HomeMy WebLinkAboutHousing & Redevelopment Authority Packet 05-27-1980AGENDA.
PLYMOUTH HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
May 21, 1980
6.30 p.m.
I. Roll Call
II. Approval of Minutes for Apr!l 7, 1980 Meeting
III. Public Hearing on CDBG "Bonus Fund" Projects
IV. Findings and Action on Rescinding Martha Knight's Section 8
Certiticate of Family Participation
V. Resolution of Approval of Revision to Plymouth's Section 8
Admission and Occupancy Policies
VI. Resolution Limiting Rehab Grant Recipients to $5,000 from Any Source
VII. Request to HUD to Raise Section 8 Fair Market Rents for P1yw.utb
VIII. Adjournment
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
400 PLYMOUTH BLVD.. PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55441.
TELEPHONE (612) 559-2800
DATE: May 23, 1980
MEMO
TO: Plymouth HRA, City Council
FROM: Milt Dale, Associate Planner
SUBJECT: CDBG "Bonus Fund" Public Hearing
ul'4PiART: CDBG "Bonus Fund" Public Hearing for selected low/moderate income
housing proposals.
At Its April 28, 1980 Council meeting, staff informed the Council of the prospect
of CDBG "bonus funds" for selected low/moderate income housing proposals in the
Metro area. Plymouth, along with all the. other Metro area communities, was encourag-
ed to prepare applications for these funds which would provide an incentive subsidy
to the developer to construct his low/moderate income housing project. At the April
28th Council meeting, staff was directed to proceed with the application process. (A
copy of the application requirements is included.) In this regard, staff has informed
developers, reviewed their applications and found them basically in good order. The
next step is for the public hearing, which will be held at the Plymouth HRA meeting
at 6:30 P.M. on May 27, 1980. (For the HRA Members benefit, I have included the
staff memo to the City Council regarding the CDBG "bonus fund" application.)
Since HUD requires that at least one public hearing be held on any proposed projects
that would be utilizing CDBG "Bonus Funds" prior to the submission of the individual
application to the Metro Council and HUD, this public hearing serves that function.
Two applicants have provided us with documentation for their bonus fund application.
These two proposals are from the Dominium Group, Inc. and from Leighton Larsson.
Both proposals relate to the development of townhouse buildings for low and moderate
income families with both proposals having been. previously reviewed by the Planning
Commission and the Plymouth City Council. One proposal is for 38 units of housing,
with the possible addition of two other units should additional land be acquired, and
a proposal for 39 units of housing. (A location map is attached to indicate where
these proposals would be developed:)
The: more salient application supportive documents are attached to this memo. In this
regard, the narrative submitted by the Dominium Group, Inc. deserved some added
attention. Past history—m this request is as follows:
1. Metro Council informed the City of developer's intent to build in November,
1978. MHFA 8 HUD were aware of developer's proposal prior to this date,
Exact date is unknown.
Plymouth HRA, City Council
May 23, 1980
Page 2
2. City application submitted on October 10, 1979 for site plan for
40 units of towAhouses. Approval was for 38 units.
3. The City Council reviewed and approved the project on January 7, 1980.
Full "credit" for o low/moderate Income housing proposal was granted
the developer as per City Ordinance. As well, the City Council granted
the following variances:
a. Parking variance from covered space requirement only.
b. Variance to allow up to 8 units/building.
c. Variance to allow detached garages..
d. Variance to allow last parking stall setbacks.
One of the basic differences between the two applications, in staff's opinion, is
the amount of "bonus funds" requested by each. Iry the case of the Dominium Group,
Inc.'s request the amount is $70,000 or a $1,150 per unit subsidy request while in
the case of Leighton Larsson the request is for $226,000 or approximately $5,800
per unit in subsidy.
Attachments:
1. Resolution
2.. April 25, 1980 Memo to Council
3. Location Map
4. Dominium Group, Inc. Application (narratives and project summary)
S. Leighton Larsson Application (narratives and project summary)
6. City Council Resolutions regarding Both Projects
MD/ ba
a -
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
5400 PLYMOUTH BLVD, PLYMOUTH. MINNESOTA 55441
TELEPHONE (612) 559.2800
DATE: April 25, 1980 .
MEMO
TO: James G. Willis, City Manager
FROM: Milt Dale/Blair Tremere
SUBJECT: CDGB Bonus fund Application
Bonus funds are available for assisting low and moderate income housing
projects. Application is to be submitted by June 9, 1980.
P.
