02-16-82 agendaHOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
Office of Executive Director
Housing and Redevelopment
Authority Commissioners ~
City of Richfield ~;
.~ '~ ~.
Commissioners: C\
HRA Letter No. 10
Agenda February 16, 1982
(1 c_{ ~.~_.ti.el ~C
Subject: Metropolitan Council Policy 39
At the January HRA Meeting, during a discussion on residential
preference for housing programs, the HRA indicated a desire for
additional information on the Metropolitan Council's Policy 39.
It was indicated to the HRA that the city could gain advantages
d ~;~ under Policy 39 if we refrained from adopting a Richfield resident
preference system. The following information is presented to
inform the HRA more fully on Policy 39.
.. ~~
c.
Since 1971, the Metropolitan Council has used its statistics}}y
imposed plan review responsibilities for all grant applications
involving state or federal funds to reward communities which plan
for and provide low and moderate income housing opportunities.
The council has done so based on Policy 39 of the Housing chapter,
Metropolitan Development Guide. Folicy 39 established funding
priorities based upon each community's lower cost housing oppor-
tunities, and its plans, policies and programs to provide such
housing in the future. Communities are ranked based on criteria
which measure local housing performance. The ranking is then
applied when applications from local governments are submitted for
state or federal funds. Grants for transportation, criminal
justice, parks and open space, and aging can be ranked and awarded
based in part on the Policy 39 ranking.
Richfield presently ranks 7th out of the 190 communities in
the metropolitan area on its housing efforts as measured by
Policy 39. The city of St. Paul ranks first, followed by Minnea-
polis,Rosemount, Coon Rapids, Hopkins, Shakopee, and Richfield.
Twenty-five criteria are utilized to evaluate housing programs
and establish the ranking. A copy of the ranking data used by
the Metropolitan Council is attached. Richfield can maintain its
ranking by:
- continuing to receive proposals from developers for
subsidized housing;
-~,,. ,t
- building more attached forms of housing (townhouses,
condominiums) each year as has been done with the Duraps
Ltd., Coach Homes of Richfield and the Knutson Lake Shore
Drive condominium, project;
Of course, maintaining our ranking assumes that the other 189
munities do not increase their ranking through improved housing
formance.
Richfield can improve its ranking by:
- increasing the stock of owner-occupied housing affordable
to low, moderate and modest income persons;
- increasing, t)he stock of affordable rental housing;
- ~_.
- adopting ordinances and authorizing resolutions that either
directly assist the development of housing affordable to low
and moderate persons (waiving of permit fees and zoning
changes) or "promote inter-jurisdictional mobility" (no
residency preference policy);
- removing ordinance requirements for minimum unit sizes in
multi-family housing; and
- adopting an ordinance permitting the creation or expansion
of mobile home parks.
Richfield's ranking is important for receiving grant monies
park and open space development. When the city applies for
her a federal Land and Water Conversation Act (LAWCON) grant
a State of Minnesota Legislative Commission on Minnesota
ources (LCMR) grant, the Metropolitan Council will consider
icy 39 when processing the application. In evaluating a LAWCON
LCMR grant request, one-third of the ranking evaluation is
ed on a community's rank with Policy :i9. Because Richfield
performed well in housing, we have ranked high in application
luations for park and open space grant monies. The city has
eived LAWCON and LCMR grants totalling $143,750 for the
elopment of D7onroe Fairwood Park and $166,000 for the develop-
t of Adams Hill Park. An LCMR grant was also responsible for
rovements at Sheridan Park, the Woodlake Nature Center board
k, and the Taft Park fishing dock. Since these grants can
er as much as 75 percent of project costs, they have been
nificant in reducing the amount of local funds for park devel-
ent. Repayment of these grant funds is not required.
Respectfully submitted,
Karl Nollenberger
Executive Director
sh
/'~
.r
POLICY 39 HOUSIr;G PERFORr~IANCE SCORES
(11-10-f31)
Community Points Community Points
St. Paul 82.0 Falcon Heigi~ts 43.5
Minneapolis f31,5 rlound 42,5 '
Rosemount 77_.5 New Brighton 42.0
Coon Rapids 69.0 Roseville 41,5
Hopkins 67.0 4Jayzata 41,5
Shakopee 66.5 Apple Valley 41.5
Richfield .64.5 Burnsville 41.0
Eden Prairie 62.5 Lexington 41.0
Eaqan 62.5 Cottage Grove 40.0
Stillwater 62.0 Champlin 39.5
Chaska 52.0 Inver Grove Heights 39.0
Oakdale 59,5 !•Jillernie 3B.5
Anoka 5q.5 !•;hite .Bear lake 37.5
Fridley .57.5 Excelsior -37-5. ~'~•5
North St. Paul 57,5 Loretto 37.0
Blaine 57.5 fhanhassen 37.0
Prior Lake 57,E St. Anthony 35.5
Forest Lake 57.0 Nillton 35.0
South St. Paul 57.(1 Cologne 34,5.
Robbinsdale 55.5 t•?endota -34.5.
Pl•yrnouth 55.E St. Pa~rl Park 34,5
Brooklyn Center 54. , Arden 11i 11S 34.5
Hastings 51.0 Little Canada 34.0
Belle Plaine. 54.0 Carver 3n.0
Maplewood 53.5 t•layer 3.1.0
St, Louis Park 53.5 Centerville 34.(1
Harnhurg X3.0 !dh i to Gear Lake T•,~p. 33, 5
Bloomington 52.5 Louisville Tv~p. 33.E
t•'aple Grove 52.5 Crystal 33,0
r~ew Hope 52.0 Lino La~:es 32.5
Oak Park Heights 52.:1 !•'oodhury 32.0
Vadnais Heights 50.0 Orono 31.5
Lona Lake SO.q "ounds ,'ie•;: ~:-~-- ZB•5
St. Francis 50.0 nayport 31.5
Farmington -^~}-:~ 5 ~.O !_aucier-+.ale 30.5
t~or-•rood •'~~.~ tleepha:•c~n 30.O
Co 1 u^rb i a He i qh is 19.0 Shore•,rcod 30.0
Jordan '•~.~ East ?ethel ,'.9,5
tt~'.•rport. "?.!1 Shore:-i~•~;r ?_9.5
St. Rnnifaeius •~~' ~ :'•'irnetriSta 29.01
b;aconia %~7.'1 ';c~+.' G~~r..rang 2.5
1•:~St St. P~u1 •'?.rl S3va:n -~=~:-0--~ `?r~.O
t '!
