANALYSIS '
1. Compile all existing information, previous studies,
plans, and other documentation into a comprehensive
data base.
2. Identification of planning issues, opportunities and
constraints e.g., traffic, special design
opportunities, etc. This tasks will involve the
on-site investigation of the study area, including
an inventory of existing commercial and residential
building stock, with the assessment of existing
land uses and zoning patterns; the identification
of physical design constraints and opportunities;
the identification of public facilities and services,.
and also the .collection of the basic background data
needed to identify regional influences. Also as a
part of this analysis, we will investigate the
surrounding neighborhood factors to the study area.
B. BASE MAP PREPARATION
For the purposes of presentation, a mylar base map will
be .prepared of the subject area.
C. PHYSICAL OPPORTUNITIES AND CONSTRAINTS ANALYSIS MAP
PREPARATION
We will prepare a physical opportunities and
constraints map based on our analysis in Task A which
may be used for presentation purposes.
D. PASSS COMMITTEE MEETING
Meeting with staff and PASSS Committee in order to
present opportunities and constraints, and review
their response to the questionnaire.
PHASE II PRODUCTS: 1) A mylar base map (e.g., 24" x 36")
2) A physical constraints and
opportunities analysis map '_
-4-
PHASE III MARKET ANALYSIS
As an integral part in determining a future redevelopment
framework for the study area, we will conduct a Market
Analysis which will include the following tasks.
A. COMMUNITY SETTING ANO AREA DEVELOPMENT
This tasks .will analyze the community setting, Brea
development and area circulation patterns, in conjunction
with Phase II, Inventory ~ Analysis. We will review
and analyze the area's existing population, commercial,
residential, and industrial characteristics as a
function of this analysis.
8. DETERMINATION OF TRADE AREA
A trade area for the study area will be determined
through analysis of development patterns, demographic &
economic patterns, and an evaluation of the physical
and locational characteristics of the community and
study area.
C. TRADE AREA DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE AND ECONOMTC
CHARACTERISTICS
A trade area profile will be compiled providing
population and household trends, employment trends,
and economic characteristics.
D. MARKET STRENGTH .ANALYSIS
A summary will be provided giving an overview of the
nature of the market for commercial, residential, and
industrial uses. This summary will provide us with
the general economic factors which may impact on
future redevelopment decisions for the PASSS area.
E. CONCLUSIONS AND. RECOMMENDATIONS
A general summary of findings and conclusions will be
provided, along with recommendations and a "where We
Go From Here" implementation strategy.
PHASE III PRODUCTS: 1) A market analysis providing
conclusions and recommendations
in order to direct the Redevelopment
Framework Plan and Implementation
Strategy.
-5-
PHASE IV. TAX INCREMENT ANALYSIS
This fourth phase will involve a number of tasks which
can be implemented concurrently with .Phases II and III.
This analysis will be useful in determining general land
uses and land use intensities on a parcel by parcel
basis which we may recommend in the PASSS area based on
the tax increment factor.
A. RECORDING DATA
Determine format for recording data.
B. IDENTIFY PARCELS
Identify parcels to be included in the analysis.
C. COLLECT TAX PARCEL VALUATION
Collect tax parcel valuation data, both current and
historical..
D. ALTERNATIVE SITES ,
Define alternative redevelopment sites.
E. SITE ASSEMBLY COSTS
Estimate site assembly costs.
F. TAX INCREMENT CASH FLOW
Determine tax increment cash flow needs.
G. INTENSITY LEVELS
Establish development intensity levels.
PHASE IV. PRODUCTS: 1) Memorandum summarizing Phase IV
findings.
-6-
PHASE V. PREPARATION OF REDEVELOPMENT FRAMEMORK -
ALTERNATIVE CONCEPT PLANS
In this fifth phase, several alternative land use
concepts will be prepared in response to our Phase
I, II, III and IV findings.
A. PRELIMINARY CONCEPT DESIGN
This series of alternative plans will be developed
in a context of providing general guidance for land
use, circulation patterns, and infrastructure needs.