In early April, staff was informed that there would be certain "bonus funds" available
to those developments that wilt provide #or more low and moderate income houstng. This
money, about $6000000, was assigned to the Twin Cities Metro Area as a "reward" for
its past achievements in low and moderate income housing. These funds are called
CDBG Bonus Funds and are to .be used to implement the primary objective of the Metro
Council Is Areawide Housing OpDortAity Plan (AHOP), ie to increase the housing
opportunities for low and moderate income persons outside areas of concentration of
such housing. At a recent HUD/Metro uOrkshop, staff was informed that priority in
funding would go to such projects that are "ready to go" in the sense that:
1. Zoning is appropriate
2. Public water and sewer is available
3. Developer has a good "track" record
4. Developer has site control
S. Construction financing is available
The. Metro Wuncil has developed three pages of "review criteria and priority guidelines"
to assist them in their selection of which projects will be funded. Boiled down,
these criteria and guidelines place emphasis on the following:
1. Activity proposed is in harmonious relationship to the community's Allocation
Plan goals.
2. Preference to adding more housing units vs. outreach programs.
3. Cost factor, ie the most units for the dollar is given high priority.
4. Rental units for: large families over other types of housing..
S. Ability to achieve but not exceed 1980-83 Allocation Plan.
6. Assurances that funds will be used promptly.
l.11..1..+.• r..i•A.. -*q- • --T 4M. - . -.6. .. • .. . • . • • . .
r
CDGB 9onus Fund Application
April 259 1980
Page 2
The City is to make application to HUD,. Metro Council and the State A-95 clearing-
house. The deadline is June 9, 1980. Possible recipients would be Dominum Group
and the Leighton Larson proposals (which were recently approved by the City. Both
developers need additional financial assistance to get their projects started; we
do not at this time have the exact amounts needed or the details of their financial
condition). A public hearing is required along with various other HUD, Metro and
A-95 requirements. Attached is this list of requirements. it is clear the "Bonus
Fund" application process is not simple and the chances of Plymouth receiving
significant funding are not high in terms of the total available for the entire
Metro area.
Staff seeks Council direction as to whether we should further investigate the
specific financial needs of the two projects and as to wether the application should
be made.
Attachments
1. Application Requirements for CDBG Bonus Funds.
4
Of Application Requirements for CDBG Bonus funds
In Support of the Areawide Housing Allocation Plan
HUD regulations for the CDBG Bonus Fundpro ra„ were printed in the Federal
Register on August 2, 1978 (Section 570.404. Eligible CDBG activities are
specified in Section 570, Subpart C of the CDBG regulations, published on
August 27, 1979.
Applications for CDBG Bongs Funds must include the following:
I. Standard form 424
2. A Project Summary (HUD -7085)
3. A Cost Summary (HUD -7086)
4. A Housing Assistance Plan as descr'A-d.in Section 570.430(c) of the
CDOG Regulations published on Jul) , 1979, or if there is an
existing HUD approved HAP which covers the applicant, a reference
to the approved NAP.
S. Assurances (HUD -7088)
6. Title VI Form (HUD -7089)
These forms and instructions are attached.
In addition, applicants are expected to do the following:
1. Hold at least one public hearing on the proposed project prior to
submission of the application to the t•.etropolitan Council and HUD.
Adequate notices of the hearing, accessible and understandable to
all citizens, should be provided in a timely manner.
2. Submit the application to the State F-95 Clearinghouse for a 30 -day
review prior to or concurrent with submission of the application to
the Metropolitan Council and HUD.
3. Include in the application a description of how the proposed program
will be administered and the previous experience of the responsible
staff in implementing similar projects. If the applicant does not
have previous experience, the application should describe where the
necessary technical assistance will be obtained.
4. Include in the application pertinent information which demonstrates
that the project is feasible and can be completed in a reasonable
period of time.
S. Include in the application an explanation of the basis for the cost
estimates and information which demonstrates why the CDBG subsidy
is necessary to make the project feasible.
G. taciude In the application a detailed implemertatior schedule.
LOCTIOA IAP PDONU5 SNA
PF'L.1 5
CITYOF Lei kim Lar
PLYMOUTI+
9 +
Mill E•1Efi
tl litiilitllit ilE tttttttttltl11tltttttlilrltt!t#ttttitttt#lintlttt:lE#EiEI!Eiltttlit#e B si
t
t
I
IO Ipp'
or
ran
OL
f
wt r
i
wwl • I n
s
WWI
STREET BASEMAP -:.
DOMINIUM G k0VP1 rN6.
