Loading...
03-18-85 agendaHOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Office of Executive Director HRA Letter No. 14 Agenda March 18,.1985 Housing and: Redevelopment Authority Commissioners 'City of Richfield Subject:. Site Plan and Design Concepts for Housing at 66th Street/Rae Drive Dear Commissioners: This letter discusses site and design concepts that have ...been developed by Mr. Dan Feidt, an architect with the firm of Val. Michelson and Associates, in collaboration with staff and the three households adjacent to the HRA owned: properties at the intersectipn of 6b h Street-and Rae Drive,: Mr. Feidt will be available at the. meeting to-discuss site plan.. concepts. The neighbors, Mr .. and Mrs, James Howard.,. 915 Rae Drive; Mr. and Mrs. Edward Burkhardt, 921 Rae Drive; and Mr. Robert Sjoquist, 1001 Rae Dri.ve,. have also .been invited to the March 18th meeting. Theedesgn concepts° area contained in a document known as a- des`gn guide. Conceptual design requirements such as privacy, affardability, unit-design, function, and. unit massing, can only be addressed by a developer creating: a final development plan.. A design guide "'guide ", the creation of that development plan. .The:-attached° guide does resolve several major. issues identified by neighbors and. staff :.. neighbor concerns, the number of additional units to be built, unit density, zoning,. bedroom unit. mix.,: building- height, site drainage, unit price range, affordability, impact~of duplex housing on existing single family property values, and. marketing. The guide also establishes minimum requirements for energy efficiency. Two si a concept-plans are part of the guide too. The conclusions drawn in the guide and discussed throughout this letter are being presented as recommendations to the HRA.. Lf the information contained in this letter and the design guide is acceptable to-the HRA, substantially as presented, staff believes:.. -a quality development can be obtained; -developers can be competitively selected; -neighbors will be assured that what is being. represented. willoccur; -the housing will be affordable and energy efficient; -the neighborhood will be stablized with ownership housing. -2- What. began in August, 1983,: as a rezoning request at 910 W. 66th Street, has provided the HRA an opportunity to stablze a transitional single family neighborhood adjacent- to the LHN Project, One house,: at q10 W. 66th Street,. had been-vacated because of improvements to 66th Street. Anew twinhome now exists as 920/924 West 66th Street on this site (9201924). Other absentee owned. housing with deferred maintenance and substandard conditions has been purchased by the HRA. The property .purchased. ,.. at 907/903 Rae Drive, and g10 and 1016 West 66th Street, will not become a strip of commercial property as the previous owners had contemplated. (see attached map). The information which follows discusses the i sues which need to be considered as part of the development process.. Neighborhood Concerns The neighbors are long time residents. They are uneasy with the planning process andproposed-development because of their experiences. Projects such as the-LHN, CP705 (66th Street and' other rights of way-within the-LHN which were improvedJ, the Godfather Block, Coach Homes .development, and the twin. home a 920'/924' have kept their neighborhood in turmoil for many years. They now want assurance.-that the HRA. is sensitive to their concerns and that they will not have. to "watch dog" this new deve opment. They don*t want eight additional unitstoday to-become:: 12 or 15 units next month. They don't want: another -'~wal1"'. There is a-_nwalY,'__of _apartments to the north,.. a "wall"' of-townhouse to the west,.. and the backside of 920/924- to the: south. Density Five different-site plan concepts ranging from. 8 to 12 additonal_units were reviewed by Mr. Feidt, the neighbors and staff. Staff and Mr.•~Fsidt feel that 8 units is the most. ap'proprate,, considering: the-size of the site., its location, adjoining existing development, and economies of scale related to development and financing. Further, $- units reduces the potential of creating additional "walls". Four units on 66th Street- and.. 4 units on Rae Drive offer better siting opportunities than 3, 5 or 6 units at each location.. For-the neighbors, 8 additional units is at the upper end of their limit of acceptance. The present single. family zoning allows the 8 additional units by special use permit. The Planning Commission. has found that the construction of two-family dwellings would be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The neighbors have discussed the construction of 3 to 4 units at 1016 West 66th Street, and 4 unit-s at-901/03 Rae Drive and 910 W. 66th St. They are strongly opposed to 5 or b additional units both _3_ west and east of q2 /924. '.The proposed density of 8 to q units/acre, ($ additional units), is mid-way between the 5 and 6 untslacre cammoniy found in single family neighborhoods .and the 15 unitslaere at. Coach Homes. - Zoning. The: site is zoned single family. However, its location. and lot-dimensions allow-for a slightly higher density than-single family detached housing without affecting the zoning (2 family dwellings can be constructed with-the issuance. of special use permits). This is an important p-Dint: since the neighbors strongly oppose>the construction of apartments in thus area. However,, because of the complexity of the home ownership .rights. being created by the development,. it can no longer be represented that 'rrezo~ing" will not be required. Rezoning. is -required. Staff has recently discovered that if the HRA proceeds in platting the additional living u-nits and common.. lots as it has fore.920t924, a total of 5 common lots and 10 living.. uni lots will. be-created. As a result, legal counsel. has suggested that individual p operty rights and- the rights of a> homeowners a soeation might conflict; lenders and purchasers might reject: the townhouse documents and purchase agreements... However, because q20/g24:has not yet been. sold ,.. there is time. to rectify° this:- situation. The most-appropriate arrangements, a single common lot. and 10 living unit: lots (8 additional units plus 920/924), would: be created if'a planned' unit deve:Iopment-(PUD) site: arrangement were authorized-by the HRA, the Planning Commission,. and Ci y Council.. In rezoning to a PUD, .there are two alternatives. One opton-would be a Planned. S"ingTe Family Residential District. (PR) because duplex type. housing is allowed in a single family-zone: through a special use permit.. The second. option would be a Planned Multiple. Residence District (PMR). This alter native could be operative because the. proposed.. development. is several units of housing on a common lot. Because"there are alternatives, staff_ would like to be sensitive ~to the concern of the neighbors and recommend the site be designated as the. PUD zoning district which both supports the spirit and intent of the zoning ordinance and provides assurance to adjacent property owners that the development which occurs will. be at the density and design as previously presented to them. Legal counsel can support this - recommendation. It would be desirable to explore the- possibility of the appropriate designation with the-Planning: Commission and the City Council. The neighbors are uneasy about rezoning, but could be assured. that the single family nature of the district would restrict the use to duplex type housing as proposed. -~- Staff would like to proce:ed_to replat 920/924 such that one common lflt WDUld include: the entire development site. The. Planning.. Commission would consider this.replattng in April,: the City Council in May, and'-both groups would be asked to support,. in p incpal, the single family PUD concept. The PUD would not. actually be initiated until after .the developer was selected and:.. final. plans are. drafted and. reviewed by the HRA. This would occur during.. the Fall, 1985. Bedroom Unit Mix The design guide indicates that there should: be 4 - 2 bedroom and 4 - 3 bedroom units. Thus, there-would. be same units suitable for growing families with the 3 bedroom units. However,. if a1T units provided three bedrooms, the number of people on the site would be too high. So two bedroom units are desirable and there is a continuing need for two bedroom units.. Finally, a mix of two and- three bedroom units provides better de ign flexibility. However, a deve oper would be given the optiom to increase the number of 2 bedroom: units by reducing the number-of 3 bedroom unit if during the mark:e ing period this need would. be identified: Two bedroom: units would: be marketed to 2 to 4 person. families. Three bedroom units would be marketed to 3 to- 6 member families.., Our experience with the two 3 bedroom-units at 920/924 Cprospective purchasers are-a family of three and a family offour).. and: the experience of other communities indicates that most purchasers will be two,.. three, and- four member families. Building Height By referring to the topographic map in the design guide,.. it- is,apparent that the property at 1016 W. 66th Street (1016) is the highest na ural point in the neighborhood. The neighbors have-asked that the hill be removed. and the grade reduced to equal the height of the new duplex at 920/924... The difference in grade is approximately 6 feet.. However, except for the steep grade at the southeast corner of 1016, the rest of the 1016. site. is primarily flat (one to two foot grade differential). The: topographic map indicates the grade differential. which makes 1016 so high occurs primarily on neighboring property with a drop in elevation of 1 to 6 feet. Staff does not believe that the height of the new buildings will exceed the 22 to 24 foot height. that exists with the present structures.. However, the final development design plan from a developer could vary the building lines and massing to help minimize this problem while also being sensitive to neighbor concerns. Site clearance, the fil-ling of old basements, and regrading to remove the retaining. wall at 920/924 will reduce the height somewhat. -5- Drainage With a portion of the development on higher- ground, the concernnei~hbors have expressed. that water runoff problems will. be created where none.-presently exist. The: design guide indicates that storm water runoff w-.ill be directed away from the new structures and neighboring property. Gr-ading..wll provide drainage primarily to 6bth Street. The. building code,, the PUD zoning plan, and the lender also have this drainage requirement.. Price Range and. Affordability of Units, and Impact of New Housing on Existing Values, and Marketing CDBG funds were utilized to acquire the property. Thus.,. the units must be affordable to moderate income families, i.e. families with incomes in the range of $20.,000 to $'30,000. (The median family income: in Richfield currently is $26,300). The guidelines establish a re ationship between family size and.. income. The higher the income, the ],anger the family need to be in order°to qualify as a moderate income family. Marketing to only larger families with higher incomes would result in a development wi h a denser .population. The. $ additional units will.. sell in the $:b0,000 to $70,000 range. Existing housing to the north has an Estmaged. Market Value-of $60,000 to $94,000. Coach. Homes- has units valued:: at $6O,D00 to-$81,000. . -Since financing of the home purchases is of primary. importance to th prospective buyer and the HRA, a review of the financial considerations-for this project follows. Providing affordable housing for modeste income families requires securing, tax exempt mortgage financing at a below market. intere t rate, utilizing tax: increment to reduce the mortgagee interest rate further, utilizing a "2nd.