La~e':1 ~ 27.5
Brc~klyn Park ~!~.~r ;il.~~:~~1~- T~•~n. 27.5
Edina ,1F,.~~ Circ'f~ ~ in~~s .'.6.~
;•'inneton;a ~`~.'~ Gem t. ,:~.~~ .'.S.O
~;~:h[c•nedi ~`~.'1 Osseo ZS.t)
Gnlrlen Valley ~1.~+ Lake Elr.o 24.~~
Young r~:,r,e,-io,-r 1:+,r1 Lin;~ca,l T•,•,p. ?a.S
H
Community Points Community Points
Coates ?_3.5 Marshan Tvrp. 16.0
Mew Scandia Tvrp. 23.5 St. Marys Point 16.0
Spring Lake Twp. ?_3.0 Hampton 1.5.5
Spring Park 2?_.5 Greenfield 15.5
Randolph Twp. 2?_.5 Lakeland 15.5
St. Lawrence Tvrp. 22.5 Young America Twp. 15.5
Ho ~ lyarood Tarp. ?2.0 Credit River T+•rp. 15.5
Belle Plaine T+•rp. 21.5 Burns Tv;p. 15.0
Andover 21.5 Sc i ota T+•rp . 15.5
Tonka Bay ?.1.5 Hampton Twp. 14.5
Spring Lake Park ?_1..5 Afton 14.5
Birchvrood 21.0 Sand Creek Twp. 14.5
Randolph ?_1 .0 Douglas Twp. 14.5
Helena Twp. 21.0 Dahlgren Twp. 14.0
Forest Lake Tarp. 20.5 Laketoa,n T+vp. 14.0
Lake St. Croix Beech 20.5 tdininc~er Tarp. 14.0
New Market 20.5 i•tedina 14.0
Ramsey 20.5 Hassan Twp. 13.5
Rogers 20.0 Vermillion Twp. 13.5
-Cedar Lake Twp. 20.0 Hancock Tarp. 13.5
Bethel 20.0 Columbus Twp. 12.5
Independence 19.5 Rockford 1?_.5
Hugo ] Q . 5 4Jood 1 anc~ 12.5
Empire Twp. 19.0 Ptarine-nn-St. Croix 12.5
Watertown Twp, 1Q.0 Oak Grove T+vp. 12.0
Dayton 113:5 San Francisco Twp. 12.0
Vermillion 1£3.0 t•tay T~::p: 11.5
Green;•rood ] 6.0 Landf ~~ 1 1 11.5
Grey Cloud Island Twp. 113.0 t'endota Heights 11.0
Jaconia T+•ro. l:?.0 Hanover 10.5
Eureka Tarp. 1;3.0 t•tinnetc;nka Qeach 10.0
Chaska Twp. 1f3.0 Victoria 10.0
Castle Pock Ta:p. 17. ~ Camden T+vp. 9.5
Maple Plain X7.5 1'edicine La~:e g.5
',Jaterford Twp. 17.5 Ravenna T~.rp. 9.5
Corc's~ran ?7.5 Lakeland Shores 9.~
tye+v Trier x.7.5 '•~iesvi I le 7.5
`Jew J•?arket T+•m. 17.5 Denrr~r{ T•,:o. 7.0
Lilyd~~le 17.0 f.,rznt T..n. 7.0
Greenvale Tvrp. 17.0 Pine Springs 6.`~
Sti 11+•rater Twp. 17.0 Del l•::ocd 5.0
Jam Lake TwD. 17.0 ilorti~ oafs ~1.`%
Jackson Tarp. 15.5 ~.est Lai:eland T;•rp. 3.5
Elko 1%,.~J i3enton T~;:n. 3.5
Bayto+vn T+•rr. 1h.0 Sunfi,r+ La~:~ 2.5
L"? 7 C~,~
CT l1T .L W N 1-• t:
X
~ T b V+ r r
A:~r-coo :;~
o3rra~ o
•9 . o . (n
O C7 > D
r/, (,, . z z a
me opd v
p~"IIC C
rv+~:3
N D H O O •--1
cDZ- pd
a n C
iJf ~ D ~J O
Hr-+c7Cm
dm"'z= z
H•: r-rH-Im I >
N~tm-1D~ I T
m• Ginrin I -n
t~ rn z 10
H 1 .'J
'9 I D
i D
r I CJ
Nllloo•w^fJ f r
1 rn --r
O O O O o 0 U
t D -+
IZD
I O r
r r-+
r o o Co rl l d '~
1 H U
VrDZ`'3 1 G~-'
'7rm00 1 m'T_
f'1 -1 '- d +'? I •'' -1
c')rn~rnm I ~`•rf
H ;J -- in (n 1 m
Duo-+-1
r:~i~ 1 i 1 c~
-.rnc~c~ I cN
ZH(1~00 I C•
mG--1NN I NL7
rn m I -~ -~ 1 r~
v ~ 1=
Vo .~07J0 1 G)
O (.~
C --~ ` --
Uf -1 m
H ~ 7J
r (n
WNNIT
O O lJl O
1•+ 1--• .~ r--. F-. H N
00VCVT ~^ WN
H H•~, r r~ r
moon 1 0
Hr-. . .U:_ I O
-I --+ -+ ' m 1 :'
.~ '~ r1T y 1 r-
;c c --~ ~ d I d
m -'1 •~ V C7 I
Gl~ra I •-'
-i ~ %~ ?J O O 1 T
C„~,r)Orr t n
Z O v 0 f
r •^.O I r'
V1 ~ • 1
NNC~ WWW
000 000
--1
C
NNNrJNN.-'
lfl ~'~UfJ r:7 .~
