Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1978 Annual ReportMAP LEWOOD HRA REPORT During the past year the attentions of the HRA have been focused in several areas--the Metro HRA Section 8 Rental Assistance Progran, Grants for hone owners with income of less than $5,000 per year, and A-95 referrals on proposed Sectlon 8 new construction in the city. Maplewood is one of the participating connmities in the Metro HRA Section 8 progran. This provides a rent supplenent for those whose incone qualifies then for certification. They find tmits for rent within a noderate price range whose limits are defined by the progran. These rmits renain in the private sector and on the tax rolls. When the applicant has located an apartment, the city must in- spect the prenises to insure i.t meets standards. After that, the applicant may nove in, and pays j\st 25e" of his incone for rent. the difference between this amor.mt and the actual rental cost of the unit is made up by a monthly check frorn the govemnent for the difference. These apartnents are existing housing stock in the city, not pre-designated subsidized projects. Only the tenant and the landlord need be aware that a subsidy exists. Thls is our second year in this progran. Last year we had about 42 rmits allocated to us, this year about 47. This is an extremely popular prograrn, and the nunber of applications received far outnumbers the nunber that can be certi"- fied. Maplewood is fortunate in that we have a slpply of rental lmits that fa11s within the rental limits established by the progran. Some conmr.mities do not. These rents are set nationwide, with no recognition belng given to regional dlf- ferences in contruction costs, which of course are raeflected in rental rates, and our Metro area is one of the hlghest construction cost areas. Applications for thls year's program will not be taken after Jaruary 1, A person nay apply by going to the Heritage Center on Wednesday morning between 9 and' 1'2, or by going to the Metro Council office in St. Paul. Last year was also our first year on the home grant prograln. We had to set up guidelines and get ourselves operational. The progran had priorities for the efairfy and energy related repairs. Last year our total allocation was $22,289.89. 0f this amormt, we authorlzed $19,902.95 for work requested. The amount actually spent was $11,143.00. The difference between authorizati-on and expenditure Lesulted for various reasons--ar applicant returning to work and earning more than $5,000 a year, failure to come in with bids for the work authorized, or changing oners rnind about having the wo rk done. l,lany of the homes inspected as part of this program were definitely substan- dard. The progran does not require that all substandard conditions be corrected howevet (there just wouldntt be that nuch rnoney available). The majority of the work authorized involved insulation, Ieaking roofs and wiring probleros. The amourt available for Maplewood this year is $26,669.61 , of which $16,850 has been authorized. 'Ihe fiscal year on.this is fron July 1to Jtme sl'st. Information on both the grant and section 8 programs has app eated in Maplewood in lllgli on, the Maplewood Review and the St. Paul paper. If a hone is soTd- litrin s years of the grant, the forgiveness rate of the grant is 20 9o pe'r year. In regard to the questions raised by the letter of Ruth Feldick, contact was made with Cheryl Darwin who administers our Section 8 program to see if other commrmities have a wider selection of rental housing stock with 3-bedroons. (Maplewood pTesently has only Archer Heights). North st. Paul has sone in Viking t:-ff"g", but there seems to be a general scalcity of these ulits in the communities with ;hich she is familiar. If there are any, they are in a nuch higher rental range. l^ihether it is economic or managenent considerations which cause this I donrt know. With regard to linitation on fardly slze Mrs. Feldick encotmtered, without knowledge of the policies of other mobile hone parks, there is no way of knowing whether the linitation was restrictive, or a general managernent procedure conrnon ly used. The Planning Commission has just consldered an amendnent to the cityrs cornprehensive plan which would provide for a new housing district, Residential Low Density - Extended. Presently, in the RL district, developnent nust he limited to an average of 1.4 people per acre, and the structures must be single family detached, or a duplex. The proposed district would allow town houses or low-density apartments subject to the following conditions: special site conditions (wetlands, hillsldes, etc), a density of no more than 14 people per acre, design conpatible with single family dwellings, and subject to the condi- tions of a PUD. It would be necessary to neet all four of these conditions in order to have such developnent. The HRA has voted recornrnendi-ng approval of such an anendnent to the comprehensive plan. If the HRC is concerned, they should nake the city cormcil aware of their views at the neeting at which this is consi dered. Lorraine Flscher Chairperson, Maplewood HRA An accout was given of last yearrs experlence with proposed Section 8 new construction proposals, and lts frustration and no new construction. This year the HRA has seen 5 proposals for Section 8, 2 for farnilies, 1 for the elderly, The first fanily proposal was on the south. end as part of an old PUD' The present status of this is unknown ' the second family proposal was on the west side of white Bear Avenue in an a]cea south of Radatz. It was a tol^mhouse t)?e proposal with rmits ranging from L to 3 bedroons, and although it net the 14 people per acre density, it was not si.ngle fanily or dtplex in structure, so did not fii the coflprehensive plan. If the amendnent to the comprehensive plan referred to above is adopted, this plan night have a chan ce for frmding, other- wise it will not. The t^hird' proposil , for the elderly, was on the east side of t{hite Bear Avenue, south of the Maplewood Plaza, across from the !1a11, and next to the park, on Tilsenrs land, This is an i,dea1 site, offering suppofi facilities for shopplng, banking and bus service. l[hether or not this will be frmded is not known at-this time. This proposal appeaTs to be in keeplng with the comprehensive p 1an. HRC had, previous to the establishnent of the HRA., reviewed building plans to see if they were barrier free, etc., and assurned this fmction had been taken on by the HRA. This was not the case. Since that time there has been the establishnent of the Design Review Board, which rnight make such review, and also a State thiform Building Code. A check will be made on the policy aad who is now doing this review.