HomeMy WebLinkAbout7.a. M&H, Inc. and Dakota County HRA Guide Plan Amendment, Rezoning & Concept PUD Findings for Denial CITY OF ROSEMOUNT
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FOR ACTION
CITY COiJNCIL MEETING DATE: February 2, 1999
AGENDA ITEM: M&H, Inc. And Dakota County HRA Guide Plan AGENDA SECTION:
Amendment, Rezoning, Concept PUD Findings Old Business
PREPARED BY: Dan Rogness, Community Development Director AGENDA NO: 7.a.
ATTACHMENTS: Memoradum from Mark Ulfers (1/29/99) APPROVED BY:
The attached letter from Mark Ulfers, Executive Director of the Dakota County HRA, indicates a request for
an extension of applications related to the above mentioned three action items. The application review period
would extend until May 5, 1999. If progress has not been made toward this project as determined by the City
Council, then action can be taken on or before May 4 (first council meeting that month)to review and approve
the findings of fact for denial of the pending applications. The council may also take action within that time
period to approve a revised housing project (assuming no greater impacts to the neighborhood or city that
would warrant a new public hearing process).
RECOMMENDED ACTION: MOTION to Agree to Extend the Applications from M&H, Inc. and the
Dakota County HRA until May 5, 1999 for a Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment, Rezoning and Concept
PUD for Approximately 17 Acres Along Biscayne Avenue.
COUNCIL ACTION:
„ �-29-33 FRI 04;58 PM DAKOTA COUNTY HRA FAX N0. 6124238180 P. 02
% �/' -
DAI�'OT.A CUUNTY �ousing&Redevelopment Authority b�i.;^3.�;;0
�496-145m Sr_��!!.•Fouaw���,?�1�;i:Qo5•T.I),I�.651-4].3..�1S. •F�L\C,i 1.--•-.
MEMOR�NntM .
TO: Mayor and City Council Member
FRO�: Mark S. YJlfers, Executive Director '
DATE: January 29, 1999 �
12E: Rosemowat To��nhome Applicatio��
On behalf of tl�e l�al:ot� County HRA,we would�ike to request an exttnsion af our �
application for various]an�d usc a�provals until May�, 1999.
We understand from thE cliscussion at the 3anuary• 19, 1999, City Council uieeting, thai
addition�l time is nc�ded befoz�e action is taken on tlus matter. 'VV'e would purpose the
followizz�:
• That the HRA and City of�tosennount hold an,educational meeting for members of
the cornmunity o.n the issues related to affordablc housing.
• That thc I�A"�il pr�pare educarional macerials for rhis conference in cansultation
��vith members of th�faith community and other interested parties.
• Tha.t the�IRA wilI investi�ate other possible site plan options that address Cauncil
concerns.
The Dakota County HT2_A anc�City of Rosemount have had a long history of working
together to address community needs. We feel that providing this extension would
enable the HRA and City to work to�ether to ensure a positive outcome that addresses the
iieeds of the community.
We hope }�ou aaree that this cxtcnsion request is in the best interests of all concerried.
cc: Willis E. $ranning, Dakota County Commissioner
"AN EQUfV.,OPPORTUNITY�IPLC�'4'�R”
CITY OF ROSEMOUNT
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FOR ACTION
CITY COIJNCIL MEETING DATE: February 2, 1999
AGENDA ITEM: M&H, Inc. And Dakota County HR.A Guide Plan AGENDA SECTION:
Amendment, Rezoning, Concept PUD Findings Old Business
PREPARED BY: Dan Rogness, Community Development Director AGENDA NO: 7.a.
ATTACHMENTS: Memoradum from Mark Ulfers (1/29/99) APPROVED BY:
�-- _
The attached letter from Mark Ulfers, Executive Director of the Dakota County HRA, indicates a request for
an extension of applications related to the above mentioned three action items. The application review period
would extend until May 5, 1999. If progress has not been made toward this project as determined by the City .
Council, then action can be taken on or before May 4 (first council meeting that month) to review and approve
the findings of fact for denial of the pending applications. The council may also take action within that time
period to approve a revised housing project(assuming no greater impacts to the neighborhood or city that
would warrant a new public hearing process).
RECOMMENDED ACTION: MOTION to Agree to Extend the Applications from M&H, Inc. and the
Dakota County HRA until May 5, 1999 for a Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment, Rezoning and Concept
PUD for Approximately 17 Acres Along Biscayne Avenue.