r .~ r .~ .- .~ r I n
m +. -.~ -. r`i ... I'~ 1
-; ~ 1 r+T
O I ~~
_.~ fir.. •~S
r I
Nr~C)v+-GCi^ I C
~w;vrvv, ,n I o
.• r^ .r ~ ~ ~~ I --J
e ;~ rv •• •~ r v
..~. 1
r^m t
(P N 1 "~
1 C"1
1 RT
NNNtJN N 1 N
O O O O O O
(T (;, 1~ VI ; J r-~ ti
;p ~-•r000 ~J
C=:rte:=~ C
'7• O• O
o n DD m
toc,~•~~:~ A
me odd cn
C7y"9C
• rr,~~3
(n D_HOo
c: dd
po c)...0
NCD ;~O
dm
H a-~ 1-. -1 !Tl I D
N l n m ~-+ :-- ?J I T
m• ~IArL~ I '^
c rn c. l o
H I 77
'9 1 d
1 D
I b7
IV ~ W 1 r
• 1 m -f
O lP l1T O
I > --1
1 >
I dr
r. r
/-+ C1 .D OD V I d '7
• 1 H O
t;TD~ ~ I ~/-+
-Jrrnoo I mC
m -~ ~ '~ d 1 :iJ -i
nrn rim I IfN
:~ O ~ -1
rDrJ 1 I I 'N
--imnn I o0
r n m 1 -. -~ I >-~
'~ n 1
t!T "'O;DO I ~7
O 6~ r1 : _
(n~-+m
H ,a ;D
r (,~
N W
O O
(UVC- VTe^WN
rw H •-. ~ r .: r
~- --- oo:c 1 n
~-..-~ .: ~ - -- -- I o
•--1} ~T ,• 1 r
:JC-T~d + d
m ., C O L~ C I O
:>d-rd
(~ r p I H
-~~ :CC 1 'J
.-•70» t r
O ~• :J Garr I rn
Q - 1
•- ^T C 1 m
(,'1 .r 1
- I -'
• 1
I ~
+ •--~
N I :7
O i ~_
r J rJ rJ N N rJ •--•
Lam..^i..N.-o~
inr --rTr-•.•_
r- .~ - ~. ,- ... r n
rn ^. ..~-.,r- i U
. ~ ~ '7
;,~
_ - ~r .r-
r I 7
~' r.) ~.) -~ I iJ
orTf-t rn-~-- I
f•t r. I
lP h 1
! O
1 r1
N rJ I ~'+
O O
~,. ,;, . ~. I .;
;K
'0 -n ~- Vrrr
~J > r- C O O R7
O ~ r CJ ._ ~ O
-p . r. C7
o cl DD x
me cpd O
C~rin33 d
i/f y H 00
c>Z2dp
G7 ("~ (.7
N,D ;JO
HH n Cm:=
dm z~=
H G H H- i m ( D
Nmm--ID.~J 1 m
m• GNrUT 1 T
p rn .; t o
H 1 ;U
-D I d
1 D
i CA
In I r
• t rn --1
o O
1 D -+
IyD
1 p r
r r
r o .o Oo v 1 d '7
I H O
NDZ33 I ,H
"~ r m 0 0 1 m Z
m-+'-d7 I ~-~
C)m`mIn 1 NCJT
D~ 0-+-1
r:>C i t I SH
-+rnc~c~ 1 oN
ZHtJT00 I C•
m ! -~ CfT %1> I N l,~
m rn I --c -1 i H
p n i Z
(1T C O ;^. O I O
C-1'=
(n -+ m
rr ,. ;D
r ;n
'~
W
1--• 1-+ .~ r--. 1~ v .~
(bv0. 1JT -'~ W N
---- :nc~ 0 I O
.-....-: ~ - :: I 0
•-/ -1 -1 ~ fTl ~ 1 >
-~ -~ ~ + ~~
;oo-,tea I d
m• C~=0t,~0 1 d
7J :»C-~d
<f7r~ 1 •-+
>C "700 1 .L
-~ > ,L•UO I "7
.-. -.: -~ O > :r I r
Z O O • 1
r ~ O I m
~ .-.. 1 Z
I ~*
1 H
1 r--r
N t O
o 1
N rJ rJ .'J 'J N •-'
V~ ~^wN.~o J
nr-~r:`r
r ~. .-.r.-..r 1 (7
1 ~. 1 ~. i I J
•7 r-. .... ' ..-. ~. 1 l,'1
':r ,r ;r3
r i
rrno~,-tc7^l I d
o: «- :h-~
C .'y V, ' I C
nl ... I D
n r- rn m -+ -~ 1 ~-'
.-. .-~ I
r. n 1 ',•
V, V, I'.
1 n
i m
N I V+
O
;K
"~TDNrr
o3r~~L o
-p . p . G7
O C7 D D p
N V1 • - 1-r
me orJo
dw-cc cn
ruT33 d
c~z~pd +-'
a n c~ m
W .T' D r<7 0
HH(7Cr'1 :_
rd+mHr-+--rm 1 7
Nmm-+?>~ 11'I
m• GtPr VT I T
p m zlo
• H 1 ;O
T I p
+ D
I W
W r r i r
I m-'r
o In to O
1 r -+
IzD
I p r
r r
Ho.oOov I dT
I H O
-crmoc I me
m-i r,Ch I •TJ --~
n m ~~*+ m + (n in
:~~v-+-+
rDi7 I 1 I ~lr
--rmc~c~.l om
ZH(n00 I C•
m m I -+ --I I r-+
d n Iz
s "" ~~ ;7 f-` I G~
O :,~ m '=-
CC --1
N ---+ fn
H D ?J
G) r ~~
NWP~^VT
0 O 0 1.1T O
r., .-i •~
ib~J.~l,'1~^WfJ
___. '~vo^_ I n
' - I ~
• - I V1
~o-•~ ,' -
rT--,•-- Gov I '~
m• n :~(~ I d
C r-Jr~ I H
C -•J y'1 f.7 1
D ''1C.7 I "7
O ;"J C '::~ f r r 1 rn
C ~ • i
C7` ~'~ '~ l•+ W W
o n o 0 0 0
I ~
"TJ ~iDNrr -.