CDBG BONUS FUNDS JUSTIFICATION
The act of developing subsidized housing for families in
suburban locations with a townhouse theme is by definition a
marginally feasible endeavor given the financial constraints
Imposed by HUD cost and rent limitations. However, due to
the apparent unanimous consensus in which the townhouse concept
is deemed to be the most desirable method of providing suitable
housing for low to moderate income families, Dominium Group
Incorporated has committed to develop the highest quality
housing in all cases where economics render such housing to
be remotely feasible.
As of this date, Dominium Group Incorporated is in receipt
of the Firm Financing Commitment for subject development as
issued by the Department of Housing and Urban Development.
Due to certain costs inherent in developments of this nature
as well as certain costs incurred in complying with the City
of Plymouth requirements have been added to the project, the
Firm Financing Commitment requires Dominium Group Incorporated
to supply additional cash equity in order to close the mortgage
loan and start construction of this project. The additional
funds represent an amount of $141,795 which is required above
and beyond the normal cash equity requirements pursuant to
the intended structure of a Section 221(d)3 Permanent Mortgage
Loan.
The cost increases which are directly attributable to
city requirements which are beyond the scope of development
procedures customarily employed in projects of this nature
are described in the attached letter from Frana and Sons,
Inc., General Contractor for the,ject, and are summarized
as follows:
1. Additional individual storage units 31,266.00
2. Additional paving required 9,733..00
3. Heavy duty paving required 13,200.00
4. Head bolt heaters 4,800.00
S. Additional play area required 10,528.00
6. Additional landscaping 81000.00
77,524.00
Additionally, the City of Plymouth has required the
following additional.fees which are beyond the scope of most
typical developments:
1. Water accessibility charge (5210/unit) $ 80400.00
2. Sewer accessibility charge ($210/unit) 8,400.00
3. Park dedication fee ($330/unit) 13,200.00
30,000.00
VOMINIUM 6okDufj TALC.
2 -
As indicated above, additional costs incurred by this
development as the result of city requirements are in excess
of $100,000.00. These costs represent fees and. improvements
not customarily encountered in the development of a project
of this nature. The economics of low to moderate income
housing developments are predicated upon a development
budget designed to comply with.standard metropolitan area
fee structures, requirements imposed by the Uniform
Building Code (UBC), and HUD Minimum Property Standards (MPS).
It is for the above reasons that. Dominium Group Incorporated
is hereby requesting the City of Plymouth provide certain
assistance in assuring the financial feasibility of this
development by approving the expenditure of certain Community
Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds in the amo.int of Seventy
Thousand Dollars ($70,000.00).
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
3400 PLYMOUTH BLVD.. PLYMOUTH. MINNESOTA 55441
TELEPHONE (612j 559-2800
DATE: May 229 1980
MEMO
TO: HRA Commissioners
FRO/. Milt Hale
SUB ECT: Findings and Actions on Rescinding Martha Knight's Section 8 Certificate
of Family Participation
Attached to this memo are the findings and actions recommended for rescinding
a certificate for Martha Knight. As you know, this item was discussed at the
April 7, 1980 HRA meeting and the authority directed staff to prepare findings
and actions on the matter. May 1 add that Ms. Knight did move out on March 31,
1984 and several weeks later she sent me a list of reasons why she decided to
move out of the apartment. This letter is attached for your persual.
Attachments
1. n tags and Actions on Rescinding Martha Knight's Section 8 Certificate
2. Martha Knight's reasons for leaving
FINDINGS AND DECISION
TERMINATI-GN OF ELIGIBILITY
FOR SECTION 8 RENT ASSISTANCE_
OF MARTHA KNIGHT
On April 7, 1980 at 6:30 p.m. at the Plymouth City Hall, the Board of Commissioners
of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority for the City of Plymouth, met to hear
evidence on the recommended termination of the Certificate of Eliqibility of Martha
Knight to receive benefits under the Section. 8 Rent Assistance. Program.
Its. Knightwas given adequate advanced written notice of the cretermination hearing
for April 7, 1980, but elected not to attend or to present a written statement
defending her actions while living at The Village Square Apartments in Plymouth.
The Board of Commissioners had heard previous testimony from Mr. Chuck Sutton,
maintenance supervisor at Village Square Apartments on February 25, 1980. He
stated Ms. Knight's brother parks his taxicab on the cement patio behind the
apartment every day, which is a parking violation, and stated there is a bed in
the hallway of the apartment, which -is a fire violation. Mr. Sutton stated
he has also seen another woman with two children besides Ms.. Knight's children
at the apartment every day, but he did not know if she stayed there at night.. He
claimed Ms. Knight's brother has lived there since July or August.
