My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2014-05-20_HRA_Minutes
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Housing Redevelopment Authority
>
Minutes
>
2014
>
2014-05-20_HRA_Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/30/2014 10:12:09 AM
Creation date
7/30/2014 10:12:08 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commission/Committee
Commission/Authority Name
Housing Redevelopment Authority
Commission/Committee - Document Type
Minutes
Commission/Committee - Meeting Date
5/20/2014
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
8
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 6 <br /> <br />1 <br />At the request of Member Etten, Mr. Hughes confirmed that sidewalks would be part of the <br />2 <br />project, with their intent to connect Fairview Avenue and Twin Lakes Parkway as a pedestrian- <br />3 <br />friendly road. <br />4 <br /> <br />5 <br />Member Etten suggested that Mr. Hughes consult with the City’s Parks & Recreation <br />6 <br />Department, as well as the Public Works/Engineering Department, to pre-plan and determine <br />7 <br />how best to make that connection and incorporate the city-owned park property across the <br />8 <br />road; as part of the park dedication portion of the project. Member Etten opined that those <br />9 <br />were partnerships that would provide value for residents and make the project a positive for the <br />10 <br />entire community. <br />11 <br /> <br />12 <br />At the request of Member Etten, Mr. Hughes briefly addressed pollutants found on properties <br />13 <br />to the north of this project site, and their award of a small grant to assist in their estimated site <br />14 <br />clean-up costs of $250,000; with the above-ground pollutants (e.g. asbestos) covered in the <br />15 <br />project’s overall costs. <br />16 <br /> <br />17 <br />At the request of Member Etten, Ms. Kelsey reviewed the balance in the SAC funds, and the <br />18 <br />process for determining those account balances; and how it related to the former Owasso <br />19 <br />School site, also open for development in the future. Member Etten expressed his concern that <br />20 <br />sufficient funds remain in the balance to address potential development of that site. Ms. <br />21 <br />Kelsey advised that the SAC fee countdown clock began upon demolition of existing <br />22 <br />structures, which had already been accomplished; and advised that she would further research <br />23 <br />that status. <br />24 <br /> <br />25 <br />At the request of Member Etten, Mr. Hughes addressed their request for SAC fee assistance <br />26 <br />from the City for 2015, the anticipated construction start, and future increases as they increased <br />27 <br />at an estimated $50 per year per unit. <br />28 <br /> <br />29 <br />At the request of Chair Maschka, Member Etten, in his role as City Councilmember, noted that <br />30 <br />the City Council majority was fully supportive of completing building demolition and <br />31 <br />completion of Twin Lakes Parkway as soon as feasibly possible; with staff continuing to work <br />32 <br />on time frames and financing issues. Member Etten stated that this was a City Council priority <br />33 <br />and should be a community priority as well. <br />34 <br /> <br />35 <br />Chair Maschka suggested this may create support for an enabling sales tax. <br />36 <br /> <br />37 <br />Member Etten noted that, if it could be used for this purpose, it may be prudent; however, he <br />38 <br />noted that various impacts for the City and its residents and for long-term planning; even if the <br />39 <br />request was approved by the legislature. <br />40 <br /> <br />41 <br />At the request of Member Lee, Mr. Hughes addressed the justification for reducing 3-bedroom <br />42 <br />units compared to previous development proposals and City Council preference to avoid <br />43 <br />concentrating families in one building versus an intergenerational approach. Mr. Hughes noted <br />44 <br />that, upon consulting with the MHFA, the proposed unit allotment would provide the <br />45 <br />affordable housing option as well as support senior housing, especially if placing seniors in the <br />46 <br />walk out units similar to the concept of a townhome. Mr. Hughes reviewed the projected <br />47 <br />breakdown of units: 50% to 60% as 1-bedroom units or 1-bedroom plus den; 20% to 25% 2 <br />48 <br />bedroom units; and the balance 3-bedroom units. While this served to create predominantly <br />49 <br />smaller units, Mr. Hughes opined that this was where the market was at this time; and would <br />50 <br />also limit their financing gap request to the City and outside financial sources. <br />51 <br /> <br />52 <br />Chair Maschka spoke in support of the intergenerational, non-segregated approach for the <br />53 <br />units. <br />54 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.