Attention will also be given to peripheral uses
surrounding the study area in developing these
alternative concepts.
8. CONCEPT REVIEW WORKSHOP
During the course of the concept design stage, a
redevelopment strategy workshop with the staff
team (and any associated consultants) will be set
up to review findings of Phases I, IT, III and IV
brainstorm as to alternatives for a Redevelopment
Framework Plan.
C. PRELIMINARY CONCEPT PLAN PRESENTATION
A preliminary concept plan presentation will be
conducted in an informal setting with the PASSS
Committee in order to obtain input on a preferred
alternative and any plan refinements. Results of
the market and tax increment analysis will also be
presented.
PHASE V PRODUCTS: 1) Approximately 3 alternative
conceptual plans, which will be
rendered in the form of large scale
presentation graphics (e.g., 24x36)
PHASE VI - FINAL REDEVELOPMENT FRAMEMORK PLAN
Based on the selection of a preferred concept for the
study area, a refined Redevelopment Framework Plan will
be prepared.
A. FINAL PLAN PREPARATION
A refined plan will be prepared serving as a tool to
guide future redevelopment in the .study area. This
plan will be prepared in a large scale graphic format
(e.g., 24" x 36") for presentation purposes. -
-7-
6. DESIGN FRAMEWORK MANUAL
In order to provide guidance in developing a strong
positive image for the redevelopment or the study area,
a Design Framework Manual will be prepared in conjunction
with The Final Plan. This Framework Manual wil-1 _
illustrate and provide recommendations on design -
detailing for signage, landscaping, lighting, bLilding
materials, etc. for the study area. This Manua-l-will be
produced in order to be made available to the public
for redevelopment guidance.
PHASE VI PRODUCTS: 1) One Final Redevelopment Framework
~ea9•in24~~1Xr36~~~cale graphic format
2) A Design Framework Manual which may
be reproduced in an 8-1/2" x 11"
format.
PHASE VII - IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY
Relative to the findings of the previous six Phases,
a strategy for implementation of the Plan will be
developed.
A. IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY
A context for evaluating and attracting redevelopment
proposals for the study area will be developed, and
translated into a written policy plan for the use. of
city officials. In addition, the team will put
together an outlook for the timing and financing of
any public improvements which may be associated with
the redevelopment of the study area.
PHASE VII PRODUCTS: 1) A written Implementation Strategy
incorporating city policies, and
outlook for financing and timing
of improvements.
PHASE VIII - FINAL PLAN do IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY
PRESENTATION
A. Final Plan and Implementation Strategy presentation
to the PASSS Committee.
B. The. Final Plan and Design Framework Manual will be
presented, along with the Implementation Strategy,
to city officials for review.
-8-
-ti
x
l~
C
H
H
H
i
~HH
~~~
z~r
SKr
~ z
0
Z a+
ro
x
t~
C
H
H
1
H3
~ro
H trT1
~~
-t H
H
M
O
z
ro
x
t~
C
M
1
H
Z
r
b
r
2
b
t~
C
i
b ~
~~
~Z
y
C
l~
n
0
z
t~
ro
H
b ro b b
~ ~
~
~ '
~ ch ~
H N M H
C H H
~••~ ~ 1-
1 I '
1 Q
~
z H
>C ~ C C+7
x
~ z y
A H
O H
~
~ K o
~ z
~
z r
~-3 K ~
z v, r
~ K
K N
~ ~
M
m
b
x
c~
O
Z
O
z
x
Z
m
c
c
s7
N
m
0
-.~
z
0
0
T
A
t
D
2
T
m
3
D
D
S
D
m
r
~ m
T
//~ ~
V/ ~
r ~
r
m
-~
O
Z
uc~tar i
-9- For Discussion Only
RESOLUTION N0.
THE HOUSING ANO REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
IN AND FOR THE CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING A
PASSS ADVISORY COMMITTEE
MHEREAS, the Housing and Redevelopment Authority-in and for
the City of Richfield (HRA) has found that the formation of a new
land use plan and program for the development and redevelopment
of that area of the city referred to as the "Penn Avenue and
Sixty-Sixth Street Area" is necessary to promote the public
health, safety and general welfare of Richfield's citi2ens; and,
MHEREAS, the formation of a plan and program should involve
input from residents and business people; and,
MHEREAS, input is best provided by an organized structure,
hereinafter referred to as the "Committee."
