08-15-83 agendaHOL?SI.NG AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
Office of Executive Director
HRA Letter No. 25
Agenda August 15, 1983
Housing and Redevelopment
Authority Commissioners
City of Rchffield --
Dear Commissioners:
Subject: Proposed Vo-Tech Rehabilitation Project Within
the Area Bounded by Rae Drive, 66th Street and
Coach Homes
The HRA and the City Council have recently been studying the
Rae Drive and 66th Street area, and the HRA is now evaluating al-
ternatives that might be undertaken to retain the residential
character of this area. The City Council is evaluating the prop-
osed rezoning of the property at 910 West 66th Street to accommodate
a dental office (see attached map). At the July 25, 1983 city
council meeting, the second reading for an ordinance would have
rezoned the property at 910 West 66th Street from a residential to
a limited business use. However, this action was deferred until
August 22, 1983.
Consequently, the council desires the HRA to hasten planning
of the proposed Vo-Tech 66th Street development particularly since
one. plan suggests the need for access to 920 and 1016 West 66th
Street via a 165 foot easement across the dentist's property. In
response, the staff has had conceptual site plans developed that
suggest one site layout utilizing an easement and one which does
not. Copies of these site plans are attached to this HRA letter.
An architectural firm developed seven different alternatives and
narrowed consideration to the two provided in this letter. This
letter discusses the merits and potential problems with each plan,
updates the Commissioners on progress in developing the next Vo-
Tech project, and makes certain recommendations that can be for-
warded to the City Council.
In developing conceptual site plans for the combined area
of 920 and 1016 West 66th Street, two significant issues were
evaluated: site access-and off-street parking.. Other issues that
require consideration include: the unique geography of the site
(a five to ten foot elevation above the established roadway); the
need for visual buffering from adjacent residential or proposed
business uses; traffic circulation (within and outside the site),
compatibility with existing or proposed uses; .and the economical
redevelopment of the site, :(extensive earthwork or site access
provisions would be cost prohibitive). To simplify the study,
some assumptions were made: each unit of each duplex would have
HRA Letter No. 25 -2- August 15, 1.9.83
approximately 1,000 square feet of space on the main level. A
single garage space-and°an additional single uncovered space
would be provided as required by the zoning ordinance for parking.
The building."footprints" would be a standard dimension, although
the actual dimensions will vary from structure to structure as the
project proceeds. Each ownership unit would probably have two to
three bedrooms. A discussion of the two site plans follows.
PLAN A
Flan "A" provides access into the site from 66th Street, orients
the front of-each duplex toward 66th Street and the off-street
parking areas, and does not require an easement from the property
at 910 West 66th Street. Some of the merits of the plan include:
-site access from the most westerly portion where the
grade is lower and a space in the median permits access
to east and west bound lanes of 66th Street;
-off-street parking of three spaces per.. unit for residents
and guests. The zoning ordinance requires a minimum of two;
-a front yard (66th Street) and rear yard (rear lot line)
orientation which clearly indicates to those entering the
the site where parking and unit front. doors are. located;
-private yard spaces in the rear, approximately 25' x 35'
per family unit;
-on-site traffic circulation away from rear lot line and
neighboring single family residential property;
-adequate space for entering, turning around and exiting;
-more functional green-space for individual owners and less
paved areas;
-dwelling units that appear to meet setback and lot size
requirements for duplexes, although one unit is shifted
to an east/west orientation to better utilize yard and
parking areas;
-setback of a majority of the units from the street to
reduce the impact of traffic noise;
-a reduction in site development costs because of the re-
duced amount of paving and earthwork needed to accomplish
this project.
Some potential problems might be:
-the concentration of traffic that will result near the
intersection of Lynwood Boulevard, 66th Street, and a
`OOach Homesoff-street parking area;
FiRA Letter No. 25 -3- August 15, 1983
-developing a suitable arrangement among the new home-
- owners for maintaining the off-street parking; and
A "common areas" of the site.
PLAN B
Plan "B" provides access onto the site from 66th Street and
Rae Drive, orients the front of each duplex toward 66th Street,
provides off-street parking, and requires an easement from-the
property at 910 West 66th Street.
