The URL can be used to link to this page

09-194Council File #_� _ � q�y Green Sheet # 3066578 1 2 4 5 6 7 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 CITY Presented by RESOLUTION 41�VT PAUL, MINNESOTA �- J WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes 462.353, subd. 1, grants a municipality the authority to prepare a comprehensive plan, which is defined in Minnesota Statutes 462.352, subd. 5 as "a compilation of policy statements, goals, standards, and maps for guiding the physical, social and economic development, both private and public, of the municipality and its environs. .." WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes 473.856 requires that municipalities prepare comprehensive plans consistent with the development guide and the metropolitan system statements adopted by the Metropolitan Council; and WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes 473.859 details the content of the comprehensive plan; and WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes 473.&64, subd. 2, requires that municipalities review and update as appropriate their comprehensive plans every 10 years and submit them to the Metropolitan Council for review; and WHEREAS, Section 107.02 of the City of Saint Paul administrative code authorizes the Planning Commission to organize and facilitate the preparation of the Comprehensive Plan and any subsequent updates and to transmit its recommend to the Mayor and to the City Council; and WHEREAS, Section 107.04 of the City of Saint Paul administrative code authorizes the Planning Commission to appoint task forces as advisory bodies to study technical issues identified by the commission and to report their findings to the commission for its consideration; and WHEREAS, the Comprehensive Planning Committee of the Planning Commission in January 2006 began the coordination of tasks necessary to prepare the Comprehensive Plan update; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission on September 13, 2006 initiated the preparation of the Housing chapter, one of six chapters in the Saint Paul Comprehensive Plan update; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission appointed representatives of Saint Paul residents, stakeholder groups, and people with knowiedge and expertise in housing to participate in the Housing Comprehensive Plan Task Force, which was chaired by a member of the Planning Commission; and WHEREAS, the task force met from October of 2006 through January of 2008 to prepare the public hearing draft of the Housing chapter; and WHEREAS, the Pianning Commission held a public hearing on the Housing Chapter on September 5, 2008, notice of which was duiy given in the Saint Paul Legal Ledger on August 14, 2008; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommended changes to the Housing chapter, after considering public comment; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission and the Mayor hereby recommend adoption by the City Council of the Housing chapter of the Saint Paul Comprehensive Plan. t�9-JG`f 47 48 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council adopt the Housing chapter of the of 49 the Saint Paul Comprehensive Plan, contingent on further review by adjacent communities and the 50 Metropolitan Council; and 51 52 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this Housing chapter of the Saint Paul Comprehensive Plan 53 repfaces the existing Housing Pian, adopted on January 9, 2002. 54 55 56 57 58 Yeas Nays Absent Bostrom �/ Carter ,/ Harris ,/ Helgen �/ Lantry Stark ,/ Thune �/ � � Adopted by Council: Date �`/��l/�/ Adoption Certified by Co cil Secretary BY= � � Approve �SyMay Date 3�Z. f .�,� By: _ `^"'`-,/ � �' � � �_—>' R este e ient oE By: Approved by the Office of Financial Services � Approved , by / C�iyt Attorney gy: �G/`�✓�� 2— � — o R Approv y Ma or bmi o ouncil By: � Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet � �._,�.t DepartmenUOffice/Council: Date initiated: � � �, PE _PlanningBEconomic 02-FEB-09 Green Sheet NO: 3066578 Development Confact Person & Phone: Department Sent To Person iitial/ at �UiS PyfB1I'2 � 0 lannin & Economic Develo me Lar Soderholm 6-6597 1 lanninz & Ecouomic Develoome CecOe Bedor Director Must Be on Council Agenda 6y (Date): Number Z � Attorne I Peter warner Z� "i`t � 18-FEB-09 For 3 a or's OfLce Ma or/Assistant Routlng 4 ouncil Kath Lan Praident Doa Type: RESOLUTION Order 5 i Clerk Ciry Clerk 6 lannin & Ecouomic Develo me Luis Pere'va E-Document Required: Y Document Contact: Contact Phone: Total # of Signature Pages (Clip All Locations for Signature) Action Requested: Review and approve the Housing chapter of the Saint Paul Comprehensive Plan. Recommendations: Approve (A) or Reject (R): Personal Service Contracts Must Answer the Following Questions: � Planning Commission 1. Has this person/firm ever worked under a contract for this department? CIB Committee Yes No Civil Service Commission 2. Has this person/firm ever been a city employee? . A PED ves No 3. Does this personlFirm possess a skil{ not normally possessed by any current city employee� Yes No Explain ali yes answers on separete sheet and attach to green sheet. Initiating Problem, Issues, Opportunity (Who, What, When, Where, Why): The Housing Plan is one of six new and upda.[ed citywide chapters of the Comprehensive Plan recently approved by the Planning Commission. The other chapters cover Land Use, Transportation, Pazks and Recreation, Water Resowces, and Historic Preservation. The Housing Plan contains recommendations about how the Ciry can meet the housing needs of a growing population, engage in the preservation and new construction of housing affordable to low and moderate income households, and maintain and revi[alize the existing, aging housing stock and neighborhoods. AdvaMages If Approved: State law requires all municipalities in the Twin Cities metropolitan area to update their comprehensive plans every ten yeazs and submit them to the Metropolitan Council for review. Municipal plans must be consistent with the broader system plans of the Metropolitan Council. Approval of the update of the Housing chapter of the Comprehensive Plan is necessary to comply with State law. DisadvanWges If Approved: None Disadvantages If Not Approved: It would delay the Metropolitan Council's review of the Housing Plan and keep the Ciry from complying with sta[e law which requires an update to the Comprehensive Plan. 7otal Amount of Trensaction: CosURevenue Budgeted: i; __ Funding Source: Activity Number: Financial Information: � FE� � 5 2�09 (Explain) February 3, 2009 2:46 PM Page 1 CITY OF SAINT PAUL Christopher 8. Coleman, Mayor January 30, 2009 Council President Kathy Lantry and Members of the City Council 320-C City Hall Saint Paul, MN 55102 Deaz Council President Lanhy and Councilmembers: a"-/�/ 9 [ (� 390CityHall Telephone:651-2668570 15 West Kellogg Boulevard Facsimile: 651-228-8513 Saint Paul, MN 55102 It is my pleasure to transmit to you the Housing chapter of the Saint Paul Comprehensive Plan. The Housing chapter is one of six that, along with the Introducrion and Implementarion secrions, will comply with state law that the City update its comprehensive plan every 10 yeazs. The Housing chapter was prepazed by a task farce appointed by the Planning Commission and chaired by Commissioner Jim Bellus. The task force included people with knowledge of Saint Paul and expertise in housing. The Planning Commission held a public hearing in September 2008 and approved the Housing chapter in January 2009. The strategies in the Housing chapter aze: 1. Build upon Saint Paul's strengths in the evolving metropolitan housing market. In an environment characterized by limited land and fiscal resources as well as climate change, policies in this strategy focus on accommodating projected household growth by encouraging housing that builds on the city's amenities and central place in the meh�opolitan region. 2. Preserve and promote estabZished neighborhoods. Given the ongoing threats to neighborhood stability presented by mor[gage forecloswes and vacant housing, policies in this strategy seek to ensure that established city neighborhoods remain desirable by encouraging the physical rehabilitarion of the aging housing stock (including energy-efficiency improvements). 3. Ensure the availability of affordable housing across the city. Given the ongoing costs of housing, policies in this strategy push for the protection of existing affordable housing units and for the development of new housing that includes units affordable to low and moderate income households. Once adopted, the Comprehensive Plan will guide development and revitalization of Saint Paul for the next 10 years as the city grows while, at the same time, retains what has made it unique for approximately 150 years. The Planning Commission has reviewed the Housing Plan, held a public hearing and recommends adoption. I concur with the Commission's recommendation. Sincerely, C � � �(i'v'w'`` Christopher B. Coleman Mayor Enclosure AN AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER 6�1-/�i�l city ofi saint paul planning commission resolution file number os-o� date Januarv 2. 