Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12/08/1993AGENDA MAPLEWOOD HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Wednesday December 8, 1993 7:00 P.M. CITY HALL MAPLEWOOD ROOM 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Approval of Minutes a. November 9, 1993 4. Approval of Agenda 5. Communicadons a. Update - Truth-in-Housing Code Amendment 6. Unfinished Business a. Resignation- Lori Tauer 7. New Business a. CARE Institute, Inc. - Rosewood Estates of Maplewood, Senior Housing Project, Maryland Avenue and Lakewood Drive b. Golden Star (Larpenteur East) Apartments - 315 Larpenteur Avenue 8. Date of Next Meeting a. January 11, 1994 9. Adjournment HRAAGEND.MEM MINIn'ES OFTHE MAPLK~OOD HOUSING AND ilRDEVEIX)PMENT AUTHORrrY NOVEMBER 9, 1993 1. CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Fischer called the meeting to order at 7:01 P.M. ROLL CALL HRA Commissioners: [x~rraine Fischer, Tom Connelly, Larry Whitcomb City Staff: Ken Roberts 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES e September 14, 1993 Commissioner Connelly moved approval of the minutes of September 14, 1993 as submitted. Commissioner Whitcomb seconded Ayes--all APPROVAL OF AGENDA Commissioner Whitcomb moved approval of the amended minutes, adding kern 7c - Resignation of Lori Tauer. Commissioner Connelly seconded Ayes--all 5. COMMUNICATIONS VOA (Volunteers of America) Assisted Care Living Center Ken Roberts, Associate Planner, gave an update on this item. He told the HRA that the VOA had withdrawn their applications in October before the City Council derided on the item. The VOA has since told staff that they may try again in the Spring. b. Larpenteur East Apartments - 315 Larpenteur Avenue Ken Roberts, Associate Planner, gave an update on this item. He told the HRA that the City is working with Ramsey County to apply for a low-interest loan to rehabilitate the apartments. The Commission questioned whether any truth-in-housing reports have been done on these apartments. 6. UNFINISHED BUSINESS There was no unfinished business. HRA Minutes of 11-9-93 -2- 7. NEW BUSINESS a. Truth-in-Homing Code Amendment Ken Roberts, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. Mr. Roberts explained that the Council is requesting an ordinance that would exempt sales to family members from the truth-in-housing requirement. The HRA considered what, if any, types of exemptions from truth-in-housing requirements should be allowed to family members. They felt that there are some transfers that the City could exempt from truth-in- housing, such as those due to a spouse's death, a gift or a divorce. The Commission felt that the City should not exempt family sales. They also felt that the City should exempt the purchase of a house which would be demolished for use of the property. Commissioner Whitcomb moved the Housing and Redevelopment Authority recommend that the City Council take no action on the ordinance at this time since the Commission feels there are family sales that should have truth-in-housing, other transfers that should be exempted, and that other possibilities exist for exemption from truth-in-housing. Commissioner Connelly seconded Ayes--all Regarding the ordinance adding a violation section to the truth-in-housing ordinance, the Commission noted that truth-in-housing probably does not have 100% compliance at this time. The HRA questioned what degree of active enforcement the City Council expects or wants of this ordinance. b. CARE Institute, Inc. - Senior Housing Project, Maryland and Lakewood Ken Roberts, Associate Planner, explained that the developer is asking for tax-exempt financing to help develop this housing. Mr. Roberts also noted the project application and plans were not ready for staff review for this meeting. The HRA will review this item at their next meeting. c. Resignation - Lori Tauer Ken Roberts, Associate Planner, explained that Lori Tauer submitted a letter of resignation to him today. The Commission directed that Mr. Roberts do a resolution of appreciation for Lori Tauer for her years of service on the HRA. They also asked that the City Council authorize staff to advertise the opening. 8. DATE OF NEXT MEETING a. December 14, 1993 9. ADJOURNMENT Meeting adjourned at 8:30 p.m. MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: SUBJECT: DATE: City Manager Ken Roberts, Associate Plarm?., _._ Resignation November 16, 1993 Log Tauer has resigned from the Housin~ a~_d .Red~.~opme~. t..Authority (HRA). I have attached her letter of resignation and a resolution ot appreoauotc RECOMMENDATION Approve the attached resoludo~ kr/memo50.mem (6.3 HRA Membership) 1. Letter 2. Resolution November 9, 1993 9 .,;3 Ken Roberts and HRA Members, Do to ever increasing demands on the my personal and professional time, I have cut back on some of my commitments. With regret, I have decided to resign from my appointment to the HRA. I would like to take this opportunity to commend each of my fellow HRA members for their commitment and for allowing me to serve the city of Maplewood in this capacity for the last three year. Sincerely, Loft J. Tauer Attachment Z JOINT RESOL~ON OF APPRECIATION Redevelopment Autho~ of Maplewooa on March 11, 1991 and has servea sdthout compensation, for the betterment o$ me c~y o! ~a~ ,.,-- WHEREAS, I.,od I. Tauer has shown dedication to her duties and has consistently contributed her leaderstdp and effort for the benefit of the City. NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RE$OLFHD for and on behalf of the City of Maplewoo~ Minnesota, and the citizens of the City, that Lori I. Tauer is extended our gratitude and appreciation for her dedicatexl service and we wish her continued success in the future. City of Maplewood this 13th day of December, 1993. Gary Bastian, Mayor Passed by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of the City of Maplewood this 8th day of December, 1993. Lorraine Fischer, Chairpenon Attest: Lucille E. Aurelius, Clerk MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: SUBJECT: LOCATION: DATE: City Manager Thomas Ekstrand, Associate Planner Rosewood Estate of Maplewood Southeast comer of Lakewood Drive and Maryland Avenue December 1, 1993 INTRODUCTION CARE Institute, Inc. is proposing to build a lO0-unit assisted-care senior housing facili~. They are requesting that the City approve: A reduction in parking. The Code requires at least 100 open parking spaces and 100 garage spaces. The plan shows 61 open parking spaces and no garages. (See their letter on page 150 Floor area variances. The Code requires that the efficiency and one-bedroom units have at least 580 square feet. The plan shows 425 square feet for efficiency units and 525 square feet for one-bedroom units. This would require variances of 155 square feet and 55 feet. The two-bedroom units would exceed the Code requirement. 