COUNCIL ACTION:
CITY OF ROSEMOUNT
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FOR ACTION
CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: February 2, 1999
AGENDA ITEM: M &H Inc. and Dakota County HRA Guide AGENDA SECTION:
Plan Amendment, Rezoning and Concept PUD Old Business
Findings for Denial
PREPARED BY: Dan Rogness, Community Development Dir. AGENDA�NO.'_ _ � � �
��
ATTACHMENTS: Draft Resolutions APPROVED BY:
Applicant& Property Owner: Dakota County HRA and M &H Inc.
Location: '/z mile north of 145th Street West, and west of Biscayne Ave..
Previous Council Action: Motions failed for lack of second
SUMMARY
The 60 day law requires cities to either approve or deny zoning and sewer service requests. The City Attorney
has advised that findings should be prepared as a means of explaining the basis of the denial in case the
applicant chooses to challenge the city in court.
Separate resolutions have been prepared for the Guide Plan Amendment, Rezoning and Concept Planned Unit
Development because they are three separate applications. It is important that the findings be as complete as
possible,to reflect all of the reasons that the project could not be approved. Any additional information that
could be included with the findings would be useful. The city extension of the review process changed the
deadline to March 2, 1999.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Motion to adopt resolutions in support of denial of the Guide Plan Amendment,Rezoning and Concept
Planned Unit Development as requested by M &H Inc. And the Dakota County HRA.
-or-
Motion to direct staff to revise the findings to include additional information provided by the City Council.
COUNCIL ACTION: '
CITY OF ROSEMOUNT D����
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION 1999-
A RESOLUTION FOR DENIAL OF •
A COMPREHENSIVE GUIDE PLAN AMENDMENT
REQESTED BY M & H INC. AND THE DAKOTA COUNTY HRA
BASED UPON FINDINGS OF FACT
WHEREAS,the Community Development Department received an application for a
comprehensive guide plan amendment to facilitate a residential planned unit development for
residential development involving mixed housing types as identified in attached Exhibit A from
M &H Inc. and the Dakota County Housing and Redevelopment Authority on December 2, 1998
to be located on a 17 acre unplatted parcel west of Biscayne Avenue %2 mile north of 145th Street
West in Rosemount; and,
WHEREAS,the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing as required by the zoning
ordinance on December 22, 1998; and,
WHEREAS,the City Council reviewed a revised planned unit development as identified in
Exhibit B on January 19, 1999 and a motion to approve the required comprehensive guide plan
amendment failed.
NOW, THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED, the City Council of the City of Rosemount hereby
denies the comprehensive guide plan amendment requested by M & H Inc. and the Dakota
County Housing and Redevelopment Authority based upon findings of fact:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. The subject property is curently guided for Public/Insitutional (PI) land use in the City
of Rosemount Comprehensive Guide Plan.
2. The land use designation of the subject property is proposed to be changed to Urban
Residential (LTR) in the City of Rosemount draft 2020 Comprehensive Guide Plan.
3. The revised Concept Plan as identified in Exhibit B results in an overall density of
between 4.5 and 5.0 dwelling units per acre.
4. The City of Rosemount cunent Comprehensive Guide Plan allows a density range of 2-6
dwelling units per acre with an overall density average of 2.5 dwelling units per gross
acre on property designated for Urban Residential (UR) use with an increase to 4.0 units
per acre based upon specified criteria.
5. Multi-family housing within the Urban Residential (UR) area may be allowed if it meets
DRAFT
four criteria identified in the City's current Comprehensive Guide Plan: (a) located within
the MUSA; (b) does not require the use of existing local residential streets for access; (c)
is compatible with adjoining uses; and(d)represents a logical transition from higher to
lower density land uses or provides sufficient on-site open space to effectively buffer
dissimilar uses or is adjacent to a permanent open space that buffers dissimilax uses or is
adjacent to the CBD or represents a logical extension of existing multi-farrrily zoning.
6. The city's housing mix goal in the draft 2020 Comprehensive Guide plan is 75% single
family detached and 25%multi-family. Since 1995, the city has approved housing
developments close to a ratio of 60%single family and 40%multi-family to the year
2010. The proposed development project is 100%multi-family.
7. The proposed land use is not consistent with the City of Rosemount Comprehensive
Guide Plan policies for High Density Housing. The plan states that it is the city's intent
to be circumspect about where and under what circumstance it will approve additional
higher density housing.