2009 Saint Paul Comprehensive Plan RESOLUTION RECOMMENDATION TO ADOPT THE HOUSING CHAPTER OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes 462.353, subd. 1, grants a municipality the authority to prepare a comprehensive plan, which is defined in Minnesota Statutes 462.352, subd. 5 as "a compilation of policy statements, goals, standards, and maps for guiding the physical, social and economic development, both private and public, of the municipaliTy and its environs. ..." WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes 473.856 requires that municipalities prepare comprehensive plans consistent with the development guide and the metropolitan system statements adopted by the Metropolitan Council; and and WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes 473.859 details the content of the comprehensive plan; WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes 473.864, subd. 2, requires that municipalities review and update as appropriate their comprehensive plans every 10 years and submit them to the Metropolitan Council for review; and WHEREAS, Section 107.02 of the City of Saint Paui administrative code authorizes the Planning Commission to organize and facilitate the preparation of the Comprehensive Plan and any subsequent updates and to transmit its recommend to the Mayor and to the City Council; and WHEREAS, Section 107.04 of the City of Saint Paul administrative code authorizes the Planning Commission to appoint task forces as advisory bodies to study technical issues identified by the commission and to report their findings to the commission for its consideration; and moved by Be��us seconded by in favor Unanimous against Cl-/ l 4� Planning Commission Resolution Saint Pau/ Comp�ehensrve P/an — Housing Chapter Page 2 WHEREAS, the Comprehensive Planning Committee of the Planning Commission in January 2006 began the coordination of tasks necessary to prepare the Comprehensive Plan update; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission on September 13, 2006, initiated the preparation of the Housing chapter, one of six chapters in the Saint Paul Comprehensive Plan update; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission appointed representatives of Saint Paul residents, stakeholder groups, and people with knowledge and expertise in housing to participate in the Housing Comprehensive Plan Task Force, which was chaired by a member of the Planning Commission; and WHEREAS, the task force met from October 2006 through January 2008 to prepare the public hearing draft of the Housing chapter; and WHEREAS, the Pianning Commission held a public hearing on the Housing Plan on September 5, 2008, notice of which was duly given in the Saint Paul Legai Ledger on August 7, 2008; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommended changes to the Housing Chapter after considering public comment. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Planning Commission hereby recommends adoption by the City Council of the Housing Chapter of the Saint Paui Comprehensive Plan update; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Pianning Commission adoption is contingent on further review by adjacent communities and the Metropolitan Council; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this Housing chapter of the Saint Paul Comprehensive Plan replaces the existing Housing Plan, adopted on January 9, 2002. y�°_1��1!�li :""iiii�llll ��..s,�,„�.. � � The Saint Paul Comprehensive Plan The Housing Plan is one of six chapters of ihe 2020 Saint Paul Comprehensive Plan This draft was recommended for adoption by the Planning Commission on lanuary 2, 2009. (��1 �'Y Table of Contents • Introduction Strategy 1. Build upon Saint Paul's strengths in the evolving metropolitan housing market Strategic housing growth New housing production Strategy 2. Preserve and promote established neighborhoods Preservation of existing, stable neighborhoods Aggressive housing rehabilitation "Lasting homeownership;' especially in areas with less vibrant housing markets Neiqhborhood revitafization Neighborhood housing for changing demographics 13 Strategy 3. Ensure the availability of affordable housing across the city 21 Preservation of existing affordable units New affordable housing production Implementation Key action steps for the City/HRA r 1 LJ 29 • � . . , ._ Introduction �9 i 9�f Fig. H-A. City of Saint Paul Households, by Number of People, 2000 • 6person z% 5-person \ r�brmoreperson s% � I 3% 4-peison to% � Sourw:USCensus,2000,5Fl,P26. • Housing is a basic and fundamental human need. Because of this, housing policy has not only important economic considerations but also a profound moral dimen- sion. The balancing of economic reality and moral imperative is very difficult in an arena where need and demand have historically far surpassed affordable housing resources. The following demands are particularly great • Mainiaining an older housing stock. It is estimated the deferred maintenance needs of Saint Paul's single family housing stock in low and moderate income Census tracts today exceeds 5750 million. Homeless housing. Over the course of a year, as many as 8,000 people expe- rience homelessness in Ramsey County. It is estimated that $131 million is needed through 2010 alone to address the demand for housing for the long- term homeless in the county. • Public housing and publicly-assisted low-income housing.The Public Housing Agency has been consistently under funded in the last several years. • New housing construction, at a range of income levels. While the housing mar- ket has slowed in the last two years, new growth is critical to the vitality of the city over time, both socially and financially. Key Trends The strategies, objectives, and policies of this plan are informed by a set of key demographic, economic, housing, fiscal, and environmental trends faci�g the City of Saint Paul and the metropolitan region. More people. The Metropolitan Council projeds Saint Paul will grow by 44,160 residents, or about 27,000 households, by 2030. Regional growth will represent a balance of seniors, middle-aged, young adults, and children, as well as a diversity of incomes. Because of this, Saint Paul continues to embrace its decades-old commit- ment to an all-incomes housing strategy. New market rate housing development and the protection and enhancement of existing neighborhoods are absolutely necessary to maintain and enhance the tax base so vital to the City's ability to fund essential services and infrastructure. Housing opportunities for one- and two-person households are likely to dominate our market over the next 10 years. Currently 66 percent of Saint Paul households are one or two persons and another 14 percent are three-person households. Two groups will fuel this continued growth - young singles and two person households with no children (particularly among the 20-29 age group), and baby boomers in the over-50 age group. At the same time, continued immigration is adding to the population under age 30 and creating a demand for larger family units and housing that is sensitive to people of diverse cultures. s � � � � � �os=«� Pig. H-6. Eme�gtng Markets Grow in MN! ProjectedPopulationChange, ' ' 2000to2olo' �, - , � , �, s V G � sw��a: nuw�ww...�nmmmp��owuvye� somam.op�.zeas�ae , � Fg.H-D. Housingand Transportation Costs Have Risen Fasterthan Incomes, Nationally Percent Change, 2000-2005 Saurce: AHeavyLOadTheCandnetlHwaFlg aM Tars�rtztron BueEe�NWark'g Fami fie.' cmre�fo. Hmsny rolkr- ocmba ams, a ss. Increased focus on housing densiry. Given the anticipated population growth, the demand for smaller o�e- and two-person units, a built city, and the need to coo- tinue to increase the City's tax base, greater housing density will be the hallmar� of the neut 2030 years. fn recognition of the importance vf the stability of existing neighborhoods to the city's future, this density should primarily be geographically focused on transit and commercial corridors such as the Central Corridod Universiry Avenue, high amenity areas such as Downtown and the river corridor, and a few large scale redevelopment sites such as the Ford assembly plant site. The strate- gic iRtegration of housing and other land uses with transportation in these areas will enable the ciry to meet expanding market demands, accommodate growth and improve the City's tax base, improve the connection between jobs and hous- ing, and address dimate change by offering an alternative to regional sprawl and congestion. Fig. H{. New Housing Demand projected for the Central Corridor by 2030 Potentialfor. RentaNn'rts OwnershipUnits UniversityAve. 