NOM THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED
1. The Committee shall be advisory to the HRA to provide ~.
input to plans, proposals and concepts referred to it by
the HRA and staff.
2. Meetings shall be held at the call of the chairperson or
if not available the vice-chairperson.
3. Robert's Rules of Order shall be utili2ed in the conduct
of all meetings.
. 4. A quorum shall be required to conduct business and shall
constitute one member more th an fifty percent of the
total voting membership.
5. Recommendations, if any, may be made by the Committee on
the basis of a majority vote.
6. Minutes of the meetings shall be circulated to the
Planning Commission, HRA and City Council.
7. Members are to be diligent in attending meetings.
8. The School District, Planning Commission, HRA and City
Council may each appoint a no n-voting liaison member.
9. After April 30, 1989 the Committee shall dissolve unless
prior to that time, the HRA has determined by resolution
that it should continue.
10. Members on the Committee shall be those persons listed
on Attachment A.
-10-
11. The Planning Commission Chairperson is appointed
Chairperson and the position of Vice-Chairperson is to
be determined by the Committee.
12. The Department of Community Development shall provide
staff support to the Committee and be in attendance at
all meetings. __
1,3. The Executive Director is directed to take'the-
appropriate steps to effectuate this. resolution.
Adopted by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and
for the City of Richfield, Minnesota this _.___. day of ,
1988.
Thomas E. Harms, Chairman
ATTEST:
Joan Helmberger, Secretary
DATE:
HRA PASSS ADVISORY COMMITTEE APPLICATION FORM
The Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) is
seeking residents, business owners and property owners to serve
on a committee and work with city staff in preparing a long range
improvement plan for the PASSS area (see map on reverse-side of
this page). The majority of members will be people with
residential or business interests in the study area~or
immediately adjacent to it. It will probably take about 10
months to prepare a plan. There will be a meeting approximately
once every two months to attend as a .committee member. There may
be more applicants for the committee than positions to fill. To
assist the HRA in making committee member selections, it would be
helpful if you would provide the following information. Please
complete in black ink or typewriter.
NAME
fast First Middle
HOME AODRE55
If owner of a business indicate the following:
Name of Business
Address
Number of .years at this location years.
If owner of real estate which is rented/leased indicate the
following:
Address of Rented/Leased Property
Number of years property owned years.
I should be selected as a committee member because (attach no
more than .one additional page):
Other civic, professional and community activities in which I
have been involved:
Return to Office of Director of Community Development, 6700
Portland Avenue, Richfield, MN 55423 by
-~,z-
BUDGET
Planning Study
Penn Avenue and Sixty-Sixth Street
1988 1989
1050 Staff $33,660 $38,110
1100 Rents & Leases 200 200
(Advisory Committee Meetings)
1102 Word Processing Rental 250 970
1110 Advertising, Publishing & Printing 200 200
1130 Expert & Professional 6,750 1,500
(Planning workshop & graphic
reproduction)
1131 Legal Counsel 1,000 1,500
1132 Relocation Consultant 9,000 500
1139 Appraisal Consultant 750 -0-
1210 Travel & Subsistence 500 500
(Advisory Committee Meeting Materials)
1300 Office Supplies 500 500
1301 Copying Charges 750 750
(Duplication of Study Report)
1302 Postage 2,250 2,250
(Meeting Notices)
1360 General Supplies, includes
graphic material 2,000 500
Total $55,560 $48,010
Revenues
CDBG $10,000
HRA Capital Fund $45,310 $48,010
CITY OF RYCHFIELD, MINNESOTA
HRA Letter No. 20
Agenda June 20, 1988
Issue Statement:
Authorization to administer a Section 8 Existing Rent Assistance
Program independent from the Metropolitan Council HRA (Metro
HRA).
