Loading...
11-27-1972 PC MIN M I NUT E S Village Planning Comffiission - November 27th, 1972. Garry Harrington appeared concerning the petition to re-zone the tract of land west of Proctor, North of and East of railroad and South of Village Limits, except the part platted, from R-2 to R-4 pursuant to a planned unit development for this tract; the preliminary unit to consist of 84 units as follows: 13 1 BR, 56 2 BR, and 15 3 SR. These units together with 84 garages were to be located on approximately the South 4 acres of the above tract. Mr. Harrington told the commission that all the apartments would be the same with Refrigerator, Stove, Air Conditioning, Carpet, Garbage Disposal and Storage area. The building was to be stucco with redwood cross hatching. Patios--no balconies. 1 BR were to be 750 to 290 Sq. Ft.; 2 BR to be 850 to 925 Sq. Ft. and 3 BR to be 1000 to 1100 Sq. Ft. The building to be 3 floors out of ground. This under a HUD 236, low rent, Mod. income Housing. Apartments to rent at a maximum of $190 to $230 with Government Subsidy up to $60.00. We were informed that the government has 26 separate items that must be approved before a loan would be granted. One of these is that the project must have the approval of the local government. Another is that it must be served with sewer and water. (On this point it is already known that the necessary sewer capacity is not available." Mr. Harrington suggests that such a project as this will probably raise the Village of Elk River1s rating or position on the priority list for funds from HUD for sewer expansion. The Village is now 14th.) It also appeared that 20% of the housing so constructed could be rented without being rented to those who qualify for subsidy. It further appeared that the HUD program is set up for 2 people in a single, 4 people in a 2 BR and 5 people in a 3rd apartment. The builder and his people who are the owners of the project, will manage the building and provide certain social services. The program is locked into a 20 year ownership. Limited Partnership, no rent supplement--just rent subsidy. Tax: 50% reduction. (Mr. Harrington claimed that in a 50 unit building in Coon Rapids there were about 7 children of school age in the 50 units.) $7900 gross income is basic in Coon Rapids--could be more or less here. (Sewer line problem and Sewer plant problem are realities that will take some doing and the coming school, school view addition, and other priorities will probably use up more than the present capacity. Mr. Harrington realizes this and knows that these problems will have to be overcome before his project goes into construction which would probably be at least 2 years anyway.) (Mr. Harrington said that a 236 program would move Elk River up on the list of grant priorities.) The question of a more valid market survey (as FHA makes its survey after the application has been made) was brought up and the furnishing of such a survey was left to Mr. Harrington. Applicants will be drawn from the area--including the Twin Cities, because HUD wants to get people out of the city. Mr. Harrington said that he could easily fill the 84 units in one month. He also mentioned that such places as Coon Rapids is already saturated. (Secretaryls note: how could this be? There is much open space in Coon Rapids still--or does HUD mean that their welcome has been worn out there?) Mr. Harrington was asked if he would consider a lesser number of units-- such as 20 or 30, and he said that HUD only goes in bigger units. It also appears that the planned unit development, if started, would continue, which would almost automatically allow for at least 200 more units and/or industrial and commercial area. At this point the meeting was thrown open for comments from the people present, who were mainly from the homes just next to the proposed development, which homes face on Proctor Avenue. November 27, 1972--Continued They were concerned that their homes would be devalued. Jerry (Mr. Harrington) says that the Supreme Court has said that this is not so and that it is entirely possible that the value of the homes would be increased. The people commented on the traffic problem that would be created, and it was pointed out that all streets, roads and public services would be born by the developers. Albert Bailey (Comm.Member) pointed out that if the sewer was the problem we would need that before any decision could be reached. Mr. Harrington pointed out that this was true and that FHA would not give its approval unless the use of the Sewer and Water system was granted. John E. MacGibbon (Comm.Member) pointed out that the prospective number of additional families of low income to our community was a trumatic, catastrophic event and that we should measure the impact of such a development in all its possibilities and ramifications. Mr. Harrington pointed out that the need was here and that the apartments could be easily filled. But Mr. MacGibbon counted with---But is the need herein Elk River---we have a responsibility to our own people and our own community. At this point it was moved that the matter be laid on the table pending further study and the furnishing of a market survey. Seconded and Carried. (Note: This writer took occasion a few days later to talk to Don Strei, the head of the Sherburne County Welfare program. He pointed out that the welfare budget of Sherburne County had gone from 350,000 in the last year to 500,000 this year and said further that such a unit was very susceptible to ADC cases from the city moving to a better environment---what was commendable---but that after those cases were in Sherburne County for one year, they became our problem and would be on our budget.) VILLAGE PARKING Con Johnson, as head of a parking committee of local businessmen, appeared and asked about our thinking on immediate parking needs. It was suggested that the businessmen would furnish funds and purchase the Schumacher Building, the Bob Hall Building, and others to be used for parking lots, and that the City would institute a program to assess the costs against the local businessmen and would own the lots. The Planning Commission agreed that any such program would be commendable and that they could have the title to these lots at some future date to be part of or raise funds for the erection of a parking ramp. It was pointed out that the businessmen and property owners in the business district should be assessed for the costs; That the Village could bond and put the costs on as assessments against the benefitted businessmen. They asked the Planning Commissionls appro.val so that they could go to the Village Council with a plan to do this. It was Moved, Seconded and Carried that the Commission approve the concept of acquiring property for the Village and improving it as parking lots and assessing the costs back to the local businesses benefited. LIBRARY SITE The question of a site for a new library was brought up. It appeared that the old Dare home (Northwest of Handke School) and the Moos property on 4th Street south of the new firebarn were the primary sites under consideration. The Planning Commission was asked their opinion or choice and it was determined that a choice should first be made by the Library Board and that the Planning Commission could then act on their proposal. Meeting adjourned.