8. The subject property is adjacent to an existing, established manufactured housing
development on the west side. The additional moderate density housing contained in the
concept PUD would create a concentration of multi-family housing inconsistent with the
stated policy of dispersing affordable housin�, multi-family housing and group homes
through out the City. Generally, it is in the best interest of the public to maintain
homogeneous housing types in a neighborhood, or to provide a logical transition from
high to low density unless there are factors which justify mixing housing types, which
factors, as detailed in these findings, do not exist in the case of this proposal. The other
property east of the Canadian Pacific rail road right-of-way and north of the Union
Pacific rail road right-of-way is developing as single family detached housing at a density
of 2.5 dwelling units per acre or less.
9. The proposed housing is not adjacent to permanent open space. The undeveloped land to
the south is owned by the Minnesota National Guard which has previously indicated to
the City that the property may be used for training which could be incompatible with
moderate density residential uses.
10. The proposed moderate density housing is not within close proximity to goods and
services provided in the city's commercial districts,nor is it adjacent to the Central
Business District.
11. The proposed land use is not a logical extension of existing or proposed multi-family land
uses.
DR,4F�'
ADOPTED this 2nd day of February, 1999 by the City Council of the City of Rosemount.
Cathy Busho, Mayor
ATTEST:
Susan M. Walsh, City Clerk
Motion by: Seconded by:
Voted in favor:
Voted against:
Member absent:
CITY OF ROSEMOUNT �RA�T
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION 1999-
A RESOLUTION FOR DENIAL OF •
A REZONING
REQESTED BY M & H INC. AND THE DAKOTA COUNTY HRA
BASED UPON FINDINGS OF FACT
WHEREAS,the Community Development Department received an application for a rezoning of
property to facilitate residential development involving mixed housing types as identified in
attached Exhibit A from M &H Inc. and the Dakota County Housing and Redevelopmerit
Authority on December 2, 1998 to be located on a 17 acre unplatted parcel west of Biscayne
Avenue '/z mile north of 145th Street West in Rosemount; and,
WHEREAS,the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing as required by the zoning
ordinance on December 22, 1998; and,
WHEREAS,the City Council reviewed a revised planned unit development as identified in
Exhibit B on January 19, 1999 and a motion to approve a required comprehensive guide plan
amendment failed.
NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED,the City Council of the City of Rosemount hereby
denies the rezoning of property from Agriculture to R-2, Moderate Density and R-3, Medium
Density Residential; as well as an alternate request for R-2, Moderate Density Residential
requested by M & H Inc. and the Dakota County Housing and Redevelopment Authority based
upon findings of fact:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. The subject property is curently guided for Public/Insitutional (PI) land use in the City
of Rosemount Comprehensive Guide Plan.
2. The land use designation of the subject property is proposed to be changed to Urban
Residential (UR) in the City of Rosemount draft 2020 Comprehensive Guide Plan.
3. The rezoning to R-3,Medium Density Residential is not consistent with the existing and
proposed Comprehensive Guide Plans.
4. The Concept Planned Unit Development is not consistent with standards for the R-2,
Moderate Density Residential and would require variances to the standards for attached
housing and townhouses. The standards for attached housing and townhomes specify
requirements for two car garages and platting of property for individual home ownership.
The proposed development indicates single car garages and 40 to 46 rental units.
ADOPTED this 2nd day of February, 1999 by the City Council of the City of Rosemount.
Cathy Busho, Mayor
ATTEST:
Susan M. Walsh, City Clerk
Motion by: Seconded by:
Voted in favor:
Voted against:
Member absent:
CITY OF ROSEMOUNT
DRAF�'
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION 1999-
A RESOLUTION FOR DENIAL OF •
A RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
REQESTED BY M & H INC. AND THE DAKOTA COUNTY HRA
BASED UPON FINDINGS OF FACT
WHEREAS,the Community Development Department received an application for a residential
planned unit development for residential development involving mixed housing types as
identified in attached Exhibit A from M &H Inc. and the Dakota County Housing and �
Redevelopment Authority on December 2, 1998 to be located on a 17 acre unplatted parcel west
of Biscayne Avenue %Z mile north of 145th Street West in Rosemount; and,
WHEREAS,the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing as required by the zoning
ordinance on December 22, 1998; and,
WHEREAS,the City Council reviewed a revised planned unit development as identified in
Exhibit B on January 19, 1999 and a motion to approve a required comprehensive guide plan
amendment failed.
NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED,the City Council of the City of Rosemount hereby
denies the concept for a residential planned unit development requested by M & H Inc. and the
Dakota County Housing and Redevelopment Authority based upon findings of fact:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. The subject property is curently guided for Public /Insitutional (PI) land use in the City
of Rosemount Comprehensive Guide Plan.
Z. The land use designation of the subject property is proposed to be changed to Urban
Residential (UR) in the City of Rosemount draft 2020 Comprehensive Guide Plan.
3. The revised Concept Plan as identified in Exhibit B is not consistent with the current
Comprehensive Guide Plan.
4. The City of Rosemount current Comprehensive Guide Plan allows a density range of 2-6
dwelling units per acre with an overall density average of 2.5 dwelling units per gross
acre on property designated for Urban Residential (UR) use with an increase to 4.0 units
per acre based upon specified criteria. The proposed development overall density is 4.91
dwelling units per acre.
5. The City Council is unable to make the findings required for planned unit development
�����
approval;
a) The Plan provides sufficient useable open space and evidences a substantial
preservation of natural features to warrant the granting of variances through
Planned Unit Development.
b) The Plan complies with the intent of the Comprehensive Guide Plan.
c) The proposed development will not be detrimental to surrounding p�operties.
d) The Plan is more creative and will provide a better living,working, or shopping
environment than is possible under strict ordinance requirements.
6. Multi-family housing within the Urban Residential (UR) area may be allowed if it meets
four criteria identified in the City's current Comprehensive Guide Plan:
(a) located within the Metropolitan Urban Service Area;
(b) does not required the use of existing local residential streets for access;
(c) is compatible with adjooining uses; and,
(d) represents a logical transition from higher to lower density land uses or provides
sufficient on-site open space to effectively buffer dissimilar uses or is adjacent to the
CBD or represents a logical extension of existing multi-family zoning.
7. The subject property is adjacent to an existing, established manufactured housing
development on the west side. The additional moderate density housing contained in the
concept PUD would create a concentration of multi-family housing inconsistent with the
stated policy of dispersing affordable housing, multi-family housing and group homes
through out the City. Generally, it is in the best interest of the public to maintain
homogeneous housing types in a neighborhood, or to provide a logical transition from
high to low density unless there are factors which justify mixing housing types, which
factors, as detailed in these findings, do not exist in the case of this proposal. The other
property east of the Canadian Pacific rail road right-of-way and north of the Union
Pacific rail road right-of-way is developing as single family detached housing at a density
of 2.5 dwelling units per acre or less.
8. The proposed housing is not adjacent to permanent open space. The undeveloped land to
the south is owned by the Minnesota National Guard which has previously indicated to
the city that the property may be used for training which could be incompatible with
moderate density residential uses.
9. The proposed moderate density housing is not within close proximity to goods and
services provided in the city's commercial districts,nor is it adjacent to the Central
Business District.
10. The proposed land use is not a logical extension of existing or proposed multi-family land
uses.
ADOPTED this 2nd day of February, 1999 by the City Council of the City of Rosemount.
Cathy Busho, Mayor -
ATTEST:
Susan M. Walsh, City Clerk
Motion by: Seconded by:
Voted in�favor:
Voted against:
Member absent:
C I TY O F RO S E M O U N T 2875 C145th St eet West
Rosemount,MN
Everything's Coming Up Rosemount!! 55068-4997
Phone:651-423-4411
Hearing Impaired 651-423-6219
Fax:651•423-5203
January 22, 1999 � •
Mr. Mark Ulfers
Dakota County HRA
2496 145th Street West
Rosemount, MN 55068
RE: Rosemount Rental Townhouse Proposal
Dear Mr. Ulfers:
The City Council of the City of Rosemount reviewed the revised housing concept for Biscayne
Avenue on January 19, 1999 and directed staff to prepare findings in support of denial of the
Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment, Rezoning and Concept Planned Unit Development.
As you may be aware, legislation adopted in July of 1995 requires cities to approve or deny
requests for zoning approvals and sewer service within 60 days. Extensions are available via
notification by the city or at the request of a developer.
Please consider this correspondence your notification that the City is extending the
approval or denial deadline for another sixty(60) days, or until March 2, 1999.
If you have any questions or concerns regarding this matter,please contact me at(651) 322-2052.