Background
Since 1975 the Richfield HRA has contracted with Metro HRA to
coadminister a rent assistance program. Approximately 375
resident households receive rent subsidies.
Richfield currently performs the following activities which
account for approximately 75 percent of the required program
tasks:
-take applications
-assist the applicant in locating Section 8 housing
-inspect dwelling units for suitability
-complete leasing and contracts for assistance
-review client eligibility annually and renew contracts
The following remaining tasks are performed by Metro HRA:
-secure administrative and rent subsidy funds from the
U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)
-implement regional administrative and marketing plans
-verify income of new participants
-make monthly rent subsidy payments to landlords
-maintain a regional waiting list of applicants
-monitor vendor activity (13 localities)
-pay vendors for administrative expenses according to a
rate prescribed by contract
The most recent contract with Metro HRA expired in April, 1987.
Several months of staff negotiation have not resolved what is
basically a financial issue. The Richfield HRA subsidized the
local administration of the program by $22,000 last year because
it is not being reimbursed for all expenses incurred. Also, more
local program control is sought because the program size and
continued growth demand more resources including office space,
staff time, and money.
Three courses of action are available:
1) Initiate an independent housing assistance program to
receive HUD funds directly.
2) Contract with Metro HRA.
3) Withdraw from administration of the program.
Recommended Motion:
Authorize the attached resolution which discontinues the Metro
HRA relationship and endorses the development of an independent
program.
Basis of Recommendation:
1) Metro HRA receives approximately $39.00 per unit per month
from HUD for all (Richfield and Metro) administration.
Metro HRA pays Richfield $12.00 per unit per month
and has offered $13.50 which is, in effect, 35 percent
of the revenues for 75 percent of the work.
2) It cost Richfield approximately $17.80 per unit per month
to administer the program in 1987. Because of the cost
versus reimbursement differential, Richfield spent
approximately $22,000 in 1987 from the HRA Capital Fund.
Since 1983, approximately $62,500 has been spent from
Richfield HRA mill levy or Capital Fund resources to cover
the difference between our cost and Metro reimbursement.
3) The Metropolitan Council makes no contribution to the
Metro HRA or Richfield HRA for Section 8 program
administration. Revenues to Metro HRA from HUD have been
sufficient to cover indirect Metropolitan Council
administrative activities outside the program and maintain a
$325,000 operating reserve. As a result, Richfield's local
contribution to expenses indirectly subsidizes the daily
administration of the Metropolitan Council.
4) In 1989, it is anticipated that HUD will increase the
amount available to Metro to cover administration. If this
increase occurs as planned, Richfield could receive up to
$14.90. This amount is still short of the amount needed to
be reimbursed for expenses.
5) Richfield has the largest vendor program in the Metro
system and has sufficient administrative experience in all
aspects of client work. A review of autonomous programs in
Bloomington, St. Louis Park, and Plymouth, have demonstrated
that independent suburban programs, all of which are
presently smaller than Richfield's, can be successfully
operated within the revenues available from HUD.
6) Outside help is available to assist staff in setting up
the initial program and receive training in two task areas
not previously performed: the processing and disbursement
of monthly subsidy payments to landlords and the supporting
accounting services that monitor and review the payment
process and subsequent reporting to HUD.
7) HUD has been supportive of Richfield seeking independence.
Although new units are not available to allocate to
Richfield at this time, HUD has stated they are willing to
help Richfield develop an independent program.
8) The administrative responsibility and overall budget,
including rent subsidies, will increase in size, but will be
offset by the availability of sufficient revenues from HUD.
9) Richfield legal counsel has determined that:
a) The Richfield HRA and City Council may rescind the 1975
resolution authorizing the cooperative effort with Metro
HRA
b) Metro HRA is prohibited from operating a Section 8
program within Richfield without City Council
authorization.
Alternative Recommendation:
1) Do not proceed with an independent program because:
-A long term cooperative effort will be discontinued,
-The time required to develop agreements with HUD and the
Metropolitan Council and subsequent start up costs of an
independent program, although researched, are estimates
and estimates cannot be guaranteed. These estimates are
based on experience of other communities.