Mr. Dale reported that the City Building Inspectors Joe Ryan and Mike Berreau made
an i-nspection of the apartment on January 31, 1980. This inspection indicated
other persons were living there besides Martha Knight and her children. Mr. Dale
further stated that Mike Knight, Ms. Knight's brother, appeared to be living with
his sister as Mike Knight's employer showed the address of this apartment as his
address. Mr. Dale stated Martha KW -'-'S Section 8 rental agreement lists herself
and her two children as the only occ oints of the apartment and HUD guidelines
call for one bedroom for every two pcple. Mr. Dale futher stated Ms. Knight's
lease agreement with Village Square Apartments also calls for three residents and
he has been notified by the landlord that she is in violation of this agreement
but they have not taken any further action to prosecute her. Mr. Dale stated
Ms. Knight has been working for Strom Engineering full time since last October
but her income is still within the guidelines.
Mr. Dale read a letter from Martha Knight, dated October 9, 1919, claiming no one
lives in the apartment besides herself and her two daughters.
Based on all the evidence and records in this case, the Board of Commissioners for
the Housing and Redevelopment Authority would revoke the Certificate of Participation
in the Section 8 Housing Assistance Program of Martha Knight. The commission bases
its decision on its finding that while a participant in the Section 8 program Ms.
Knight dSd, by her actions place herself in violation of the conditions of her lease
and the Section 8 Program by allowing additional persons to share her apartment with
her.
Therefore, Ms. Martha Knight's Certificate of Participation is herby revoked.
Such revocation shall be .effective on May 31, 1980.
HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
FOR THE CITY OF PLYMOUTH
By
Dated:,,._. , 1980.
March f, 1980.
Martha Knight
3301 North Counts -toad 18 #114
Plymouth, MH 55441
Uear Martha:.
Op9 g
CITY OF
PIYMOLffR
L2t•ti,
It is vW understanding that you Intend to pennanently move out of your apartment
in Plymouth and you wish to be removed from the Section 8 Rent Assistance Pro-
gram. If such Is the case, please Indicate below yo,:r desire to terminate
your participation on the. Section 8 Rent Assisteaui b Program in Plymouth.
I no longer wish to participate in the Section 8 Rent Assistance Program in
Plymouth and I have rade arrangements with the apartment manager to give them
adequate notice. NY reason(s1 for leaving is(are) as follows:
ww
mow.
j• l ..ter _. a .. 1 I.>_ +..1 .. ... -moi ^ ir I
i w '^ S 4
4 " 1
ice• -
1...
r /'
4.1
1
wgnat reT"..'_.
1.'
i
lawtvacating apartment)
tDate)
A
Rent paid through A0
Date)
Thank you for your response. Please fill In the blanks and mail this back to
me as soon as possible.
Sincerely,
X Wopad/4./x
Milt Dale
Plymouth HRA
340 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTM, MINNESOTA 5541, TELEPHONE (612) 559.2800
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
3400 PLYMOUTH BLVD- PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55441
TELEPHONE (612) 559-2800
DATE. May 22, 1980 MEMO
t6: HRA Commissioners
FROM: Milt Dale
SUBJECT: Resolution on Approval of Revision to Plymouth's Section 8 Admission and
Occupancy Policy
At the meeting of April 7, 1980 the matter of revising Plymouth's Section 8
Admission and Occupancy Policies was a matter of discussion. However, due to
the fact that two commissioner's did not receive complete copies of the new
Admission and Occupancy Policies, this item was deferred for action until the
next meeting. Complete copies were mailed to Commissioners Neils and Hoyt for
their review. Staff therefore, has put this item on this meeting's agenda for
possible resolution at this time. It should be added,that Chairman Rod Hillstrom
and myself have reviewed the new polices previously and it is my recommendation
that they be adopted.
Attachment
1.Resolution
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
3400 PLYMOUTH BLVD.. PLYMOUTH. MINNESOTA 55441
TELEPHONE (612) 559-2800
DATE: Noy 22, 1980
MEMO
TO: -,#RA Commissioners
FROM: Milt Dale
SUBJECT: Resolution Limiting Rehab Grant Recipients to $5,00.0 From Any Source
to the past there have been several Rehab grant tecipients who have requested
additional funds from the City Home Improvement Grant Program after they have
previously received a grant through the Minnesota Housing 'Finance Agency (MIIFA)
grant program. While each grant program has a grant limitation amount of $5,000,
Plymouth has no restrictions stating that art eligible applicant could.not recieve
5,000 from both MHFA and from the City. The Plymouth,housing rehabilitation
committee would like to plug this "loop hole". Consequently, staff has prepared
8 resolution Limiting any single grant recipient to a_total of $5,000 from any
source.