-lien concept." to defer a portion of'the housing price,. and, requesting a tax exempt state on the properties until development occurs... With all: of these tools, families with a $20,000 to $30,OOD income can anticipate a $500 to $600 monthly housing payment (prnci.pal, interest, taxes, insurance, (.PITI).. An additional $50 to $100 monthly owners- association fee could be anticipated. The fee is utilized as a building maintenance reserve „ for yard maintenance, snow removal etc. The. purchasing families may pay approximately 30 percent of their income -for housing (a- guideline related to using CDBG funds to assembly the site). Thus, with a $20,000 income the PITI could be $500.. Wi h a $30,0.00 income the PITI would be $750. The mortgage financing will likely come from MHFA. A 9 to 10 percent interest rate is anticipated to be available if the HRA requests at least $500,000 in mortgage money. Eight to nine mortgages would utilize the $500,00.0... This is the minimum -6- amount that .can be requested of MHFA. The-monthly PITI on a $60•,000 mortgage at 9'to 10 percent would range from $580. to $625. For the housing to be affordable by the families with the lower incomes,. additional assistance would be needed. Annual tax increment revenves'whch would be generated by this-new housing are estimated to be in the range of $4,500-in ~ - 198fi to $8',600 in 200?. Thin tax.. increment could-be utilized to further reduce the interest rate. Tax increment can be uti ized: for interest. reduction-only if a program is established by - December 31. ,, 1985. The PITT on eight $60,000. mortgages utilizing $.4,500 for interest reduction would be $"535. to $580 with a 9%' and: 10~ mortgage rate respectively. Because the tax .increment wouldnTt be available the firsttwo-years, the developer could be requested to provide the initial contributions.. The tax increment assistance could be provided on a sliding scale. The lower income families receiving greater assistance. and the higher income families receiving lesser assistance. Another source of assistance could. be the deferral of part. of the initial purchase price. This-has been. done with the second: lien concept on the Vo-Tech project homes.. However, the:.. developer would... have to be properly compensated. for development. .costs, pass the anticipated HRA writedown in land- cost through:. to the buyer-, and al ow the HRA to hold the lien.,that prevents a speculative sale. The lustrations used above with. a $60,000 mortgage-assumes that some of the price has been deferred. Finally,. obtaining tax exempt status-for the properties would reduce the HRA holding costs (approximately $6-,000) the • developers initial holding costs,.and-ensures that purchasers can assume the benefits of initially paying property taxes based- on a. tax- exempt mate rather than a non-homestead tax rate. This can: provide a $100/month house payment savings in the first year of ownership and. would be important if the developer was not able. to contribute toward. interest reduction during the interim=period before tax increment revenues were available. Because this concept was not used on the 920/924 West 66th Street project, the purchasers will owe $1,200 more in taxes in 19$6 because: the property now has a non-homestead status. The neighbors on Rae Drive expressed concern about the impact of this development on their homes. The impact of duplex. or townhouse type housing on .the value of single family homes is discussed in the attached letter to the neighbors. The .studies indicate. that duplex or townhouse type housing does not have a negative-impact on single-family homes. - In addition to price, there are other considerations that make affordable housing marketable. The Minneapolis/St. Paul Family Housing Program, University of Minnesota School. of Architecture and Landscape Architecture, and the Center .for Urban and: Regional- Affairs (CUBA)-.have conducted. a joint study... .~_.. They analyzed 1,800 condominium, townhouse, and single family units that have-been developed. in Minneapolis and. St. Paul since the formation of the Minneapolis/St. Paul Housing Fund in 1981. A summary conclusion of that study is included in the design guide as "attachment one". Many of these concepts are represented in the dsign guide site and bui ding considerations. It i.s recommended that.: 1) the design guide be approved which calls for the _ development of eight additional units of housing, four on the western portion of the site and four on the eastern portion of the site.. These. unites would. be priced in the $b-0,:000 to $70,000 range.. 2:) replatting proceed designating a living unit lot at 920 and 924 West. 66th Street and a common lot which includes 901 and 903-Rae Drive and 910 and 1016 West 66th Street._ 3) the support of"the 'Planning Commission and the City Council be sought for a PR zoning district to help alleviate the concerns of the neighbors. 4) an application be prepared- and submitted to-MHFA for tax exempt: mortgage money when funds become available. 5) a consul ant be retained. at a cost not. to exceed $5,000 to prepare documentation fore the establishment of a tax increment. interest reduction project and submit the document to the-HRA for its review.. The cost would'be charged to the. New Home Program-. 6) tax exempt status be sought for g0l and 903 Rae Drive, and 91'O and 1016 West 66th Street until redevelopment occurs, and, •. 7) proposals based on the design guide and other considerations in this letter be.solicited from developers who have experience in developing quality,. affordable housing in the metropolitan area and that the names of the developers to be contacted be provided to-:.the HRA and the results of the solicitation and an evaluation be presented to the HRA at the appropriate time such that construction may be initiated during 1985. Respectfully submitted, ohn G. rtwr ght Executive Dir ctor 92~-23 ~~~ i %' r~ ~' °~ ,• r: .. ;~ ,; ;" i -_i :, .~ ; %~, ~.. ,\ 7~U ~ ~'~'~ -- - a ~ ? ~ iii r k" "^. ~ y` ". `. ~~ ~ } cs ~ s.~a ~ . t..3 DEVELOPMENT GUIDE ~HOUSIN~C AT 66TH STREETAND RAE DRIVE TTY. OF RICHFIELD HOUSIN{~ AND REDEVELOPI'~ENT AI~THORITY APRIL, 1985 66TH STREET AND RAE DRIVE DEVELOPMENT .AREA PREPARED BY VAL MICHELSON $~ ASSOCIATES, -INC. ARCHITECTS & PLANNERS GOALS I. To provide eight new owner-occupied duplex type townhouses affordable for f first-time home buyers. 2. To provide an attractive,.energy-efficient, noise attenuated living:. environment for the new residents. 3. To provide a development of the land that will be compatible with the surrounding-land uses. EXISTING CONDiT1ONS SITE DESCRIPTIONS 66th Street and Rae Drive Development Area. consists of an irregularly shaped parcel of land approximately 55,0©Os.f. in size. There. i-s approxi- mately 392 feet of frontage on 66th street and 292 feet on Rae flrive. A - newly constructed double house occupies the central portion of the site. LOCATION The 66th Street and Rae Drive Development Area is located in .the north central section of the city Richfield, a first ring suburb south of Minneapolis. The site is three blocks east of Highway 35W on 66th Street a major arterial roadway. CONTEXT The'site is located between .Wood Lake and Richfield Lake. It is bounded on the north by single family houses, the west by townhouses, the south by single family .and duplexes and commercial on the east. .The site has bins service on 66th Street, is close to shopping, within the Richfield School District and is conveniently located near I-35W and the Crosstown Highway. TOPOGRAPHY The 66th Street and Rae Drive Development area is located on a gentle knoll that slopes down to the south and east. VEGETATION A number of mature maple, oak, cottonwood and elm trees exist throughout the site and a lilac hedge is located on the western edge of the parcel. UTILITIES 66th Street contains of Rae Drive contains and electric service. EASEMENT storm, sanitary and water service. The north. end water service and the site in accessible to phone There is a 20 foot highway easement at-the south edge of the property for street work completed in 1983. LEGAL DESCRIPTION Lots 1, 6, 7, and S Rae Addition, according to.the plat thereof on file or of record in the office of the Registrar of Titles in and for said County, and all that part of Section 28, Township 28, Range 24 in the County of Hennepin and State of Minnesota, described as follows, to-wit: Beginning at a point marked "Judicial Landmark" on the east and west quarter section line of said section distant 410 feet west measured along said line from the east quarter corner of said section 28; thence South at right angles to said east and west quarter section line 74.6 feet to a point on the original Military Reservation line, which point is 83.5 feet SEIy measured along said reservation line from its inter- section with the east and west quarter section line, of said Section said point being marked by a monument. marked "Judicial Landmark" thence South 71°i0' West 115.44 feet to a point in the traveled road ; thence North 71°32' West 405.09 feet to point of beginning of the tract hereby to be described; thence continuing North 71°32' West a distance of 140.53 feet; thence North 13° East a distance of 165.9 feet; thence South. 83°50' east 140.9 feet; thence South 13° West a distance of 196.1 feet to point of beginning. The site is being replated as a common lot subdivision to accommodate duplex type townhouses.. ZONING The site is presently zoned single family residential. Duplex housing is permited in a single family district by special use permit,. and the Planning Commission has determined that duplex housing is consistant with the com- prehensive plan for the area. The Richfield HRA has received preliminary assurances that the Planning Commission and City Council-will support a Planned Unit Development Concept for the development area when final plans are completed. This assurance is based on the development consisting of not more than 8 duplex type units. DESIGN GUIDELINE Proposals submitted for development of the 66th Street and Rae. Drive site should strive to meet the development objectives listed below. .The Guidelines were created to insure that the housing built on the site responds to the .concerns of the surrounding neighborhood and the Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority. GENERAL 1. Type of Ownership All units shall be owner occupied. 2. Housing Type All units shall be Duplex type. 3. Density The maximum allowable number of units will be 4 on both the .portion of the site west of the existing duplex, and east of the existing .duplex. The total number of units shall not exceed 8. 4. Price Range of Units The housing shall be marketed between $60,000 and $70,000 a unit. SITE STANDARDS 1. The development shall provide a transition between the single family housing on the north and busy 66th Street on the south. 2. The development shall be effectively screened from the single family houses utilizing a variety of materials and techniques. 3. Vehicular access to the western portion of the development and to the existing duplex shall be from 66th Street. Vehicular access to the. eastern portion of the development shall be from Rae Drive at least 100 feet from the 66th Street intersection. Curb cuts shall be minimized. 4. A tot lot accessible to all families in the development shall be provided within the eastern portion of the site. 5. The grounds shall be landscaped to be aesthetically pleasing in all seasons. Land forms and. plant materials shall be used to define and buffer the site. 6. Site lighting shall be used to promote the safety and security of the guests and residents of the development. 7. .Power and telephone-lines are to be buried. 8. -Utility meters shall be screened from both 66th Street and from Rae_ Drive. 9. Site drainage is a significant concern of the adjacent neighbors. Drainage should be accommodated on the site so that water is directed away from the new units and the neighboring property. Excess water sh-all be directed to 66th Street. 10. Existing trees shall be preserved whenever possible. Care should be taken to preserve existing root systems. BUILDING STANDARDS 1. The development shall have a mix of two and three bedroom units, but not more than 4 three bedroom units. 2. All units shall have parking that accommodates three cars: one enclosed garage space, one in the unit maneuvering space, and one visitor's parking space nearby. 3. Sound control between units is of the utmost importance for family living. Double wall construction shall. be used to minimize the transfer of noise between. units. 4. Unit. height and mass are significant concern of the adjacent neighbors. The scale of the buildings shall be compatible with the scale of the surrounding neighborhood. The use of a variety•of techniques. including stepping the rear building line and orienting the roof slopes to mini- mize their impact on the neighboring homes to the north shall be expected. 