-Metro HRA will no longer "shelter" Richfield from
program and revenue changes proposed and implemented from
HUD. This would include the ability to compete for and
receive more housing units.
-Since Metro HRA secured units on Richfield's behalf but
in Metro's name, they may be reluctant or may refuse to
release them to Richfield. HUD may be reluctant to
require Metro to do so. If this would occur Metro would
not be able to place new subsidized renters within
Richfield.
-Negotiations with HUD and Metro may allow Richfield an
independent program at a different, perhaps lesser amount of
administrative revenues. This would make a break even
situation more difficult, but possible.
2) Execute the approved contract with Metro HRA at $13.50.
-This action will cost Richfield approximately $20,000 to
$30,000 annually from Richfield HRA revenues.
-The Metro HRA program appears likely to grow further,
exceeding staff capacity and requiring more office space,
without more revenues except those of the Richfield HRA.
3) Release all program responsibility to Metro HRA. However,
this effectively precludes local control, oversight, and the
ability to resolve local issues and concerns that may arise.
Decision Mode:
Following HRA consideration and authorization of a course of
action, the matter will be referred to the City Council for their
consideration on June 27th. Actions in support of the stated
recommendation will likely require submitting applications for
fund allocations from HUD and negotiating agreements with HUD and
the Metropolitan Council to provide program funds directly to
Richfield. Administrative details of the independent program
would be brought to the HRA when prepared at a later date.
Respectf ly submitted
James D Prosser
City Hager
JDP:eja
HRA Resolution No.
RESOLUTION RESCINDING RESOLUTION N0. h
DATED FEBRUARY 24, 1975
WHEREAS, on February 24, 1975, the Housing and Redevelopment
Authority in and for the City of Richfield (Richfield HRA) passed
Resolution No. 4 authorizing the Metropolitan Council to apply
for federal funds to implement a program of rental assistance for
lower income families and elderly in the City of Richfield; and
WHEREAS, under Minn. Stat. 473.195 and 473.199, the approval
of the Richfield City Council is necessary for the Metropolitan
Council to operate a rental assistance program within the City of
Richfield; and
WHEREAS, on February 24, 1975, the City of Richfield passed
Resolution No. 5323 authorizing the Metropolitan Council to apply
for federal funds to implement a program of rental assistance for
lower income families and elderly in the City of Richfield; and
WHEREAS, on June 4, 1980, a contract was entered into
between the Metropolitan Council and the Richfield HRA regarding
operation of the rental assistance program; and
WHEREAS, the above contract between the Richfield HRA and
the Metropolitan Council was. amended on January 1,1983, and has
since lapsed on April 15, 1987; and
WHEREAS, the above parties have been unable to renegotiate
the contract to provide adequate compensation to the Richfield
HRA for its administrative services provided on behalf of the
Metropolitan Council; and
WHEREAS, the Richfield HRA has the desire and capability to
contract directly with the United States Department of Housing
and Urban Development to continue to provide such rental
assistance in the City of Richfield.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Housing and
Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Richfield as
follows:
1. That Resolution No. 4 passed by Richfield HRA on
February 24, 1975, is rescinded effective 90 days from
the date the City Council takes a similar action and
written notice of that action is sent to the
Metropolitan Council.
2. That the City Council is requested to consider, from
and after 90 days from the date of their action and
written notice, that the authorization previously granted
by the City of Richfield to the Metropolitan Council to
operate a program of rental assistance is withdrawn.
3. That the Richfield HRA endorses the development by the
Richfield HRA of a rental assistance program
independent of the Metropolitan Council.
4. Nothing herein shall be construed as prohibiting the
Richfield HRA from recovering monies owing by the
Metropolitan Council under Section 4.A(3) of the
contract amended on January 1, 1983.
5. That the Executive Director is hereby authorized
and directed to refer this matter to the City Council and
send immediate written notice of the results to the
Metropolitan Council provided the Richfield HRA and City
Council rescinds previous agreements.
Passed by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for
the City of Richfield this 20th day of June, 1988.
