HomeMy WebLinkAboutHousing & Redevelopment Authority Packet 01-26-1976i
CITY,OF PLYMOUTH
3M HARPOR .LANE, PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA, 55441
TELEPHONE (612) 559-2800
QATE: January 23, 1976 MEMO
TO: Housing and Redevelopment Authority Commissioners
FROM: .Planning pepartnmen
SUBJECT: Organizational Meeting of Plymouth housing and Redevelopment Authority
Attached please find an agenda for the Organizatio al meeting of the Plymmth
Housing and Redevelopment Authority. The purpose of the meeting includes
election of officers, organizing the Authority according to Minnesota Law,
approving bylaws and adopting a seal for the Authority. Also,. two items
of new busiutess, Budget and Administration. and.1976 Work Program, are up
for discussion.
The necessary resolutions are attached as proposed as well as copies of
the proposed bylaws and proposed seal.
ATTACHMM:
1. Agenda
2. Resolution Organization According to Minnesota.Law
3. Resolution Adopting Bylaws
4. Resolution Adopting Seal
H.KA Yhih1 5 i 1p,
Ah
CITY OF PLYN"i'OUTH
3026 HARBOR LANE. PLYMOUTH. MINNESOTA 55441
TELEPHONE (612) .559.2800
DATE: January 26, 1976
MEMO
TO Housing and Redevelopment Authority
FROM: Charles E. Dillev d., Planning Direcuago
tUBJECT: Housing Data
The. Housing Division of the Metropolitan Council has generated two sets
of housing data for Ply=uth of substantial importance to the HRA. Both
sets. of data were developed in response to immediate metro area needs
to develop Housing Assistance Plans in support of Community Development
Revenue Sharing applications. Your staff predicts a much broader usage of
the data by the Metropolitan, Council in -the future.
The first set of data is the current estimate -of Housing Need. Using
crude statistics and heavy interpolation formulas c a e y the Metro-
politan Council, the housing' -stock condition and current needs statistics
found in Attachment A result for Plymouth. The HRA Board will recall that
this same date was found less. than believable by our City Council during
Its 1975 review of our 1975 CDRS application. The data looks every bit
as unbelievable this year!
Plymouth is not alone in its objection to need and housing stock condition
data.resulting for its community from questionable Metropolitan Council
methods of computing. The universal problem, however, .s that few, if
any, communities have local data sources to logically counter the sources
used by the Council staff (principally 1970 census data and a Metropolitan
Council staff survey of housing conditions).
Our current need, then, is for: a complete., detailed and up-to-date description
of Plymouth's Housing Stock plys a workable method of maintaining our
inventory. This is by no means a simple task, but a high percentage of
recently constructed homes plus a good local set of assessment records
should help the situation immensely.
As a parallel, we also need a locaily generated and maintained model of
housing need. The first difficult problem here will be to establish a
definition of need, is it local, based on employment or metro or how
much.of each. For the local componentwe must, in some manner, seek the
cooperation of local employers for wage breakdowns. This data, too, must
be capable of periodic update without extensive new field work.
Staff suggests that if Plymouth is to embark upon an affirmative program
to maintain a baianced and community responsive housing stock such a program
must be guided by quantified needs and resulting quantified goals-. If
we cannot believe the "needs numbers" our goals will be equally meaningless.
The local inventories, plans. programs and rionitoring. system necessary
to achieve a defensible local housing approach have only been sketched
by iocal staff'in a most basic format. Staff advocates request by the t;RA
to the City Council for a grant of a substantial portion of the 1976
CDRS Allocation (about $60,000) for HRA use in developing such a housing
approach locally..
The second.set of data of importance to the HRA is the recently adopted
Metropolitan Council Allocation Plan for Subsidized Housing Units. The
plan (Attachment 8 hereto) depicts the Council's Housing Committee's
adopted distribution levels for the now hypothetical 12,000 -units of
Section 8 Housing available to the Metropolitan Area. Plymouth has been
allocated 291 units over the next three years on a ccinplex formula rooted
fna.general "share the poverty" approach. (The absolute 1800 parallel
to the existing Fiscal Disparaties "Share the Wealth" program.) By the
Plan, every community takes care of "its own" plus a percentage area -wide
low income needs. The Metropolitan Council policy on this Plan clew
states that these allocations do not constitute mandatory minimum pro-
duction: level --but, in fact, they do just that.. Assuredly all relations
with the Metropolitan Council on any topic will be reviewed against local
progress to 291 subsidized units (in our case), as well as the mandated
609 family 40% elderly formula. The recent improvements to Policy 31
wfll certainly be heavily compromised -by the numertcalpolicy of the
Allocation Plan.
Clearly, then, whatever local housing approaches we adopt we must be
addressing our 2.91unit allocation for subsidized (Section 8') flouring.
Our profile may not be overly compromised if 1976 sees little progress,
but thereafter we should be under way.
As with utilities, storm water and parks, the housing element of P1ywuth's
development fabric may now require guiding by way of a fine tuned plan and.
program. Staff suggests that this should be the HRA's first program concern.
Specific HRA actions suggested include:
1. Direct staff to return February 23 with a Project Outline for the
preparation of'detailed Housing Inventory, Plan, Program and
Monitor System for Plymouth. Included would be recommended
approach (staff or consultant) projected costs and required
time for completion.
2. Immediately request of the
the 1976 CDRS Allocation to
Housing Plan.
ATTACHMENTS:
City Council a grant of $30,000 from
cover possible 1976 costa of the
1. Current Estimate of Housing Need
2. Metropolitan Council Allocation Plan for Subsidized Housing
AZZ4LIM
SUBSIDIZED HOUSING ALLOCATION PLAN
SECOND PRIORITY COMf[TNITIES
Percent Units
m Udea gills * .85 102
Brooklyn'Park 1.16 139
Burnsville * 2..42 290.
Landfall .05 6
Lilydale .16 19
Little Canada .54 65
Medicine Lake .06 7
Mendota .05 6
Mendota. Heights .75 90
Mianetonka 1.84 221
Moundsview .40 48
New Bri hton 1 08 130
1
Newport 22 26
North St. Paul 48 58
Plymouth * 2.43 291.
St-. Paul Park 23 28
Shoreview 1.14 137
Sprint Lake Park 23 28
Wayzata 42 50
White Bear Lake 60 72
Part of this community is in another priority area,
but the community's total share and number of units are
shown here.