5. Exterior materials should be low maintenance and compatible with the surrounding .homes. 6. Units should be contemporary in appearance and the exteriors should be varied but related to each other. 7. Each unit shall have a semi-private outdoor space; deck patio, or porch. 8. The-use of amenities which make the townhomes"more livable is en- couraged. These might include. bay windows, increased floor area, sky lights, oak trim, or basements.. SOUND STANDARDS Sound Control To facilitate the reduction of interior sound levels produced by aircraft and traffic noise, the following is required: Windows shall have a minimum sound transmission coefficient (STC) of 30. Windows which meet this requirement usually employ double glazing and a removable storm panel. Sliding glass and hinged patio doors shall .have a minimum sound transmission coefficient (STC) of 30. All ventilation ducts, except range hoods, connecting interior space to outdoors shall. be provided with a bend such that no direct line of sight exists from exterior to interior through the vent. Manufacturers shall submit STC levels determined by testing according to ASTM E90-75 or equivalent. ENERGY STANDARDS General Requirements Construction methods and materials must meet the requirements outlined in this section.- These requirements are derived in part from the MHFA Prescriptive .Energy Requirements for Builders as cited for the 1983 Single Family Mortgage Loan Program; participants are encouraged to obtain and read this booklet. As an .alternative to meeting the prescriptive standards for specific insulation values of building components, a thermal integrity factor (T.I.F.) calculation may be performed according to the method described in the MHFA Energy Efficient Housing Demonstration Program workbook. The maximum allowable T.I.F. is 4. If the glass area exceeds 12°0 of the floor area, the T.I.F. calculation must be performed. Insulation Requirements The following overall minimum insulation values of building envelope components must be met: Ceilings: R40 Walls: R22 Foundation Walls From top of rim joist to frost line: R15 From frost line to footings:. R5 Slab on grade. Edge and 2 foot wide perimeter strip: R15 Slab interior: R5 floors above unheated spaces: R22 Joints in heating ducts passing through unheated spaces shall be fully insulated and sealed (use "hardcast" or silicone sealant, not duct tape) The joint between the bottom of all gypsum board walls and floors .(including interior and party walls.) shall be caulked (before the base molding is installed). Caulking shall be applied to cracks around all pipes and conduits entering and leaving exterior walls and ceiling as well as where they pass. through interior wal s to attics and basements. A fireproof seal shall be installed around. furnace, boiler and water heat vents and around chimneys where they pass through w~l s and floors, Blower-Door Testing To verify that tight construction is achieved, each dwelling unit will be blower-door tested, by an independent contractor, immediately after drywall installation. the building contractor shall perform additions l caulking or other procedures as required to attain 3 air changes per hour at 50 pascals of negative pressure.. A description of test methods and a list of local contractors is available from the city. The preceeding pressurization standard is commonly achieved in new resi- dential construction and should be easily attained if the procedures in the infiltration control section are performed in a professional manner. Indoor Air Quality and Condensation Control To reduce formaldehyde concentrations in indoor air, particle board shall not be used for subflooring. One kitchen or bathroom exhaust fan shall be equipped with an automatic dehumidistat control, wired in parallel with the conventional on/off switch and accessible to the homeowner. If the dehumidistat controls a bathroom exhaust fan, the bathroom door shall be undercut 1/2 inch. Equipment In general, the equipment provided shall. be of energy efficient design. The following is required: Furnaces or boilers shall achieve a minimum annual fuel utilization efficiency (AFUE) of 80% and shall be controlled by a clock thermostat. Electrical resistance heat sha 11 not be the primary heating system. .Where a forced-air gas system is used for heating, the furnace shal l be of the induced-draft or sealed-combustion type. Blown type insulation shall be weight, not depth, installed and shall measure everywhere within 10% of the average. depth.. Attic access doors must be fully insulated and weatherstripped. Windows and Doors Windows and doors shall be energy conserving in design and shall be tightly installed with good seals.- The following requirements apply: Wihdows shall be installed so that they remain tight whether locked or unlocked and shall have a maximum air leakage rate of .30 cfm per lineal foot of crack. Windows shall have a maximum U-value of .35. Exterior doors shall be weatherstripped on all 4 edges and shall have a maximum air leakage rate of .50 cfm per lineal foot of crack. Exterior. doors shall be protected by storm doors or vestibules. Exterior doors shall have a maximum U-value of .39. Infiltration Control In order to minimize drafts.,. heat .leaks and airborne sound, the following requirements steall also be met: A plastic vapor barrier, ,6 mils or thicker, must be installed oh the warm side of insulation in walls, ceilings and under concrete slabs. Seams must be lapped at least 16" and sealed with acoustical sealant. The membrane must not be punctured during construction.. Exterior caulk shall be fully compatible with adjoining materials and sha11 have a minimum nominal lifetime of ten years under con- ditions of use. Gaps around window and door frames shall be sealed and insulated. Sill. sealer shall be used below all exterior sill plates. Faceplates for electrical outlets and switches on exterior walls must be equipped with gaskets. Holes where wiring and plumbing penetrate upper and lower wall plates shall be caulked (for both exterior and interior partitions). Ducts partially formed by joist spaces shall not be used. Ductwork should not be placed in exterior walls or attics but where such location is unavoidable, ducts must be fully insulated and sealed (use °hardcast" or silicone sealant, not duct tape). .Kitchen ranges shall use electricity rather than natural gas. Hot water heaters shall be rated and labeled to meet Ashrae Standard 90A-1980. Plumbing Plumbing should not be placed in exterior walls but where such location is unavoidable, the pipes must be protected with a minimum of R15 insula- tion {such as 2 inch thick foil-faced isocyanurate). Flow restrictors shall be installed on each shower-head. Fireplaces Where installed, fireplaces must meet the. following requirements.. Both the fireplace and the chase shall be fully insulated. A tight damper shall be provided for the fresh air intake and the flue. Tightly-fitting g lass doors shall be installed. Heat recirculating features are required. Energy-Related. Design Recommendations The following .recommendations reflect preferences in some additional areas of building design relating to energy conservation. These are offered as suggestions rather than requirements.- The heating system should be sized to closely match design heating loads; avoid excessive oversizing. Locate glazing 'toward the south and away from the north. To reduce. summer cooling requirements, windows, sky lights and sliding glass doors facing toward the east and west should be minimized and/or should be protected from summer sun by plantings or by other shading methods. i.arge areas of glass facing south should be shaded from the summer sun. Roof overhangs are a common method. Design .for cross-ventilation within living areas. Minimize light fixtures and convenience outlets in upper level ceilings and exterior walls. Minimize internal wiring in exterior walls. Electrical .outlets and other penetrations in exterior walls and ceilings should be taped or sealed to the vapor barrier. Limit the use of particleboard to exterior application unless the particleboard is effectively sealed. An infiltration barrier should be installed under the exterior siding to further reduce infiltration. Building paper such as spun bonded polyolefin sheeting should. be used. Certif icate of Compliance The following is a fascimile of the certificate of compliance that the builder will be required to sign at the completion of construction. (Form to be similar to MHFA certificate and provided by the.: by the City of Richfield ~ HRA) FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS The use of CDBG funds require that units be marketed to low and moderate income persons having incomes that are no more than 80 percent of .the median income for the metropolitan area. To be eligible family incomes must not exceed the following: Family Size 2 3 4 5 6 Maximum Income Leve l .$21,000 $23,600 $26,250 $27,900 $29,550 Below market rate mortgages will be secured by the Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority for all units. A tax increment district will be created to further write down mortgage interest rates. ATTACHMENT ONE Summary of Conclusions "Preference in Dwelling Desigr~' (an evaluation of the Minneapolis/St. Paul Family Housing Program, Phase 1) Buyers purchase primarily because of attractive financing. Units sold from X59,000 to $69,000 in Minneapolis/St. Paul. Purchasers were first time .home buyers with $24,000 average annual income (same market anticipated at 66th Street and Rae Drive. Project) Buyers are looking for a home that is close to job, highway access, bus routes, shopping, and schools. Town .home buyers see first purchase as a place they will stay at least five years. Duplex housing is emerging as a popular home ownership option. Townhouse projects as a building type, vary their visual image more and can be more sympathetic to their neighbors in massing, roof pitch, entry, and window placement than other types of housing. Most important factors in selecting a unit are energy efficiency, maintenance ease, and housing size. Architectural quality and unit diversity more important on a site with environmental constraints - traffic, noise. Privacy between units is an important design concern. Garages are important and large open parking areas. should be minimized. Kitchen spaces should be large, large enough to allow a small eating area. Two bedroom and three bedroom units were found to be similar in unit size. Three bedroom units should be large enough so that kitchen and bedroom spaces are not compromised. LOCATIO~1 66TH STREET AND RAE DRIVE DEVELOPMENT AREA CITY OF R1CHFfELD A +~ O to to .1 C~ d v~ .1 Of d .~ (11 A .1 W V N V _1 d O V O 41 {0 CD T v O1 O1 Of rr Of A 01 W 01 N -T s ~ ~ a n a a p ~ 7 s T i i i a 2 o A 10 fA N (n t/1 N lA N N y N to N N H N N to = N g A--i -~ -t ~ -t :-t 1 ;~ -~ -a -~ -~ :i -~ 1 ~ ~ -~ r~.< (~ ^ XERXES AVf. • WASMBURN O VINCENT ~ ~ UPTON "'~ ~ THOMAS m ~ SHERIDAN m RUSSELL ~ ~ . QUEEN PENN AVE. ® ~ OLIVER NEWTON MORGAN rn ~ LOGAN m KNOX Z JAMES m ~ IRVING 0 HUMBOLDT (TI ~ GIRARD ~ m FREMONT (~ EMERSON DUP.ONT COLFA) m BRYANI ~ ALDRICF A D LYNDALE AVE. GARFIELD D HARRIET GRAND PLEASANT PILLSBURY WENTWORT BLAISDEL • NICOLLET AVE Is STEVENS 2nd 3rd CLINTON 4th 5th PORTLAND AVE. OAKLAND PARK COLUMBUS CHICAGO ELLIOT IOth II ih 12 ih 13 ih 14 ih 15 th BLOOMINGTON 16th 17 th 18th CEDAR AVE. LONGFELLOW 0 0 N O 2 m z ~J m ..., z rn+ ~ r.lr "I o 'TJ ~ C ~.+ O Z ~ ~I ~r Z Z Q O~~ ~~~~ ~_~~ _~ ~~~ 0~7 I~~~ ~~~~~~ - ~~~~~ % ~~~~~~ • ~~~~ a ~ AKE _ cunpE DRIVE ~ ~~ {SW r ~~ •!,~•!'-`~; XERXES AYE. ~II ---~lr WASHBURN L---J ` -- ----~ V I N C E N T ~~~- UPTON ~i --' --- THOMAS --- SHERtDAN RUSSELL UEEN ~ ~ ENN AVE. r,~ LIVER C m~0 NEWTON MORGAN C ~I~ ; LOGAN n D`:~ O KNOX C -II~ • ~ JAMES CQIOC ~ IRVING ~~~ o HUMBOLOT . Z GIRARD FREMONT EMERSON r;:%•••••• DUPONT ;~:~':;:}'{;: • •••• COL FA X ~;a:%~~~• BRYANT ALDRICH I LYNDALE AVE. ^ GARFIELD ^~ HARRIET GRAND a -PLEASANT ~~ PILLSBURY ~~~ ~ WENTWORTH BLAISDELL NICOLLET AVE. ::'y:{{. -, 1st ~~ STEVENS 2nd ~~ 3rd CLINTON 1 ~ ~ 4th 5th o ~ PORTLAND AVE. ~ i T - ~ ''- {~~ OAKLAND •;%};•;•;';';'f•~ •'; •' PAR K ~;:•:•:•:;:;:•:•:,{•:;:•:•: COLUMBUS =_ ,,: ~i,:;:;:;: ~;••r;~;:;:;:;::: CH 1 C AGO ~ •Q•• 'r,: o.::• ••~' f:::~::::::.::: ::..... ..f ff ::•. = m ~~•~ II th Q (n ~~~ 12 th ~ D, 13 ih n ~~~i 14th ~~~I 15th Bl00MINGTON ~ D O { •:•:•:;:.: ~ L~ %v'%'%'%%%%~ 16 1 h •••;:•:•:•:•::•:•:.