3,950-5,050 7,675-2,450 Caprtol 750-200 N/A Downtown 5,000-6,000 500-1,000 Total 9,t0U-iL250 2,175-3,450 The Cental Corridortransrc line is an5cipared xo aeate a sustained market demand for newhansitorierrced housing and mmmercial developmeng wrth 11,000-15,000 new housing units expMed along i[ by20.?0. Sourcr. CeirtalCOrridorDevelopment5trategy Decreased housing affordability. Housing affordability is of inaeasing concern.• Between 2000 and 2004 median household income in M innesota declined by almost 3 percent in real terms while the median sales price of homes increased by almost 30 percent in real terms. Despite the fact that the housing market has recently slowed, economic conditions in the pasY ten years have greatly reduced affordabil ity for both homeowners and renters across ali income Ievels.Trensportation costs havefurther limited housing affordability, with gas prices rising by over 100 percent between 2002 and 2006. Given such trends, the support of housing affordable to low and moderate income households is a key priority for the CitylHousing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA). Given the existing stockof such housing in Saint Paul, a preference should be on preserving existing affordable housing over new production, given the greater cost effectiveness. However, new production that servesthechanging demograph- ics will also be necessary. Aging housing stock. In the neut 20 years, the housing stock in most Saint Pauf neighborhoods will be more than 700 years old. Even in the most affluent and stable neighborhoods the aging housing stock will demand sustained reinvestment to maintain its vitality. Neighborhoods disproportionately impaded by foreclosures. In some areas where the housing market is less vibrant and househoid incomes are lower, invest- ment in the rehabilitation of houses will demand higher levels of direct public support than has been available in recentyears. in addition, the recent surge in the number of vacant and foreclosed properties has disproportionately impacted some • of the same neighborhoods. CityofSaintPaal ComprehensivePlan � � V c� a , ,� � o ,� e 3 i i c � � g P �o , V �C @ y , , C� Q , Q ,�c e" c 9 F r' ` c ¢° � � �I�19 `< Fig. H-E. Median Age of Single �ty, Duplex, and Tripiex Homes int Paul 8 Summit-Universrty 1909 7 ThomasDale 1910 9 bVest 7ffi 1910 � ---- - ---- ---- - - -- ----.. 17 Downtown 1911 76 SummitHill 1972 4 Dayron'sBluff 1913 _ _ _. _ - - _ _ __ _ _ 3 WestSlde 1914 13 Merriam Park- Snelling: Lex-Ham 1914 17 Hamline-Midway 1915 12 SLAnthonyPark 1916 CITYWIDEMEDIAN 7 922 74 MacGmveland 1923 5 Payne-Phalen 1924 6 NorthEnd 1924 _____ ____ ______' _ _ ID Como � 1941 15 Highland 1948 2 GreaterEastSide 1952 1 Sunray-BattleGeek- Highwood 7958 Source PamsryCa GIS � The Housing and Redevelopment Authority of the City of Saint Paul, Minnesota (HRA) is a legally distinct publi<entity which undertakes housing, commercial and busi- ness development activities.The HRA autho- rizes the acquisition of real estate, housing and mmmercial loans and grants, and the issuance of bonds.The City Council serves as the H RA Board of Commissioners, while staff at the CiTy's Planning and Economic Development Department (PED) manage HRA projects. For purposes of this plan, the "City"(one or more City governmental departments) and the HRA are discussed jointty. Fig.H-G. RegisteredVacant Buildings on City List October2006 752 July2oo7 7,700 November 2007 1,466 ,�tay 2008 1,800 �rce: City of Saint Paul registered vacant buildingslut Fig. H-F. Map of Saint Paul Planning Districts 10. � 6. 12. ---__ ' 11. 7. 5. 2. �� 4. 13. � 8. ��,:�,row�� -� i 14. . � 3. 1. �5. � : . /�� A far greater focus on and commitment to the physical repair of housing units is needed if Saint Paul is to maintain its housing stock. However, strategies to revital- ize neighborhoods heavily impacted by foredosure and disinvestment demand cooperative, longer-term, community-wide efforts that must reach beyond the scope of Ciry government and well beyond just physical repairs. Growing energy costs. As energy prices continue to increase, much of Saint PauPs housing stock must be updated to maximize energy conservation and o energyefficiency.Giventhedemonstratedrealityofglobalwarming,andgrowing � demand for housing that is "green;'this emphasis will continue over the next 20 � years and beyond. ; Major Strategies As a community we must: Build upon Saint Paul's strengths in the evolving metropolitan housing mar- ket. This strategy recognizes that in order to accommodate the projected growth ofsmallerhouseholds in an environmentofdimate change, limited fiscal resources and limited land resources, Saint Paul will need to encourage the market to build housing projects that use land efficiently and are strategically bcated along its commercial corridors. This housing will capitalize on the city's amenities and cen- tral place in the metropolitan region and add vitality to its commercial corridors. In addition, the City and its partners must strive to maintain the economic and cultural diversiry of neighborhoods that receive a lot of new development. Given the limited size of public budgets, City/HRA resources must be used strategically and seledively. Preserve and promote established neighborhoods. This strategy seeks to ensure that established city neighborhoods are supported through the effec- tive provision of infrastructure and services, and that the older housing stock is reinvigorated so that neighborhoods remain desirable places to live. Given the deferred maintenance needs of the aging housing stock, the Ciry and its partners must allocate significantly more resources to the physical rehabilitation of older homes, including updates to make them more energy-efficient. � TheHousingias,kwrce,composedof Ensuretheavailabilityofaffordablehousingacrossthecity.Giventheongoing 5ainiPaulcitizens,professionats,and costofhousing,theCityanditspartnersmustprotectexistinglow-incomehousing pla'nning commissiooers,convened units and support the development of new housing that indudes units affordable• mornhly;between octoberzoo5and ` to low and moderate income owners and renters. New affordable units are highly lanuaryzooa;anddirectedthepoiiciesof` neededinneighborhoodswherelowandmoderateincomepeopfehavefewhous- ��xheHousingPfan. � ' � � ing choices. Funding Priorities Fig. H-H. New Construdion is Costly, Per Unit Deve�opment Costs, ' Neyshousingpraductionwith Ctty/HRAsubsidy,2002-20U5 , RedevelopmerK& , , � .- Publidmprovements —', Housing ' Sfl,800 , --Eztraordinary T ! 570,200 �, � V� ., . , Dwelling Unit . � �'`$775,006; , „ TotalDevelopmentCostPerUnit=5797,000 Fig. H-I. The Per UnitCify/HRA su6sidy to various housing adivities New ca�t�,rn� Rerrcal New Canrtruction -Ownership Supportive' Housing . -'� �-RenWl Home Improvemeot (RehahJ Preservation ofExisting Afforda6le Housirg The limited size of the housi ng budget means the Ciry/HRA must be selective about the types of housing projects to assist financially. Incentives, zoning, creative part- nerships, and Ieveraging of other resources should also be part of the assistance. Fig. H-J. Funding Priorities" for CitylHRA Housing Activities Vacant Nousing rehabii'�tion 1- & 2-family homes I 20"/0 HomNes & supportive housing 15^/a New mnstruction low-modera[e 1 ncome renml 20Mo ew mnstructian low-moderate incane awngship 15% • 'Fa WR�e at tl�uNali�9 Housng Tazk Fo�ceqion0es oNY represent alual tlotlar amauMS or db9et al bmno�a While over the past few years, the City/HRA focused most of its financial resources on new housing production, the figures in the margin show that reinvesting in existing affordable housing and home improvement are the activities that make the most of limited public housing resources. In addition, there are pressing hous- ing needs in these two areas, given the broad dedine i n the affordabiliry of housing and the aging housing stock. As such, housing rehabilitation, preservaYion ofexist- ing affordable housing, and new production of low and moderate income housing should be top funding priorities for the Ciry/HRA over the ne� five to ten years. • New mnstruction iarke[ 2te housng 4% Cityof Saint Paul Comprehentive Plan � Public housing & preservation of afforda6le twusing 2� �a �� aa xisn�w �� NOSNHOf � T, I� � ' VI� C Q U E � � 0 0 N ° c N N d J O U S � v � L � 3 t � U1 C 3 O � � 7 LL S p " O d iP 4� 0 S. N OI n- � Z W � � O N F � t N L C T N N V � C 9 N V N m � � b a '�c cm W o � � m _ ;� � � �. =� �,� ;a� �� C N U � � � N � 0 � =a a�—� 3� � c3 C O L C N O n,cd� E3 d v v °' ��c ap� �ti ��a � = y o� a�n- m 3 5a� cu;m oamv yvm � q N ry O � � "mc° �UE 9 i O � N � r C O a `! Q y X � ` N Ol N N � � q � � � N C �� y L a � 3 w x�xmo zz� `1� Z � S � > � ..I Q � r W { N N C N U a 0 0 � � � d Z � � � � Q O N > � � � C N N � � O L `m 3 C v O C N � _ � 'a � � o N N O � Q � � O � O � C � � N � 41 Q � Z L � -� � 'c � tC � N N � Q w6 � O W � 1 a� U .; � N � � U N � N C 3 � o � � a %�+ o — x o � � • Strategy 1: Build upon Saint Paul's strength�ri the � evolving metropolitan housing market In 2007, "transportation" remained the top concern in the Metropolitan Council's survey ofTwin Cities area residents. As the metropolitan area continues to sprawl, transportation costs continue to rise, concern about dimate cfiange heightens, and the demand for multifamily housing grows, Saint Paul has the opportunity to position itself as a central, vibrant urban place in the region. The inauguration of light rail transit along the Central Corridor during the middle years of this plan is a large public investment that is anticipated to create a sustained market demand for newtransit-oriented housing along it.5uch housing should offerexisting residents increased housing choices and new residents an urban lifesryle. Housing located in plaws with greater transponation options not only gives residents greater choice about how to get around, but it also can reduce congestion on city streets, decrease CO emissions, and improve air quality. In addition to good transit service and a central location, the city has an abundance of cultural, institutional, and recreational assets, including parks, museums, ethnic restaurants and businesses, colleges and universities, and a vibrani riverfront with extensive trails. Residents of new housing will benefit from these amenities, and these assets wlll be strengthened through a larger population base. Saint Paul must build upon its strengths in the metropolitan housing market by encouraging housing that appealsto expanding demographics, uses land efficiently, takes advantage of our amenities, supports transportation choice, and fosters tax base growth. Strategic housing growth o The broad policy principles below should guide new housing produdion in the � city. °— 3 1.1. Increase housing choices across the city to support economically diverse neighborhoods. Neighborhoods should seek to capture a realistic share of the growing housing mar- ket, providing more choices—including a mix of rental and ownership units, a range of housing types, and diversity of income levels. 1.2. Meet market demand for transit-oriented housing. The city has recently captured a share of the market of smaller households, focus- ing primarily on the production of apartments, condominiums, and townhomes. Forecasts state the city will add 44,160 new people by 2030. Several demographic and economic trends suggest a continuing demand for housing that is well-served by transit and amenities: • More households at all income levels burdened by growing transportation costs, TheTransportation and Land Use . More retiree households wiih disposable incomes looking for housing with less CoalRion,agroupthatpromotes maintenancedemands; sustainabil'rty in the San Francisco Baynrea,characterizestransit- • Moreyoung working professionalsand partly-retired baby-boomers;' oriented housing as being bcated on compact infill sites close to job centers and transit nodes, with appropriate amounts of affordable housing. ' Somec�mes referced So as Ihe"creacive dass, ihe Mintiesofa Department of EmploymenY and Ecavom« Devebpment • characterizes this group as being highly-educa[ed segment of the labor markM—induding workers as diverse as health <are pmfessionals, software developers, muscians, and architects.The group mnstitutes over a third of workers in the sevemcounry metm area's labor force, and by 2012, employment in such oc<upations is expeaed to grow by 20.6 percent Source: Labor Market Informanon, Mincesota Employment Review. Regwnal Spotlighr Twm Cities Area, by Rachel Hillman (http.//www.deed state mn.usAmJpubhcanons/review/1005/rs.htm) � • More people of color among first-time homebuyers. The Metropolitan Council " reportsthatoneinsevenminorityworkerscommutebytransit; - CoMinuing populations with special needs, including individuals with limite� mobiliry and service-dependent seniors. Given that many in these communities do not drive, housing dose to transit is in high demand; and Continuing workforce populations. Householdsearning low and moderate incomes are more likely to ride transit, and the transit service can benefit from such ridership. a. Priority sites are those within a quarter mile of a transit route, such as along the Central Corridor (within the Area of Change) and other corridors, as well as those in high-amenity areas, such as Downtown and the rivertront b. Such housing must be designed to be sensitive to the neighborhood context, including the built form and the treatment of natural areas and landscapes within the public realm. c The City and its partners should support the local development and use of alternative mortgage under-writing standards for borrowers buying homes in dose proximiry to transit lines (similar to the "location-efficient mortgage"'), enabling potential homeowners that rely more on transit to invest more in their home instead of devoting it to growing transporcation costs. 13. Revitalize the city by developing land-efficient housing. tand-eikciertrfrousingrefersto Promotingthedevelopmentofmoreland-efficienthousingispartiallymotivatedbya residenciai developmentthat makes concern about the Ciry's fiscal health. Recent fiscal challenges have resulted in service 2he most.of(re)devebpmentsttes, cuts and property tax inaeases, chalfenging the livabiliry of the city. Despite such induding higherdensitymukfiamity challenges, adding land-efficient housing along the city's corridors, within neighborv build�ngs Iocaredalohg and nearbusy hood centers, and Downtown makes sense for several reasons. Saint Paul has a lac streetsand compact infill fiousing ' of undeveloped land and faces qrowing land and construdion msts, and rising tax withinneighborhoods. " burdens.inaddition,manyoftheciry'scorridorsandcommercialintersectionsconsist of one- and two-story commercial development with under-used parking lots. As an alternative to raising taxes or cutting services, increasing the building densities along and nearcorridors-thereby using limited land more e�ciently-can stabilize the City's fiscal situation.lncreased population along them would mean a largercustomer base for existing businesses, and potentially spur demand for new businesses. Over the long term, increased economic activity in the city will allow the levy to be collected from a broader tax base. Allowing increased densiry along Saint PauPs corridors and neigh6orhood centers will also benefit the adjacent lower-density neighborhoods, particularly when corridor land is under-utilized and these same neighborhoods face development pressures. Such growTh can also stabilize the tax burden for these neighborhoods� 1.4. Implement citywide policies for new housing developments to promote sustainability. 2 Met. Coun<il's Directions newsletter, htto�// t '1 rglD' ecC /d 1 irt/d 2005/ d �.�_ SeotOS.htm.The same newsietter s[ates that on average, minoriTy households tend to be larger, creating more demand for units with more bedroortss. 3. Developed bythe nonprofit Instimte for Location Efficiency and supported 6y Fannie Mae,the"LOCation EfficieniMott- gage" (LEM) a a specific mortgage pradutt that azsis[s people to become homeowners in "bcation efficienC neighbor hoods in four US ckies-Chicago, San francisco, Los Mgeles, and Seattla °L«ation efficienC neighborhoods are those developed mmpac[ly with a miature of uses and at densities that support transit. Research has shown that residents in mch neighborfioods fiave Iess needto drive. own fewer cars per fiousehold, and drive fewer miles than people who live• in more sprawling areas, resuking in household savings on transportation.The LEM's underxriting standards allow such savings to be taken irrto mnsiderztion, which results in the LEM enabling bonowers to qualify for a larger mortgage, as lang as they meetthe aher requirements Cityof5aintPaul CompreheqsivePlan, � �� i 4� • New housing construdion in the ciry can be inherently more sustainable than new housing built on previousty undeveloped land on the edge of the metropolitan area, the latteroften having high household, social, and public infrastructure costs. a. Projeds developed with City/HRA financial assistance should result in reduced greenhouse gas emissions and increased energy, water, and resource usage efficiencies a6ove conventional standards i� the housing industry. b. For all housing developed in the city, policies and other incentive tools shouid be created that ensure reduced greenhouse gas emissions and increased energy, water, and resource usage efficiencies above conventional standards in the industry. c Consider fast-track approval processes for projects that meet best practices in "green" design, potentially induding zoning, site plan, and other permitting reviews. New housing production The following policies offer more specific guidance to the City/HRA in facilitating new housing production financed predominantly by the private sedor. 