Sincerely,
�-�----
Rick Pearson
City Planner
cc Ed McMenomy
Dan Rogness
MEMORANDUM
DATE: February 2, 1999
TO: Mayor & City Council
FROM: Thomas D. Burt, City Administrator
SUBJECT: HR.A Affordable Housing Proposal
On Thursday January 28, County Commissioner Branning, Mark Ulfers, Mayor Busho and I met
to discuss the HRA's town home proposal. Commissioner Branning asked for the meeting to
facilitate a discussion on the topic.
Mr. Ulfers began the discussion emphasizing the need for affordable housing in Rosemount and
Dakota County. He identified that May 11, 1999 was the critical date for the funding application
for this project and that the HRA would assist the City in a community discussion on the needs
for affordable housing. He will also assist staff in assembling information on the housing stock,
both owner occupied and rental. The May 11`'' date is when a decision is made on funding the
proposed project and Mr. Ulfers indicated he would proceed with the funding request for the site.
Mr. Ulfers also identified that he is interested in acquiring the entire site. He is looking into the
HRA developing the land to the north of the proposed HRA Townhomes for single family homes
first time homebuyers. He also expressed concern that there are further reaching discussions
about the impact of this decision and that the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban
Development (HUD) expressed some concerns and that it may impact Community Development
Block Grant (CDBG) funding requests. There are also some concerns that the federal funding,
approximately $12 million dollars, for County Road 46 could be affected.
Staff has been contacted by Met Council, Association of Metropolitan Municipalities, and
Minnesota Family Housing Fund who are all interested being apart in the discussion on the needs
for affordable housing in the community. Staff will begin planning an affordable housing
discussion as well as gathering statistics on existing housing in Rosemount.
�
�
■� . ,
� ; dSM
� :
� , :
_ � : , . dSS
� .— ; : ��us�
� � � : �
-�.-� � : : H W �
.� ; : : cQn'
� : � a in =
� � : ; Il. l �
� � ; a�
�
� ; HJI `�
: : : ��
� U � : ; Q
— : ; s6�sH >.
� � : : � ��
� : : �
� : u�6u�� �.
� : ; o
�-�— � : U p6p �
4— '— : 3 ■
O �
� . : , a����8
L , . ,
4� : I ne
.� .
� o00000000
00000000
� 00 I� �O In �f' M N �--�
z
; �
; �
�
r�-I
`I--� �: 4� O
� � � °
� �
a�
�
0 � a�
: : � � �
� � � o �
� ; � � i
� ; � O �
O pp ; �' °C �'
oC � ; : ,� �_ �
� �
.� � �. �, � �
� : ,--� � �
i,!) � : c� a� �
�.-� 0 . � � o
� � L O
� : � Q �
� � : �
� � ; � � o
: : � � �
� � : � � �a
4� o o : o
� L L � �-"� Y..�
C� � � : � n
� .� .fl ; '� �
� N M
� l j ; �
T T ; O,
Q : , �
,--�
O O O O O
O O O O O
O 00 �O d' N
.--i � �- �- -bR-
�
Worki n Doesn 't Alwa s
g v
Pa For A Home
y
A traditional standard of afFordability is based on the
Department of Housing and Urban Development's 30% Standard.
That is a household should pay no more than
30% of its monthly income towards housing costs.
To afford an average Two Bedroom Apartment in Rosemount,
a household would have to earn
$Z6,280 a year
To afford an average Three Bedroom Apartment in Rosemount,
a household would have to eam
$35,000 a year.
For Example:
• School Teachers starting out in District #196 make $24,693
per year. They would be able to afford $617 per month.
� Machine Builders at Cannon Equipment make $12.40 per hour
after two years. They would be able to afford $644 per
month.
• School Bus Drivers working for District #196 make $11.50 per
hour. Assuming they are working 40 hours per week they
would earn $23,920 per year. They would be able to afford
$597 per month.