3. Architectural, site and landscape plans. The building would be three stories tall and have an exterior of horizontal-lap vinyl siding. (See the attached plans.) 4. Up to $13 million in tax-exempt housing revenue bonds. State law requires a heagng for the tax-exempt financing: A hearing is not required for the other requests. The site is five acres on the southeast comer of Lakewood Drive and Maryland Avenue. (See the maps on pages 11 and 13.) There would be 26 efficiency units, 70 one- bedroom units and four two-bedroom units. This facility is an alternative to the typical nursing home. Residents would have independent apartments with the availability of 24-hour nursing care, if needed. Services include housekeeping, laundry, bathing, mobility, medication management, social events and nutritional needs. Most residents are frail elderl!~ The average age would be 84 years old. (See the article on page 17.) DISCUSSION Since the parking would be for the staff and visitors, this project will not need the parking and garage spaces required by the Code. Most of the residents will not drive a vehicle. The parking space to unit ratio would be about the same as exists at the Rosewood Estate project in Roseville. The Maplewood project would have 61 parking spaces for 100 units or .6 space per unit. The Roseville project has 35 spaces for 68 units or .5 spaces per unit. The Roseville project administrator said that they have not had a parking problem. The City has reduced the parking and garage requirements for all past senior housing. (See the paddug reductions for other senior projects on page 8.) The parking ratio for this project is the same parking ratio that the Community Design Review Board recently approved for the Volunteers of America Assisted-Living facility. (The VOA withdrew their application before the City Council acted on this request.) Some of the projects that have more parking per unit are for younger seniors that may have vehicles. The proposed number of spaces should be enough. If a problem develops, there is room to add more parking. The City Council should approve these variances. The architect told me that this facility would have 55% of the total floor area as apartment space. The remaining 45% would be common space, used primarily for meeting and socializing. Apartments usually need more floor area per unit because their buildings do not have as large a common area as proposed here. Also, there are fewer people per unit in senior housing than in conventional apartment buildings. (See the architect's letter on page 16.) The property owner has requested a lot split to create a separate parcel for this project. The access drive would cross the adjacent lot to the south. The City will require an access easement as a condition of the lot split. The two proposed ground signs do not meet the Code requirements. The City allows a maximum size of 1S square feet or 32 square feet with Community Design Review Board approval. The proposed signs would each have an area of 40.5 square feet--8.5 square feet over the maximum allowed size. 2 Another problem is that the proposed sign by the south entrance is not on the site. The Code does not allow off-site signs in an R-3, mul~ple dw~,11ing district. The applicant has three options: request a Code change, buy the property for the access drive or do not install this sign. The applicant plans to deal with the sign issues at a later time. The shoreland ordinance requires that the building be at least 80% screened from at least 80% of the Beaver Lake sho~!ine. There will be extensive landscaping to provide Tax-exempt financing reduces the interest rate for the developer's financing. The City is not liable for this financing. There is no loss of money to the City. This money normally would have gone to the Federal lreasury. Tax-exempt financing is for the expansion or new construction of businesses that would provide a needed service, create new jobs or provide additional tax revenue. This project would provide a service for the area and create about 26 new full- and pan-time jobs. The City has approved tax-exempt financing for nine housing projects in the last nine years, including five senior housing projects. (See the list of projects on pages 8 and 9.) The City has spedal design requirements for projects using tax-exempt bonds. A project using tax-exempt financing must include three mandatory design requirements and at least 8 of 21 optional design requirements. The proposed project meets all three of the mandatory design requirements and has at least 8 of the 21 optional design RECOMMENDATION A. Approve 139 fewer parking spaces than Code requires and no garages, since: 1. Most of the residents would not drive a vehicle. 2. The City has allowed fewer parking spaces for similar seniors housing developments. The property owner shrill add off-street parking ff the City Council determines there is not enough parking. Be Adopt the resolution on page 18. This resolution approves a 155-square-foot floor area variance for the efficiency units and a 55-square-foot floor area variance for the one-bedroom units, because: Ce 1. The common areas compensate for the reduced unit size. 2. Senior housing has fewer people per trait than conventional apartment buildings. Approve the site and grading plans (stamped November 9, 1993) subject to the revised partial grading plan (stamped November 30, 1993), the landscaping plan (stamped November 30, 1993) and the building elevations (stamped December 2, 1993) for Rosewood Estate, subject to the following: 1. Repeat this review in two years if the City has not issued a building permit for this project. 2. Complete the following before the City issues a building permit: a. Provide the following for the City Engineer's approval: (1) A utility plan and an erosion control plan. The erosion control plan shall be consistent with the Ramsey Soil and Water Conservation District Erosion Control Handbook. (2) A ponding easement below contour elevation 956 or within the wetland boundary, whichever is large: (3) A wetland buffer easement over the area that is below a line ten feet beyond the wetland boundar~ This easement shall prohibit any mowing, cutting, fllllng or dumping within the easement. b. Verify that the building will be no closer than 100 feet to the W'flliams Brothers pipe_llne. 3. Complete the following before occupying the building: a. Restore and sod damaged boulevards. b. Install a reflectorized stop sign at the exit. c. Install handicap-parking spaces and signs that meet all requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act. d. I~stall signs along the wetland buffer eas__em__ent. These signs shall state that there shall be no mowing, cutting, filllng or dumping beyond this point. 