1.5. Prioritize non-financial City/HRA assistance to multifamily and mixed use housing in new construction projects. Such assistance includes, but is not limited to: a. The identification of potential sites. Private and nonprofit sector actors will hold the primary responsibility for site assembly. Priority should be given to sites that are both located within walking distance to transit and amenities and those that maximize the cost effediveness of the public investment. s 0 • b. Zoning, land use, or neighborhood sTUdies to identifij housing redevelopment � opportunities. Rezonings to allow residential uses should result in transit-sup- � portive densiry levels to help ensure the city provides adequate housing sites � for: 7, the 71,000 -15,000 new households expected in the Central Corridor by 2030; or, more comprehensively, 2. the 21,000 new households expected citywide by 2030. c The identification and leveraging of the commitment and resources of part- ners, including nonprofit, employer, union, or community organizations with an interest in reinvesting in existing housing or creating new housing to serve their constituency groups. d. Appropriate zoning incentives and variances. One potential model is to pro- vide a density bonus for housing projects that make some percentage of units affordable to households at 30, 50, 60, and/or 80 percent of the area median income. � e. A reduced parking requirement for housing located in areas with frequent transit service. (See Policy 2.10 of the Transportation chapter). 1.6. Develop clear criteria for the use of scarce City/HRA financial assistance for new housing projects. Such criteria should include, but not be limited to: a. the development has extraordinary costs associated with the redevelopment of a site, including contamination clean-up; b. the development adds to the housing choices of the area in which it is located (income and tenure); and/or c. the development follows best practices in green building and design. 0 7J. Track the preservation, rehabilitation and construftion of mixed income housing wiYhin the broader geographic area identified as part of the Centra� Corridor, which indudes: a. up to eight blocks to the north and south of University Avenue; and b. sites along north-south bus routes connecting to the Corridor. 1.8. �thpartnerjurisdidions,seeklegislativeauthorityandfinancingtocreate a special transit development "bank" that will have the capacity to aggregate funds and imest them along transit corridors throughourthe region to encour- age high quality transit oriented development that, by definition, provides mixed income housing. a. 7he authority should be housed within a regiona! or siatewide agency with appropriate advisory committees to shape both policy and resource allocation. 1.9. With other municipal jurisdictions, seek legislative authority to establish local increment-based financing for specific activities within transit corridors. a. The financing source would be the inneased value captured in an area with significant transit investment as defined by each municipality; b. Spxific terms such as the percent of increment to be captured and the dura- tion of the district should be based on a more specific financial analysis of the expected development costs related to the transit improvement; and c Eiigibie uses of funds may include: 7. New construction of affordable housing; 2. Substantial rehabilitation of euisting housing; 3. Strategic acquisitions of land; 4. Financiai assistance to mitigate disproportionate increases in property • taxes caused by increasing values in the corridor; S. Smallbusinessassistance; 6. Streetscape improvements (lighting, seating, plantings); 7. Parks/open space; and/or 8. T2nsitandparatransitservice. 1.10. Create a forum for policymakers, community leaders, developers, Ienders, and funders for continuous evaluation of individual mixed-income housing projeds, funding mechanisms, and review processes for lessons learned that can be applied to future initiatives. O e Potential Mod I t Implement P 1"cy 15(d)• A De ity Bonus a an Ince tive for C eatinc� Affordable Housing Units in Mixed Inmme Projecis A density bonus muld be made available to developments proposed in the Centml Corridor Area of Change, and Downtown. For developments proposed in the Central Corridor Area ofChange and Downtown, developers want- ing m access addifional Floor Area Ratio (allowable building square footage) beyond what the 6ase zoning permits might dedicate 25 percent of the bonus floor area achieved through a densiTy zoning bonus to affordable units. For example, for every additional square foot of affordable housing created, the developer would have the right to develop four addibonal square feet of market-rate housing. Alternafives to building [he affordable housing migBt 6e tfiat tfie developer would pay an in-lieu fee — which could be used for the development of new affordable housing elsewhere in the city, or the developer would acquire exiscing housing thai muld be restricted to remain affordable over time. If the densiry honus were to be successFul, the City rtdght consider eMending such a program to ben- efit properties located along bus lines that mnnec[ to the Cental Corridor, as well as high-frequency bus lines across the ciTy. Cityof5aintPa�1 ComprehensivePlan m a 1-�9� oa��iu��w o o Otl1H91NN�W • W LL < a � 3 ¢ n �' - � O ,� „ runa n '_ � * � -* avaea�Hm & 6� � �O aoa�nzvH,� � N bj dSO � tl N a � H15119N3 � �d NOSNHOf W � � a z x o P � a o = M � N � � 5 � �`, o e yA a iav3 (i(, iava `o �� ° V a � � � �io., � v 0 aa�nn�� ,; N d os = d (,� *�d`� �� m 3NAtld 'Y O E � -, FI NO1tl3943 �� ''-Y �PFP�� o � ,� v � v v � 9 sb � �? � � U ' `m � 1H91tlMJINtl � "+ � y o. lE9HOtl N � m o �° � y Q W ./ I ', T '� � in o tn O � m S V yb 7 � Y N 'Jl � � C N J 35£9 pbE P N3NA815 v v � ; ° c � Q y.�Pe � � m � 3 3 � n� � O � v p� N R � NOSB]tlf � s n 9 La E v Z NOSN�tlf . � v v w w N 'O E VI V] ✓1 ln 1n F N W � � 3�ia � a�ia *e�� 5 �b � �C i� � � �� 0 �o a p� y � o z � � F ��by ��¢ {�. � Ntl3153M � Ntl3153M �� a "'y � � � � � a � o Z i W o a Q � i � � 1� � < a � z � >'s V l � �va �� i :� �va ' .i � o � a z � � = � �� O = � � y� � hy c �" o z tlIN01]In � > � tllt1011lA ^ Z P l�' I � F O � No1�Nixai o a o �� m �s� o � 3NnwvH d � � a ��' J � o Q 3NIlWtlH �, � a o 0 � > � E ii z bb T. � � � � w '_^ � � n �y ,r r w 9NIT13N5 9Nfil3NS Q M � ¢ LL � 0 (� a � � N � ° Q a o SS eP V� ONtll3A3U y � �O y , p,� qp ONtll3A3l� ONM3A317 O � � * J N113NJ N113tl� � �� Strategy 2: Preserve and Promote Established ��"�� Neighborhoods Saint Paul has a unique mix of neighborhoods that consist of a diversity of people. The ciry is known as a high-qualiry place to live with an abundanw of assets—ameni- ties such as numerous parks and recreational opportunities, strong educational and religious institutions, and vibrant, community-based organizations. Its collective identity is constantly being forged, a function of its distinct historic plaws, estab- Iished and evolving neighborhoods, and its diversity of cultures and languages. Most of ihe housing stock in Saint Paul's predominantly residential neighborhoods was built between 1850 and 1938. While the housing stock continues to represent a range of styles and options for families, it also presents challenges as it ages, in terms of maintaining its market viability and curb appeal of the homes. Housing rehabilitation is one of the top three funding priorities of this plan. As neighbor- hood demographics change, most notably due to growing numbers of seniors and larger families with children, we must consider how well the housing stock serves their needs, and become more flexible in the reuse of traditional housing stock in new ways. The foreclosure crisis that began in 2006 has hurt the city's most vulnerable neigh- borhoods, particularly the areas with less vibrant housing markets.To turn the tide, existing neighborhood assets that are strong must be maintained, and built upon. In these cases, addressing the social and economic distresses at the household level are essential elements to neighborhood vitality, but targeted rehabilitation assis- tance to vacant properties is a more immediate strategy to help ease the distress of the worried homeowners who remain on a block. Community-based organizations are critical leaders and partners in defining and implementing strategies for suc- cessful neighborhood revitalization. o � ln sum, Saint Paul neighborhoods are great places to Iive, and will require ongoing � maintenance, reinvestment, and development to keep them desirable. ; Preservation of existing, stable neighborhoods 2.1. Maintain the vitality and high quality of life in existing sWble neighbor- hoods by engaging in a variety of actions: a. Continue to enforce City codes; b. Support community-based organizations' efforts in community organizing and crime prevention; c Continue to invest in public infrastructure and municipal services as well as support newand existing public art; d. Support pedestrian, bicycle, transit, and other non-automobile connections throughoutthe Cityto promote active personal mobilityand improvethe link between housing and jobs, and housing and amenities; e. Support private investment in the existing housing stock by using city loans as a Ieverage. Preserve properties designated historic f. Promote new construdion of mixed-income housing to build upon existing neighborhood vitality and to improve the fiscal health ofthe Ciry; and g. Continue to showcase neighborhoods through events such as the HomeTour and area festivals. . 