~Dr'-000 ~ o
o3rtz~~ H to
"9• O• C7 \
o ~ DD = o
me opd H ~
pw-oc m co
rtn-'3 r r
(fT D H C7 O d
cD~zpd
w n c)
NzD :tJO
HHC)Cm'=
drnzz= z
H G H H~ -1 m I 'J
Nrnm-IDS 1 T
m. G N r N 1 T
d m zlo
H 1 ;O
'~ 1 d
1 D
I CA
N r W N H I r
I m-i
0 0 0 0 0 0
1 > -~
9J l>\ o s' ul ~l 1 z n
for
r r
r o .o Co S I C '7
. I H O
(1TD: -' ~ 1 ~H
'Drm00 1 m.z
m-1~pi7 I ;O -1
c)m mm I IITN
HiO?c.~:n 1 m
Dzo-+~
rDC 1 I 1 zoo
-I m c~ r7 1 0 ~
ZH(POO I C•
m < -1 V+ N 1 V~ lIT
m m 1 -~ --1 1 ~-+
d n I'-
N :': O ~ C 1 GJ
ONm'~
C -i
N -~ Rl
H D :'J
r (n
O
H
NC11 CT l.t~
000111 O
r 1~ / .~ 1~-+ N ~
q ~1 c:~1I11~ W N
~. ~'~
_ ---- ~cr.Jn I c
fir; " ~. ;*J C7 1 D
rn• (l2OG,C 1 p
r » O -~ O
• ~n~ I :?
L ~ C O I
~Jp770rr I r
~.c C• 1 3
iP r-. • I
r.. 1 D
--/
r.r
H
H
o c No•uWWW
... 0000000
S° r,` s Lo W lr~ W
'J •J rJ •+rJ .'J ....
1„'T . U ' J .•' a7 •J
t1 ~~ Z (.~
OC '•-•r-
Clr _ -'r'
r .-.. . , .-. 1 f1
rn :~ .. ., 1 0
. r I I
I ^t
r-' i r 3
rl-c• ~•~-~• I =`
I
O "T
--~ .~ ~; ~; , .c
:~ .~ ,- , -- -- I o
O r n f n m .-• -, I .-•
r--. '-. 1
rrn 1
L7 ~,, 1
1 C,
I m
N N N N 1 V+
O O O U
L -. ~^ t.+ r J .-- o -o
"' `^ -. ~^
r~. ~ . - ~ C .-.
tyrZr'~r~
~7 H 11 ~ :1
r .... r .-. r- .-. r 1 n
•1 ~ 1 ti 1 C
.J .-. ..-. 1 •.~
__r_3r:_ r3
r't-...~. ~.....~. 1
r I
1JnG~N-C `_ O 17
~Ar, (r~ I o
Gl '7 ti .-...° 1 Q
rn rn m .-• .-• + -•
.-. ~. I
f', r•7 1 :~
V, t,~ I Z
1 (7
I T
N NNrJ t N
r •0 000
1~) U CJ AJ iU 3J U
C'J
O
3
C
H
-~
'(
C_
V1
H
O
T
n
:o
O
3
n
rn
n
?J
--1
n
m
0
N
~~
#~
~~r;
gy`p' WL j>3< r
~,~
GUIDELINES FOR PRIORITY FUNDING FOR HOUSING PERFORMAPICE
POLICY 39 EVALUATION CRITERIA
The following are the factors which the Metropolitan Council
uses to evaluate a community's housing performance. The
relative weight of each factor is indicated.
AFFORDABLE A;ID DIVERSE HOUSI;IG
Points
0 to 5* 1. Low- and Moderate-Income Homeownership '?nits -
Municipalities are ranked according to the
1 percentage of their total homesteaded hcusing
units in 1980 `•aY:ich are affordable to low= and
moderate-income persons based or. 1980 mar',cet
value data cocapiled by the county. The
percentage of mobile homes is added to arrive
at a total percentage. .
0 to 5'~ 2. Loca- ar.d `".oder3te-Incor-e Rental Units -
a Municipalities are ranked according to the
percentas~e of their total rental hous ir~~, in a
price range affordable to low- and mod~rate-
income persons based on the. most current
census data. The percentage of subsea^:?rd
rental units is subtracted to arrive a~ a
total percentas~e. (For example - units
renting fcr S1~? or less, 1970 census.)
0 ~0 5* 3. Subs~~~°e~' '-'.cusi^.~ Un_ts - ^
V ~ ~ ~
;"un_^,pa~~~~es are• rar.xed acc.,rd_.^." o ."e
~ oercentag° o.' .,'.•:elr total house nq s~oc'~ vha~
is co~apr ised of subs id `_zed ..^ : is cor.str~~c ted ,
h tee' or apprcved b_r t::e `~.r.dirg
pure used, ass_s
age..^.cies for constr`.:ction, purchase or
assistance in the ccr-~+Jn-t'% for lof.~- ar.d
T d rat _^ccmA perscr.s. (-^c_udes c;-~~ _ow
rent oub'__c ':ous_^,g r°^t supp_eme.^.t pr erects,
g d ;,,^_ts Sect_cr. 2?5, %.7 a.,d
Section ass'_s~e `
_'.~ 1 -~~ '~e _ :l:_":3:~~{or ^Pr ., pr7 ~?~t3, 3••r± ~.: :::S
~:..^.a7Ce'~ •" .SS::AC~ ~.v ;'-~o .'3. ^PrS ;;,~^.;?