.Some of the merits of the plan include:
-a more standard frontyard setback arrangement, although
closer to the street, for each duplex unit;
-a site layout-.with large front yards and an "alley-like"
service to the rear for parking;
-off-street parking of three spaces per unit for residents
and guests;
-alternative site access from the south (as in Plan A) and
to the east.
Some potential problems might be:
-having to secure an easement and create some sort of public
alley or private-drive across the rear of 910 West 66th
Street and around the perimeter of 920 and 1016 West 66th
Street;
-the front yard (66th Street) and rear yard (rear lot line)
seems to introduce a confusing orientation for those enter-
ing the site since parking is at the rear, but front doors
exist along 66th Street. Visitors might not know where to
park without special signage;
-no quiet private yard speces for residents since the only
large green area fronts on 66th Street;
-concentration of.traffic circulation to the rear lot line
and neighboring residential property where none has pre-
viously existed. Providing effective screening at the
rear of the property would be an additional expense and
require routine. maintenance;
-requiring a larger amount of paved area to provide access
and parking;
-conflicting traffic circulation at 66th Street (as discussed
previously) and some additional conflict with potential
dentist office parking and the use of the easement .drive by
other than duplex residents;
HRA Letter No. 25 -4- August 15, 19.83
-traffic noise since all resident units would be closer to
66th Street;
-developing a suitable arrangement among the new homeowners
for maintaining the off-street parking and "common areas"
of the site (or with the city for maintaining the."alley"
type drive).,
The result of the staff review of the merits and potential prob-
lems suggest .the recommendation that Plan "A" is tYie best alterna-
tive. Plan A produces marketable units and provides a suitable al-
ternative to site development without relying on an easement from
910 West 66th Street to ensure project success. It should be
kept in, mind, however, that Plan A is still a "concept" to be used
as a guideline in final plan development. This recommendation, if
suitable to the HRA, will be forwarded to the City Council and be
available as they deliberate the zoning issue concerning 910 west
66th Street. If the Council determines that rezoning of .that prop-
erty is appropriate, the HRA should recommend-that effective and
aesthetically pleasing continuous screening be required on the
western lot line of the property at 910 West 66th Street to ensure
privacy for the proposed residential-structures.
In addition to conceptual site plan development, other. events
have occurred and are discussed here to update the HRA:
-On July. 26, 1983, the planning commission determined that
acquisition of 920 and 1016 West 66th Street would serve
a public purpose and that the property acquisition, duplex
.development, and property disposition were in conformance
with the city's. adopted comprehensive plan (Resolution No.
48, copy of which is attached).
-On July 19, 1983, the-city received preliminary approval
for securing $59,60.0 in CDBG funds to be utilized for the
proposed duplex development (Council D?emorandum No. 113
attached, discusses this funding). Those funds, in addition
to other CDBG funds already programmed, were needed to acquire
and prepare the site for development. The Hennepin County
Board will .consider this allocation at their meeting at the
end of August.
-Negotiations for the acquisition of 920 and 1016 West 66th
Street are proceeding.
The future of 901-03 Rae Drive was also discussed when the
planning commission considered the proposed project. The commission
suggested that the HRA look at the acquisition of the property be-
cause of-its declining condition. More recently, Richfield resi-
dents have contacted the city staff with their concerns. Residents
have indicated their concern that 901-03 Rae Drive would "suffer
the same fate" as 910 West 66th Street should the council approve
the rezon-ing. It is readily apparent that the acquisition, rehab-
ilitation, and disposition of two units at~901-03 Rae Drive, as
ownership housing, would be a stabilizing influence for the property.
HRA Letter No. 25 -5- August 15, 1983
However, it appears. no funding for acquisition is available for
at least one year. To rehabilitate this site economically, the
Vo-Tech students could be utilized. However, .they would already
be committed. to three years' worth of projects on 66th Street.
As an immediate alternative, and to perhaps assist in preventing
further decline, the city staff can recommend various home im-
provement finance mechanisms to the property owner.
As a result of this discussion, it is recommended that:
1. The staff continue to proceed with the development
of the Vo-Tech project .based on "Plan A" as a guide-
line
2. The Acting Executive Director transmit the following
information to the City Council:
A. No easement would be required across Q10 West
66th Street;
B. If rezoning occurs, a condition of the rezoning
would be the appropriate screening of the westerly
boundary of 910 West 66th Street for adjacent
residential development.