~ 17 t h f%:%'•'' f '~ ••••••• •~ 18 t h CEDAR AVE. LONGFELLOW 1~~ 19th ~(~--'~ 20th. ~~ 21 st r-~ 2 2 n d STANDISH --- 23 rd N 7 n /_~~ ~~-V ~, ~ ~.\~/ ` / \ a `~ Q e I ~ ~.-. r.., , ~ ~ t k ~~ x P J ~% ~ ti ~ ~` ~ Q ~ rt W ~~ ~~ ~~~ ~~ ~ it -~ ~~ , ~,~ ~ ~~ ,n 1 r~,~j '~ , -.:1 ~ a -r1a c,{-,a~11~Nr1+~• _, ~~, Z J-; 1-`~ ~ I i.. ..y 1 x. \ I f - i. 1_ O. ~ ~~~. i r ,~ d 1 J ~ ~~~ ~a~ ( r ~ , 1 I ~,- O I Ix ~ ,/ ~ ~ 01 ~ ~ ; ~,~ / ~~+? ._~ V i ~~ J ~ _ ~ ~~ - .E~ '2~ / -~ e. ~ ~ / ~ ~ ~ as ' I i~ _~:°= _0111 '~~ ~ O ~ W `~ 'g Wis.- a~.~i:~- v c-ro"q^~t1Y~ "_ ~ ~e ;a: •Ps~~x: z t aj' zp ~` 3 ~ ~4 s, - :3'' - k ~ W g[~~~li z' u M1 Y « _ - e u S~ ... pg$ZI .__i _ 11 ~ ~ S S ; ~7~7'7'f .~~.a i•~~~° <oN~~~ 'cJO GCa'Llr „ ~~~ Y Si i `o s ^, v i _ 4ry X9 QE ~ 3~ _ 'S"aid: Y~ ~~' (,~ i3 ......, -~vu 0 z ^~ V ~. Z 0 U C~ Z Cn X W i- !SJ LL! F^ 1- ~D CO H w Q W Q Z W a. 0 J W W W Q z Q W 3niao 3da 0 o , i ~ i o co u~ ~ ~" ~ ~ /l ~ `/ ~ ~ . \\ ~ ~ w ,w z ~ ' ~ ' ~ W Q w ~ ~ ~ Q ~ Z ~~ W ' Q W ~ I I ~ -- W ~~ cooo ~ ~ co I W ~ ~ ~ W ~ Q V fJ9 , ° ~ W G*~ Ch Z z W ^~ --- ~ ~ ~, ~ ~ o 0 z }- Y' ^ Y ~ a--~W4. N i i Q L~ W ~ U' ta.. ~ Q..... p I I W W Q Z Z W 1, '- ~ W Q~ C~ ..+ ..~ p~ Q Q ~ Y Y ~ W ~ T ~~ Z W Q Q Z ~ ..L. Q Q J Oda J , ~ . - ...~-~- • ..~-= M-f- Q J W W Q +--~'' ~ U W¢O z--E-i- CD 3 W 1~- W t!Y N. ~ ~ 3A1l~0 3ba ~~ - - i i i I ~ • ~ ~ 1 o ~1 (~} O ° tL{Tm'-_IL ~ 1 F" 1~ \ t 'rt W V W Z O i-- N x ' = W ~ Q w ~ ~ ~ }~-~ ~ ~ Z ~_ W _ ---.. _ - O I J W • , ~ -- w ei'~ aoo~ ~ O !~ ~ W N t ~ w ~ v Q N ~ ~ `~-~ W z z ~ ~ --~ -• ' ` F- Y ^ Y Q Z Q !- Cn Q - - - - ,z' ~ d....W4. i ~ 'Q '~- ~ N l.L W ~ U' L~ Ll! O c~~-...0 --_- E- a LLJ Z W QZZW T' ... CG W QQE "YYf W W ~ ~CL~~ ~ o `' _ cll N F- U F- F- H- 3 W ~ Zy W u'1 to ~ CO CD March 12, 1-985 N Cf' ® ~ i~+ 0 ~~ ~ , ^ .' ~ ~ s.. Q ~' ^ !® O Q CO Mrs. Edward Durkhardt 921 Rae Drive Richfield, U~v 5523 Subject: u~npact of Duplex and TowThome ;sousing cn 'rousing Values Dear ~!rs. Burkhardt, ~t the February 28, 1885 neighborhood meeting at s~ ich we discussed the adjacent housing development, you expressed. concern that. duplex or to'frnhome housing Types will decrease housing values. I have included information with this litter that supports the comments I made on the 28th The construction of duplex or t~wnhczne housir:g next to single family residential arias does not negatively affect property values and may actually increase property values for neighboring single family l.'nits. The enc hsed .information was provided by the Nousirg. Division Cf the Metropolitar: Council. i"ae Lietrapolitan Council received this information fr~sn t.^.e City of Cocn Rapids, CCC:Cerni ng COOn Rapids hOUSing i and , ~i sCla].r and Calder Corporation COCCernng C"iOUSing development in ~lOOmingtOn. T'ne conclusion of the Coon .Rapids studies completed in ig7q, ~ q80, ~ q$ ~ , acid . q82, is t'rat duplex type housing uses "do not affect the abutting property values". 111e ~!".rO1SClar Arid Calder Corporation studies, 'N~':ict1 evaluated Bloomington subsidized Section $ rental apartments and towrh^mes for families and multi-Unit market rate rental apartment housing for families, respectively, ind].CateS :nCreaSeS.n VaIUeS of properties adjjaCent to these various uses. There are similar studi?S, or.e for the .City of Savage and ore for N10UrC5 V"iew, 'dith S1m].lar CCt":C1USiOnS. ~Ut the repCrtS are tco lengthy to i:^.ciuce ''^ere . telephone: 869-7521 (612) an equal opportunity employer -2- I .have briefly evaluated the one to three bedroczn Coach Home townhome development because of 'its proximity to your home. Housing at Coach Homes is valued at $60,000 (for 1 bedroom units) to ~$1,OGC (for ? bedroom units). Since construction was canpieted in 1881, these properties have increased i to 6 percent in Estimated ;Market Value according to determinations of the Hennepin County Assessor. Gne and three bedroan units increased the most within this range,- two. bedroom .values increased the least. During the same period (1981 to 1984), the three single family homes at 915, 921, and 100 1 Rae Drive increased 10 to 15 percent in Estimated Market Value according to determinations of the ~:enrepin County Assessor . A negative impact cannot be substantiated based on these values. It should be noted, if you wish to refer to "this information in future years, that in 1g85, the County. Assessor on a city-wide basis is noting no growth or a slight decrease in estimated market values for single family residential property. This trend is a reflection of the present real estate market (referred to as a "buyers market"), rather than an indication of the negative impact resulting from duplexes and townhomes. You may also be interested to know that when the Assessor evaluates the property at g15, 921 and 100i Rae Drive, a 5d adjustment. is made in the land value because of the apartments to the north. The value of the- structure is not affected . No similar downward adjustment is made because of the townhouses (Coach Homes) located to the west. If you have any questions or wish to discuss- this- further, please contact me at 869-7521. Sincerel .a` ~~.u`•. ,• ~a r7 Eruce Nordqu~ ~~ Housing Specialist ~, Housing ~ Redeve~. ~ .ent Division cc: Robert Sjoquist, 1001 Rae Drive James & Karen Howard, 9i5 Rae Drive city of .:oon rapids August 9, 1983 Guy Peterson Metro Council 300: Metro Square Bldg. 7th and Robert St. Paul, Mn. 55101 Dear Guy; Per your request, I have enclosed the results of a special sales study that the Coon Rapids Assessor's Office has performed for the past four years.. The enclosed pages are from: an informational booklet prepared for our Local Board of Review. I hope this is the information you were looking for.. If I can. be of any further assistance, please feel free to call Denny Montague, Senior Appraiser-City of Coon Rapids 75.5-2880 .ext. 247. Sincerely, -~,.'`~ Denny Montague Senior Appraiser DM/ah 1313 Coon Rapids Boulevard, Coon Rapids, Minnesota 55433 (612) 755-2880 .., :.. 19?g SPECIAL SAIL STI~DIL:S Many times in tltc n,zst_tl~c__s.L-atc~ment has_.t3een.=andc~ by v:•Irious people that "Zf that double bungalow or that. apart~t~nt or that lionle occupation is - allowed it wi_11 have a detrimental_.effect on my property value.", More: often than not this type of statement is made by the abutL•i.ng property owner or the owner across the_.str.eet...and .the ,m:nediatc~ assumption is that the new proposed use will cause his property ~=al•;~e to decline. In order to accurately determine. if the above statements i~~ere Crue,~ouroffice this year again conducted some rather cozpreaunsive sales studies to cilec?c the ~- market beh.ivor. In or.c{ar. to a:rr.ive .t ,:, m+_'aT11:ly;.CU co,~~lusion several guidelines *~ere ;et as fcli;,ws: 1, All the sales that occurred in 1977 and 1978 were used, 2. All sales were c~:npar~d to our 197y estim~:ted market values. 3. Abu~•tin; pro{erties nor double bun~alo~as, duplexes and homy ocec:patiorls are defined r:s ti~ose properties along side, across. the st=cot anc? C2?:ir:d the subi?ct pracerty while in the apart- menu study ail properties t•~ithiu JJJ feet of the subject wcr~ used. 4. The abutting property sales a=:d t{:eir ratios to our values Wert COmpc3l'CCi :. () Simil3 bUt ^.Oi1-Ubutting property sales and their ratios to our values. 5. AlI comparables ~7ere to properties c~ithin the immediate area. On the follokji_ng page is a sullurary of the co:npr21-.cas~ive study outlining the numba-r of subject :+roperties in each study, the run~bFr or abuttingr properties, the r~umuer of sales. i:: 19:77 anc I97S and tT:e total sales, th+~ coIbined ratio of sales to our value end the corresponding uomoir:ed ratios of sales of our values of the surroundil~; area. Ttihi.le indi~`Cdual rreas :nay sho.a a fluctuation of ratios es;~ecially when only one or two sai~s are involved the cc:.:posi_te overall difference is so small that +_i:e only conclusion t:I4t again can be reached is that the presencr_ of t'aese uses do not affect the abutting property values ~s of this.- date.. ~ -~- _ . Page d4 c~ w o ~+ A cn . OG¢ m ir, O H ~ W o0 n .p Q~ Q~ ,C1 a A ra O cn A v] W H r-1 r1 ~ - CA Q~ ~ 1'1 O LL S O~ O~ - H O V H w R.. x cn W H H W O ~ ~p N O f3+ v.~ H O R+ N W H QQ H A n ~' W G'~ W O ,-a :+~ O C!J N ~ M .-1 ~ CY.. H P,+ W H n H Q n ~ W O *~ N M . ~+ ~ ~ o z w v~ ~o ca w a~ s:, z ~-+ ~ OwH c~ H ~ ~o E O C O ~ ~ M N N ~ N ~ ~' W H A O [c7 H h O i c. ,t ch ~ ~.:. N cJ ~~ O~E ' y ... ~ ., 0 3.1 W r3 VJ ~ y y d G 3 » ~ y ~ O ~ U G=. N r-+ ..a U U G >C ~ ~ ~ O v ~ .:d L W ~ 7 ~ ~~ N P., n. ca J r ~ ~ ~ x Page 45 i i ~9sa SPECIAL SALES STUDIES Many ti>rnes in the past the statement has been made by various people that "If that double bungalow or that apartment or that Koine occupation is allowed it will have a detrimental effect on my property value," More often than not this. type of statement is made by tl?c abutting property aFmer or. the owner across the street and the immediate assumption is that the neca proposed use will cause his property value ro decline, In order to accurately determine if the above statements were true our office this year again conducted some rather comprehensive sales studies to check t,;he market behavior. In order to arrive at a meaningful conclusion several guidelines caere set as follows: 1. A11 the sales that' occurred in 197$ and 1979 were Wised, 2, All sales were compared to our 1980 estimated market valur_s, 3. Abutting praperties for double bungalows, duplexes and .home occupations are defined as Chase properties along side, across the street and behind the subject property while itl ti'ie mart- meat study all properties within 350 feet of the si.bject caere used. 4. The abutting property sales and their ratios to cur values were compared to similar but non-abutting proper..*.y .sales a.nd their ratios to our values, 5. All cor..parables were to properties within the immediate area. On .the follc~aing page is a summary of the comprehensive study outlin~n~ the number of subject properties in each-study, the number. of abutting properties, the number of sales in 1978 and 1979 and the total s.:~les, the combined ratio of sales to our value and the .corresponding combined ratios of saps. of our values of the surrounding area, t•]hen first looking at the comparison of the ratios in the home occupation category, it wouid appear that- the properties immediately adjacent to or across from are selling at a loc•~er value than those in the surrounding area. However, the sold properties used ne:ct to the home ..occupations are heavy on 1978 sales which would make the ratio higher. tv'hen the carne number of sales for each year are taken or when the 1978 soles are adjusted for value increases, the ratios between the adjacent sold properties and' the surrounding areas are within one percent, a very tolerable range. tJhle individual areas may show a fluctuation of ratios especially when only a few sa3.es are involved. the composite overall difference is se sriaL1 that the only conclusion that can be reached is that the presence of these uses do'not affect the abutting property values as of this date. Page 43 . ~ '" o ~ + ' ~ H W ~ ~ ~ a 6 ~ ~ ~ A a cn aoc, H Lta ~`+ O'~ N ~ O W rn ~ p U O O .-~ V H ~ ¢a a w ~HA} o a o ' ~ c o ~ H o cr., x a~ rn H t~ G~ A ~ cV M ~p ~ cV M i,7 O v~ GC, N W W ~ H i`r ~ ~ ~ '-a N O a+ c~: z p H x w v~ p c~ w o v O t-; ~ ` H ~ .-~ p ~ 7 A O W ~ a W H A W O W r -r O p H p M z. ~, ~, ~, a a .,~ W a~ U ~ 3 u ~ ~' ~ C u w ai 5 U O ~ ,a ro c. Q ~ ~ ~ q ~ ~ ~ x Page 49 ~:.} 1 SPECIAL SALES STUDIES ~s l Many times in the past the statement has been made by various people that "If that double bungalow or that apartment or that home occupation is allowed it will have a detrimental effect on my property value." More often than not this type of statement is made by the abutting property owner or the owner across the street and the immediate assumption is .that the .new proposed use will cause his property value to decline. In order to accurately determine if the above statements were true our office again this .year conducted some rather comprehensive sales studies t'o check .the market behavior. In order to arrive at a meaningful conclusion several guidelines were set as follows: 1. All the sales that occurred in 1979 and 1980 were used. Z. A11 sales were compared to our 1981 estimated market values. 