C
~~~ ^ll _ i~"3' cn
~ ~{~~ oo n
g I `I- 1
. ~ ~~ni ~.~ l ~
a,~ ~~
1
Points
0 to t0* 4. Allocation Plan Achievement -
~ Municipalities are awarded points based on •~
the percentage of the 1980-1983 Subsidized
-.Housing Allocation Plan's~* family ar.d large
family foals which the communities have
achieved- as follows:
58.0~.,~,~r~+~.r- ~~~~ 100+ - 10 points 50-59~ - 5 points
~1 a ~~-...T~ ~ 90-99 a - 9 ~t0-49 a - a
80-89 0 - 8 30_?0_.- 3 -
70-79 e - 7 20-29 ~ -
60-69~ - 6 1-190 - 1 I
Municipalities not allocated individual
numerical goals in the 1980-1983 plan but
providing subsidized housing opportunities
during the period of this plan through the
allocation to the "balance of-the Metropoiitar.
Area" receive a point for each family or large
family unit achieved up tc 10 points.
5 O 5. Fa~~ ilv Subsidized Housinsz Achieve^~e^t -
Municipalities in which two per^ent or more of
- the total housing'stoc;c is lcw-wand ;aoderate-
income subsidized receive five po~*;ts if 50
percent or more of such-housin3 is not ~ ~~~
specifically designated as elderlf units.
5. Proposed Subsidize% Housing -
a Municipalities receive an addition=_: two
points if they can verify that in t!:e past two
years they have received a proposa_ fer a
family subsidized housing develop;~er,t not yet
selected for fund i n.~ by HUB, ~'-- o^ ~ ^~~iA
.....' .a ~ n~
whic:~ is consistent with regior.'_ 5ca'_s and Q~~~`,
pCli-Gies, ?~~ :'Cr which -they ha'!e ~..,nvPd ~crFux~UN"`
necessar_~ ~:unicipal approvals a::d wcu'_:i issue
a bu_ld-::3 permit cr can demcr.strate ^?
0 tc 5~ 7. i•!edes`-~cs` -:cTpcwnArs!~_p 'i^
c~ uuniC_~3__,i?s a^o ..~^~eC+ aCC'.^''_ ~'
p"rcer~t3~°°_FO-• t~ei. total !?C.^.oc~a~av~±C?~IOL'S?Il
units in 9a0 which 3^e :+:t::_.. a modes` g
• -Cost
ra^ge 5ased en t 980 ~nark~ ` va' ue data co:-p t lid
by the county. V _
`~~~ ;~!un_cips__~_es a.^e rar{e~: acc~..a_. _c `
pence^t~keMo: t~:ei. fora- rA^Vz_ ~;~ ~ e
^ sus:::g
'•~1_...._.^. 3 '.'.C:t'c,.-CCS~. ^-~r,~o ~35,~.+ C.; _^a ."..OS~
Cl`.'.'.°.' ~ ° s r
..Art _.,.? : cr bPtwPe.^. .; • 0 and ~ ~ :" ~ ~?„0
~ J ~ r
41n~`ISJ
sir ~.~~~~
A
';! ..
_ z;
„#
Points
0 to 5~ b 9. New Modest-Cost Housing Achievements -
Municipalities are awarded points upon
verification of new modest-cost housing units
rented or homesteaded within their
• jurisdiction for the first time during the
previous calendar year. Points will not be
awarded ~.rhen rental units given points in
previous criteria are converted to ownership
units. Points will be awarded for the city's
regional fair share new modest-cost private
market housing achievement according to the
following percentages: ~ ~ „~,~~ ~
10+ percent - 6 points
6-9 percent - 4 points
3-5 percent - 2 points
0-2 percent - 0 points
1 ~o ac~ ~o,,,~r~ _ ~~~ v~,-o
The Council will adjust the unit value and
rent limit for modest-cost housing annually
based on HUD-determined income categories
for the S~?SA. The number of modest-cost units
produced in a single-year which exceeds ten
percent of a municipality's fair share goal
may be carried over and counted toward the
next year's achievement.
0 to 5~ 10. Alternative Housing T~Jpes -
~ Municipalities are ranked according to the
J percentage of their total rew housing unit or
occupancy per;~its issued in the previous ~ ~1,,,,,;,
~~ nc ~-~ ,
calendar year for dwelling units other than
traditional, detached single-family homes,
such as all forms of attached housing, mobile
homes or zero-lot line units. the
municipality must have eermitted at least five
new ur.'_ts or a number which rep^ese^ts five
percent (at least five units) o.' i~s
fcrecasted !:eusehold g^~:~th t^roug^ ;g?0
aCCCrd:ng tC Deve IOD,:.en ~ ^ .ra.^.:ewOr't for?C3StS . ~'~
'c? 1 ; .. Housi:,~ =or Soecia? `lee's -
,1unic_ca? it:es are awarded t::o po:r.ts if
wi..h_n t'.:e_r jUr'_S~_Ct_On. ~ 1 ~fa'~er3-, St :te ~
• cCl:.^. ~': Cr -CC~~ :ll^.~S Cr tC:OSe C:' a ^C^.-~r0"
or~ar._~at.c-: '.^.ave bee.^. used tc ^~... c:^.a;e ?^d
J •
P^7 ~e .,~J{ Jpn .._al .:^. t9 .. .. v:'~'/_'~e _.. ~^SP~
C~
~OOe_„~
}.n~V : ,., r J .A..... ^?_r•l ,^e9: ~er~.5 Cn 2n
C.
~
~ a~s.Si~-~nc•2.
^
o^`^.,~, ''_S.S,
Of .... ~':? '_3C°_:'1?^.~ C.° a~Ul., 0~`~ `~.-i~~rb~
'" ~.. ~ - .. .'~ J '~ ~ J : ~ :..~ r'~ y ~+ n C ^ - '1 ^ C : .. ..~~ ~ r ~i ~ ° i r' `r.~ ~ ~__ j r. f,('1~ o.~
/,
lace..;,ed ~v _::e D'^~r:._.e^., c: ..?a'_t.. or
~~
~epartwe.^. t c. ?sb? _.. ~?'_...^e a7-c."•
CrC•Ji ^~oy •o^C„^3^•! C'' CE',^":3.^.A.^.: .^.CU3_^~ `'~^
t-?e p".JS:~a__;J ':a.'1.~.~C3^~?~, :a e.^.t3~~f i~~~
mental_•~ r^tar,iAd or c^e'aica'_ly de^e^dz^t is
locsted in t".e cc^:~un:ty.