3. The staff will transit information to the property owner
of 901-03-Rae Drive about methods. to stabilize the
dwelling condition and information regarding financing
of .improvements.
Respectfully submitted,
~- ~ ~
1
Thomas A. b?organ, fir. ~
Acting Executive Director
cc: Community Development Director
City Planner
Housing and Redevelopment Coordinator
TAM/eja
HRA RESOLUTION N0.
RECOMMENDATION RELATING TO DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE AREA
BOUNDED BY 66TH STREET, RAE DRTVE, AND-COACH HOMES
WHEREAS, the Housing and .Redevelopment Authority of
Richfield, Minnesota.{HRA) has been evaluating the develop-
ment of housing within the area bounded by 66th Street,
Rae Drive, and the Coach-Homes development; and
WHEREAS, simultaneously, the City of Richfield has
been evaluating the rezoning of a:.resideritial parcel
(910 West 66th Street) within this area; .and
WHEREAS, .the HRA has developed conceptual.plans for
rehabilitating and stabilizing'-the housing at 920 and
1016 West 66th Street and thereby retaining the residential
character of the area; and
WHEREAS, the availability of funding affects the
scope of housing redevelopment that can .occur.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Housing and
Redevelopment Authority of Richfield,- Minnesota:
1) that .conceptual Plan "A", included as an attachment to
HRA No.. , will be-used as a guideline-for the final
site plan development of .the next Vo-Tech project,
2) If reaoning of the parcel :at-910 West 66th Street is
permitted, it is recommended that:
- an easement is not required for access to the
HRA site.
- effective, aesthetic, solid continuous screening
be provided and maintained near the western
lot line,
3) Staff-assist adjacent residential property-owners by
providing information on .property improvement financing.
Passed by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of
Richfield this 15th day of August, 1983.
Thomas E. Harms, Chairman
Joan Helmberger, Secretary.
VO-TECH DEVELOPPdENT- ~~~
66TH STREET
r^t.=32,690
= 3/4 acre
sT~~
ET
o ` .. m
z jai .. ~, oZ cp
z
t
~, ~
o Q g
~ l--
w ~
d-
=~; ' ~ W
a Z
O z
~ ~
_'' w
n > o
• X 4
. W~ ~ w
~ 0 w
w H _
°r`- w U
L n W ¢
.oso, ~~ oc
`'~~ . to
N
• N 2L
r
1 'P W
M
z ~ o
~ •°~ V -.,
r ~ w
t-' LL.
i =
• ~ g O U
• ~ °j ~ ~
a
s9`£
.bz R
__ ~ .
o P~ _
n ~ ~~~
N ~ ~¢Q3
r a ~~~~
~ ~~ ~ w ~
ti ~ ~}_W
ti °-m<
0
n ~ ~ Z ~~~~
4 ~o J ¢a~ ~
a- m~~
w ~~~~~a~
.~ - ~-
~~~ ~
' J v ~a
w ~ Q ~j a
Z ~'
N. ~ m
O f" w ra-
52 ~- O -~ O
Ow
F- . ~ w m z
Z ~
r Q ~ FW_- w O
U ~ = W~
(~ w
s ~ ~ 4 mw
i z
~ ~ Z G ~_
.~£ u! ( 3
Z ~
J
V ~
_ N. ~ ~ O
~ ~ ~?~
i
~. a ~
,~ w
~w
~ .(~ '~ s
a .
' ~
~~
~~ ~~~
~ ~~
0
N
O
O
W
_H
o~ d
W
U
Z
O
o < .. ~,
Z ~" z m
~ < £
o ~ 9
I- Q
Z ~"
W ~
~ w
d. Z
O Z
J ~
W
W J
w
~ ~
F- _
W U
W °C
t-
_.