13 Aggressive housing rehabilitation The city's aging housing stock requires substantial ongoing maintenance and reinvest ment. According to HUD's Office of Policy and Development and Research, about 4� percent of the housing rehabilitation need nationwide is unaffordable without some measure of subsidy°—whether from the public, nonprofit or private sector. A 1997 study of Saint Paul's low and moderate income Census tracts found that the rehabilita- tion need approached 5750 million in these neighborhoods (i.e. a rehab subsidy need of $300 million).s The Ciry mustcontinue to support housing rehabilitation across the city, but prioritize rehabilitation funding for neighborhoods with a concentration of dilapidated units to enhance livability. However, the City and iu partners will not be able to focus its housing rehabititation efforts effectively without first knowing where the greatest needs are. 2.2. Perform an inventory of housing conditions and update it periodically.e This will help inform where rehabilitation assistance is needed most, and the type of assistance needed. In the past several years, most of the City/HRA's housing resources have been used ThechaRengeofrehabil'rcationis for new construdion activities, particularly given the strong housing market. The especialydifficulcforsingleiamiy downsideofthatwasthatthefundingallocatedtohousingrehabilitationfellfarshort and duplex renwt buildings, whose of what was needed. Recent reports from the Department of Safety and lnspections, ownersoften lackthe professional - knowledge,abiircy,desire,or Gty Council Research, and community development corporations indicate there is a rewurcesrequired co propery pressing need to improve the quality and maintenance of single family and duplex maincain and 6pgradecheseaging homes in the city's neighborhoods. Discussions have emphasized the importance of buildingaihecity recently began code enforcement, rehabilitation assistance, and historic preservation. a Cert�cate of Occupancji program forsinglefamiyandduplexrentats Severalorganizationsthatdohousingrehabilitationinthecityhavebeendeveloping (§33.oe)toensurethattfiese . decision-making criteria to determine whether a particular structure in disrepair propertiesareincompliancewith � 5hould be rehabilitated or demolished—including a consideration of potential� che Housing code. historic significance, the cost effectiveness of rehab, and other factors. Such criteria should continue to develop, and be applied on a case-by-case basis. 23. Realistically weigh the market viabil'rty, maiMenance needs, and neighbor- hood conte�ct of houses before providing public rehabilitation funds to them. AssessmeM criteria may indude: a. Therypeandcost-effectivenessof"basicandnecessary"improvements,includ- ing those that dirxtly affect the safery, habitability, energy efficiency, and accessibiliry of a home. Basic and necessary rehab improvements are a top pri- ority, and the City should coordinate with partners doing similar work without duplicating their existi ng lending or services. b. The concentration of units with similar enterior conditions in the viciniry. While "basic and necessary improvements' are of great benefit to the homeowner, exterior improvements can have significant neighborhood impacts. c. Possible synergies between the housing rehabilitation projectand nearby pub- lic and private assets (schools, parks, community centers, new developments, infrastructure, and public art). d. Historic significance of the property. 4.A°subsidy"canbealow-mreres[loanorgantfromthepublicrector,nonprofit/mmmunitydevelopment • mrporation (CDC), ar priwte sec[or. 5. "Housing Conditions in St. Paul's Urban Core,"1997, Day[on's BIuR Neigh6orhood Housing Services. 6. See related policies 3.7 and 32 in the Histori<Prezervanon Chapter. GtyofSaintPaul ComprehensivePlan m A mnsuitant with the Neighborhood Energy Connection performs an energy audit on a home. Energy audits provide to property owners pract¢ai steps that can be followed tozaveenergy. Source:wwwthenerorg • 15 OG-/9� 2.4. Improve energy efficiency and water conservation within the existing housing stock Improving the resource efficiencies of the city's older existing housing stock—how a home and its occupants make use of electricity, gas, and water—is perhaps the most effective "green" building strategy for the ciry to pursue. Such improvements are crucial in an era of rising household utility costs, resource scarcity, and dimate change. The Ciry/HRA must prioritize such improvements through iis rehabilitation efforts and capitalize on the existing resources of its partners: a. Strongly encourage homeowners to take fu{I advantage of existing programs, tax rebates/credits, loan funds, and other tools to increase energy efficiency and water conservation in their homes. b. Continue and formalize partnerships with existing organizations that provide energy audits to existing homeowners. Households receiving City/HRA housing rehab loans should especially be encouraged to do a home energy audit and implement recommended retrofits. c Establish partnerships with organizations such as the Energy Cents Coalition and Community Action Partnership of Ramsey and Washington Counties to ensure that their programs and resources, designed specifically for lower- income households, are used to the fullest extent possible. 2.5. Assess the effectiveness of the Certificate of Occupancy program for single family and duplex rental properYies in improving overall code comp4iance for this type of rental property within three years of this plan's adoption. 2.6. Coordinate code enforcement with housing rehabilitation loans or other housing rehab assistance, including non-City programs, to improvethe energy- efficiency of homes. 2.7. Support the adoption of a requirement to correct safety hazards at the point a house is sold. Saint Paul is the only major city in the metropolitan area that dces not have a policy requiring hazards to be repaired or replaced at the point of sale. 2.5. Promote heakhy indoor living environments (indoor environmental quality). a. Continue the remediation of lead-based paint, asbestos, and other human exposures to chemicals and airborne pollutants that are common in older houses when they are rehabilitated. b. Promote other indoor air quality improvements, including adequate ventila- tion, moisture control, and use of no- or low-VOC products within housing structures. 2.9. Create a centra{ized location for a{{ housing rehabilitation-related resources, such as a web page with links to organizations that provide rehab assistance or services. 