GOALS AND IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAMS TO PROVIDE
HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES
Municipalities receive points as indicated if their
comprehensive plan includes goals and implementation programs
as described below:
Points
3 ~ 12. Low- and Moderate-Income Housing ODOOrtunities
Goa l -
A numerical low- and moderate-income housing
opportunities goal consistent with the ~ ~ ^~
Council's ten year fair share plan for low- "7 Z ^~ ~ "r
and moderate-income housing opportunities.~*
3 "' 13. Modest-Cost Housing Onoortunities Goal -
A numerical modest-cost housing soportunities
goal consistent with the Council's ten year ~
fair share plan for new modest-cost private
mar!~cet housing opportunities.'~'~
3 ~ 1-~ . Programs
Income H
Specific
programs
low- and
goal.
to Achieve the Low- ar.d ?~Ioderate-
cusir,Q Goal -
local, regional, state or federal ~ ~`~ a
to be used to achieve the co,:~munity's ~3a'
moderate-income housing ODpOrtunitieS
3 :~ 15 . Prograr~s to Achieve Housing ua~ nter~nc~ and
Rehaoil=`at_~n Gca~s -
SpecificVrehabilita~icn loan ar.d grant ~
progra:.,s or local funding efforts to be uses'
to ac~:ieve the community's housing :aaintera:~ce
and rehabilitation goals. C~IIG
r ~ ~..., t\~ ~.~ P,.,~, ~..,, - p ~ ~,,.~ F~~! ~ ~-~
TGrX c~iY~'-'s rY.., ~ ~A~1 c~-'c.~ ~ ... ~~t~~/~~
l0 3s~ ., , ~,.~_~ ~_
5 16 . Loca 1 -?c,;s -,Q T.. ~ .a` ~ ~Ja~ - ^~ s^a~ an.i
'aur.:c_aa:_ties ~..hc.". hays used `''_sca? device.;
or i.^.i .,_at_ves s~ c?: as tax-exe~^^t ~:or-za;~e
roypn,~e bO.ndS, ~ax irC~on.a.^.t ~`i-~anL+inr :.ola`.
.i5 a(~
to hous_:~g, or ^GpG cr lccal :'a.^.ds to assist
the deveco:aent of .new low- and mederate-
inco:~e cr mcdest-cost hcusir.g opcertuaities
are a~«ar~'ed twe po:ats for eac!: actin-.
?o;.^.ts a^e a::ar~'ed once :'or each *j~P o~.
actin-`. a^d ar° ^:a_^ta_^ed fen two~yea--~ or
uaY:.rU~ of Six ^O.:~tS.
;~.` ,
x'~~~.r-
+ F,
,,~
-,K.v*
Points
6 a
6 ~
i7. Local Housing Initiatives - Official Controls -
Municipalities are awarded two points for
each of several additional activities for ~~~~,,~Ct;~
which .it can be demonstrated that new lower-
cost housing opportunities have been created I~~~,~~~.~C~°, rp
in -the community. The activities may be ~^'-~'"~`
official controls used specifically to assist 9~.~«~,°"' °~~'~(
the development of new low- and moderate- ~^ ~"~' ~ ~''~
income or modest-cost housing such as the
waiving of permit fees or dedications, the
establishment of mandatory inclusionary zoning
requirements, the provision of density
bonuses or the implementation of policies or C~~~«,~.
programs which promote interjurisdictional „~
mobility such as the elimination of residency f1~s~
_ preferences for assisted housing. Points are _
awarded once for each type of activity and are
maintained for two years, or as long as the
activity is continuing. Maximum of six points. ~~~-~
Official controls for which points are 7~~.,..~~ ~~'T
subsequently awarded under Codes and ~~2-~ '~~"~`"`
Ordinances {below) are not awarded points in
this criterion. •
18. Local Housing Initiatives - Preservation of
ousinq Stock
Municipalities are awarded two points for each
use of a fiscal device, initiative or
impler~entatior. of an official control which
assists in the preservaticn of housing stock.
These initiatives may be official ccr.tro'_s c~;~ c~:C
such as a housing maintenance cede, a '~~ -rt~~-~ ~Y
mainter.ar.ce code en: crcement progra~a o~ .~~,~~_,,,
s_milar :~cni Lori^.g effort to DrAyor1~, fit,,, ~~~ ~~"
deterioration, or the initiative may to a '
fiscal device cr tool Whi~^ •Nou_d r.ot
otherwise be avai'_able without kcal
initiat:ve sue: as the use of CLaG or local
funds fcr !:cus_.^.g rQ:^.a5i~.tation ac~_v_~_~~.
?pints are awarded for each type of ac~_•ri`y
and are :::a..^.tai'led fOr two fe3^s, Or aS ~CC:~
aS the aCti'rlt:' iS CC:ltinui:"liS. uaYi":t.7 O:~
Slx aO1ntS.
5
CODES AND ORDINANCES
Municipalities receive points as indicated for current codes
and ordinances as described below: "~
Points
2 a 19. Sir.~le-Family Development Densities -
Zoning ordinances or standards which permit
single-family residential-development at
densities consistent with the Council's land
use advisory standards.~'~
2 ~~ 20. Multifamily Development Densities -
Zoning ordinances or standards which permit
multifamily residential development at
densities consistent 'with the Council's land
use advisory standards.*~
2 ~ ~ 21. Single-Family Housinsr Size -
No :souse size requirements for single-family
housing.
Z ~ 22. i•'~alti`'amily Unit Size -
• J . J rI S.~ P ~] ~
No unit size requirements for multifa~^ily 'J e~ ~
housing.
