Laserfiche WebLink
Gem Lake Planning Commission <br />David K. Gardner, Chairman <br />1399 E. County Road "E" <br />Gem Lake, Mn 55110-5231 <br />(612)429-9288 FAX 429-5034 <br />November 15, 1995 <br />Paul R. Emeott, Mayor <br />3960 Scheuneman Rd. <br />Gem Lake, Mn 55110 <br />Dear Paul: <br />The Gem Lake Planning Commission met Tuesday, November 14, 1995, <br />7:00 PM, at Tousley Ford, the meeting having been postponed from Monday <br />due to scheduling conflicts. Present were Gardner, Titcomb, Nielsen, <br />and Emeott. Notice of the change in date was published in the White <br />Bear Press on November 8. Rob Hansen also attended. <br />Jack Frost and Mike Kuehn of the Metropolitan Council staff <br />presented the Livable Communities Act and requested the City's <br />participation. This legislation is a result of the 1995 session and is <br />voluntary in nature. The Act, basically, is designed to encourage <br />communities to develop "affordable" and "life cycle" housing. At this <br />time, all Ramsey County cities have agreed to participate, with the <br />exception of Vadnais Heights (voted down) and Gem Lake. We were <br />clearly not a high priority, as the deadline for participation is <br />today. <br />The definition of "affordable" is $115,000 for a single-family <br />home, or $630 per month for an apartment. Although these numbers seem <br />reasonable in this market, it is difficult to envision an appropriate <br />location in our City. Although there is aid money mentioned, it was <br />suggested that we could not expect a developer to qualify. There are, <br />of course, conventional sources of aid for such developments, such as <br />Minnesota HFA, etc. The suggestions for accomodating such development <br />fly in the face of the City's Comprehensive Plan and goals: increased <br />density, sewer extension, etc. <br />The "life cycle" housing component has no cost limit, and North <br />Oaks is participating on the basis of that aspect of the Act. Although <br />we do not have zoning for common-wall/condominium development, it is <br />possible that such could be accomodated without a density increase, and <br />may become an attractive option at some point in the future. <br />The process for participation would require that the City Council <br />adopt a resolution at the November 20 meeting, and adopt the agreements <br />by December 14. The City would then develop an "action plan" by June <br />30, 1996, and prepare an annual progress report thereafter. Non- <br />