2012-05-15_packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

HRA Meeting Minutes – Saturday, April 21, 2012 Page 2 1 place within the next 3-4 years, the HRA would have failed in their goal. Chair Maschka further 2 opined that the Target location on County Road B would be a prime candidate for a housing and 3 commercial development, allowing the HRA to address the Economic Development goal as well; 4 and would provide the greatest opportunity to meet housing, economic development and area 5 needs. 6 7 Redevelopment of the Southeast/East Section of Roseville 8 Chair Maschka opined that this area of Roseville needs the HRA’s immediate attention, before it 9 was further threatened with decay, impacting the entire community. As an example, Chair 10 Maschka sited Brooklyn Park and his interpretation of the reasons for that community’s failure to 11 address that decay before it resulted in its current state. Chair Maschka cautioned the HRA to 12 avoid similar concentrated housing efforts that could become a cancer on the community; opining 13 that this section of Roseville was the potential cancer in Roseville. 14 15 Economic Development / Redevelopment - Commercial Businesses 16 Chair Maschka suggested the HRA consider gap financing to facilitate a good office project in the 17 Twin Lakes Redevelopment Area; even though the HRA couldn’t finance it entirely right now, it 18 could possible find a way to assist to jump-start redevelopment in that area. 19 20 Chair Maschka opined that the HRA needed to support staff with resources dedicated to work 21 cooperatively with business leaders to find out how the HRA could help them most effectively. 22 23 Member Willmus concurred. 24 25 Member Majerus noted the value of the data derived from interviews with other communities; and 26 suggested that more detailed information be sought (e.g. pros/cons and their experiences – whether 27 good or bad) to determine what projects worked, which didn’t work, and how to avoid land mines. 28 Member Majerus opined that if the HRA was to strike, they needed to ensure the City was well- 29 positioned to do so. 30 31 Chair Maschka concurred; however, he observed that leadership was not without risk, and the HRA 32 couldn’t wait forever to act. 33 34 Member Majerus recognized Chair Maschka’s comments; however, he opined that it was also 35 possible to minimize those risks. 36 37 Single-family Housing Stock / Market 38 Considering a subset of individual housing stock, as part of the community’s redevelopment, Chair 39 Maschka noted that the price of Roseville single-family homes allowed for reinvestment, and cited 40 four (4) homes in his neighborhood that had been sold recently, and rehabilitated; with each having 41 received multiple bids and good interest. 42 43 Ms. Kelsey noted that the housing market had come back. 44 45 Chair Maschka opined that this area would work itself out, without assistance from the HRA; 46 however, his concern was how to monitor the redevelopment to make sure the rehabilitated single- 47 family homes were well done and up to community standards . 48 49 Chair Maschka opined that another consideration was how to impact new housing styles, citing the 50 IKEA home selling for $80,000, consisting of panel construction, as an example; opining that the 51 Mounds View School District site set up an excellent opportunity for that type – or similar – affordable 52 housing. 53 54 Member Majerus questioned if and how the rental licensure issue impacted housing rehabilitation. 55