Average Rents in Rosemount are
$657 for a two bedroom & $875 for a three bedroom
'J �
a � �
DAKOTA COUNTY MULTI-FAMILY HOUSING STOCK
Met Council Data Center, 1996 Data
Multi- Total % MF
DAKOTA COUNTY Family Housing Units of
CITIES Units Units Totai Units
Burnsville 11,351 22,833 50%
West St. Paul 4,390 8,933 49%
Eagan 10,223 22,741 45%
Inver Grove Heights 3,794 9,949 38%
Hastings 2,166 6,270 35%
Apple Valley 4,738 14,482 33%
South St. Paul 2,627 8,323 32%
Mendota Heights 950 4,127 23%
Farmington 692 3,159 22%
O,Se. 0 ' .` 8�
Lakeville 1,522 11,724 13%
.�-33 MON 12�56 PM DAKOTA COUNTY HRA FAX N0, 6124238180 P, 02
01/25/199y 20:36 612-370-3Q33 MpLS CpD P�GE Q1
�'"L4�D' U.S.Department of Ho
ob° ''�, usittg Q11d Utb� Devebpment
,'�`'�t��� Mfinesota 8'tnte Otficn
'� I� ,�` 220 s6aond Street South
�""+-+a.��°� Minneapolis,Minnesata 65a01-,2795
h:tp�(/www.hud.gOvlloCeflmirl/minhot�m.html
Iarcuary 29, X 999
h�*.1L�axk LTi�ers
�xecu.tivc T�irector
Dal�ota County Housing and Redeve�opment,Authority
2496 245tI1 Stzect
�ose�,vt�t,lvL,�T 5�068
Dzar NXx.T�'].fers:
Su'bject: Afforflabie I�ousk�g
Rosexzzount,MN
C:otxununit��I,7eveiopment Block�ant a�ad HONfE Prn�m R�ezx„ents
Over the pasi�v weeks,we har•e been watck�the pzogr�ss of the Rasemauzxt Gxty Council
diseusszo�s regarding the develo�c�ent of 40-46 a,ffardabla xental u:aitts and 33 for-s�.te twizi and trip�C�
units.We�verc dis�ppointed to read o;f thie d�cision by the Gity Couneit to��ject the Dakota Cour�ty
�iF,A's pc�vposal.
We ar�revzewiz�Q tkzi,s zejection in light af t}�,e obligatians the City 1�as a z�zac.►rnber of the
Ur�+ata Dakata Cownty.The County,a.s tb�c CDBG and HQI1�lE gra,�t xeczpient,hr�s fizll z�esponslbz�ity-
Thzs includes the res�onsibi�ty:for the cxccution of the coz�uir�ity deveiopnient pzogram,far
following its C�rzso�idated Plan,ata.d;for meesn;g the re�uireznents o�its assuran�ces with oiher
a�plic�tsle laws such as:
• Title�'T of the Cxv�Rights Act o�19611;
� Section 504 af i��e Reb.ab�litation Act of'1973,
� S�ct�o�,�09 vf the Housing a�d Com.mun.ity Devalop�e,�t,A.ct of 9 974;and far
• .Af�'irmatively furtk�eriz�g fuir housing.
In the National Aff'ardab�a�ous�ix�.g�at of 1990,Coz�,ress reiterated this�zmative obligation.The
nativnal hvusing policy established t�y Congress also r�ntn�a commitrner.t to izap,rove housizag
opporiunic�es far aJl z-eside�yts of the United Stztes,particularly mauoz�t�cs,on a nondiscr"�atory
basis. �addition it estabI�sb�ed a goat to incxease tk�e s�p�y of deren.t houszug tYzat is affordable to
lo�v-income and�naodexate-income fa�ilies.Neither the Houaxz�g and Commaniry peveiop�e�t Act
of 1974,as aznended,nor the I�'atzoxial Affotr3able Houa-ing Act,llmit(he a�atively further,utzg
ceztaficataon to fedexatly-.funded or federal�y-assisted housing.
The Cauraty axad tkze ciry ofRosc�.noant enter�d iuto a legally bit�ding Coopeza�on Program.
Thi3 entztted tlze City to parkicipatc in.the Co�nty's Co�ur2iry I'jeyelapmexi,t��oc.�c Grant(CD$�)
and HOb�progra.m��. '�'�Ze ag�te�nent expzessly states that th,e COunty and ihe Cilty 3gree to
,l�awy Vcijkbonloedr Or.eAnierkq--CrlsGrate38YarrsoJFafrXouatng
.-33 MON 12�56 PM DAKOTA COUNTY HRA FAX N0. 6124�38180 P. 03
t7i/L�;1�99 2d:36 612-37Q-3093 ��5 CpA
PA� ��
2
"eoo�erate to uz�dac�tt�:e,or assist in�ndert�lcl�ig,eommwa�ty xez�e�va1 and Iawer ix�conae hvusing
assistancc activities. . . ." �n a�idition,bot�paz�kies,mutua�ly agree ta cake atl actions to comply with
t�te pxovisions of the aba���statutes.