4 Do e. Remove the extra driveway entrances on Maryland Avenue and replace them with concrete curb and gutte~ f. Screen roof-mounted equipment visible from streets or adjacent properties. (code requirement) g. Construct a trash dtunpster enclosure for the outside trash storage. (code requirement) The enclosure must match the color of the building. h. Make all two-way driveways at least 24 feet wide. (code requirement) Widen all visitor/resident parking spaces to 9-1/2 feet. Post the remaining nine-foot-wide parking spaces as *employee parking only.* (code requirement) Install an in-ground sprinkler system for all landscaped areas. (code requirement) 4. If any required work is not done, the City may allow temporary occupancy if: a. The City determines that the work is not essential to the public health, safety or welfare. be The City receives a cash escrow or an irrevocable letter of credit to the City for the required work. The amount shall be 150% of the cost of the unfinished work. Ce The City receives an agreement that will allow the City to complete any unfinished work. 5. This approval does not include the signs. Adopt the resolution on page 19 and the Housing Finance Program on page 26. This resolution approves tax-exempt mortgage revenue financing for up to $13 million to construct the Rosewood Estate project. Approval is subject to the developer meeting the City's requirements for tax-exempt mortgage revenue note financing. 5 REFERENCE SITE DESCRIPTION Area: 5 acres Existing land use: Undeveloped Arlington Properties SURROUNDING LAND USES North: Maryland Avenue, undeveloped land and the Beaver Lake Manufactured Home Park South: Undeveloped land that the City has planned and zoned for multiple dw~_11ings Undeveloped land that the City has planned and zoned for multiple dwe!!irtgs West: Lakewood Drive, County Open Space and Beaver Lake PAST ACTIONS March 20, 1980: The City Council approved a conditional use permit for a planned unit development (PUD) at the southeast comer of Maryland Avenue and Lakewood Drive. This PUD was for 184 quad units in 46 buildings. This permit expired on December 13, 1983. February 27, 1984: The Council changed the zoning on this site from F (farm residence) to R-3 (multiple-family residential). April 22, 1991: The City Council changed the land use plan for these five acres from R-3M (residential medium density) to R-3H (residential high density). The Council stated they would consider changing this site back to R-3(M) after one year if construction has not started on a senior housing project. April 13, 1992 and June 28, 1993: The City Council approved one-year time extensions for the R-3(H) land use plan designation. 6 PLANNING Land Use Plan designation: R-3(I-I) (multiple dwellings at 9.5 to 16.3 units per acre) Zoning: R-3 (multiple dwellir~gs) Section 36-22(a)(2). Off-street parking. There sb_sll be two spaces for each multiple- dwelling unit. One must be a garage space. The City Council may change this requirement. Section 36-22('o)(1). Minimum parking space dimensions. TWo-way drive aisles must be at least 24 feet wide. Parking spaces must be at least nine feet wide for employees and at least 9-1/2 feet wide for visitors and residents. Section 36-230. Sign definitions. A billboard is an off-premises sign that advertises or identifies a building or use not on the property the sign is located upon. Section 36-316(3). Multiple dwplllng sig~s. Ground signs shall not exceed fifteen square feet, unless the Community Design Review Board allows a larger sign. In this case, the maximum allowed size is 32 square feet. Section 36-122(b). Minimum habitable floor area. The minimum habitable floor area for efficiency and one-bedroom units is 580 square feet. State law requires that the City Council make the following findings to approve a variance from the zoning code: 1. Strict enforcement would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the property under consideration. 2. The variance would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the ordinance. 'Undue hardship', as used in connection with the granting of a variance, means the property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the official controls. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property, not created by the landown~ and the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locali~. Economic considerations alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of the ordinance. The City has approved reduced parking and garage requirements for all past senior housing. These projects include: 1. Concordia Arms: 100 spaces for 124 un/ts or .8 space per un/t 2. Hazel Ridge: 75 spaces for 75 units or 1 space per unit 3. Casey Lake (Harmony School site - never built): 62 spaces for 62 units or I space per unit 4. Village on Woodlynn: 87 spaces for 60 units or 1 space for each 1.5 units 5. Carefree Cottages of Maplewood: I space for each 1.5 unit 6. Volunteers of America Assisted Living Complex (never built): 40 spaces for 66 units or 1 space for each .6 unit PAST CITY ACTIONS ON OTHER TAX-EXEMPT HOUSING BONDS 10-8-84: The Council gave preliminary approval for $3.8 hr;Il;on of tax-exempt bonds for the Maple Ridge Apartments at 1695 East County Road D. 1-14-85: The Council gave preliminary approval for $5.8 mill;on of tax-exempt bonds for up to 100 units for the Hazel Ridge Seniors Residence at 2695 Hazelwood Avenue. 2-11-85: The Council gave pr 'ehminary approval for $8.5 m;l!ion of tax-exempt bonds for the 180-unit Pondview Apartments at 2565 and 2585 Ivy Avenue. 11-25-85: The Council gave p~l!minary approval for $6.5 mill;on of tax-exempt bonds for the ll6-unit Casey Lake Seniors Residence (County Road C and White Bear Avenue). This approval was subject to construction beginning within one year (The developers never built this project.) 12-31-85: The City issued $4.8 million of tax-exempt bonds to build the Silver Ridge June 1986: The Council gave final approval of $2.9 mill;on in tax-exempt bonds for the Century Ridge Apartments at 89 North Century Avenue. 