2.70. Encourage homeowners and property managers to make passive green improvements to their properties. Principles include: a. Building with a smaller buiiding footprint b. Reducing construction waste and recycling building materials when a building is rehabilitated or renovated c Following sustainable best pradices for site management s � � � � d 3 Through a rxent City initiatfve � known as InvesFSi.Paul,the City � has engaged communrty partnes to dire¢ housing rehab business assistance, andforedosure prevention programsto areas mort� impacted by a conceMra[ion of foreclosures and vacant housing. W h7e Invest-5t Paul is a curreni in itiative, the intent is timeless: to mntinue to ensure that euisting � City neighborhoods remain liva6le; particufarlythose wRb less vibrani markets.The investment i� a particular housing unit goes beyond the household Ievel, as i[ was rxently found that a hoasethat is foredosed upon and subsequenttyforn down can resuh in a largedepreciation in propQrty yaluesfor[hose in close proximity. (More spec�cally, the resufting va�nt lot can result in a ST/,000 value deprxiation ofa property withini50feetofit7' � � L'TheMunidpelf¢ssofFOredowrez'ACFicago casesn,dy,�HOmesrne�shlaPrEe aa«iwum dauon,HOUSi'gF�ancePolicyResearch Paper Number20�1,F beuarylT,Zl10SAaessedan 102 W 08 at Mtp Apgar_Duda_StudyJull_Versiwpdf "Lasting Homeownership;' especially in areas with less vibrant housing markets Some Saint Paul neighborhoods have been disproportionately impacted by the� foredosure crisis, and many have housing markets that are less vibrant than other areas of the city. In these neighborhoods, some households that could not support the costs of long-term homeownership have been abandoned their homes, leaving vacant housing behind. This plan recognizes certain neighborhoods will require more sustained mmmunity-based efforts to keep them as desirable places to live. The ongoing foredosure crisis highlights the need for"lasting" homeownership — a homeownership that can be sustained despite an unforeseen episode of financial crisis, such as a large health care bilt, bout of unemployment, emergency property repair, or an interest rate that is reset in the case of adjustable rate mortgages. Rising utility cosu and property taxes also contribute to the need for such an "income cushion"in homeowners'budgets. 2.11. Engage in mortgage and personal finance education in ihe community. The City and its nonprofit and lender partners sfiouid: a. Continue to educate homebuyers about the full cosu of homeownership, including the initial costs when purchasing the home, as well as ongoing maintenance and replacement expenses.Ongoing budgeting and supportive services are cruciat. b. Impbre financial institutions that offer mortgage loans in the ciry to require new homeowners to attend pre-purchase training and counseling, as well as provide incentives to new homeowners to attend post-purchase training and counseling c Endorse the efforts of non-profits, schools, churches, block groups, and com-� munity organizations to provide personal finance education to all ages and social groups 2.72. Continue providing mortgageforxlosure prevention programs.5pecifically, a. Continuefunding forthe Mortgage Foredosure Prevention program, and mor- dinate with partners. Continue City participation in the Don't Borrow Trouble Campaign. b. Continue to scrutinize new home loans to ensure that homeowners will have a greater disposable income'tushion`when they encounter unforeseen finan- cial difficulties. c. Organize, with communiry organizations, "Loan check up days,"rn which hous- ing counselors a re available to assist homeowners with budget planning. Neighborhood revitaiization W hile t6e plan recognizes the importance of the foredosure crisis, vacant properties in general represent a longer term threat to neighborhood vitality. The following policies seek to promote neighborhood stability in areas with high concentrations of vacant properties: Z73. Continue to assess vacant housing conditions with C'rty/HRA partners such as community development corporations, nonprofit organizations, private developers, district councils, and block groups, and prioritize City/HRA reviW I- ization assistance to areas with less vibrant housing markets a. Demolitionshouldoccuronlyaftercarefulexaminationofcriterialistedinpol-• icy 2.3. When applicable, the HRA should follow the CiTy's Replacement Policy. CityofSaintPaul ComprehensivePlan 16 �� /9�` 2.14. Promote aacisting and innovative new programs and incentives that sup- port rehabilitation of 7-3 unit residential properties in areas with less vibrant housing markets Such programs provide financing or incentives forthe purchase and rehabilitation of substandard homes, rypically for owner occupancy. Where appropriate, the City may support the demnversion of a building that was previously divided into multiple units backto its original numberof units. 2.15. Engage the investor and lender communities to revitalize areas with high concentretions of vacant housing and foreclosures a. Engage vacant properry owners with a stake in the foreclosure issue in Saint Paul, potentially as an opportuniry to recover some of their losses by selling some of their properties at a discount to �ity partners working to rehabilitate vacant housing. b. Make use of all available City/HRA tools to ensure that owners of vacant prop- erties maintain their properties to City standards. 2.16. Market programs to new homebuyers a. Continue City/HRA and other programs for first-time homebuyers, especially to households with stable incomes b. Partner with organizations that have existing and demonstrated programs and resources to help low- and moderate-income renter families move into homeownership, such as programs offered by Rondo Community 4and Trust and the P�blic Housing Agency. s 0 � Neighborhood housing for changing demographics � � Nationallyandlocally,thepopulationisaging,andfirst-timehomebuyersareincreas- "_ ingly likely to be people of color.The majority of households will continue to be small (1-2 people). Relevant trends for the existing housing stock in city neighborhoods are: 1. Someretfreesandolderseniorswouldliketoremainintheirsinglefamilyhomes, while others would prefer to move to a unit with less maintenance and more services. 2. There is a demand for modest-cost family housing. Given the projected demand for long-term support services for seniors who choose to remain in single family homes, the growing demand for housing choices for seniors who opt to downsize, and the continuing demand for largerfamily housing, the City should be pragmatic in addressing how the existing single family stock can be adapted and added to in order to meet their needs. 2.17. Support creativity in the construction of neighborhood infill housing by proactivety developing zoning and design guidelines a. Devefop, with 6road public input, cirywide infill housing design standards so that infill housing fits well within the existing Saint Paul neighborhood context. Neighborhood groups should be directly involved. • 17 b. Explore,viaazoningstudy,thepotentialforaccessoryunitsinexistingneighbor- hoods. Accessory units may provide a solution for the changing demographics, allowing the elderly to age in place while providing more affordable housin� opportunities for singles and couples.7 c. Encourage the development of attached single family and neighborhood- sensitive multifamily infill housing at appropriate locations as identified in the Land Use Plan and small area plans to increase housing choices. 2.78. Support the expansion of housing choices for seniors, particularly in neighborhoods thatare underserved. By encouraging the marketto provide housing choices to seniors currently living in a larger, single family home, it can make such a home available to a family. a. Encouregethe marketto provide senior housing at sites that are closeto ame- nities attractive to seniors, including transit, paratransit, trails, and parks and recreation, health care providers, services, retail uses, and institutions of higher education. Universal design guidelines are encouraged (see sidebar). b. Support rezonings for senior housing development that makes the most use °uoiveruloesign°isa term asedio of the Ciry's limited developable land, but also allows for one-level living in dexribe a seriesof design efements thatareintendedtoaccommodate multl-stotybuildings. a wide rangeof peopie, including c Provide flexibiliry for the re-use and/or physical adaptation of existing single fiamilieswah youngchiidren, people family and multifamily buildings for senior housing. Possibilities include but who want to stay in their homes � astheygrowolder, and peopfe are not timited to the conversion of farge structures to one-level condos and/ who usewheelchairsorwalkers. ' or rental units, and the use of shared housing models in existing homes. improvementsinclude,butarenot d.6cploreapartnershipbetweentheCity/HRAandtheSaintPaulPublicHousing limitedto,35^widedoorways,and Agencytodoseniorhousingdevelopmentopportunities. the provision ofa kitchen, bathmom, endatleastonebedroomontfie e. Continue to provide referrals to programs or services that enable seniors to� maFn floor. age in their exisYing single family homes, induding, but not limited to, home maintenance, meals, the Block Nurse program, and home rehabilitation with adaptive technologies. f. Seek input from organizations representing seniors on senior housing needs across the city. 2.19. Promote culturel sensitivity in housing As the ciry bxomes more diverse, and peopte ofcolor represent an ever-increasing segment ofthe first-time homebuyer market, housing that is culturally-sensitive has become more important. Culturally-sensitive housing provides opportunities For families of many cultural and ethnic backgrounds to engage in traditional family functions, such as eating meals together, as well as maintain traditions, including participation in civic, cultural, or social gatherings inside or outside the home. While investments in culturaily-sensitive housing will be predominantly made by private developers, the City can and should encourage the market to consider including key elemeou in new housing investments, and provide a reg ulatory environment that is conducive to it. Recommendations: a. DeterminetheadequacyoftheexistingCitydefinitionof"family°inreflecting evolving demographics 7.Uni[ssuchascaniagehouses,andtheuseoflargerhomesformndominiumscouldalsoprovidehousingformuch- • needed health care/social assis[anceworkers, which represeM the larges[job grovrth sec[or in Minnesota overthe nett5 years (over 90,000 newjobs mthe state are projxted between 2a042014 (DEED)). Providing housing for care- givers in dose proximiryto where dependent individuals live supports efforts.to move away from a"medicai"model - Mat mnsists of°separate epiwdes of care"mward a model of longterm care and support servi<es Cityof Saint Paul Comprehensive Plan � D9-/�y • --aait+�ixH�w o z • aa�srvH�w LL �o z w p , ¢� . w < W ' 3 � ° ; / i w m � o ' y N H1f1U Q � � — — _ __ � A„ _ �� Mtl383llHM �� / e t p O ffi6�� F � N � //" �COMl32tlH �' v � i YH � k� W w � � '� S� � / A � _ $ �� r �� H1511�N3 . � AMNd NOSNHOf � m �� a+ x uu` ...r�. ��"�'' _ ..