A revicw of the Co�solydated��au�'or the D�kota Ccrunty Coxasortiurn shows tt�as the xnaxzl
obj ec�iwe of ti�e Can,sortiuiu,fox the next 5 years(19gs_zp�}p)���e to:�increase th�numb�r of
affordable�Zo��s,ing units Fhrougb new co,nstruction"(pg. 57�,Tiie p�ority.Neads Sw�unuy Table (pg.
53)zndacates s high need for affo�lable renter and o�vner b,ousi.z�due to hi�h c�st burd,�us.1�e czty a�
Rosemount had an.oppo.�huzity�o pmvid�a�f'ordab]e hottsing recently. Th�p,�posal was rcwiEwed
and reccnnmended fox approval by tl�c�Slann3ng ca,oazn�ssion,Yt was rejacted b��th,e G�ty Cou�cil.
�zs�ejoctivn is a concenn Ec�the Taepartment,�hen a;�'oXdab�e liousing develo�ments axe voted
d���,it gives the appearanc:e that t�ae City is rxot tal�g steps to a�matiticly;Fiuther fair aouszxag x�vz�
is it takitag actions to el��imatc barriers to a�rdab�e hduszz�g,
WC a�t'e nat yet makiri.g a detezmination or findirr,$s on t�e actioz�s ofthe City,Howevex,�ve
waz�t to remind you tha.r tlxe County is prohibited�rozn fundin�acrivities,in or�support of a
cooperating uxut of gexzerallocal gove�mat�t that does not aflirma�ively fiuth�r fair housing witi��ts
own jtuisdxcti�,on ox that iz�feded t��:co�ty's acbions to comply wiih the cou�ky's fair housing
certificatian.It wou�d be unfortuna#e far the xeside»ts of Roscmo�uit if this�v�to oCGt�r.Qut�xe�pi�s
show that since 1983,RosemounY has received ove,x$2,ppp,Opp un Cbm�nuni�r 7�eve�op�r�e�t B�ock
Grazzt�'uz�ds.The activiti�s ran�e fronn such things es acquisitioz�az�fl cicaa�ance o�'bl�ghtec�propext7ies,
to housing rek�abilitation fvr law aud moderat�incoxne persons,tv acquisitiau for sezu.or citi.zen
housing.
Please keep z�e inf'ormed of the acrio�ns takez�by the City of Rosemoun,t,��'you}aa�e a,�y
q�:estzons about this matte.�,p�e�se fccl free to coi�taer 7ohn Stiv�so�at(G1;)3�0-3019�tension
21�}5,or at j ohtt swanso�@EZud.gov,
Si.nc,�relY�
�".�,�'�`�-
Ala;�L.Joles, c r
Offica of Commuu�ity P�anxting and Developmez�t
.�l..-_�_,___�-. •� .,..,��
� �.,..
Thomas T.Feeney, ��
Sex3ior Commim,ity uild �
..;x of affordable housing puts Dakota County in bind(2/02/1999) Page 1 of 3
�DVER-ISEP.i�N�
�'r.�� ,e.
�LA{��'�:,�. r.F. ..'� � �,� f�F�.�'3"�'IP�RGE8) CARB:�OM .��_B� NO�
Published: Tuesday, February 2, 1999
r ;i',cfPlatlt?C I'un[ '
� ��E,:,.;s SUBURBS
� Business
� SPorts Lack of affordable housing puts Dakota
i Entertainment/Just Go County in bind
� Living
� Tech JENNIFER EHRLICH ST�'F wRITER
* Water Cooler
andy and Don Daniel have spent three years on waiting lists
� Special Reports
for affordable rental housing in Lakeville and Rosemount.
v Classified Ads
r Site index They pay$790 a month for their apartment in Apple Valley--
which is more than the couple�vill soon be able to afford. Don is
retired and Sandy has a degenerative disease.
"Some days I can walk, and some days I can't," said 58-year old
Sandy Daniel. "I want to be able to live where we can get to our
church in Farmington, but the rent really takes a chunk out of our
income."
In Dakota County, more than 1,000 other families are waiting for
spaces in affordable housing projects, where rents are hundreds
of dollars lower than market rates.
The average wait for a space in an affordable housing building is
18 months. But many seniors, such as the Daniels, have had to
wait much longer.