F-
t0 Q
~ ~
_ _
U °
W w
~ ~
O ~
> ~
~~~3
J
~~~~
W ~ ~
~YN<W
~ ~ ~
~~~
~3~/
U~ ~ p
Z
~~~~~~~
w
H
~~
U '~
Z N 2
m J Q
O J F
N
W
(~ Z
H U o~
~ ~ wo
~ = wh
W
W ~ aU
D Q mw
RESOLUTION N0.48
RESOLUTION FINDING THAT THE ACQUISITION AND DISPOSITION
OF PROPERTY IS IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
WHEREAS, the Planning. Commission has reviewed ,the acquisition
and disposition of properties at 920 and 1016 West 66th Street,
and described as follows:
1. Lot 1 Rae Addition
2. Lot 8_Rae Addition
3. Commencing at a point the east and west quarter section line
distant 410 feet west from the east corner of Section 28
thence south at right angles to said east and west quarter
section line 74.6 feet to a point in the original military
reservation line which is 83.5 feet southeasterly measured
along said reservation line from the east and west quarter
section line thence south 79 degrees 38 minutes west 140.14
feet thence south 7 degrees 10 minutes west 115.44 feet
thence north 71 degrees 32 minutes west 405.09 feet to a
point of beginning thence continuing north 71 degrees 32
minutes west 140.53 feet thence north 13 degrees east a
distance of 165.9 feet thence south 83 degrees 50 minutes
east 140.9 feet thence south 13 degrees west 196.1 to point
of beginning except road.
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has found that the acquisition
and disposition of the property would serve a public purpose; and
. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has found that the acquisition
and disposition of-the property would be consistent with the City's
Comprehensive Plan.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Planning Commission
finds the acquisition and disposition of the above described property
for two-family residential use to be in conformance with the City's
adopted Comprehensive Plan.
Passed by the Planning Commission of the City of Richfield this
day of
ATTEST:
Mark Ahlquist, Chairman
Richfield Planning Commission
Maggie McDermott
HOUSING .AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
Office of Executive Director
HRA Letter. No. 24
Agenda August 15, 1983
Housing and Redevelopment
Authority Commissioners
City of Richfield
Council Members:
Subject: Public Hearing Regarding the Sale of
Property at 6822 Queer Avenue
In October, 1982, the HRA authorized a contract with South
Hennepin Vocational Technical Center (Vo-Tech) to substantially
rehabilitate a structure at 6822. Queen Avenue. Project details
included demolition of the "garage" house at this site and re-
location of a structure from 6640 Grand Avenue to 6822 Queen
Avenue. The rehabilitation work, which created a "super-insulated."
house, is completed and the house is ready to be sold. The
$48,000 contract with Vo-Tech will be paid from the proceeds of
the sale. ~ ~.
In order that the structure be sold and the contract paid
in a timely manner, it is appropriate for the HRA to authorize
the sale of the property to a moderate income family. However,
before a purchase agreement can be effective, the HRA must hold a
public hearing on the disposition of this property. A public hear=
ing has, therefore, been scheduled for the August 15, 1983 HRA
meeting. The planning commission has found the disposition of
this property to be in conformance with the city's comprehensive
plan.
Previous Vo-Tech rehabilitation projects have been financed
by_the FHA Section 235 low interest mortgage program. Because of
budget cuts in federal programs, the Section 235 program is no
longer available. Financing for this project will be provided by
a standard FHA 203B mortgage at an interest rate to be determined
at the time of closing. This type of mortgage is frequently util-
ized by first time home buyers, since the program permits lower
down payments. The present interest rate is approximately 13 1/2
percent with the HRA. paying a maximum of six points. An alterna-
tive mortgage program is available from the I~~innesota Housing
Finance Agency (MH'FA) in mid-August. The program offers an in-
terest rate of 10 1/4 percent with the HRA paying a maximum of
3 1/2 points. The MHFA mortgage is more attractive, but compet-
ition for commitments is strong. The MHFA financing would make
the property at 6822 Queen more affordable for a moderate income
family.
HRA Letter ~To. 24 -2- August 15, 1983
The selection process to determine a purchaser began in
April, 1983. The selection criteria required the applicants to:
-have a five to eight member family to best utilize-the
four bedroom home;
-have an annual income between $19,000 and $27,200, de-
pending upon family size (this was 80% of the metro area-
wide median income--a Section 8 level income);
-pay the initial sale price of $55,000 with $5,000 required
as a down payment;
-be subject to a second lien by the HRA for the difference
between the sale price and the actual value.. (This lien
is discussed in detail later in this letter);
-be a first time home buyer or not have owned a home within
the past three years.