3. Abutting properties for double bungalows, duplexes and home occupations are defined as those properties along side, across the street and behind the subject property while in the apart went study all properties within 350 feet of the subject were i used. 4. The abutting property sales and their ratios to our values were compared. to similar but non-abutting property sales and their ratios to our values. 5. All camparables were to properties within the immediate area. On the following page is a summary of the comprehensive study outlining the number of subject properties in each study, the number of abutting properties, the number of sales in 1979 and 1980 and the total sales, the combined ratio of sales to. our value and the corresponding combined ratios of sales of our values of the surrounding area. While. individual areas may show a fluctuation of ratios especially when only a few sales are involved the. composite overall difference is so small that the only conclusion that can be reached is that the presence__°of these uses do not affect. the abutting property values as of this date. Page 47 ~~~ 0 O H A v~ E+ O w ~ ~ a~+ a ~ ~ ~ A O W ~~ 11 ~ z H O O O ~ ~ U H ~ ~ a W H e-~ A E-~ O W O c0 H ~ cn e+ ~c ~ w a w H Q H A c0 ca.' ...7 . ~T wOr-+ o"' z ~ N ~ F-i W V] W H p~ H A t`~ W O .~-+ N N R~ cA O ~ ~sS N a m c~ w o O H H N [[ ~~ E-+ W O • oaa ~- ,; o z~ ~ ~ w H A W V W O~.IA ' ~ N ' a N ~ O -+ ~ E ~ z cn v~ w G'1 <C ~ of 77 C7 ~ .u m ~ O X ~ ca ~ a v .A i j ~ A A H 6 O O O M r-r N N m a ,~ L C3. 7 U O 01 O x Page 48 jgz SPECIAL SALES .STUDIES Many times in the past the statement has been made by various people that "If that double bungalow or that apartment or that home occupation is allowed it will have a detrimental effect on my property value." More often than not this type of statement is made by the abutting property owner or the owner across the street and the immediate assumption is that the new proposed use will cause his property value to decline. In order to accurately determine if the above statements. were true our office again this year conducted some rather comprehensive sales studies to check the market behavior. In order to arrive at a meaningful conclusion several guidelines were set as follows: 1. All the sales that occurred in 1980 and 1981 were used. 2. A1I sales were compared to our 1982 estimated market values. 3. Abutting properties for double bungalows,. duplexes and home occupations are defined as those properties along side, across the street and behind the subject property while in the apart- ment study all properties within 350 feet of the subject were used.. 4, The abutting property sales and their ratios to our values were compared to similar but non-abutting property sales and their ratios to our values, S. All comparables were to properties within the immediate area. On the following page is a summary of the comprehensive study outlining the number. of subject properties in each study, the number of abutting properties, the number of sales in 1980 and 1981 and the total sales, the combined ratio of sales to our value and the corresponding combined ratios of sales of .our values of the surrounding area. While individual areas may show a fluctuation of ratios especially when only _ a few sales are involved the composite overall difference is so small that the only conclusion that can be reached is that the presence of these uses ~~ __._-_.,.~. ~,..r .. do aot. affect the abut~ing~~~roperty values. as of this. date. Page 48 . }f I •_ I ~ Gs. Q h-1 a m oz~ ~ ~ ° ~ o ; a aow c~ v~ r1 Z [-+ o O o~ ' ~ ~ pp ~ U H N a H z a 0 p ~ o N Q v~ W H ~ E-~ G1 0~ ~ ~ rn W ~ .-r Cn '-~ N ~ z N ^~ .-+ a '"'' v~ w a S O °i ~ ~ co o"' z a. ~, -.--.. ~ ~.. FH Q H t.y ,'~.. ~ ¢ x a ~ Q o ~ N ~ ~ 2 V] U y t * m V ~y ~ 3 u o L t'r y 0 '-d ~ C ~ O ;~ X r i v " ~ .G CO i! ' R. H n. o ~ a p ~ ~ a A ~ c Page 49 x September 15, 1980 Ms. Nancy Reeves Housing ,Division lietropolitan Council 300 rletro Square Building 7th Street and Robert Street St. Paul, i~uV 55101 Dear Nancy: Enclosed is a copy of some of the data on property values that I gathered, as we dis- cussed. Sincerely, Barbara P. Loving BOISCLAIR CORPORATION BPL:amk enc. SUITE 350 • 2925 DEAN PARKWAY • MfNNEAPOLIS, MN. 554.16 • PHONE: (612? 926-1631 DEVELOPING Q1IAUTY INVESTMENTS !x REAL ESTATE AFFECT ON NEIGHBORING PfiOPERTY VALUES OF SECTION ~8 ~ MULTI-FA2'ILY HOUSING .~, The Bloomington City Assessor .provided us with the following data, The average increase in value in Bloomington during 1979 was 12.57.. A. BoiscLair Corporation owns a 49. unit family section 8 townhouse development at 105th-106th FZhode Island Avenue South, 1. There were the following single family home resales adjacent to the Boisclair development. These homes were built in 1978. -- 10504 Quebec Ave. So. - $73,800 new home price - $$3,000 April, 1979 resale price -- 7409 West 104th Street - $,59,400 new home price - $72,750 June, 1979 resale price - 7401 West 104th Street `_ - $62,400. new home price - $b8,000 December, 1978 resale price Z. Directly across the street to the south of the Boisclair development is a 163 unit townhouse development named Woodstock. Woodstock experienced 18 resales during 1979 or an Il% sales ratio.. (A 57o sales ratio makes a valid sample acceptable as evidence in a court of law.) The ' average increase in value within this sample during 1979 is 22% based on these 18 resales. B. The Boisciar Corporation also developed a 45 unit Section 8 assisted apartment building at 99th & Penn Ave. S, The City Assessor stated that sales along Penn Ave. S. near the site ,during 1979 indicate a 1570 increase in value that year, higher again than the average increase of 12~% throughout the Bloomington community . 2. The Sold 2~iarket Report of the Greater Minneapolis Board of Realtors for October 1979 indicates the sales experience noted below in New Hope.. The Bosclair Corporation owns and manages a Section 8 assisted development at Wisconsin Ave. & Bass Lake-Road, -- 5431 Virginig Ave.. N. - 1 block from Sec. 8 development $78/sq. ft. sales. price $49,900 sale, 640 sq. ft. home -- 10/4/79 -- 5324 Quebec Ave. N. - b blocks from site $60/sq. ft. sales price $62,900 sale, 1040 sq. ft. home -- 10/4/79 __ 5949 Cavell Ave. N. - over 1 mile from. site $bOjsq. ft. sales price $58,500 sale, 980 sq. ft. home -- 10/4179 This data indicates a higher per square foot sales price for the home nearest the Section 8 subsidized development. 3. A 100 visit fully Section 8 assisted apartment and townhouse de- velopment was constructed: in 1978 on a site on Louisiana Ave. in St. Louis Park. Adjacent to that site there is currently under 'construction a 108 unit luxury condominium. That development,. Rustic Oaks, has experienced a sales pace of over 9 condominiums per month at prices 'among the highest in the suburban metropolitan area. They have increased sales prices several times as indicated . in the attached excerpts from a market study prepared by Development Concept Corporation. 4. A 90 unit Section 8 assisted development was constructed in 1978 on York Ave. in Edina at 75th-76th St. The Minneapolis Sald Market Report for October,-1979 indicates the following sales experience: -- 7516 Xerxes Ave. S. (adjacent to site) $60/sq. ft., $62.,500 sales price 1044 sq. ft. -- 10/18/79 __ 7509 Thomas Ave.. S. (4 blocks from site) 110pssq.fft. $56~10/31/79s price -- 7000 Oliver Ave. 50. (over 1 mile from site) 1134ssq.fft. ~66~Q0%2179es price These sales indicate a higher sales price per square foot for the home nearest the Section 8 development site. 5. Attached is ;a ,study- of-sales experience of single family homes adjacent to multiple farm-13' dwellings as compared to single family homes adjacent only to other single family homes.. The study was conducted by the- Calder Corporation in Bloomington and indicates increases in value. of properties adjacent to-multiple-are equal to the increases in value of~-properties~in strictly single family areas for the 1960-1g7~0'~'perod. , PREPARED BY BOISCLAIR CORPORATION FEBRUARY 12, 1980 TABLE 10 STUDY AREA CONDOMINIUM MARKET DATA - Total Units New or Market Number of Remaining Conversion. Initiafiion Year Project Units August,. 1979 Minnetonka ' Greenbrier C 1976 420 30 St. Alban's Mi11 N 1978 135 95 Seven Oaks C 1979 60 9 John Gc1e's Condominiums N not started 72 ~ Shady Oak Road Condominiums N .not started 36 N.A. Minnetonka Totals New Projects 243 lb7 Conversion Projects 480 39 St. Louis Park Lynwood Condominiums C 1973 11 0 Greensboro C 1974 140 0 Westwood Villa C 1976 b6 ~ Wynmoor C N 1978 1978 56 250 0 100 Twin Fountains N 1979 108 34 Rustic Oaks Cedar Tra i Is C i 979 280 30 St. Louis Park Totals New Projects 358 134 Conversion Projects 553 30 Bloomington Woodstock. C 1973 182 0 Lochmoor 1 N 1974 98 0 Girard Park N 1975 132 0 Lochmoor I1 ~ N 1978 48 0 Fountain Lake C 1978 120 0 Old Shakopee Park N 1978 132 0 Marsh Park N 1978 90 4 Hyland Hills N 1979 114 99 Courtyard C 1979 46 31 Bloomington Totals New Projects 614 103 Conversion Projects 348 3l 19 c . -v c c o ~ ~ c N ~ ~ °- a .'o c o~ ~ ~' c ~ aci ~ O) ~ E G1.'. ~ C ~ ~ _ ~ ~ Z7 C U ~ C ~ O ~ ~ 7 = ~ ,,, ~ • '~ G ~ ° C ~ ~ °c ~ v O ~ D o ~ ~ ~ G ` u N ~ ~ ~ C7 S c ~~ ~. a_ ~ ~ a, 8 w ~- N o °° Q c °s ~c~ °o oQ c g g a,~ ~en , ~ ~ O N C d ~' CG G c7 ~ N~ O O O C O ~+'~ '" y Q O ~ 6t' O~ :. u' `' ~ Q1 O) ~ ~ ' L ~ a ~ m o ~ > ~ ~ c c c ~ VC~U ~ ~ o O ~n° -= ~ c "L ~ -L-C~c° O ° -~-~nt~a°. ~ ~ c u.~~n acu_ - -- - r - .. ~,? v~ ono ~- N d y ~~ www Q~ ~OA~ O~ O~ ~~ ~~1~ Q www w w w w w w w w w y~ °o~hn~ nn ~~ .o~ {~n~ C7 Z tl.. www ww ww ww ~ ~ www ~ ~ i ip m m v O ~ ~ ~ ~~~ c ~ ~~ ~ r ~~ W+~ h~~ t ~ 7 ~ °- www w w w w w w w w w 8 ~ S ~ a O Z •-- ` O` u~~h ~O CO PQ ~ ~ ~O h a w w w w w ~ ,_ ppQ OO OO OO OO~O ^, -Wj ~ O P COO O ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ as ~ ~ c")ap~ ~ W O ~ ~ 'a' `O h b O~ .d. O~ _ _ N ~ _ H'? ~O h .! m ~ www ww ww ww www ~ ~ _ Z N h f`O') ~ N Q N h O ~ .~~ cow o•N ao~n ~ m rn o` o i i t i t i i i i - ~ ~ O O O O ~A 0 0 N_ O W 8~ CD ~~ N^~ 0 N ti CD N ~ O ~ CO ~i' CO O h p..- U ..r ~' LL O ~., W ~ _ C 6G1 {N Q ~ 0 ~. + ~ -J- ~. _ g g g g g g s `+ 8 8 C ~ ~ 't7 -p m ~ 'O -O ~~ ~ ~ ` zyi'n om m ("~ y ` c C O C O ~ C C C Ot-F- O~ O~ 0~-- OOr- ~ ± -o aro -°~ N O N _ < p N .Y M C d ~ '~f ~ p II ~ O` O O -~ N ~ N~ O d O ~ ° N h Y ~ i ~ o~c Q c -o rL` 67 t~ ~ ° . ~ ° ' °~° Z O ~ ~. j O O ~ ~ O~ >` M M ~ ~- p y : O j C V c o o O Na O ~o: ~ _ ~ N'~ ~ ti a i Q = ~ ~ ~ V o O = N F- t~'1 N ~ ~ ^' 6 . < O U `'j ~ f C`7 . ~O t . Of the new projects, the most expensive are located in the Edina-West Bloomington Area. Hyland Hills and York Plaza ore the two most expensive- projects now being marketed in the Twin City Suburban Atea. Both projects hove soles pr+ces of $70 to $78 per square foot. Hyland Hi1Is, by Gitt{eman Corporation, has extremely large units, 1,400 square feet for two bedroom units and ],800 square feet for three bedroom units. 