8 1987-88: 8-28-89: 12-30-91: The Council approved $2,448,100 of tax-exempt bonds for the 60-unit V'fllage on Woodlynn project. The Council also approved $275,000 of tax- increment finan~. The Council approved $5,300,000 of tax-exempt bonds for the ¥OA Ca~re Centor- The ¢oundl save prelimina~ approval of S5.2 minion of tax-exempt bonds for the 108-unit Carefree Cottages of Maplewood. INFORMATION ABOUT THE FACILITY · ' cili cts the individual's right to privac~ It also works. The environment of this fa ty ~ ....... , .... ,,, ....... to relieve the slress of the threat of in~.titutionalizafion Dy pro..vi.au~ a. The proposed faeillty would be fo_r frail.senio.rs who ,n.o.w ~ .H. vi~. g _wi'th,` _or_ge.._.t~n,~g_n~eip r~,,, ~m~lv members. It also is for semors who are uvmg m me~r own nora= ;'e~s-. 'S"~cl~ ~ple often have their health deteriorate because they do not get the se~ces or helv they need. The proposed facility would not.have the extensive regimentation'and health professional supervision that a sldlled care nursing facility would provide. The physical setlin~ of the buildin~ includes private space and common space. The private space would typically be in one-bedroom apartments. This would include individual sleeping space, full baths, kitchen space, lockable doors, indivi'dual temp~,---,,~ controls and ,~_rsonal fumishh~ There also would be community space including a dining room, laundry, lounges on each floor and an activity room. The developer is proposing rents of $1,850 per month for a studio unit, $2,250 for a one- bedroom unit and $2,800 per month for a two-bedroom unit. COMPEHTNENESS WITH EXISTING SENIOR RESIDENCES The proposed project would not dir?ctly compete w}..'~ the .Co,~ages, Archer H.ei~ts or Concordia Arms residences. This is because this facility woma nave more serwces --v.~l~hl~ ~nd the develooer intends it for less mobile older persons. The desi _gn of. this d-~v-'~lo-~n~-would mos~ likely am'aa persons_ similar, to.those livi?.g_a.t_I-l, az,el. ~J~ge~.__ Hazel Ridge's rents range from $.755 to $995 f_or one ~e .aro~ m a~..a two-bedroom units. These rents include a laundry on each noon ~eaim are available at Hazel Ridge for additional costs. Hazel Ridge has 16 parties on their waiting list. Since the City approved tax-exempt financing for Hazel Ridge, it is reasonable to approve similar financing for the Rosewood project. 9 OPEN SPACE The City's Open Space Committee strongly recommended that the City acquire 19 sites for open space. This site was included. It ranked fifth of the nineteen sites. The City Attorney has advised me that the City should not consider this in reviewing development applications. The City cannot use its land use regulations to get a better deal on buying property. go/b-6:rosewd.mem (25) Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. Land Use Plan Map 3. Property Line/Zoning Map 4. Proposed Site Plan 5. Parking Reduction Justification Letter 6. Floor Area Justification Letter 7. Article 8. Variance Resolution 9. Tax-exempt Financing Resolution 10. Housing Program 11. Plans stamped November 9, 1993 (separate attachments) 10 Attachment 1 Attachment 2 R-34 BC =l M-1 CEM Ave. FI-2 ,land Ave. Stillwater Rd. BC(14) ~rvester Ave. LBC© ,Minnehaha Ave. BC LBC BEAVER LAKE LAND USE PLAN '12 I G ~V T. L.::'.?. 1 bouhd~fy AV£ Attachment 3 I : GERANI 1083 PROPERTY LINE/ZONING MAP 13 N Attachment 4 .I WETLAND III I i I I! !! I 1, ~OV 0 9 19~ !!I (~T,~E PLAN SITE PLAN 14 11.'10:93 16:47 FAX 612 6.36 39,,. ARTHUR SHUSTER ~]00~ Attachment ..... ': ,~//. .~ ~ ~ ' .'~1 .... ~ ..:~< .~-, ': "*"' '~'"'~ '"~'~'t 1995 O~cfcst Avenue W~st · S~in[ Paul, Minnesota 55113 Novem~ 10, 1993 Telephone (6~2) 631-92()() · ~'acslmile (612) 636-3922 Mr. Ken Roberts Associate City. Planner City ot'Maplewood 1830 East County Road B Maplewood, MN 55109 VIA FACSIM]%E TR.A.NS~SSION RE: PARKING REQI_rI:REMENTS FOR ROSEWOOD ESTATE PROJEC'ITMAPLEWOOD Dear Mr. Roberts: I am responding to your conversation with Kirk Velett ofBRW/Elness of Mirmeapolis, regarding the amount of parking required ver.~us the amount of parking we are proposing for our Maplewood t~eility. As you may be aware, we are. operating a'facility in Roseville, Minnesota, which currently has 68 units and operates with 35 parking spaces. We are in thc process ofcxpmiding our thcility to 106 units and have received a variance from the City. of Roseville for 60 parking spots. Our resident population is very. similar to that ora nursing home. Most ot'our residents are of the very fi.m] elderly and avera~3e appro~matdy 84 years of age. Currently. only. one of our residents operates a motor vehicle The primary, use of parking at the Roseville facility is for stafflmd visitors. At most,, thc t~cility will have 30 staff memb~'s al one Ihne. We are. proposing 65 parking units at the Maplewood site, with the possibility of up to 85 stalls. We hope that you find this adequate. If you have any que..~rtion$, please feet flee. to contact me at 631- 3825. Sincerely, SWB MANAGEMENT, INC. Charles A. Shuster Pre,ident CAS/ks 15 BRW ELNESS ARCHITECTS INC Attachment 6 7111 V 1 9 199 November 17, 1993 Tom Ekstrand Community Development City of Maplewood 1830 East County B Maplewood, MN 55109 Rosewood Estate Maplewood, Minnesota Dear Mr. Ekstrand: In response to your request, I would like to provide you the following information to support having less square footage in the Rosewood units as a trade off to more common area. This assisted living project, as in the similar facilities in Roseville, Bloomington, Edina, and Minnetonka, are designed exclusively for the frail elderly. Key to their successes has been to offer residents small apai-hi~ents that are very private, of a manageable size. This reduced square footage is less than criteria established for general occupancy but is offset by increasing proportionally the common areas that are shared by all the residents. This enlarged area is represented by parlors, lounges, wide corridors, dinning room, activity rooms, etc., which encourage residents to spend more time out of their unit where there is assistance and sodal activities. Generous and pleasant common areas support social interaction by the residents and offer a pleasant experience in travelling to dining and programmed activities within the building. In a building of this type it is common to expect a 60/40 split between private and common areas as opposed to 80/20 in a typical apartment. In post occupancy evaluations, it has been clear that the unit size proposed in Maplewood is the desired size. I encourage you to take exception to the square foot criteria for this very special building type. If you would like more information or specific data related to these or other similar projects, please contact me. Thresher Square 700 Third Street So. Minneapolis, MN 55415 612/339-5508 Fax 612/339-5382 Sincerely, BR