Attachment
I. Re -solution
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
1400 PLYMOUTH BLVD.. PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55441
TELEPHONE (612) S59-2800
DATE: May 23, 1980
MEMO
TO: HRA Commissioners
FROM: Milt -Dale
SUBJECT: Request of HUD To Raise Section 8 Fair Market Rent for Plymouth
Due to some dramatic increases in rent for nearly all of Plymouth's apartments
over the last few months, staff has found it necessary to determine if it would be
possible for the fair market rents (FMR) in Plymou`h to be raised in order to
continue the Section 8 rent assis tance program. .Attached is a listing of
apartment rental rates in Plymouth by bedroom size showing the percentage of
increase from June, 1979 to June, 1980 to illustrate the extent of the present
problem. Out of a total of 72 Section 8 apartment units in Plyaouth,. only 3 units
are currently being rented under.fatr.ma,r.ket rent.. Many of the other Section 8
apartment renters are renting apartments in Plymouth where rents are up to 20
percent over fair market rent.. They have been allowed to rent these apartilenis
because they have received hardship approvals by the local HUD area office. Also,
local housing authorities are granted the right to permit 20 percent of its Section
8 allocation to be rented to Section 8 renters at up to 10 percent over fair market
rent. Many of the present renters in Plymouth fiave been renting tilie;r Friesent
apartments for two and three years or longer. To require that these ren:eric look
for cheaper apartment in Plymouth each time their annual lease comes uo for
renewal would mean a constant game of "musical apartments". From month to month,
a renter may find one apartment under fair market rent only to discover a month or
two later the owner has raised the rent over the fair market rent. An additional
provlem in Flymouth, for the Section 8 renter, is the scarcity of available apart-
ments at this time. In a survey recently done by office staff, it was determined
that presently there are only 13 vacant apartments in the. City of Plymouth. This
is approximately a k of 1 percent vacancy rate. Obviously, the apartment shortage
is acute.
The apparent solution to the fair market rent problem in Plymouth is to request an
increase for Plymouth in fair market rent. However, the undesirable side effect is
to encourage the inflationary spiral already a very severe problem in our Country.
Unfortunately, many people have become more and more dependent on the rent subsidy
program, as they have on many of our federal government social welfare programs.
In Plymouth, we recently had to "close off" our Section 8 waiting list, which
presently has more applicants than we can assist within the next year. Regretably,
Plymouth does not have a high supply of older low rent apartment buildings in the
City. For this reason, many Plymouth Section 8 renters are in apartments that are
somewhat expensive, although by no means luxurious. Those Section 8 renters in the
elderly and handicapped catagories tend to be willing to make any sacrifice, just
to stay in their present accomodations. While low income single parent mothers
have, in the past, been willing to move quite frequently, it seems within the last
several months, even this mobility has decreased significantly. Unfortunately, I
have no easy solution to the present dilemma. Should we not get fair market rent
HRA Commissioners
May 23, 1980
Page 2
increases, there is no doubt in my mind that the Section 3 program will "dry up".
While this would provide a tax -payer cost savings, it will also put a number of
Section 8 families in Plymouth in somewhat dire financial straits.
Staff recommends that HUD be requested to raise fair market rents in Plymouth up
to 20 percent over current fair market rent. Also, staff recommends that the
Housing Authority look carefully at the Section 8 program in Plymouth to determine
how long Plymouth wishes to continue implementing this program within the City.
Attachments:
1. Resolution
2. Apartment Rental
June, 1980.