'these units ore approximately 200 square feet {urger lhon other Gittlemon projects that have .been built in the Edina-Bloomington Area. York Plaza has nightly smaller units, however, its. casts are higher because of its design as a six story con- crete building.. Hyland Hills is the first project in the Study Area to have all units priced over $100,000. Almost all projects that have been marketing for over six months have. had recent price increases. The Greenbriar recently raised prises about $2,000 per-unit. Twin Fountains raised prices 10 percent on smaller units and 5 percent on larger units in duly. Rustic Oaks raised prices from 5 to 10 percent in August with the larger inaeases on the smaller units. The Musters is indicating substantial price increases on their second phase. York Plaza also recently increased prices by about i0 percent overall with the largest increases in the smaller one bedroom units. Almost all projects are three story elevator buildings with underground parking. .Most provide- outdoor swimming pools and indoor reueatian and exercise rooms. Units have well appointed kitchens and bathrooms and most have laundry facilities in each unit. From marketing brochures ond on-site inspections most units have appealing exterior appearance and have made use of mature plcnt materials in landscaping of the site. The best examples of exterior appearance are the Gittlernan projects where much attention has-been paid to exterior appearance as a marketing tool. Associa#ion dues vary considerably by project. One bedroom dues range from $45 to $115, two bedroom dues range from $80 .to $165 and three bedroom dues range from $110 to $175. Average dues for both new and conversion projects are about $75 for one bedroom units and $105 per unit for two bedroom units. However, because conversion projects tend to have smaller units the over- all association dues for conversion projects are greater on a per square foot basis. Three bedroom dues for new projects average aboufi $150 per month. The most expensive association dues are found at York Plaza for new projects and at Seven Oaks for cortv~rsion projects. The higher relative monthly dues of conversion projects may reflect o more immediate need for maintenance and repair funds. Association dues average 94-104 per square foot per unit for new projects and 104-124 per square foot per unifi for conversion projects. Underground parking with one underground space included with the sale of each unit is provided in ail new projects except for Twin Fountains. Additional surface parking is normally available in all projects at no cost. Most buildings have additional underground. parking available for pur- clxise. Underground parking ranges from 1.0 to 1.5 spaces per unifi with the average being 1.3 per unit. Those units with exterior garages have one garage space per unit. Surface parking ranges from 0.3 to 1.5 spaces per unit with an overage of 0.7 spaces. Overall parking availability ranges from T.3 spaces at the Edina Colony conversion to 2.5 spaces at Mnrsh Park and Seven Oaks. .The overall parking availability is approximately two spaces per unit when both enclosed ond out- door parking are considered. The following table shows parking ratios for each of the 13 Study Area projects. 26 ,~ • ,- EVACUATION SURVEY APA?TRENT VS. SINGLE FAMILY EFFECT 0;2 ADJ1lCE1tT PROPERTIES For somr time. these has been a lack of inforsaation concerning, I the effect on single family residonc~ values-by the construction of adjacent mu![iple tarnily r:en Ca. structures.. Qnly too often hats ve heard the anguish cry of single family owners against rezoninga or multiply family developments. .Unanimously thiy i agree ti-at a>> and a-tl multiple apartracnts reduce the rconomic v:lug of th~cir os.•n properties.• Our firm, in a recant rezoning try, vas beset with the sazaa problem. Z!e bought the .construction of two 21-story condominiua • ~ apartment buildings in the. City of Bloomington, Hinnasota. Bloom.ngton is just to the South of ?iinn••apolis and to the- South and Hest o.° St. Paul. It has l.Qan a quick growth area with some ')O,OOC population. It houses the American Lnague~s baseball Tesm (The Ttiins),•the National Football League's (Vikings). and the. National Hockey I,eague~s (Northst:rs). Zt has nuzsaroua apartment protects as yell as larte single family LzacL araaa. Yost Zrovth has occued in the last 10 years. It saamad an ideal plats to rake an on-the-spot survey. -~ FivQ single family districts vets chosen at rarndon. S~7a did the same vlth four apartment areas adjoininY sinYla family districts. Our method of judging vas simple. Streets veto aolectad and thn • areas thereon daterained by a 3-block radio. Next va examined all sales of single family in a strictly single family residential area. Then ve examined all sales of single family rasid®acial araaa adjocent to the KultiDia family areas. Out starting date Wa 1961. ,- - .~. - 2 - Ia eo~aputing averaQca ve omitted streets and nuzabers on xhich no oeordcd up through 1970.. .Our next step ws thn axsm- sales vara r fficial a:snssot''s'zacords of percent:ga incrnasas iration of the o eriod of tuna and in axict ame h iy the lama p e s in evaluation over t areas. Here is chat ++s came up vitht ' 1~ Single Family Residential Areas JwaraYe anlca price incrc:sa 1961 to 1970 a. Xa}, 5 35.622 b, Xap ~ 25.382 c. Nap 17 30.0SZ d. .Nap 24 34,312 asap 2 S 27.322 e" 30 . S 3Z Avera~,a ?oral - S areas ngIe Farsily Ad~ecent to Hultiple Family 2, Si _ 1503U8 Apartment District 69.802 a. b, 060102 Apartment District 24.182 artment District- 34.322 c. 040101 A.p • d. 080111 Apartment District 11.172 • 34.862 Avarage Total - 4 areas Aszessoz~ s Avera~rease 3 ~ Evaluation in the same period of ticas vith tat:aL calculation made at the- and of.1971. • 2 5.2 4Z a. Ail 5 arena Single Family b. All 4 Areas Sin~IQ Farsily add:cent 23.312 • Sales As~e__-__saing Differential Suaznariea - • 4 . 30.532 le Pamily Sin 25.242. g a. ~. ~ b. Single Family Ad~acent to 34.8bZ 23.312 . Xvltipla ~ A LIS•tIItG 4F ALL AREAS AHD SECTIONS TOGE'Il{'ER VITEi ?{AYS USED ARE . HER1:'i0 ATTACHED. - 5. Cnuclusiona - Single ~Fazaily ad~acant 'to Hul[ipla Farsily shovod. a Yood 4Z ' - lsetter evatu~+tion. over Single- Pami ly RQaidaatiat ar~a~ ' vhil.t.the tYSeasut''s shovad less than 1Z in favor of Sitz~ir Paraily XaaidentinY areas. - Thezafore., ve do not hesitate is saying that not only has Multiples Pamily construction no adverse affect but to tha contrary a slight beneficial affect arriscs from a higher ' pcrtea:tage is:ctaa:e on salcr and.. from.:. lo~+at tax evaluation period. • CALDER CORPORA?ZOi`i Alfted A. Albert ~ Grady L. Lnrspaian Calder Corpor:tlon 366 Jackson StreeC St. Paul. Hinnesota 55141 Ha .' ; n'1cn. A1nd, b tTd, 84th, 85th St.tr~, Rl .i 88th (151)0 to 3000) 19.822 X.rxar, t:asht,+it'it, ti'lucent, 't't.omas, auYSCil, Q++oen, Logs:) 3:ua«s Irving, Yorgan (dJ04 to 8800) 49.422 _ , 1~ ~ • E. Rlst d 82nd tit. (100 to G00) O.OO;L E. A1r~i. 84th,86th, 88 a ~Oth (I00 co 11+3t1) 15.182 C. 8°ri~ S 8'~th (.1(10 to z~0) O.AOZ Stav~na.. Clinton, P~rtler-J, . 0..+.1 end, Par:c. Col•u.ib•,r,, ~ r .l ••sto, it t iot, 1st Avo..2i:d, ...., .h, 5ch, l~lth, Llth, 12t h(8100 to 9000) 37.542 H, •. 1- ~ Olc! Shokepee, c. 92nd, ~ _ '~:.th. lUOth St. (lOp to 12~~U) 17.722. F.. . ylyd St. (bt)~ to 4:)0) O.OOZ E...9sth fit. (lnn to 6A0} O.OOZ r...ybth 5t. (3t:0 to it10t)) {).(1p~ ;:' -vl :mot. C: lniun 3rd d 4L1- Avc. (`)tU0 to in20t)) 2b.7gZ -ns, d 2nd Ave. ('cit)0 to 94+10, -~R'~ to 10200) 3~.3tT. g•,, . , •u.t. Columbus. Chlc:go {•)ayrt) to 10:(10) 23.182 OJIC: Z2. •' S Park (~O:)t: to 98tt0) ~ S1. '1tZ t:i : t,ot (91.A~ to 10770) 2A.27Z i0th G~J. (9000 to 9b00 d 9800. to 1021)0) O.AOZ l l , h i I2tl) Ave. (9i)UO to 94!10) 35.813. Y s~ 2 4 O~arlook nrive (2200 to 350D) 31.952 c.as'~burn, Yincn:r t, tl~ton i1,nu+sa. Scirridan, Rusbcil, ~~•r~t,. Penn, X~Y>;s+~ (10Gt)0 to 11000- 43.412 ::rst ~ .tn, lUc,t t. 1')~+th, ll~lth (16A0 to 3100) 28,b77, ri~+ L: 1 liwrriut. t;rastid, Pleutani (1020{1 to 104t)Q) 0.042 ?i: ~s:on :td.. 204th 102nd ldb b :.1~ (1+30Etc to 1 SOOLJ} 1 S. O1Z S~,r.n); y„i;oy' Dr)ve (iOftE to 40(117 O.OOZ ~nI:^y +ii~;h Ur:vc ~ Btias Lar+.+ (i'00 to 15n0) 27.772 vic.~llcc ~ ~:entvorth (1G2t~0 to 107'lA) O.AOZ G • e,. ti7i 1 cling Dri re (10800 to 1 1200) O.OOZ aOT£s Arnas Lena[it)~ lcsa than 57. axcluded in computtnQ avaraF,a:>i . J1va. Incro~sa 35.622 J1va. Incraaa~ 26. 162 Jlva. Incraasa .30.0 SZ Jlva. Lncrr:aaa 34. 31 Z AvQ. Increase 27.322 Ava. Increase S Ar-ens 30 . S 3Z DLoooinYton • • ;~,L~,tib: .~?3`~~Y •f~~..~~i~' .J11 Tt?_..Jj,~~'CL1.,L ~. C..+n.J r + rt, (1118{17 t n 109!10) 2 S. 17'.. • Hitr: son '.•~.2SZ trvtn 6).332 . .ls,t,~-,.,~n " .. _ . ~ 73. 372 Avn. Incraa,a Old Slt+~l.~,poe (~9'd) t;o ~1 t)U) 1 5b. A 3Z Kell Ave. (in700 to 10')OU) b2.86Z 69.802 `itft,Ji Streit (3rlX, to 42Qt)} 0.003x, ~5~~ (A~t. 76ri1A2) Frrraont Sc. (81~r1 to BG~n) 3U.22Z Cirar~t (A4~i0 to 9500} O.OOZ ~.,p~at (h2t)0 [0 8 i!')0) O.OOZ ~Praou (R1t~0 to r~i~U) t1.0^Z J{„rr,t~o l d t { 8 31)1 to 5',r)0) 0.0nZ Irv~nK {a:itt0 to A'>n~) 29.142 Ava. Increa:;s u. 8)nc~ Sc. (1J00 to I30U) 23.182 ' .. ft ;r.! Si . (11 t~tt t~ 1 zr+++) O.OOZ 24, 182 ~'. 86t1~ St:. (11rt0 to 13A0) O.Ot3Z I4u~ Aft. (+401,~~ .. 'ltlth St. (4it)0 Co 4300) O.OOZ .3oh+~,nn Ave.- (90vU co 91{10) O.OaZ :;ol I Avr. ~d90t1 to `?I(>(+) 0.0'3 i. Ave. Increaaa Fran~~ Av.+. (8700 to 881)0) O.ODZ Si•t},het'd tit 1I~ ('t~,RO to X900) 0.00?. 34. IIZ Tr~tb.++gh Ur. (b900 to 9000} 34.322 ~. d5t.h St (1700 Lo 1900) O.DOZ 17th :ve. (3200 to 84n0) 2t~.~8Z lbt;, A~•^. {tiJ~O to 84:*U) 2.252 Ave. Inezeaae r . s ~t,a s t. (i 700 to 1 •,oo } o . ooz ~. BTr~ St. (1700 to 1900) O.OOx, 11.172 F.. 84th St: {1700 Lo 1000) 0.002 AvtraEo oC increase in values of i( 1, R 2. R 3 Sa areas wh+rre agar t.rssctrsta ware bui 1 c in i9t,l~ lyb4~ 19.65. lybG ........... Lo 1970 t~OTt:t Areas denoting less thr,n SZ axcludad in CoatputinZ Avaragss Ave. Inereas~ 34.8bZ ]lioaatington ,• SIKGLE P1~~iILY AD,IACENi TO ?(ULTIPLE v Last ?lat Parc_ ert 1968 A~Puisal Incru~o 70 S$0 4210 1081)1 Har>'.isaa l1va. So. 10,740 I3, 620 26.822 72130 5500 4825 Old ShakflQaa Ra:d 13,200 23,608 78.792 70825 5000 .10832 K.atl Ava. 21.180 24,x.80 1S. SaZ 70gb0 400 8519 Girard Ava. 14,700 17,400 18.312 1 72190 ~ 4a 5o E 364 Izvf a~ Ata. So. ~ 20, 460 22, 5 50 IO.70Z 72372 b000 1.210 Vost 82nd St. 14,080 21,600 I3.21Z ~ 73083 5075 9017 Kall Avs. 19,830 23,.700. 19.SIZ 77228 SAdO ~ 8825~ TratbauEh I}riv~ 20,880 26.220 2S.37Z 7146tt 2810 8318 17th Ava. So. ~ ~ 21,240. 23,520 10,732 70202 220 8230 18th Avs. Sc~. I6,A30 19, 200 14.082 725T4 2000 Is01 Last 82nd St... 21,780 24,400 14.322 1 J 11461) 2235 1712 F:st 84th St. 7,950 10,500 32.08Z~ ` - AYER~E ASSESS02S' INt:AEASE . ,.~ . ~ 23.312 J .. ...w.. • . ~.. _ ~ r ~.d . ' (~rt '~~ nc3crs) i dCrnss.# In Bloonin~tcn, Hinneaota (.1968 appTaiaal and Host teCenL Sclcctr~ t,pr:isal... 1970... 1971...1972)... inczeasa or chin=p . . ASSESSORS YALUCS •+ ~ Laat 19G8 Apnra~l, Inc, r°a'_ Flat Parcel 1i69S 100 S ~ 2307.tI:ac Rtnd St. 20,.;70 . 70 24, 720 430 23 21.352 18.St1 Z2A`3:, [.900 241a '~c~st 8.4th St. 1 9.7 964 21 , 050 31 41.392 7Zo47 3G0~~ 8124 Vtnccnt Ave. So. . 090 24 , 26,940 11.832 72111 3000 87n0 Irving Ave. So. , 990 18 Z2, 260 11.222 71041 3000. 90G fast 40th St. S t . 070 20 25,800 2$.SSZ 7013 ~ 3G00 o. ian~! Ave.. 82L5 Por , 17 100 21,A00 25.152. 7:~'lE' 1 2EL0 8 52E 10th Avc. So. , 278 21 23•x90 33.0 SZ 10295 4240 1100 Fast 4th St. > . , 16, 530 Z2,fi80 33.632 ~ 30 tv 4~~00 a. So. 101 I 1 Ci i nton A. 100 13 5,'.90 1 I8,II1Z 71212 2A00 9141 Oakland Avc. So. _ , 800 13 . 16,ao0 21.7~Z 70250 750 8332 11th Avc. So. . 40 440 45,000 11.282 72440 4;00 3131 Ove r l ohk T:T i ve . 590 19 25,470 30, 022 71I4i 75ri0 10317 i:ashburn Ave. So. , 604 3 6,300 75.nDz "733G0 i6~0 1420. Vast 106th St. ' , 590 19 T/•, 450 24.812 7i?J.22 I'tA Ava, So. 1G33S Grazad i h D . 050 25 25,550 5.9gZ 7>>221 ,471 ve r 1420 Vallsev HS E 'eatvorth Avg. So. 105:0 L , 30,600 33.900 10,782 718?U SG00 . AYERACE ASSESSORS' I3~CREASE 2 5.2 4Z -t HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Office- of Executive Director HRA Letter. Nfl . .13 Agenda March 1$, 1985 Housing and Redeveiapment Authority Commissioners City of Richfield . Subject: (1) HRA Liaison Appointment to the ILN Advisory Committee; and,. (2) Concurrence on Selection of BRW as the ILN Planning Consultant Dear Commissioners: TLN Advisory Committee On February 25, 1985, the City Council adopted a resolution establishing a community wide City Council Advisory Committee for the ILN area (see the attached resolution).. The committee consists primarily of interested people from within-the study area or immediately adjacent to it. A city-wide perspective is al o needed because of the importance of this area to the entire .community. Thus, several members from throughout the community were also selected as members (see-the attached membership list).. Nan-voting liaison members-from governmental organizations have also been accorded a position. To date, the School District has. designated Jim Carlsor. as a member and Maggi McDermott-Lindstrand will represent the Planning. Commission.. The- City'Council on March 11, decided to designate no particular per-son,. but have each member attend meetings as they desire. The resolution e tablisping the ILN Advisory Committee provides-that the HRA may select a liaison member. The liaison person, if designated,: would be responsible for expressing concerns of the HRA-and would report from time to time to the Daher members on the status of the planning process. However, BRW would also report regularly to both the HRA and City Council and involve them in the planning process. The resolution also establishes certain operating procedures for the committee to follow. Unless action is taken by the City Council, the resolution provides that the Advisory Committee would dissolve after March 31, 1986. The resolution also designated Gertrude Ulric h.. as the Chairperson. Selection of BRW Consulting Firm The purpose of the committee will be to provide input to plans, proposals, and concepts which emerge from the planning process which will be directed by staff and facilitated by the -2- BRW consulting firm .which was selected by the City Council. on February 25, 19$5. Bennett-Rongrose-Walsfeld-Jarvis- Gardner, Inc.. (BRW) of Minneapolis w-as selected over Barton- - Aschman Associates,. Inc.