To keep up with the demand for low-income housing, the Dakota
County Housing and Redevelopment Authority is hoping to
expand its power to tax and finance community development
proj ects.
The Dakota County HRA is proposing legislation that will turn
the housing authority into an economic development agency.
That means the HRA will be able to develop land for community
projects and can increase its ability to tax by about 25 percent.
The reason for the growing affordable housing crunch is an aging
and increasing population in Dakota County, said Mark Ulfers,
director of Dakota County Housing and Redevelopment
Authority
"By 2020, the number of seniors living in this county is going to
triple," said Ulfers. "If the waits are long for affordable housing
http://www.pioneerplanet.com/news/mtc_docs/025663.htm 2/2/99
..,x of affordable housing puts Dakota County in bind (2/02/1999) Page 2 of 3
now, imagine what they will be in the future if we aren't
proactive."
As a housing authority, the HRA's ability to tax is capped at$2.2
million annually-- money that is only used for senior housing
and has already been spent this year, Ulfers said.
Ulfers said the demand for affordable housing has outpaced their
ability to raise money. The HRA has built 11 senior housing
complexes since 1989,but all are full. When Eagan's newest
senior center opened last fall, it already had a waiting list.
But even if the changes are approved, the HRA's ability to build
affordable housing faces obstacles other than money. If the HRA
expands it will still have no new power to force communities to
build affordable housing projects.
Ulfers is trying to drum up support for a larger HRA at a time
when support for building affordable housing projects is not
assured in many communities throughout Dakota County.
For example, in Rosemount the City Council recently rejected
the HRA's proposal for affordable rental townhomes.
Rosemount Mayor Cathy Busho said the community was behind
her when she decided not to support the project and that some
residents told her they would be willing to circulate a petition
against the townhomes.
Busho said community members opposed the project because
they believe that providing low-income housing will lead to
increased crime and "social issues in schools."
"The issues I heaz is that when kids come to school without
adequate breakfast they can't do what they are supposed to and
there may be a lack of parental support for after-school
activities," she said.
Aside from community reaction, the HR.A proposal is still far
away from becoming a reality. It must first clear the county
commission and then it will need a sponsor to introduce the bill
in the state Legislature. Ulfers said the other changes include:
. Exempting affordable housing projects from 6.5 percent sales
tax on construction materials --to save$1,000 to $3,000 for each
unit;
. Requesting that the Met Council exempt affordable housing
projects from new sewer connection fees of$1,050 per unit;
. Renaming the HRA the Dakota County Community
Development Agency to reflect its broader mission;
. Creating a local government housing trust fund by using part
http://www.pioneerplanet.com/news/mtc_docs/025663.htm 2/2/99
ack of affordable housing puts Dakota County in bind(2/02/1999) Page 3 of 3
of what the state collects on deed tax and mortgage registration
taxes, to be used to help communities build affordable housing.
Even the Metropolitan Council,which has led the effort to
finance affordable housing in the suburbs, is not guaranteed to
support all of the changes in the HRA proposal, said Tom
McElveen, director of housing and local assistance for the Metro
Council.
But McElveen said the Metro Council is willing to work with the
Dakota County HRA because there is not enough money to keep
up with the demand for low-income housing in the suburbs.
"Our suburban experience is that the communities out there
apply for twice as much for housing resources as we have the
funds," said McElveen. "That's a pretty steady trend that says to
me that suburbs aren't turning their backs on affordable housing."
In the metro area, counties have taken different approaches with
their economic development agencies. In Hennepin and Ramsey.
counties, the HR.A boazds consist of elected officials while in
Washington County they are appointed, Ulfers said.
Other commissioners were concerned that the process was
moving too quickly. They are reserving judgment until they
discuss the implications of an expanded HRA, said
Commissioner Patrice Bataglia.
"Moving forward with caution is really required here," said
Bataglia.
But for families such as the Daniels, who are faced with rising
rents at the same time as they are grappling with medical bills,
the expansion can't come soon enough.
,. He� "You get on these lists and you wait and wait and wait," said
�
Sandy Daniel. "I don't want anything to happen to anyone living
r News Archives in those complexes but I do hope something opens up."
;� Feedback
Jenni er E lich,w o covers gro an development in Dakota County,can
r .;�:scri to�o;� be reached at lehrlich(iu,pioneerpress.com or at(651)228-2171.
http://www.pioneerplanet.com/news/mtc_docs/025663.htm 2/2/99