MD/.ba
Rates in Plymouth by Bedroom Size Between June, 1979 and
ONE BR APARTMENTS, RENTAL RATES IN PLYMOUTH
nNik I hKM—T R 1T5
9iZG NMR
0 *j
Per Month Rate)
57o
Two
Percentage
bq (o
Am 6bo 116
Increase frog
Number of June 1979 to
Avartment Prosect One.BR.Units June 1979 Jan. 1980 June. 1980 June 0.0
1. The Place 4&P 270 290 335 24.1
2. Wellington 18 260 270 290 11.5
3. Plymouth Colony 30 270 285 300 11.1
4. Manor Royal 78 295 325 325 10.2
S. Village Square 77 265 290 315 18.9
6. Fox Meadows 63 260 265 308 18.5
Fox Meadows 63 280 280 304 10
At The Lake 108 265 280 310 16.9
Urleas.ter Vi l lade 64 2.53 280 280 9.8
9. Plymouth Terrace 43 250 260 290 16
10. Four Seasons Estates 48 265 275 290 9.4
11, Four Seasons Villa 48 230 250 265 15.2
Four Seasons Villa 95 250 275 275 10
12. Countryside Estates 12 250 265 270 8
Countryside Estates 24 260 275 280 7.7
13. Ellen -Villa 4 N/A N/A 175 N/A
TOTAL UNITS 793
nNik I hKM—T R 1T5
9iZG NMR
0 *j
10116
09 57o
Two NOS bq (o
Am 6bo 116
TWO OR APARTMENTS, RENTAL RATES IN PLYMOUTH
Per Month: Rate) Percentage
Increase from
Number of June 1979 to
A,,,p_artment Pejo ect. Two OR Units June979 Jan. 1980 June 1980 June :980
1, The Place d56 296 315 355 20.3
The -Place 96 310 330 375 21
2i, Wellington 14 315 31.5 345 9.5
Wellington 7 32.5 325 355 9.2
3. Plymouth Colony 12 315 330 350 11.1.
Plymouth Colony 11 320 335 350 9.4
Plymouth Colony 12 325 340 350 8
4. Manor Royal 12 335 375 375 12
Manor Royal 42. 345 385 385 11.6
6. Village Square 76 300 325 345 15
Village Square 24 320 350 365 14.1
6. Fox Meadows 83 305 315 360 18
Fox Meadows 83 335 350 390 16.4
7. At The Lake 4.8 305 320 350 14.7
At The lake 24 315 330 350 11.1
At The Lake 6 326 335 365 12.3
8.. Lancaster Village. 64 290 320 320 10.3
9. Plymouth Terrace 4.1 290 300 330 13.8
Plymouth Terrace 12 290 320 355 22.4
10. Four'Seasons Estates 48 305 315 290 9.5
21. Four Seasons Ville 30 260 290 330 27
Four Seasons Villa 67. 290 320 330 13.8
32. Countryside Estates 12 285 300 330 15.8
Countryside Estates 24 295 310 330 18.9
13. Ellen -Ville 1 N/A N/A 350 N/A
TOTAL UNITS 0964
OTHER APARTMENTS IN PLYMOUTH NOT ON THE
SECTION 8 PROGRAM
Apartment Pest j tr-- ,fA _.-:U tas ... Rental .Rate. As of June,. 1980
1.
Percentay.
Increase f;o
June 1979 io
June-19801980 June 196U
385 N/A
415 7.8
445
THREE OR.APARTHENTS. RENTAL RATES IN PLYMOUTH
Per Month Rate.)
Oakwood:
Number of
2 OR Units:
AQarfi ent Project. Three. BR Units June 1979 Ja_ 980
I. Plymouth Colony 1 N/A 360
2, Fox Meadows 20 385 385
Fox Meadows 20 410 425
3. At Tate take 6 855 360
TOTAL UNITS 47
OTHER APARTMENTS IN PLYMOUTH NOT ON THE
SECTION 8 PROGRAM
Apartment Pest j tr-- ,fA _.-:U tas ... Rental .Rate. As of June,. 1980
1.
Percentay.
Increase f;o
June 1979 io
June-19801980 June 196U
385 N/A
415 7.8
445 8.5
395 11.2
OTHER APARTMENTS IN PLYMOUTH NOT ON THE
SECTION 8 PROGRAM
Apartment Pest j tr-- ,fA _.-:U tas ... Rental .Rate. As of June,. 1980
1. South Shore
1 OR Units:
2 8R Units:
2. Village Arms
1 OR Units:.
2 OR Units.
3. Sunrise Bay Estates
1 OR Units:
2 8R Units.- nits:
4. 4. Oakwood:
1 OR Unfts:
2 OR Units:
S. Willow Creek
Efficiency
I OR Units:
2 OR Units:
Totals
Efficiency
1 8R Units:
2 OR Units:
6
11
35
46
44
63
21
39
60
21
132
F7
No rental rate information
available. Owner will not
participate in the Section 8
Program at this time.
to n of
350-$385
450-$495
325
380-$415
260 This apartment has its
330 own Section 8 Program.
Me
DEPARTMENT Of HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
MINHEAPOLIs-sr. PAIL AREA OPFICE
6400 FRANCE AVENUE SOUTH
MINNEAPOLIS. MINNESOTA Sam
itgGo" V
April 21, 1980 004 RSPLV Rss;w To.
