My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2014-07-28_HRA_Agenda_Packet
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Housing Redevelopment Authority
>
Agendas and Packets
>
2014
>
2014-07-28_HRA_Agenda_Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/24/2014 4:39:43 PM
Creation date
7/24/2014 4:39:37 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commission/Committee
Commission/Authority Name
Housing Redevelopment Authority
Commission/Committee - Document Type
Agenda/Packet
Commission/Committee - Meeting Date
7/28/2014
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
46
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
HRA Meeting <br />Minutes – Tuesday, May 20, 2014 <br />Page 7 <br />1 <br />Member Etten referenced the former Sienna Green renovation project and the majority of 1- <br />2 <br />bedroom units with the exception of those units in the newly constructed building; and how <br />3 <br />these smaller units would address the apparent shortage or need for rental units for families, <br />4 <br />including how to address visitors or possible assistance for family members on a short-term <br />5 <br />basis. <br />6 <br />7 <br />Mr. Hughes noted that this was a fair observation; and advised that the new building would <br />8 <br />allow for that flexibility in the 1-bedroom plus den units. However, while this project is <br />9 <br />enhanced by the connection to Langton Lake, Mr. Hughes opined that this site was less <br />10 <br />conducive for family housing due to its location. Mr. Hughes further opined that, while it’s <br />11 <br />appropriate to achieve that mix and to meet the good policy objectives of the City, this was not <br />12 <br />the project to push the market, but rather should be developed to be well-received by the <br />13 <br />current housing market. <br />14 <br />15 <br />At the request of Chair Maschka, Mr. Hughes anticipated construction beginning early in 2015. <br />16 <br />17 <br />Motion: Member Elkins moved, seconded by Member Majerus, recommendation by the <br />18 <br />RHRA for City support to assist in the redevelopment of 2785 Fairview Avenue by <br />19 <br />establishing a tax increment financing (TIF) District; and provide assistance with sewer <br />20 <br />access charge ISAC) fees, contingent on a final underwriting review by Springsted. <br />21 <br />22 <br />Ayes: 5 <br />23 <br />Nays: 0 <br />24 <br />Motion carried. <br />25 <br />26 <br />Motion: Member Majerus moved, seconded by Member Elkins, to authorize staff to <br />27 <br />prepare a letter of support from the RHRA committing to use of $270,000 of the allotted <br />28 <br />Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds; and allowing submission by the <br />29 <br />RHRA of an application for Living Community Development Account (LCDA) funds to <br />30 <br />assist with the development of 190 housing units, 64 of which would be affordable. <br />31 <br />32 <br />Ayes: 5 <br />33 <br />Nays: 0 <br />34 <br />Motion carried. <br />35 <br />36 <br />Motion: Member Lee moved, seconded by Member Etten, adoption of RHRA Resolution <br />37 <br />No. 57 entitled, “Support for Sherman and Associates, Inc. Application for Minnesota <br />38 <br />Housing Finance Agency Funds and Livable Communities Demonstration Account <br />39 <br />Funds.” <br />40 <br />41 <br /> Ayes: 3 <br />42 <br />Nays: 0 <br />43 <br />Motion carried. <br />44 <br />45 <br />10. Information Reports and Other Business (Verbal Reports by Staff and Board Members) <br />46 <br />47 <br />a.Multi-family Rental Licensing Update <br />48 <br />Ms. Kelsey advised that 144 applications for inspection had been received to-date; with only <br />49 <br />18 properties, representing eight different property owners, not making application. Ms. <br />50 <br />Kelsey advised that staff would follow-up with those property owners to determine their <br />51 <br />rationale in not applying; with inspections scheduled to begin the first of June. Ms. Kelsey <br />52 <br />advised that so far, staff had fielded few questions about the program. Ms. Kelsey noted that <br />53 <br />the majority of the feedback from property owners and/or managers had been positive; and <br />54 <br />they considered the program fair to good property owners based on their perspectives. <br />55 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.