V ELNE~S ARCHITECTS, INC. _! Arv Elness, FAIA Princi' ~al Attachments (1) 16 Attachment 7 Adopted on Attachment 8 VARIANCE RESOLUTION WHERFAs, CARE Institute,/nc. - Maplewood appl/ed for a variance from the zoning ordinance. WHEREA~, this variance applies to a five-acre tract at the southeast comer of Maryland Avenue and Lakewood Drive. The legal descr/ption is: That part of Lots 7 and 8, Block 1, Beaver Lake Addition, Ramsey Count~, Minnesota described as follows: The south 375 of the north 408 feet of sa/d Lots 7 and 8 which lies east of a line 49.5 feet east of and parallel to the west line of the Northeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 25, Township 29, Range 22 and which lies west of a line 635.5 feet east of and parallel to sa/d west 1/ne. WHEREAs, Section 36-122(b) of the Maplewood Code of Ordinances requires that the m/n/mum habitable floor area for effldency and one-bedroom apartment un/ts shall be 580 square feet. WHERE,, the applicant is proposing that the effidency un/ts have 425 square feet and that the one-bedroom units have 525 square feet. WHERF2~, this requires variances of lSS and 55 square feet. WHE~, the history of this variance is as follows: 1. On November 23, 1993, the Community Design Review Board recommended that the City Council approve this variance. 2. The City .?_u~..cil .held a.pub hearing on notice in li.c December 13, 1993. City staff published a me ~aplewood Review and sent notices to the surrounding property owners as required by law. The Council gave everyone at the hearing an opportunity to speak and present written statements. The Council also considered reports and recommendations from the City staff and Planning Commission. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED variance for the following that the City Council approve the above-described reasons: 1. The common areas compensate for the reduced unit size. 2. Senior housing has fewer people per unit than conventional apartment buildings. ,1993. 18 Attachment 9 Extract of Minutes of a Meeting of the City council of the City of Maplewood, Minnesota Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the City council of the City of Maplewood, Minnesota, was duly held at the City Hall in said City on Monday, the 13th day of December 1993, at 7:00 P.M. The following members were present: and the following were absent: introduced the following Member resolution and moved its adoption: i~ESOLUTION RECITING A pROPOSAL FOR A FINANCING PROGRAM FOR A MULTIFAMILY HOUSING DEVELOPMENT, GIVING pRELIMINARY APPROVAL TO THE PROJECT PURSUANT TOMINNESOTA STATUTES, CHAPTER 462C, AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF ELDER CARE FACILITY REVENUE BONDS, AND AUTHORIZING THE pREPARATION OF NECESSARY DOCUMENTS AND MATERIALS IN CONNECTION WITH THE PROJECT AND PROGRAM (CARE INSTITUTE, INC. - MAPLEWOOD pROJECT) The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member and, after full discussion thereof and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. 19 RESOLUTION RECITING A PROPOSAL FOR A FINANCING PROGRAM FOR DEVELOPMENT, A MULTIFAMILY MOUSING GIVING PRELIMINARy APPROVAL TO THE PROJECT PURSUANT TO MINNESOTA STATUTES. AUTHORIZING THE ISS" ....... CHAPTER 462C, v,,~mu~.' OF ELDER CARE - REVENUE BONDS FACILITY PREPARATION OF ~-mm~-~: .AND_ AUTHORIZING THE u-,. AND PROGRAM (CARE INSTITUTE, INC. - MAPLEWOOD PROJECT) (a) WHEREAS, Minnesota S confe~ upon cities the ow tatut~, Chapter 462C the - , program for ~ ..... P er to issue re ........ (. Act ), ......... ~',= purposes of nla--~ .... ~=~ue monas to financ ~ugaslng loans with ~ ..... f ~'"'~"~, a~mlnzsterin, -_~.__ e a aevelopments ~ .... m ~o one or mo~- -..~ .... g -~-~- une moundaries n~ ~ ~i~ua~amllY housing ( )' through the issuance of revenue bonds or obligations in one or more series (the "Bonds,,) pursuant to the Act; and (c) WHEREAS, the City desires to: facilitate the development of rental housin a facility within --- ...g nd an existin affordable encourage th ca e e ,.., ..... ~''~"~ opportunities ~. _~_~"=_u~ve~opment of - ---' S · g d for uevelopment o~ ,,-~--.~.- - = per OhS, and ob3ectiv,,' ._~ j ct will assist the Ci~,, ~ .... ~ar~es of the --, =-u --z ~- uonlevlng these o- _. (e~ WHEREAS, the City has been advised by representativ z ?ne company that conventional, commercial financing to a es capital costs of the Project is available onl on · · P y the and at such high costs of borr ....... Y a llmlted of operating the p--~ .... owing that the eco,om~ .... CO~ ........ ~uj~o~ would be s . . __ -. .~u zeaslbllit -~-~ nas aiso ignlflcantl . Y advised the Cit,, eh~ -.~= ~.Y r~auced, and th, z ..... wlu. =ne aid of municip~[ financing, and resulting low borrowing costs, the Project is economically more feasible ~ and (f) WHEREAS, no public official of the City has either a direct or indirect financial interest in the Project nor will any public official either directly or indirectly benefit financially from the Proj eot: NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City council of the City of Maplewood, Minnesota, as follows: 1. PreliminarvADDrovals. The City hereby gives preliminary approval to the proposal of the Company that the City financing therefor, consLs=lng o~ ~ A , construction and equipping of a development consisting of a ombination of multifamily housing and an existing elder care ~ ...... ''''- '~e Cit~ -ursuant to the Companyts specifications ~'~u~~ ~"reven~e~agreement between the city and Company co.taining such and conditions revision from time to time as necessary) as may De ne~B~aax ~ roduce income and revenues sufficient to pay, when due, the P .......... ~- =~nds in a total principal amount prlncLpal an~ Ln=eres~ on ~= ~ not to exceed $13,000,000, to be issued pursuant to the Act to finance the renovation, acquisition, construction and equipping of the Project. 2. Financina Structure. At the option of the Company, the financing may be structured so as to take advantage of whatever means are available and are permitted by law to enhance the 3. EjJ~Ltng~. on the basis of information available to the Cit it appears, and the City hereby finds, determines and dec~ares= (1) that the Project constitutes a multifamil~ housing development within th? mean%n 462C.05 Of the A ............ ~acilit-- and a new or exLs~lng nea~un ~a~= ~ _ . the= the nnesota Statutes, Section ( ) as-~}]~-b[-~--- --~elooment is desired and intended to be development is designed and ln=enaea =o ~ us p ~ elderly or physically handicapped persons, (4) that nursing, medical care, and other health ~el~te~ a~is~ed ½iving~s~_rv}~s ........ .,-~-- -- - o~-hour ~as~s ~n cae oeve~opmenc =o reSidents~ (5) that the Pro~ec= w}}l_ ~?.~rlm~r~¥ ~y~uy~_ elderly personsl (6) that the avaLla~LLL=y o£ cae ~znancz~9 the Act and the willingness of the City to furnish such financLng will be a substantial inducement to the Company to undertake the Project~ and (7) that the effect of the Project, if undertaken, will be to encourage the provision of. additional multifamily rental housing opportunities to residents of the City, and to p~omote more intensive development and use of land within the City. f' 4. _.Fu~ur? ADDroval~' The Project, and the program to lnance ~e Project b the given premtmina~va~o.._. =_ ~nc~.?f re~nue bonds, is hereb by the Cit Com ] o final approval Y, piny and purchasers of the details of the financing of the Project. Bonds as to ultimate _~_~_.~_ ~o~Dan¥ t? p~v. cost~. The Company has a tee ~ ~remy ae=er~lnea ~1 g d, and it ....... . ....... ~, an~ and all costs incurred b t ' - ~m===&on wi~n ~le ~ y he City th ~nanc~ng of the Pro ect w co:~l~,~ject is carried to completion wi1 j u~,h~evth~[.Or not ---c---z- , i be ~--- ~ .... ~. A~s~stan?e with Documen~f. Briaas an~ -aa~aams & Co. Incorporated, acting as investmen selected by the Cit-- w'-= -~ · t bankers = ~un =ne consen= of the Co~pany, are authorized to assist in the preparation and review o . documents relatina ~ ~. ~--=-_. ........ f necessary ....... ~ .... ~j=~ ~nu =ne ~lnanclng program there=or, co consult with the Cit A -utc~ ............... Y ttorney, Company and m -~r~ o~ =ne ~onas (or the ~rustee for the to the maturities, interest r-' ..... cha ers of ~=~ ~,u ocher =erms aha o{ .the Bonds and as to the covenants an provisions or ~he ne~ .... ~ ........ d other doc ..... ~ ........ --~o~= uv~umencs and =o submit ~-~u~ ~o ~ne cl~y ~or final approval. - 7. Revenue Obliaation~. Nothing in this Resol documents prepared ~urSuan~ ~ ............ ution or the m ~ -~a=~o ~all aucnorlze the expenditures of any municipal funds on the Project other than the .. . ~ ~m '~ ~on~s snail no~ constitute a char ~le~ or encumbrance, lena1 ~- ---.~-=.- ge, payment thereof, nor sh P egs pledged to the the ........ al~ the City be subject =o an liabi =~n. '£ne no%aer of the Bonds sba1! never h Y lity compel any exercise o .~. ~_~ .... aye the right to f --.- ~n~ power of the City to pay the outstanding principal of the Bonds or the interest thereon, or enforce payment thereon against any propert of to ~ogds shall recite ~n substanc- ~-- -=- --Y- .the_City. The Interest thereon, - ~.~u une uonas, ~ncluding the are payable solely from the revenue and proceeds pledged to the payment thereof. The Bonds shall constitute a debt of the City within the meanin not constitution or statutory limitation, g of any __ ~- . Authorization for ExDenditure~. In anticipation of the anu =ne Issuance of the Bonds to finance all or a portion of the Project, and in order that completion of the Project will not be unduly delayed when approved, the Company is hereby authorized to make such expenditures and advances toward payment of that 22 proceeds of the Bonds as the Company cons~aers nece ~, ~ncluding the use of interim short-term financing, subject to reimbursement from the Proceeds of _t~..e..Bonds ~i~f_a_n?~whe_n~ the delivered but otherwise without lia~ili=y on =ne paru v~ City. 9. Notice of Public Hearina. The acti?9? ?f.C%ty.~taff in causing the notice of public hearing to b~,ptm~sn~a ~n Maplewood Review are hereby ratified, con~rmea aha aaop=ea. 10. ~estrictions. The Company shall enter into various agreements With the City which shall impose the following restrictions on the Company and the Project= (a) Construction must begin by December 13, 1994. The City Council may grant a time extension if just cause is shown. (b) Contracts entered into with Contractors doing work on the Project shall provide that: (i) the contractor shall not discriminate in the hiring or firing of employees on the basis of race, color, creed, religion, national origin, sex, marital status, status with regard to public assistance, disability or age. (ii) the contractor shall compensate employees with wages and financial remuneration as providedunder the United States Code, Section 276A, as amended through June 23, 1986, and under Minnesota Statutes 1985, Sections 177.41-177.44. (iii) the.contractor shall be required to employ Minnesota residents in at least 80% of the jobs created by the.project~ and, at'least 60% of the ~roup shall be residents of the seven-county metropolLtan area. Resident status under both of the above categories shall be determined as of the date of this reso}ution. H?w~¥~=}~ the contractor can show that these quo=as are no= ~eas%~e because of a shortage of qualified personnelin specific skills, the contractor may request the City Council for a release from the two residency requirements. The requirements shall continue for the duration of the construction project. (iv) the contractor shall be an active participant in a State of Minnesota apprentice program, approved by the Department of Labor and Industry. (v) all provisions of these tax-exempt finance requirements shall apply to all subcontractors working on the Project. 2520~ 23 (c) The Company shall pay an administrative fee to the City at closing calculated in accordance with the Cityts tax-exempt revenue requirements. (d) The Company ~ha½1.~omply with the City,s tax-exempt revenue requirements, lnclualng the optional deslgn requirements. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Maplewood, Minnesota, this 13th day of December, 1993. 2520~ 24 STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF RAMSEY CITY OF MAPLEWOOD I, the undersigned, being the duly qualified and acting Clerk of the City of Maplewood, Minnesota, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that I have compared the attached and foregoing extract of minutes with the original thereof on file in my office, and that the same is a full, true and complete transcript of the minutes of a meeting of the City Council .of said City duly called and held on the date therein indicated, insofar as such minutes relate to the Cityts bonds for its Care Institute, Inc. - Maplewood Project. WITNESS my hand and the seal of said City this 13th day of December, 1993. (SEAL) Clerk '' Attachment 10 CITY OF MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA HOUSING FINANCE PROGRAM CARE INSTITUTE, INC. - MAPLEWOOD PROJECT This housing finance program (the "Program,,) is undertaken by the City of Maplewood, Minnesota (the "City") to finance a Project (as defined and described in this document) to be owned by Care Institute, Inc. - Maplewood, an Indiana nonprofit corporation (the "Company.). The Project consists primarily of the acquisition of a tract of land and the construction and equipping of a 100 unit elder multifamily rental housing facility, along with related improvements, to be located at the Southeast corner of Lakewood Drive and Maryland in the City of Maplewood (the "Project"). The expected base monthly rental fees for a Residential Studio Unit will be between $1,800 to $1,900, a Residential One-Bedroom Unit will be between $2,200 to $2,800, and a Residential Two-Bedroom Unit will be $2,800. The Project will be operated as a mUltifamily rental housing development within the meaning of Minnesota Statutes, Section 462C.05, Subd. 4; The City will issue multifamily housing revenue bonds (the "Bonds") pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 462C.07, Subd. 1, and loan the proceeds of the Bonds to the Company to finance the Project. 