234;5.6G:sjg
Mr. Milt Dale
Associate Planner
Housing and Redevelopment APRi9$4 `;
Authority of Plymouth
3400 Plymouth Boulevard
Plymouth , Minnesota 55441 „
Mat Mr. Dale:
Subject: Existing Section 8 Program
Identity of Extraterritorial Powers
In November 1979, the Department of Housing and. Urban Development issued a
revised Handbook 7420.7 entitled Public Housing Agency Administrative
Practices Handbook for the Section 8 Existing Housing Program. Chapter 7
addresses the unique Motrility aspect of the Section 8 Existing Housing
Program which encourages and provides a wide range of housing choices
for families participating in the program. Paragraph 7-2 provides
further guidance on the requirements of HUD regulation Section 882.103
that PHA's promote greater choice of housing opportunities for participating
families. Among the FHA' responsibilities in this context is the seeking
of participation of owner . in any area :W which the PHA determines it is
not legally barred from entering, into corrLracts. Specifically, paragraph
7-2a M states that "the PHA must submit •ith its application a copy of a
legal opinion defining these areas where C. PHA is not explicitly barred
from entering into contracts with landlords
Although you have submitted a legal opinion previously, the Area Office. is
nolo required by paragraph 7-2a(2) (See Attachment) to review all prior legal
opinions submitted by PHA's where the PHA has concluded that it does not
have extraterritorial jurisdiction. None of the legal opinions previously
submitted has specifically addressed this particular question. We are,
prohibited by law from entering into Contracts with respect to units that
are located outside your regular jurisdiction. If you do conclude that you
do not have extraterritorial jurisdiction, please include the State Statute
provisions that limit your jurisdiction.
2
2 ` you have any questions concerning this requirement,. Please don't hesitate
to contact Stephen Gronewold, Attorney Advisor, at (612) 725=-4708.
Sincerely,
Thomas T. Feeney
Area Manager
Attachment
U
y
2
2 ` you have any questions concerning this requirement,. Please don't hesitate
to contact Stephen Gronewold, Attorney Advisor, at (612) 725=-4708.
Sincerely,
Thomas T. Feeney
Area Manager
Attachment
U
7 420.7
CHAPTER MOBILITY
CHAPTER 7
CHAPTER 7'. CW a
7-1. CHAPTER OVERVIEW. One unique aspect of the Section 8 Existing
Housing .Program is that it encourages and provides a wide range
of housing choices for families participating in the program.
This opportunity for mobility is to be extended both to Certificate
Holders who are seeking eligible units and to participating families
who wish to move to another unit or jurisdiction and continue to
receive Section 8 Existing assistance. Emphasizing mobility in this
program promotes a greater choice of housing opportunities for
lower-income families and discourages.the concentration of such
families in any community or neighborhood. In any geographic area
established for the purpose of allocating funding to PHAs, those
PHU which provide families with the broadest possible geographic
choice of units will be given preference when Section 8 Existing
applications are approved. The discussion below focuses on the
PHA's responsibilities and procedures for promoting mobility of
families as permitted in.curvent regulations.
7-2. MOBILITY OF CERTIFICATE HOLDERS. (See Section 882.103 of the
Regulations.) PHAs should promote a greater choice of housing
opportunities for participating eligible .families by:
a. Seek Participation of Owners in Any Area in which the PHA
Determines it is not Legally Barred From Entering into Contracts.
The Section 8 regulations require the PHA to determine the
geographic area where it is notlegally barred from -entering
into Contracts with landlords.
1) For this purpose, the PHA must submit with
a copy of a lexal opinion defining those a
PHA is not explicit& barred .from entering into contracts
with landlords. PHAs that have been operating the Section
8 program without a legal opinion on file at the Field
Office regarding their area of operation must submit one
to the Field Office. Many PHAs should find that they are
not explicitly prohibited by law from entering into Contracts
on an extra -territorial basis (i.e., with respect to units
that are located outside of their .regular jurisdiction) since
the Section 8Existing program., unlike the Public Housing
programs, does not involve the owning or operating of units.
The Field Office will accept without challenge a PHA legal
opinion in administering the Section 8 Existing Program
thrt it has extra -territorial jurisdiction.
2) In
review all
where the
territories
maximize housi
to facilitate i
rior or future
As has conclud
iurisdiction.
7-1
gortunities for Certificate
ity. the Field Office will
1 opinions submitted by PHA
at it does not have extra -
11/79
w
14.20.7
CNAPTWt 7
11/79
eeld-ifi3ce will mT"sure tiftat sucH doteFmithatio6i'
are necessarily required by explicit state statute,
judicial determination, or state attorney general's opinion.