Advertisements for qualified purchasers were published in the
Richfield Sun, A?inneapolis Star and Tribune, and the Richfield
Exchange publications. Four applications were received and pre-
liminarily evaluated. One of the applicants was qualified. The
other three had either owned homes less than three years ago, did
not have a large enough immediate family, or had a questionable
ability to assume a significant mortgage debt. The six. member
qualifying family, presently renting in Richfield, is currently
being evaluated for eligibility for an FHA 203B mortgage. Data.
privacy requirements prevent a release of information that might
identify the family.
In order to receive the firm commitment for financing, a
purchase agreement must be executed and authorized by the HRA
before the family can be determined eligible by FHA. The purchase
agreement is void and earnest money released in the event author-
ization is not received.
The purchase agreement also discusses the HRA second lien
placed on the property. After the $50,000 first lien mortgage to
the lender and the $5,000 downpayment, the purchaser is responsi-
ble for paying an additional $22,500 to the HRA. This amount is
the difference between the $55,000 sales price and the $77,500
FHA estimated value of the property. This amount accrues no in-
terest and would not-have to be paid by the purchaser until the
house is sold at some future time. Since project costs were
covered within the initial $55,000 sales price, none of the
$22,500 is needed now. This type of lien has also helped keep
the initial purchase price affordable to moderate. income families
in previous Vo-Tech projects.
A new element of the purchase agreement permits the HRA to
monitor energy expenditures during the first two years. This
should demonstrate whether the estimate of $150 to $200 per year
for heating costs was accurate.
HRA Letter No. 24 -3- August 15, 1983
It is not known at this time if the applicant is def inately
the qualified purchaser. FHA or MHFA will. make that determina-
tion once a loan package and purchase agreement are received.
However, because the lender has found them acceptable, FHA or
MHFA will likely find them acceptable also.
It is, therefore, recommended that the HRA adopt the attached
resolution authorizing the disposition of property at 6'822 Queen
Avenue and permitting the Acting Executive Director to effectuate
the sale of the property.
Respectfully submitted.
r
Thomas A. Morgan, Jr:
Acting Executive Director
TAM/eja
cc: .Community Development Director
Housing and Redevelopment Coordinator
HRA RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SALE OF PROPERTY
AT 6822 QUEEN AVENUE SOUTH
WHEREAS. the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of
Richfield., Minnesota (hereinafter referred to as the HRA) owns
certain real property located at 6822 Queen Avenue South, said
property legally described as follows:
Lot 6, Block_2
Tingdale Bros. Lincoln Hills Third Addition
Hennepin County; and.,
WHEREAS, the. property was acquired by the HRA so that the
South Hennepin Vocational Technical Center (Vo-Tech) could
relocate and rehabilitate a.house on the site and-the HRA could
subsequently-.sell the home to a moderate income family; and
WHEREAS, the rehabilitation-work is completed and dispo-
sition of the property would allow for the timely payment of
the Vo-Tech.:contract; and
WHEREAS, as the result of advertising, and in cooperation
with the lender, a qualified purchaser for 6822 Queen Avenue
South. has. been selected.. and it is likely that ,they will be found
eligible by FHA .or MHFA; and
WHEREAS, a purchase agreement must be authorized by the
HRA; and
WHEREAS, the conditions of sale include a sale price of
$55,000, a mortgage amount of $50,000, and provisions for a
second mortgage by-the HRA; and
WHEREAS, the purchaser will also be subject to any require-
ments imposed by FHA or MHFA; and
WHEREAS, the HRA has completed a public hearing on the
proposed disposition of 6822 Queen Avenue South.
NOW,. THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE HOUSING-AND REDEVEL-
OPMENT AUTHORITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA:
1) that the property located at 6822 Queen Avenue South
can be sold in accordance with the conditions of sale; and
2) that the Acting :Executive Director and-staff are
authorized to take such steps necessary to effectuate this
resolution..-and .any sales agreement.