Thomas E. Harms, Chairperson
ATTEST:
Joan Helmberger, Secretary
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
HRA LETTER N0. 19
June 20, 1988 Agenda
Issue Statement:
Authorization to reduce amount of a Rehabilitation Deferred Loan
Repayment Agreement.
Backgraund•
In 1984, a homeowner at 7221 Aldrich Avenue received a deferred
loan for home improvements. Among the improvements made was the
installation of a new roof.
Recently, HRD staff was informed by the homeowner that the roof
had been leaking for sometime. Subsequent inspections identified
some troublesome areas in the original installation. The
homeowner requested additional assistance to make necessary
repairs.
Generally, repairs for problems of this nature are covered under
a five year warranty on workmanship provided by the contractor.
However, the company who installed the roof has since gone out of
business. Thus, no warranty exists to cover the repair.
In similar instances, additional program funds in the form of
emergency loans, have been utilized to make repairs. However,
due to an increase in income, the homeowner is no longer eligible
to receive additional funding. As the roof repairs are necessary
and should be completed as soon as possible to avoid further
water damage, the homeowner has initiated repairs using personal
funds.
Although additional funding cannot be provided to the homeowner,
it is recommended that the amount of the Deferred Loan Repayment
Agreement be reduced by the cost of repairs. The cost of the
original roof was $2416.
At the request of HRD staff, two independent contractors
inspected the roof and confirmed the problems described by the
homeowner. Bids submitted by the contractors for roof repair
were $2100 and $1870. As both contractor bids were equivalent in
content, the amount of the lowest bid, $1870, would be deducted
from the total amount of the Repayment Agreement. This would
reduce the repayment from $8250 to $6380. The homeowner is
presently improving the roof structure and replacing all the
roofing material at a cost of $4,300.
An affirmative decision by the HRA reduces the amount of CDBG
funds that will be returned to Hennepin County when the deferred
loan is paid at a future time. Hennepin County indicates this is
a Richfield HRA decision and they will be satisfied with any
reasonable outcome.
Recommendation:
Authorize the attached resolution which reduces the amount of the
Deferred Loan Repayment Agreement for the property at 7221
Aldrich from $8250 to $6380.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. The roof provided through the Deferred Loan Program in 1984
leaked and resulted in water damage.
2. No enforceable warranty exists to make the necessary repairs.
3. An increase in the homeowners income has made the homeowner
ineligible for further rehabilitation assistance.
4. The homeowner is satisfied with the solution as presented.
Alternate Recommendation:
Provide no compensation to homeowner. The homeowner would remain
responsible for the repayment of $2416 associated with the
original roof installation. In addition, the homeowner is
incurring an expenditure in excess of the $1870 repair amount
from personal savings to improve the faulty roof.
Decision Mode:
If acceptable to the HRA, the amount of the Repayment Agreement
will be reduced and the agreement filed with the property title
at Hennepin County.
Respectfully submitted
Jame D. Prosser
City Manager
JDP:eja
HRA RESOLUTION
RESOLUTION TO REDUCE DEFERRED LOAN REPAYMENT AGREEMENT
WHEREAS,
a Richfield H
WHEREAS,
$8250; and
WHEREAS,
allocated for
WHEREAS,
damage; and
Aldrich Avenue South received
Deferred Loan in 1984; and
was executed in the amount of
in the amount of $2416 was
new roof; and
resulted in leakage and water
the homeowner at 7221
ousing Rehabilitation
a repayment agreement
a portion of the loan
the installation of a
the roof installation
WHEREAS, the cost of repairs was estimated to be $1870; and
WHEREAS, no enforceable warranty exists to lower the cost of
or assist in making repairs.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Housing and
Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Richfield,
Minnesota:
That the Chairperson and Executive Director are authorized
to execute a new Repayment Agreement for property at 7221 Aldrich
Avenue South, which reduces the amount of the deferred loan by
$1870 from $8250 to $6380.
Passed by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for
the City of Richfield, this 20th day of June, 1988.
ATTEST:
Thomas E. Harms, Chairperson
Joan Helmberger, Secretary