2 ~ 23 . S?n~le-Fami 1v Garasre Reouirements -
Local land use regulation which does not
require the construction of a ga:'age or
covered parking space with a single-family
detached housing unit.
2 c7 2u . Multi ..°a:~ily Gar?~e Recu~re^~e.^.~ -
Local land use regulation w:^.ic:~ does not
req•.::re t"e cor.structior. of a garage or
covered park_^g space with s_ng e-°a:aily
3ttaCti:e~ or multi °a^lily hcusi^g~units unless
p:'000S3~S for SUCK tyCe O~ ~e'JC=C~.".lentS d0 nC~
:..^.C_ude 4:.`la~ t~:? .'^.u.^._C_Ca~ _t.J CC.^.S~''~^S t0 }JP
aCeCi'13 ~e Un l t StOr3g°_ __°aC 111 t 1 _S .
`".oc:'_e ::Gme zCn:-;g or other local la.^.d use
re g::la t i CnS Or Or'~ I n3nCeS wh 1Ch pe.^~! t t;:e
C^_3~iOn Or eX~Z.^.SOn Of 710~J1>.e :^.0.^.!e
' develcpr~ents.
a .".a:.^._ ~.~a_: :J ~~--- CPC°- `.'O- .^.C ~0..^. :.3 t .° :t aC?S .^.Ot ~^3'J?
.~
at leas C.^.e .:n_~ .,. 3 ~:....^U:~ ^l:^~z^ C: Un-tS 3S ~e3^^:~P~'
in eac:~ crite^ic::.
b
HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
Office of Executive Director
HRA Letter No. 9
Agenda February 16, 1982
Housing and Redevelopment
Authority Commissioners
City of Richfield
Commissioners:
Subject: Development Proposal for the Godfather Block
At the January 18, 1982 HRA meeting, the Executive Director
presented a status report regarding proposed development on the
'':Godfather Block" portion of the L/H/N Redevelopment area. The
city council and HRA are scheduled to hold a concurrent meeting
on February 16 to hear a proposal from New Age Developers,
potential developers of that site.
New Age Developers are requesting the city council to authorize
the use of Industrial Development Revenue bonds to finance this
project. The HRA will be asked to assemble the land for this
project. New Age Developers proposes to redevelop the block into
a mixed-use development, containing office, commercial and res-
idential uses. The 75,000 square feet of commercial space and
50,000 square feet of office space is proposed to be situated
adjacent to 66th Street and Lyndale Avenue, with a 625-space
parking structure to be placed off of 65th Street. The residential
housing complex would contain 288 dwelling units of various sizes,
including efficiency, one, two and three bedroom units. The.
primary emphasis in a mix ed-use project of this type is to create
a synergism. Synergism is complementary uses; that is, one use
helping to support a second use. A copy of the developer's pro-
posal, which provides additional information, is attached to this
letter.
The project is in conformance with the L/H/N redevelopment
plan which was adopted in 1975 and amended in March, 1979. The
development will help achieve a number of program objectives:
1. Reduce underutilization of land by intensively developing
the block in a unified and integrated manner;
2. Provide a compatible environment for living and shopping;
3. Provide shopping which will be in an organized, planned
environment;
4. Provide a parking structure and related shops which will
encourage "one stop" shopping;
HRA Letter No. 9 -2- February 16, 1982
5. Include additional housing choices which will relate to
the amenities of Richfield Lake;
6. Reduce the number of curb cuts which will improve traffic
flow;
7. Provide employment opportunities and tax revenue.
The proposed participation by the HRA would include the
acquisition of property, relocation of building occupants, demo-
lition of the existing structures, sale of the property, and
some improvements on the project site as further detailed in the
developer's proposal. Initial runs of the tax increment feasibility
indicate that the project is one which is financially sound subject
to the final conditions of a developer's agreement. It is recom-
mended that the HRA approve the concept of the development,
authorize the staff to finalize negotiations on a developer's
agreement, and direct the staff to meet with RING and CIC to review
the proposal.
Respectfully submitted,
Karl Nollenberger
Executive Director
KN/sh
cc: Community Development Director
Housing and Redevelopment Coordinator
Council Members
~ K~
`\~
J
j ~N
/V ,
CITY OF RICHFIELD
HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
January 18, 1982
Special Meeting With Cit Council
The Housing and Redevelopment Authority of the City of Richfield met in
concurrent session with the city council on January 18, 1982 in the council chambers
of the city hall at 6:15 p.m.
The meeting was called to order by Chairman Harms at 6:50 p.m,
Present: Commissioners Freeman, Hassenstab, Helmberger, Ludeman, Harms
Present: Council Members Bunce, Hassenstab, Kirsch, Ludeman, Hamilton
1. Consideration of Resolution Authorizing Bond Issue
Executive Director Karl Nollenberger described the purpose of the concurrent
meeting with the city council - to present an update on the sale of the $2,450,000
bond issue to finance the costs of the Lake Shore Drive Condominium and Lyndale
Garden Center project. Administrative Services Director Joyce Wilde described the
following alternatives for marketing of these bonds as outlined in HRA Letter No. 7:
1. Wait for change in the bond market and/or changes in state
law that would remove the 12 percent interest rate ceiling;
2. Make more optimistic assumptions regarding inflation, and
the corresponding growth in tax increment collections that
will support the indebtedness;
3. Reassess the original HRA policy that requires each component
of the redevelopment project to be self-supporting.
HRA members suggested authorizing the bond sale immediately, so that the staff
would be in a position to seek a negotiated sale as soon as the interest rate ceiling
is raised. The staff requested the opportunity to consult with the city's financial
advisers before taking such action.
The HRA recessed at 7:20 p.m, and reconvened at 7:50 p,m. Commissioner Ludeman
left the meeting.
HRA Meeting Minutes -2- January 18, 1982
Regular Meeting
1. App royal of Minutes of Regular Meeting of December 21, and Special Meeting
of December 28, 1981
Motion by Freeman, seconded by Helmberger to approve the minutes of the
December 21, and 28, 1981 meetings.