251616 26 The City will issue the Bonds to finance the Project in the principal amount not to exceed $13,000,000. The City will loan the proceeds from the sale of the Bonds .to the Company pursuant to a revenue agreement (the "Loan Agreement") by and between the City and the Company. The Company will be required, pursuant to the Loan Agreement, to make payments sufficient to pay when due the principal of, premium, if any, and interest on the Bonds. The Bonds may be structured so as to take advantage of whatever means are available or necessary and are permitted by law to enhance the security for and marketability of the Bonds. Substantially all of the net proceeds of the Bonds (the initial principal amount thereof, less amounts deposited in a reasonably required reserve or paid out as costs of issuance of the Bonds) will be used to pay the costs of the Project, including any functionally related and subordinate facilities. The Project will be undertaken to further the policies and goals stated in the Cityts Housing Plan, under Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 462C and is consistent with the Cityts Housing Plan. The City has adequate existing capacity to administer, monitor and supervise the Project in order to insure that the Project will be consistent with the City's Housing Plan. The Company will construct the Project in compliance with all applicable development restrictions, and all new construction and rehabilitation of the existing buildings is subject to applicable 251616 state and local building codes. The Company will be required to operate the Project in accordance with state and local anti-discrimination laws and ordinances.. The costs of the Project and the Program undertaken to finance the Project, including specifically the costs to the City, will be paid or reimbursed by the Company. 251616 Community Design Review Board Minutes of 11-23-~3 Boardmember Robinson and the landscaping plan United Methodist Chtwch approval of the plans (stamped November 9, 1993) on November 18, 1993) for the addition at Christ Hudson Phce). Erickson, Robinson, Thompson, B. Phalen Lake Town Homes Dan Ogren of Good Value Homes Boardmember Anitzbevger regarding this proposal. The exterior of the buildings, a presentation explaining this project. Planning Commism'on's recent action the materials ro be used on the lot sizes, and the proposed cul-de-sacs. Chairperson Moe asked comments the audience. There were no comments. Boardmember variances and allowed by the moved the the density land use pla~ Design Review Board deny the the maximum number of units seconded C. Rosewood Estate Seniors Housing (Section 25) Richard Webb, the developer for this project, and Kirk Velett snd Chris Beringer, of BRW/F. Iness, were present at the meeting. Mr. Velett described the layout of the project and the proposed landscaping. A landscaping plan was submitted, but it did not meet the code. It was decided that this plan will be revised and resubmitted to staff for approval. The Shoreland Ordinance requirements for screening were discussed. Secretary Ekstrand noted that the developer could apply for a variance from the screening code, but the State's requirements for a variance may be difficult to meet. He said another option for the developer may be to buy more land. A. Approval of 139 fewer parking spaces than code requires and no garages, since: 1. Most of the residents would not drive a vehicle. 2. The City has allowed fewer parking spaces for similar seniors housing developments. Community l view Board Minutes of 11-23-93 -3- Ce The property owner shall add off-street parking if the City Council determines there is not enough parking. Adoption of the resolution approving a 155-square-foot floor area variance for the efficiency units and a 55-square-foot floor area variance for the one- 1. The common areas compensate for the reduced unit size. 2. Senior housing has fewer people per unit than conventional apartment btfldinSs. Approval of the plans (stamped November 9, 1993 by the City) for Rosewood Estate, subject to the following:. 1. Repeat this review in two years if the City has not issued a building permit for this project. 2. Complete the following before the City issues a building permit: a. Provide the following for the City Engineez's approval: (1) A utility plan and an erosion control pla~ The erosion control plan sb~11 be consistent with the Ramsey Soil and Water Conservation District Erosion Control Handbook. (2) A ponding easement below contour elevation 956 or within the wetland boundary, whichever is larger. be (3) A wetland buffet eas-ment over the area that is below a line ten feet beyond the wetland boundary. This easemem shall prohibit any mowing, cutting, tql~ir~ or dumping within the easement. Verify that the building will be no closer than 100 feet to the W'gliams Brothers pip,,!ine. Complete the following before occupying the building:. a. Restore., and sod damaged boulevards. b. Install a reflectorized stop sign at the exits. c. Install handicap-parking spaces and signs that meet all requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Community Design Review Board Minutes of ! 