My PWA which is legally barred from entering into HAP Contrac
develop Certificate exchange oroftrams or other means by which
b. Undertaking Outreach to flamers. Once the PHA has established
those areas where it is not legally barred from entering into
HAP Contracts, it should actively seek the participation of
owners throughout this area. Effective outreach to encourage
landlords to participate, both in the initial stages of the
program's ,operation and on an ongoi,-g basis, is essential if
a PHA is to increase housing opportunities for assisted families,
especially in non -impacted areas. PHAs shall encourage the
participation of owners to areas other than low income or
minority areas. (see :lection $82.208). Outreach procedures to
facilitate mobility for certificate holders are discussed in
more detail in Chapter 3. By increasing landlord outreach
efforts and attracting those owners in areas with a low
proportion of lower-invome residents, the PHA will be able
to increase both economic: and racial integration for Certificate
Holders.
c. Advising f'amLlies of their OUortunity to Seek Housing in all
Areas. At the timeofapplication, PHAs must advise families
of their area of operation, the general market conditions of
this area and current unit availability in the broadest
possible range of neighborhoods, particularly those in which
there is no roncentr-•tion of lower-income households. Maps
of the area and infLrmation regarding owners who are willing
to participate In the program should be used at the time of
the briefing to make the family aware of a variety of
housing opportunities. in provieIng assistance to the families
In finding units eligible for the program, the PHA must not (per
Section 882.103(b) of the regulations) directly or indirectly
reduce a family's opportunity to choose among the available units.
Instead. all PHA efforts should be aimed at broadening the family's
choice of housing possibilities. (See Chapter 4 of this Handbook
for more information en the briefing session and Chapter 9
of the Section 8 Existing Handbook 7420.3 REV for related
activities which may be described in the EOHP.)
1) if 8A. applicant is -interested in moving to another PHA's
urisdletiona the PHAshould:
a) inform the applicant of any special programs, such
as activities performed under the PHA's E -goal
7-2
Apri 1 25, 1980 1
Steve Gronewald
NUD Area Office
6400 France Ave.. South
Edina, MM
Dear ter. Gronewald:
The Plymouth HRA has entered into an interjurisdictional agreement with
the Metro Council, the St. Paul HRA, the Dakota County HRA and the Scott.
County NRA. Enclosed is a copy of the contract.
Sincerely,
t
Milt Dale
Plymouth HRA
A
rit}Tr1 .' 'E'EIVARD FLY.." ro!, j `'.. ''::, .Et,F`N'r''r':'``
Nay 6, 1980
q4 6
V010 - 67th ' *c, ie Nsrth, Apt 109
eruvklyn renter, :;'; 5S430
a r Pd'-!:
4
At this tire, tf;e City of als,—lith has twenty -:we 1.:-'.:s on Its waiting list
for the Section a Program .,hiie -:e have only forty-scven certificates in the
two bedroom category (these forty-seven certificates are all taken). It
appears that you;ould have to wait a year or rare tefore you could be
granted a certificate in Ply,,outh.
Sincerely,
Vq
Ply: ;oath NIRA
21 ba
e
CITY(y
May 14.. 1980 PIYMOU R
Ms. Ann Anderson
POST PubUutions
8801 Bass Lake %cad
New Hope.. MN 55128
RE: Enclosed Notice for Section 8 Applications
Dear Ms. Anderson:
Enclosed is a notice for future Section 8 applicants in the City of Plymouth.
We world appreciate U. If you would publish this notice in the flay 22. 1980
edition of the New Hope -Plymouth POST so that people can be informed as soon
as possible thatapplications are closed fo:- this program.
Thank you for your assistance.
Sincerely,
1Wt )&tt,
Milt Dale
Plymouth HRA
Enclosure (1)
34W PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH,; MINNESOTA 55441 TELEPHONE (612) 559-2800
CITY OF
PLYIhOUIl'F
CITY OF PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA
NOTICE
This NOTICE is dealing with the Section 8 Existing Housing Program"in the City
of Oymouth. Due to the excessive number of applicants on the waiting list, we
are closing the program to nor applicants since they would probably be. obliged
to wait for a year or more. We have done this to help avoid both unnecessary
application processing cost and the raising of false hopes among applicant
families that assistance would be available to them in the near future. The
program will be closed to new applicants until further notice.
Published in the. New Hope -Plymouth POST on May 22, 1980)
3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55441. TELEPHONE (612) 559,2800