- (BAA). The experiences of both firms are: BRW 1. Lyndale-Hub-Nicoliet Project 2. 50th and. France Are a: Plan, Parking .Plan and. Streetscaping.;• 3.. Rochester Dow town Commercial Area Redevelopment Plan and:Streetseape Design; 4. 26th and Ncollet Commercial Area Revitilization, Streetscaping and Parking.. Plan; 5. Calhoun. Street Mall; 6. East Hennepin Commercial Area Streetseaping; 7. Milwaukee Avenue Historic District Mall; ' 8. 1$th Street Neighborhood Pedestrianway; 4. Lower Nicollet Avenue urban Design Study; 10'. West River Parkway EIS and. Urban Design Study; and, 1t. Airport/Stadium South Transportation Element for Metropolitan Council and Bloomington. BAA.. ~. 1.: Oxbaro Redevelopment Area Planning, Bloomington, MN; 2. Financial Analysis of Central Area Redevelopment, Des Moines, Iowa; 3. Future Land Use and Reuse and Frontage: Development Along Six Miles of Trunk Highway 65, Ham: Lake, MN; ~#.-' Redesign for the Redevelopment of Cedar Avenue, Minneapolis; 5.- Industry Square. Redevelopment and Marketing. Strategy, Minneapolis; 6.- Opus 2 Office/Industrial Park Expansion,. Minnetonka; 7. nowntown Development Strategy, Hopkins MN; 8. Downtown Development Pian, Appleton, Wisconsin; g. Prairie Lakes Business Park Traffic Operations, Eden Prairie; 10. Traffic Access Study for IBM Research and Management Facility, Rochester; 11. Central Business District Parking Study, Minneapolis; 12. Hennepin/Lake Commercial Node Streetscape Design, . Minneapolis; and, 13. Downtown Minneapolis Nicollet Mall. BRW can complete the assignment within nine months. BAA estimates g to 12 months to complete the study. BRW's proposal is for a figure not to exceed $44,500. BAA says the fees are anticipated to range from $45,000 to $4$,000, but not. to exceed $4$,000. -3- The source of funds to finance the study are allocated in the 1885 HRA Capital Improvement Fund,- ILN Division at $63,740. The economic/market base data and study will be gravid-ed and conducted by others. A representative of the BRW firm will be in attendance at the HRA meeting.. This representative will give a brief presentation which will include slides to illustrate the firm's capabilities and experience. Recommendations: It is recommended that the. HR'A select one of its members to serve as a liaison representative to the. City Council. iLN Advisory Committee- and- authorize the Chairman and Executive Director to enter into a contract with the Mayor- and City Manager for services from BRW as the ILN Study Area Consultant. Respectfu 1 mitted, ~%~t h/ ohn G. Cart right Executive.Direetor JGC/eja r,_ RESOLUTION N0. 7010 ~, RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING AN ILN ADVISORY COMMITTEE WHEREAS, the Gity Council of the City of Richfield has found. .that: the formation of a r.ew lard use plar. and program: for the development and redevelopmen of that area of the city referred to as the:"Interstate-Lyndale-Nieollet Area." is necessary to promote the public health, safety and general welfare of Richfield's citizens=; and.,.. WHEREAS, the. formation of a plan and program should involve input-from residents and business peop e; ard, WHEREAS', input is 'best provided by an organized structure, hereinafter referred to as the "Committee"`. NOW- THERE'FOR~,, BE IT° RESOLVED 1. The"Committee°sha1l be advisory to the City Council to provide input to plans, proposals and concepts.-referred to it by the City Council and staff. 2. Meet.:ngs sha l be held at the call of the. chairperson or if not< available the vice-chairperson. 3. Robert.'s Rule of Order shall be utilized in the conduct of a11: meeting,s~ - u.. A quorum shall be required to conduct business and shall aonst.itute one member more. than fifty percent. of the-total vtiting; membership. 5. Recommendations, if any, may be made by the Committee or. the basis of a majority vote. b. 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 Di trio, Planning Commission, HRA. and City Council may each appoint a non-voting- liaisor. member. g. After March 31, 1985, the Committee shall dissolve unless prior to that time, the City Council has determined by resolution that it should continue. 10. Members on the Committee shall. be those persons listed on Attaehmer.t A., Section I and II. 11. Gertrude Ulrich is appointed Chairperson and the positior. of Vice-Chairperson is to be determined by the committee. ~. -2- _ 12. The Department of Community Developmentshall provide :-~ staff support to the Committee a:2d be in attendance at all ~ meetings.. 13. The City Manager is dire.c`ted to take the. appropriate steps to effectuate this resolution. Passed and adopted-by the .City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota, this 25th'day of February, 1985. Johr. Hamiltor. Mayor ATTEST;: ILN ADVISORY COMMITTEE CON~tERCIAL AND CHURCH REPRESENTATNES MEMBER ASSOCIATED WITH. Bob-Adelman Richfield Plumbing -805 West 77 ' 1 /2 Street 869-7517 Allan Anderson Emerson Avenue Congregational Church 7333` Garfield Avenue South 869--9085 Don. Anderson- Woodlake Barber Shop. 7624 Lyndale Avenue South. 869-8180 -Tom Austin Dairy Queen. 7533 Lyndale Avenue. South 869-4250 Tony Doherty.: Doherty Furniture and Carpet 800. West. 77 1/2 Street- 869-0190 Bob Jensen Tandem Press ' 7716 Colfax Avenue South 869-0505 Judy Kerssen Richfield Flowers 701 West 77th. Street 866-5972 Richard`LeMettry LeMettry's Collision & Paint 500 West 78th. Street 866-0016 Tom Price - Colonial. Lodge Motel. 7745 Lyndale Avenue South 861-2063. Steve.Sawitzke A-1 Foam Specialty Company 7608 Lyndale Avenue South 861-5255 Larry Schneck Champion Auto 7600 Lyndale Avenue South Corporate Manager 535-5984 Ken Sterbuck Broadway Pizza 7514 'Lyndale Avenue South 861-3402 -2- CITY WIDE: COMMERCIAL. REPRESENTATIVES ~ El+.~ HOME ADDRESS Wendell Treichel N.W. Bell.. Telephone 7060 Oak Grove. Blvd.. 200. S`. 5th Street.. MpIs.~ ~ 55402 344-7315 - Mark.Ahlquist Self Employed 1005 Rae Drive Attorney & Owner/Mgr. of Commercial. Property 64.49 Lyndale Avenue South. 866-2110 Marty-Chorzempa Richfield Bank & Trust,. 9714 Rich Curve President Bloomington. 6625 Lyndale Avenue South 861-'T355 RESIDENTIAL.REPRESENTATIVES . MEMBER. RESIDING AT. Helen Hanson: 7632 Harriet Avenue South (resigned. because-she sold here home and: will be moving°soon.). -Jerry Krause 7600. Emerson Avenue-South 861-6878... Cindy Latham 7638 Garfield Avenue-South . 869-68$0 Leon Limas: 7508 Bryant. Avenue South. - 866-2015 Gertrude Ulrich 7601: Aldrich Avenue. South 866-8171 Robert; Werner 7645 Harriet Avenue South. 866-7553 CITY WIDE RESIDENTIAL. REPRESENTATIVES Betty Carr 6633 Lynnwood Blvd. 869-5215 J. B. Clarkson 6615 Lake Shore-Drive 869-6979 Jeanne Summicht 6620 Logan Avenue South 869-7522 -3- HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Office of Executive Director HRA Letter No. 12 Agenda March 18, 1985 Housing and Red eve opment- Authority Commissioners City of Richfield' Subject;:. Scattered Site Property, Acquisition Dear Commissioners: In February, 1985, the HRA authorized. the continuation of the Voluntary Acquisition Program. AS CDBG funds are available, staff negotiates the-purchase of property according to HRA program guidelines. There is approximately $45,000 in CDBG funds that will not be utilized for site preparation activities at the 66th Street/Rae Drive Project this Spring.. This is an amount sufficient. to acquire one structure, possibly pay relocation benefits to tenants (if applicable) and clear the site. The funds must be spent by June 30, 19$5 or be returned to: Hennepin County. This letter recommends that staff be authorized to proceed_in determining the probable purchase price for a preferred list of scattered sites identified in this letter and to return to the HRA in May for authorization to acquire one of those identified sites. The HRA acquires scattered sites for clearance of obsolete, deteriorated structures and provides new housing opportunities for moderate income, first time home buying families. The HRA last authorized scattered. site acquisitions in September, 1984.. Five properties were identified as available and discussions were initiated with the owners. Two properties, one at 7245 Humboldt Avenue and the second at 6820 12th Avenue were acquired by the HRA. The three that were not acquired were 7508 Colfax, Avenue, 7521 Dupont Avenue, and 7520 Bryant Avenue. Two of these, the Colfax and Dupont Avenue properties, remain available:. At the present time, staff is considering the following properties which are listed in order of preference. They also appear to be acquisitions which could be completed by June, i9$5~" 7517 Humboldt Avenue; 7508. Colfax Avenue; 7521 Dupont Avenue; 6824 13th Avenue and 7216 First Avenue. The values identified on the attached table for the preferred sites are the Hennepin County Assessor's estimates for 1985. Garage homes and cottage type structures, which are deteriorated. and. obsolete, are often under valued because there are not many comparable structures and sales to assist in determining value. Independent appraisals assist staff in -2- ' determining a maximum purchase price. Acquisition prices may range from 10 to 30 percent higher than the 1985. Assessor's Estimated Market Value (EMV), but the acquisition price would not exceed the independent appraised value. In establishing the priority rank, it is not appropriate to consider only EMV. Structures may suffer from deterioration and obsolescence due to-age., location on site,. and size. The need to pay relocation benefits to tenants and the lot szze (if variances are needed prior to new construction), are also important considerations. It is recommended than the HRA authorize staff to proceed to negotiate. prices for the property in the following order and return in May with a request for authorization to purchase one property.. 7517 Humboldt Avenue 7508 Colfax Avenue T521 Dupont: Avenue- 682~ 13th Avenue 7216 First Avenue ,: Respectfu 1 mitted, ohn G. Car wrig Executive. Dir c JCG/era HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Office of Executive Director HRA Letter No. 11 Agenda March 18, 1985 Housing and Redevelopment- Authority Commissoners- City of Richfield Subject: Temporary- Rental Agreement for g20 and 924 W. 66th. Street Dear Commissioners: The, two-unit townhouse structure constructed by South Hennepin Vo-Tech Schools- at g20 and 924 W". 