1-23-911 Iastall ~ along the wetland buffer easement. These signs shall state that there shall be no mowing, cutting, ml~n~ or dumping: beyona point e. Remove the extra driveway entrances on Maryland Avenue and replace them with concrete curb and gutter. Screen roof-mounted equipment visible from streets or adjacent properties. (code requirement) Construct a trash dumpster enclosure for the outside trash storage (code requirement). The enclosure must match the color of the h. Make all two-way driveways at least 24 feet wide. (code requirement) Widen all visitor/resident parking spaces to 9 1/2 feet. Post the remaining nine-foot-wide parking spaces as "employee parking only". Ccode requirement) j. Instan an in-groUnd sprinkler system for all Landscaped areas. (code requirement) 4. If any required work is not done, the City may anow temporary occupancy if: a. The City determines that the work is not essential to the public health, safety or welfare. The City receives a cash escrow or aa intwocable letter of credit to the City for the required work. The amount shall be 150~ of the cost of the unR~hed worlc 5. This approval does not include the signs. 6. All work shall follow the approved plans. The Director of Community Development may approve minor changes. 7. Submit the landscape plan for staff approvaL Boardmembe~ Anitzberger seconded Ayes-Moe, Erickson, Robinson, MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: SUBJECT: DATE: City Manager Ken Roberts, Associate Planner S~nlor Hon-~nE Projects November 15, 1993 INTRODUCTION On September 14, 1993, Lorraine Fischer asked staff to investigate the number of units and densities of the cottage-style snior homing developments in the area. DISCUSSION The following is a list of the cottage-style senior homing projects in the area: Pro~ect Name Village on WoocUynn # of Units Site Size (acres) 60 4.7 Density (units/acre) 12.8 Carefree Cottages of Maplewood 108 9.6 11.3 Cottages of North Saint Paul 94 8.2 11.5 Cottages at Hillcrest (Saint Paul) 32 3.3 9.7 Aspen Cottages (Oakdale) 114 28.0 4.1 kr/density, mem MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: SUBJECT: LOCATION: DATE: City Manager Ken Roberts, Associate Planner Golden Star (Larpenteur East) Apartments 315-321 Larpenteur Avenue December 2, 1993 INTRODUCTION Mr. George Van Vliet is requesting that the City Council approve a request for a low- interest loan from the Gounty. Mr. Van Vliet is now the owner of the Golden Star (Larpenteur East) Apartments at 315-321 Larpenteur Avenue. He is asking the Gity to apply for a $500,000 low-interest loan. Mr. Van Vliet would use the loan to help rehabilitate the project. He is putting up to $200,000 of his money into the project. BACKGROUND The City has approved a loan and a grant from the County for two other projects: 1. In 1988, the Gounty approved a $252,000 grant for the Village on Woodlynn senior housing project. 2. On March 22, 1993, the Gity Council approved a request from the developers of the Garefree Gottages of Maplewood. The request was to apply to the County for a $648,000 loan-interest loan. The developers used this money to buy the land for the project. DISCUSSION This project has been one of the worst apartment buildings in Maplewood. Since purchasing the building, Mr. Van Vliet is working to improve the quality of the building and the tenants. Mr. Van Vliet recently rehabilitated the Marion Street Brittney Apartments in Roseville (west of Rice Street on Larpenteur Avenue). He used a low- interest loan from the Gounty to help with this project. If approved, the Gounty would make this loan to the Gity. The Gity then passes the loan through to the owner. If the owner defaults on the loan, the Gounty would require the Gity's help in trying to recover the loan balance from the owner. The Gounty would not require the Gity to make up the difference. Rehabilitation Standards The County will require the City to bring the project up to Section 8 Housing Standards. These are minimum housing standards to make the units safe and livable. As part of the City's contract with the owne~; the City can require improvements beyond the Section 8 standards. If the County approves the entire loan, the City should require the developer to make the following improvements beyond the Section 8 standards: Exterior 1. Correct all grading and drainage problems. These problems include: a. The washout on the south side of the south parking lot by Larpenteur Avenue. b. The eroding slope and retaining wall on the site's northeast comer. 2. Add enclosures for trash and recycling containers. 3. Restripe the parking lots to code, including handicapped spaces. 4. Clean and re-dash all stucco surfaces. 5. Update all signs including fire lanes, no parking zones, handicapped spots, stop signs and addresses on the buildings. 6. Add (where needed) exterior security lighting. 7. Repair or replace exterior brick and joints as needed. Interior 1. Add or repair the hard-wired smoke detectors to each apartment. 2. Update all electrical circuits in the kitchens and bathrooms with ground-fault interrupters. 3. Replace all broken or damaged appliances. 4. Add a secUrity system with lockable exterior doors and an intercom system. RECOMMENDATION Approve the resolution on page 6. This resolution requests that the County approve a low-interest loan for the rehabilitation of the GOlden Star (Larpenteur East) Apartments. ' go/b-6:aptloan.mem (18) Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. Property Line/Zoning Map 3. Loan Resolution 3 Attachment ~B .~:~-::~;:ia}~Ok. -.~.. ON... . . ... REQUE~G A LOW-INTEREST ~i't~ROM FIA~ COU~ ~'~~, ~s project.ig.~O< '~~~Sta~Ap~ments (~o~ ~,ore as ,~.,_:,~2_'.:, .... ~~~~ 315,~ L~e~teur Avenue, ",~!:inc~:cifi~~, Maplewood '.wish~.'-:~,._ '~?~t~P'~et ~ housing needs of low ~d moderate , '.'..~ ~ .~se ap~ents..~¢ ~ ~~-~d need'~abilitation. ~ ~' · [-z~'t ~~ thes~:.ap'~ents/~eha~litated, ~d hd~.meet the housinv need, nf [c ~;....~~,.theS¢~.~p~$ ~t fo~ ~ vin, ~ Woodl~ and a low- lY7 (" ~': ~'[:~~O~5"~L~'~ t~,Maple~od Ci, Council requests that ;2.'~.(~ ~...~. ':.~,~~~ve ~. C~ ~,0~, '~mest loan for the rehabilitation of the ;.~'~.. ' ". . .: L .. ~.'; : ,:' - , . , · ,.~ ..,~:.~z ,. P~apl~d,g~~ p~ed.tNs ~esoluuon on December 13, 1993. - ~ : ..... .. (~) Attachment ~) .F~: :~;iA~Ok. -!~rl, ON REQUE~G~..,: .. A _LOW'INTEREST ~'tCROM RA/~. ~ COU~ .~~,~ ~, ;. . .'"~~, ~?~-~a~StarAp~ments (~o~ ~ore as ~:~'- m~i,~t~,East Apices).~ ~,- ~)~ ' ' ~." .. z :,=. '~2 'U ~,~, ~e loeauon o~fi~~r~m 315~ La~enteur Avenue, ~{, '-,'. ~~, Mapl~ ~;~,~p:~ ~ ~us~g needs of low ~d moderate  , .~, ',.., .~se ap~ments.-~ M ~~'~d need~abilitation. ~- · ~. - .~.,_ w~~, mese apa~ents; ~ena~matea, ~]d help meet the housing needs of ~ ,' ;L :' .~ ow ~.m~te-Mcom~~ citizem ;;.' '::'-.'.7~;~J~;.t"~,~9,~.~P~~ ~.t ~or t~ vin~e ~ Wood]~ and a low- ~d: ,..: ?~~ m~~ mr me ~a~e~ee <o~a~ of Maolew~d. ~ ~ ~.SH~O~, ~ ~ ~L~ t~ t~,Ma lewood C, Counml re uests that ..... , ..... , .. : ....... . .. P . ~ q ;'~.g.%; g ..,~.~~~~.~ve ~e C]~ ~a, ~0,0~, ~w~m~est loan for the rehabilitation of the ~:..-'5~fl' ~~~t~ ~ments~'~ <" :-.=ex~:-~t:,. 5 ~ P, ~ .':,: ~"' - p~ed.tNs resolution on December 13, 1993.