All ayes - Carried. Absent - Ludeman.
2. Oath of Office for HRA Commissioner Donald Hassenstab
HRA clerk Joyce Wilde administered the oath of office to Commissioner Donald
Hassenstab.
3. Annual Meeting and Election of Officers
- In accordance with the bylaws of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of
Richfield, election officers for the year 1982 was held at the annual meeting.
The following nominations were made:
Motion by Freeman, seconded by Helmberger to elect Thomas Harms to serve in
the capacity of Chairman.
All ayes - Carried. Absent - Ludeman.
Motion by Harms, seconded by Freeman to elect Joan Helmberger to serve as
Vice Chairman.
All ayes - Carried. Absent - Ludeman.
Motion by Harms, seconded by Helmberger to elect Michael Freeman to the office
of Secretary.
All ayes - Carried. Absent - Ludeman,
4. Opportunity for Citizens to Address the HRA
Lawrence Wozniczka, 6744 Wentworth, asked questions regarding the bond sale
discussed earlier.
5. Discussion of Small Business Loan Program
Executive Director Nollenberger described the Small Business Administration
HRA Meeting Minutes -3- January 18, 1982
Loan Program, as detailed in HRA Letter No. 4. The HRA deferred this matter to
the February 16, 1982 meeting, for further discussion and encouraged the staff to
contact other cities and community businesses to get more detailed information
regarding how the program may actually work and the level of interest. The HRA
indicated enthusiasm for the concept, while not being ready to endorse it fully.
6. Residency Preference Policy for the Vo-Tech Housing Rehabilitation Program
Executive Director Nollenberger described the need to establish a policy
regarding residential preference for selection of a qualified purchaser of the
Vo-Tech rehabilitated home at 6413 22nd Avenue.
The HRA took no action to establish a residential preference for this property,
but requested the staff to analyze the impact of the Metropolitan Council Housing
Policy 39 on the city's ability to receive federal grants, if a preference were
established.
7. Discussion of the Status of L/H/N Projects
Executive Director Nollenberger presented a status report regarding the following
projects:
United National/Hub Shopping Center - The space formerly occuped by Sibley is
tentatively leased, and they are revising their traffic/parking lot plans.
Richfield State Agency - The developer's agreement has been signed and negot-
iations are underway for HRA acquisition of Bjorn Hagen and Kentucky Fried Chicken
properties under terms of that agreement.
Trestman/Star Auto - Have indicated some preliminary interest in join t. improve-
ment of their properties.
Lyndale Garden Center - The parking area is complete and rest of the project
is substantially completed.
Godfather Block - The city council will hold a hearing in February on request
by the developer to issue IDR bonds.
HRA Meeting Minutes -4- January 18, 1982
Lake Shore Drive Condominium Project - The sales office has reported that more
than 100 of the units have been sold.
City Project 705 - It is just about completed and the remainder of the finishing
touches will be completed this spring.
8. Claims and Payrolls
Motion by Freeman, seconded by Helmberger that the following claims and payrolls
be approved:
SiIMMIT STATE BANK
Checks 2912/18233 $1,175.51
All ayes - Carried. Absent - Ludeman.
9. Adjournment
Motion by Helmberger, seconded by Freeman that the meeting adjourn.
All ayes - Carried. Absent - Ludeman. Time: 9:00 p.m.
Date Approved:
Michael 0. Freeman Secretary Thomas E. Harms Chairman
HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
Office of Executive Director
HRA Letter No. 8
Agenda February 16, 1982
Housing and Redevelopment
Authority Commissioners
City of Richfield
Commissioners
Subject: Resolution Designating Official Depository
Attached to this HRA letter is a resolution naming Summit
State Bank of Richfield as the official depository for the Rich-
field Housing and Redevelopment Authority for the year 1982.
Summit State is pledging collateral in the amount of $353,600.
This collateral pledge means that the HRA's deposits up to this
amount are secured with the depository. In addition to this
collateral pledge, HRA funds are protected by the Federal Deposit
Insurance Corpora t~.fln in the amount of $100,000, making the
total protection afforded by this depository for HRA funds
equal to $453,600.
It is recommended that the HRA adopt the attached resolution.
Respectfully submitted,
~'
Karl Nollenberger
Executive Director
KN/sh
cc: Finance Coordinator
City Council Members
Administrative Services Director
HRA RESOLUTION N0.
RESOLUTION DESIGNATING THE SUMMIT STATE BANK A DEPOSITORY OF
FUNDS OF THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF RICHFIELD
FOR THE YEAR 1982 AND APPROVING COLLATERAL
BE IT RESOLVED by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of
Richfield as follows:
That, in accordance with law, the Summit State Bank be, and
hereby is designated a depository of the funds of the Housing and
Redevelopment Authority of Richfield, subject to modification and
revocation at any time by said Housing and Redevelopment Authority,
and subject to the following terms and conditions:
The said depository shall not be required to give bonds or
other securities for such deposits provided that the total sum
thereof shall not at any time exceed in any depository the sum for
for which its deposits are insured under the Acts of Congress of
the United States relating to insurance of bank deposits; but not
in case such deposits in any such depository shall at any time
exceed such insured sum, said depository shall immediately furnish
bonds or other security for such excess according to law, approved
by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of Richfield.
That said depository shall pay on demand all deposits therein;
and shall pay all time deposits, at or after the end of the period
for which the same shall be deposited, on demand.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that there shall be maintained a
general account in which shall be deposited all monies. Checks
on this account shall be signed by the following officers or their
facsimile signatures.
Thomas E. Harms, Chairman
Karl Nollenberger, Executive Director
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that there shall be a daily interest
savings account. All withdrawals from said account will be for
transfers to the general checking account.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the collateral in the amount of
$353,600 deposited for safekeeping at the Marquette National Bank of
Minneapolis, is hereby approved.
Passed by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of Richfield
this 16th day of February, 1982.
Thomas E. Harms Chairman
ATTEST:
Secretary