66th Street was completed in December, 19:84. Two eligible purchasers have been selected from: families who responded to sales advertising in November, 19$4. This letter discusses the sales status and requests: that the Executive Director be authorized:. to execute a rental: agreement with the prospective purchasing families to rent the units until closing can occur. •As discussed in the-March 18, 1985, HRA-letter- reg;arding "Site and Design Concepts for Housing at 66th Street/Rae Drive", the a two housing units are centered in the. s a being planned for additional townhouse development along 66th Street and. Rae Drive:.. During the past few months, staff has been working with HRA legal counsel to develop a purchase agreement and a set of covenants, conditions, restrictions and easements {"Townhome Documents") which would be applicable to 920 and 924 W. 66th Street and the future development. The HRA has not previously been involved in townhouse development for families so this has been a time consuming process to date. Although the platting and subdivision requirements have been approved by the Planning Commission and City Council, in retrospect it is now felt that a PUD rezoning process should be pursued. The PUD process would include the adjoining property owned by the HRA as well... Through this process there would be one: townhouse development and one homeowner association. Marketing, financing, and management of this entire development would be more practical. However, this process would delay closing on .920 and 92.4 until the entire sit e. was properly platted.. Because of the delays, and because of lease expirations at their present location, both of the eligible purchasers will be without housing for a period of time.. Closing on these units is -2- not expected to take place before the month of June. Thus, they have a need for "interim" housimg. It is proposed that these families rent~the units until-the closing.. This rental process has occurred with previous Vo-Tech projects and the rental agreement is similar to those. used previously. The rental agreement will require: -Monthly rent of $589/month. (Approximately a fair market rent for a Section 8 - 3 bedroom townhome). Prorated $19 a day if closing occurs sometime during the month other than the last day. -The tenants to pay all utility bills -$150 damage deposit -HRA responsible for landscape maintenance -No modifications or-decorating of property, except c-lothes washer and dryer hoof-up and installation of curtains far privacy and security -10 day vacate notice if the mortgage application is not approved. or if the purchase agreement is not entered. into when presented -Only immediate family members to occupy the residence -No actions which could result in liens or encumberances against the property -Right of entrance by HRA representatives at reasonable times to mo itor property conditions It is requested that the Executive Director be authorized to executes rental agreement with each of the eligible purchasers.. It is an icipated that rental of 920 West 66th Street would be initiated on March 29, 1985 and that the rental of 924 West 66th Street would be initiated on April 29, 1985- Respectf y omitted, c ohn G. Ca twrig Executive D1 ect JGC/eja HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Office of Executive Director HRA Letter No. 10 Agenda March 18, 1985 Housing and Redevelopment Authority Commissioners City of Richfield Subject: Joint Meeting between the HRA and the Senior Citizens/Handicapped Commission (SCHC) Dear Commissioners: The Senior Citizens/Handicapped Commission has requested a joint meeting with the HRA for the purpose of discussing potential opportunities for.senior citizen housing in Richfield and to determine what the HRA's position is on this subject. A presentation on potential sites- in the community was. made to the Senior Citizens/Handicapped Commission at their regular meet-ng of March 14, 1.985 by .the Director of Community Development, The SCHC would like to become more active in a supportive role for senior citizen housing and is Looking for suggestions or ideas on-how best to perform this role. This meeting will also afford an opportunity to discuss other areas of mutual interest to both groups. ~e,~,pectft~'l1~ ~fa~mitted: ~~ l/John G. Car wrigh City Manager JGC/eja HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Office of Executive Director HRA Letter No ., 9 Agenda- March 18,, 1985 Housing. and Redevelopment Authority Commissioners City of Richfield Subject: Cedar Avenue Business Area, Liquor Store Site, and, East 66th Street Dear Commissioners: During 1984, the HRA discussed issues and tank action related to the Cedar Avenue Business Area (CABA),. Three developers presented preliminary proposals for redevelopment of" the liquor store site: a cooperative housing and commercial development; a bowling and banquet facility; and, an office/ service center. The budget adopted in October allocated $34,000 in funding for staff and consultants to formulate. an improvement strategy for the. area delineated on the: attached map. The.Gty Gouncil also provided funds for planning, of which there is a balance of approximately $3,.000 for consultants. Of the three proposals considered, only the office/service. center is still vi-able..- The bowling and banc}uet facility was determined to be incompatiable with the adjoining single family homes.-.The cooperative development was not viable as the developer could: not obtain financing and- the density seemed to be too high. This letter contains preliminary development strategy .concepts-for the area. If the concepts a.re acceptable to the. HRA, the reaction of the City Council. and the people in the area will be solicited.. A neighborhood meeting would-be held the first week in April. The reactions received along with appropriate recommendations will be presented at the April HRA meeting. Proceeding_at- this time with the concepts is appropriate for the following reasons. 1`7 The liquor store is in need of major repairs totaling approximately $115,000. Approximately 60% of these costs would be incurred in installing a new roof. The roof continues to leak severely and patching provides only temporary relief.. The beer coolers must also be replaced at a cost of $40,000. These -2-~ figures are several months old and are in the process of being updated... The need for repair and maintenance of-the parking lot pavement is also being examined. Also, because of the age of the structure,-.energy consumption is very high.. 2) Lincoln Companies is ready to proceed with the construction of a 45,000.square foot office/service center facility the design concept for which was presented to the HRA in early 198• Lt is their desire to have this facility completed by the end of 1985 if at all possible. It wiT1 require the full. cooperation of the HRA, City Council,. Planning Commission and the developer to complete this development in a timely manner. - 3) The City has an IDRB allocation for 1985 of $3,600,000. It would behoove us to utilize a portion of this allocation for the appropriate development. IDRB is under assault by federal. and state legislators again, and this funding should be utilized: as soon as practical. 4) Staff`is analyzing alternative sites for a new-liquor store in the-vicni y of East 66th Street. A location at 66th and Cedar would be isolated and would not benefit from trade from other retail facilities. However, if located with complimentary businesses each could benefit the other. Also,. a retail store is inconsistant with the light industrial. and service orientated businesses along Cedar Avenue. Based on a customer survey undertaken a y-ear ago, on two weekends, the primary source of customers at the Cedar Avenue Liquor Store. lies'to the west of the existing site. Approximately 60~ of the cus omens resided in Richfield in the area between Portland and Cedar Avenues. Minneapolis provided.28% of the customers, who resided in an area just north of the crosstown highway and east of Portland Avenue and west of Hiawatha Avenue. The balance of customers:, about 6~- were from Bloomington and other areas.. A location-.near Bloomington Avenue would benefit from the bridge. over the crosstown highway into Minneapolis. Finally, a new store located to the west-could serve as a catalyst for improving the appearance of East 66th Street. Because this customer survey was taken on two weekends- it may not be repre entatve of our customer base. Starting March 18, 1985, daily surveys of~our Cedar store customers will be made so that we have a more comprehensive study of where our customers reside. It would be appropriate to consider-locating the store within a neighborhood convenience center containing other retail outlets. The city could enter into a contract with a private developer to construct a facility to city specifications and. agree to a lease with an option to purchase. As part of a convenience center with a lease/purchase option, the city would be-.able to respond to changes in the retail liquor market more readily than if the city constructed and owned a free standing facility. This approach also offers the advantage of a time- _3_ table thati shorter and one that would enable the Lincoln Companies to meet their November/December deadline for a completed facility. Relocating the. liquor'stnre would permit redevelopment of the existing site. .The basic strategy envisions identification of CABA as a redevelopment area utilizing tax increment financing within. it. However,. the extent of- the area to be included within a tax. increment district would be determined by a study. The area north of 66th Street. and east of Cedar Avenue exhibits evidence of blight... For example, it is a "bodge-podge" of uses and. building types .from single family residential to light industrial.. Land ownership is fragmented,: traffic circulation is poor, and -parking for motor vehicles is a problem. The poor image of the area is highly visible. Without a plan-for improving the area, it will continue to deteriorate.. The increment generated by the office/service center facility would be an important source of revenue and would range between $30,D00 and. $0,000 annually. This would.. be sufficient to amortize between $350,000 and. $500,000 in bonds assuming g~: interest and an 1'$ year amortization. If .further customer survey were to show that: significant trade is a result of Highway 7T fron age, the NE corner- of Cedar and 66th..SUreet is stil a good` possibility. The-bond monies would be expended to assemble sites for redevelopment north of 66th Street and east of Cedar Avenue.. Two alternative strategies appear to be possible. The most likezy plan envisions an "in fill" strategy. A study would identify structures which are substandard or obsolete or house inappropriate usesuch as residences.. -The property would be sold: for redevelopment by light industrial uses. Another basis for "°n fill"' would be to provide expansion space for existing viable businesses which are appropriate for the location. By providing expansion space, the HRA could require the benefiting business to upgrade their entire property especially the exterior. This would be analogous to the. upgrading of the Lyndale Hardware building at 66th Street and Lyndale Avenue.. The basis for that "deal" was the buying and selling of several parcels of land between the City and the hardware store owner. This strategy would generate minimal tax increment. The second alternative would be to assemble a large site fore a major development. However, such a project would need to be intensive enough to provide a significant tax increment to permit site assembly, i.e., acquisition. The sale of the existing liquor store site and service station facility (used car sales) would generate revenue. Based on an appraisal report completed in March, 1g8~, the value of the property for an office/service center facility was $05,000. There are alternative uses for these revenues. They could be utilized to partially fund .the construction or purchase -4- of a new liquor store. We do not believe it would desirable tc have a long term lease rather than to own a new facility.. However, an alternative would be to utilize the revenues to bolster .redevelopment efforts within CABA. The City Charter permits the use-of land sale revenue from the sale of s liquor store to be used for- aeti~ities not related to liquor store operations, Under State law the City Council is authorized to transfer funds to the HRA. Liquor revenue bonds could then be sold to finance the construction or purchase of a new facility and future liquor store profits could be utilized to-meet debt service obligations._ Preliminary estimates for a new liquor store: have been prepared. A store of b,000 square feet with a full basement would cost approximately $340,000 plus fixtures and land (the figure includes carpeting and finished. interior walls and ceiling). Anew faclit y with less than 6,000 square feet is also being studied. (The existing. Cedar Avenue store contained 8,200 square feet on the first floor., and, Lyndale and Penn contain 7,500 square feet and 4,400 square feet respectively). Staff now seeks the reaction of-.'the HRA and City Couneil to these concepts: -redevelopment of the liquor store site with an office/ service center facility -the relocation of the liquor store. to a site west of Cedar Avenue along East..66th Street -incorporation of a new liquor store into a neighborhood convenience center with a lease%purchase option -use of the revenue from the sale of the liquor store- site-to make redevelopment more feasible in CABA.- If'the.:response to all or most of these concepts is' favorable, they will be presented to the CABA neighborhood meeting in early April. At the April HRA meeting, specific recamrnendations-will. be made regarding these concepts... Respectf ly submitted, John G. Ca tw ght Executive Director JGC/eja oQo- ~; co 0 0 c°a ,~t . ~. i ~ m r m n x . x a /'~ N C N ~ Q A l ~ ~O N! 1 !> > O n 1 C -t 7 O ~ v ~ N Z ~'f. ~a ~o< ~ ~ < ~ c ..w N co D m 2 c m ~ 0 -. z i~ i m a 133a1S 4359 r~ V J ~`' _ ~ ~ C C m ~ Q Z C z c ~ R1 m ~ (/~ ~ z 133a1S 439 rn - ' . m a m D