Passed by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of
Richfield this 15th day of August, 1983.
Thomas E. Harms, Chairman
Joan Helmberger, Secretary
HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AITTHORITY
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Office of Executive Director
HRA Letter No. 23
Council Letter No. 280
Agenda August 15, 1983
The Honorable Mayor Housing and Redevelopment
and Authority Commissioners.
Members of .the City Council City of Richfield
City of Richf field
Council Members and Commissioners:
Subject: Presentation of Preliminary Concept for
Redevelopment of Graham Avenue Area, L/H/N
In March, 1979, the HRA and the City Council adopted several
plan modifications to the L/H/N project. .One of these modifica-
tions called for the renovation of the two existing structures at
6630 Lyndale Avenue (Trestman Music Building) and 6700 Lyndale
Avenue (Big Wheel Auto Building), the vacation of Graham Avenue,
and-the construction of additional commercial space in the vacated
right-of-way. All three structures would have an integrated
facade and the three parcels owned by the HRA at the rear of Big
Wheel Auto would be sold and utilized for parking.
At the August 15, 1983 HRA/City Council meeting, Mr. Jerry
Trestman and Mr. Richard Enrico will make a presentation of a
preliminary concept for the area.
Concept
Mr. Enrico, who presently operates Scarpelli's Restaurant
in Minneapolis, would be a tenant of Mr. Trestman's and would oper-
ate a restaurant with a hockey theme. In addition to serving
food, he feels a need to be licensed to serve alcoholic beverages
including liquor, in order to be successful. The proposed restaurant
would occupy a new structure of 6,000 to 7,000 square feet to be
constructed within the vacated Graham Avenue right-of-way. Other
appropriate retail uses would occupy the remaining space in the
development. -The land to the rear would be utilized for parking,
with Circle Place and the alley adjacent to the Big Wheel prop-
erty being utilized for access. The. facades of the three structures
would be renovated and architectually integrated. The feasibility
of this concept has not yet been fully determined, however, it
does meet the objectives which have been identified for this loca-
tion.
A restaurant appears to be appropriate for this location.
However, a restaurant without. a liquor license would be unable to
-2-
pay rent at a level. which would support new construction.
It would be necessary to relocate Big Wheel and the other
tenants in the 6700 Lyndale property. Typically, auto parts
stores pay rent at a level which is less than is needed to
support new construction and renovation. Also, people who
shop for auto parts tend to make single purpose trips. That is,
they purchase an auto part and do not shop at other stores.
Actions Necessary
The-HRA and the City Council would be responsible for the
following activities: The HRA would acquire the Big Wheel prop-
erty, relocate the occupants and sell the. property to Mr.
Trestman. The purchase price and resale price to Mr. Trestman
are not yet known., Tre three HRA owned parcels would be sold to
be utilized for parking. The City Council would be requested to
issue a liquor license and possibly provide tax exempt financing
(although only a limited amount of the proceeds could be utilized
for the restaurant portion).
The 6700 Lyndale property was sold in late 1981 to Triple
S. Investments.. Triple S is owned by some of the same people
who own the Big Wheel Auto Stores. Recently,-Big. Wheel Auto
bought out the Star Auto business and installed new store fixtures.
Some building renovation also took place with the installation of
a new furnace and repairs to the brick at the front of the prop-
erty. Mr. Shaller, who is a partner in Triple S and president
of Big Wheel Auto, recently indicated that for a "fair" price he
may be agreeable to selling his property. However, he was con-
cerned about a location for Big Wheel Auto as 6700 Lyndale seems
to be a very good location.
-The city staff and the potential developer and tenant are
now seeking an indication from the HRA and the City Council as
to wY:ether or not this development concept is appropriate for the
area. If it is .thought to be appropriate, the staff will begin
to pursue the issues which must be addressed and return to the
HRA and the City Council at the appropriate time for further
action.
Respectfully submitted,
1 /'`d1~• ~j
Thomas A. Morgan,`Jr~
Acting City Manager/H Executive Director
cc: Community Development Director
Housing and Redevelopment Coordinator
TAM/eja
_.. _ _ .
..~.... _
a s -,~
.~
~.
..v~~-~~
~~~~~~od