�. ° V i s oLt '.&c�'Ra`'� e� t� m C I G J 0 � � � I � i � p ' s �ava �ava � �oP� � m > a a f �� o` a� c ,n � aav�av � � - a o- °� � � �5; � v °,' m ° a o i 'o � i � � e4��' V�� v a � ti Q 3NAtld �� `�O � � 9 � O d NO1H39O3 ��_z �� s / O � m N N C C '(�} l j G N Z � 1H`JIUMMtltl � � �-� � n J� 18390H � � � � � � � V D�9 � � � • w Yb �� - W J � J O_ 3 Q 2 T � d J �� S tl3NAtl15 = v C u K L � i � -' __Z , 35Ei �\ ___�� PO P ¢ � '6 C v � � Y C Z \ a � 9 c �u, v '� �a 3 .n FI a I NOSNJtlf 4° � v�i �n V Q � Q � O a � d� � � O � ___ _.._ _ i i� �� • u T � 1 � � � • 3J18 391b 3>IL � F � � �' � � S y � Z , ¢ � L�. \ j NN3153M _ • ��; o ,, T o,, �� .; � � �� ,� � y \ �o Z 3ltld .- ¢ � �I• 3ltlO I s f.� y {LI Y x u . . e d, ',y s .. � � � � I z > • � �5 � � f � I � I� O viaonin ; ' v�aol�in o � e l i� . 'e � a �� a ¢ � � �,.-_ LL ' I ' — �'``. _"=3sc i _ J I � F, N019NI%31 � � _ Z > --� � _ C y � 0 � DO • 3NIlWtlH 6 3NIlWtlH I � ' a S �� d b � 0 '� ,� r � �a � � F I 6 O f 5 � Z i —� w 1 F� u z �'�� r � o w � = e � V _ , � �—_ � i �� —�---- N 9NIll3N5 � 9Nf113N5 ¢ � LL ¢ � f Z n � O i � C f � � I 1 "- � �� ¢ �� y �� p Qp ut '_ ONtli3431> ti �.� � � � � 4. a > 4. Qy q o /� �', QNY13A31J � ONtll3A31� F� " 2 /� �� tii�a� �, Nu3a� i �- �Np� b � � - � `"'_,- .�_—_ i , 08ZAMH" s> ,� I N �� r � a c=� c C �N �C y _ J CJ d ��s d N � N v N N V �¢¢ �`_° �� 0 0 b. Encourage those rehabilitating existing housing as well as building new housing to indude common culturally-sensitive elements, induding but not limited to sufficient counter space for food preparation for large families� kitchens that can be closed off from other parts of the house, adequate venti- lation throughout the home, and multiple gathering spaces c Wherefeasible,identifysitesinthevicinityofhousingthatcanbeprogrammed for social gatherings and/or communal gardening d. Partner with Emerging Markeu Homeownership Initiative-cert�ed realiors to market city neighborhoods as places with housing for larger families earning low, moderate, and high incomes. • � CityofSaintPaul Comprehe�siVePtan m _-- � Cff %�1 � Strategy 3: Ensure the availability of affordable housing across the city Safe and affordable housing is a basic human need. Yet during the last decade, housing affordability has declined broadly for both homeowners and renters in theTwin Cities. Traditionally, housing is considered to be affordable if a household spends no more than 30 percent of its gross income on housing, whether towards rent or a mortgage payment.The number of Saint Paul households paying more than 30 percent of their incomes on housing expenses has increased sharply among both renters and own- ers over the last decade. Compared to the metropolitan area, the need for affordable housing in Saint Paul is heightened: In 2006, the median household income in the Twin Cities metropolitan area was 578,500, while the median household income for Saint Paul was approximately 56 percent of that Fig. H-N. Percentages of Cost-burdened households in Saint Paul 1990 2000 2f Percent of owner-occupied households paying at least 30% of their income on housing 183% 19.6% 33. Percent of renter-occupied households paying at least 30% of thev income on housing 5owce LLS Census S O • The following table shows that many of the service jobs in today's economy yield � incomes that would qualify a worker to live in "affordable" housing: ; Fig. H-O. Selected Occupations and Affordability Levels Selected Oaupations Typiwl Typical Income PercenWgeof Level Area Median Income (AMI) Food serv¢e worker, parking lot E�remely low <30% attendant eank teller, cook, home care aide, Very Iow 31-50% �anitor, nursing aide, receptionist, medical assistant, school counselor Carpentu, computer/office Low 51-80°!0 machine repairer, electricians, interpreter and translator, li<ensed vocational nurse, marriage and family therapist, plumber Appliance repair technician, civil Low-Moderate 81°/a - 100�/ servant, insuance sales agent, medical soaal worker, police o�cer, teacher source usa�rewoiiaeorswim6,accupauonaiempiaymemsauma, ,N�omrimome � 8. Source2o06 Amencan Communrty Survey. This plan uses the AMI for ffie Twm Gnes metm. 2� The 2006 American Communiry Survey data suggests that a majority of Saint Paul householdswould qualifyforhousing consideredto be"affordable"(assuming income levels of a four-person household): • 17 percent eamed incomes at or below 20 percent of the AMf; • 30 percent (cumulative) earned incomes at or below 30 percent of the AMI; • Over 70 percent (cumulative) earned incomes at or below 100 percent of the AMI, i.e., three-fourths of the city's househofds have incomes that range from extremely-low to moderate incomes. Approximately a third of the existing rental housing stock in Saint Paul today was produced or is now maintained with public subsidy.9 Low-Income Housing Tax Credits (LIHTCs) were used to develop many of these projects, but many LIHTCs are at risk of expiring every year. Given the housing needs, the City and its parmers must make a concerted effort to keep these units affordable, and reinvest in them as needed. Preserving existing affordable housing is one of the top three funding priorities of this plan. Housing affordability has declined in every area of the city. This strategy aims to ensure that every area of the ciry can be accessed by individuals and households earning low and moderate incomes, a value known as "locational choice." Given an increasingly-limited HRA housing budget and rising land and construction costs, providing strategicfunding fortheconstruction of new housing units that are afford- able to low to moderate incomes is anothertop funding priority ofthis plan. Preservation of existing affordable housing units 3.1. Support the preservation of publicly-assisted and private affordable housing. With its public, private, non-profit, and philanthropic partners, the Ciry should: a. Support the preservation of public housing. In the last few years, funding for• public housing has been reduced significantly.To conserve limited capital funds and generate additional revenue the Public Housing Agency has begun to sell scattered-site homes (with replacement).The plan proposes a goal of"no net loss in public housing units" If public housing continues to face such fund- ing shortages, selling of units should be the last resort. In such cases, the City should work with the PHA, non-profits, for-profits, and philanthropic partners to make up the lost units in other projects. b. Support the appfication of the (ow-income housing tax credit (L(HTC), historic tax credits, and other appropriate funding sources to maintain existing low- income units.The City/HRA should work with Minnesota Housing, community development corporations, and property owners to continue the provision of low-income housing units in these developments, and to use LIHTCs on the rehabilitation ofexisting affordable units. c Support and advocate for regional, state, and federal legislation and policies that provide funding or vehides for construdion and preservation of afford- able housing, including public housing. d. Support the preservation of other low-income housing units under private ownership and management The City/HRA should actively work with private owners to ensure the long-term affordability of such units, particularly in neig h- borhoods where there are fewer housing choices for low-income people. � 9.This per<enWge is based upon the number of publidy-assisred renWl units divided bythe number of rentai units. Source: Houvnglink,CiryofStPau7,andAmericanCommuniry5urvey(US.CensusBureaW. Ctyof.SaintPaul ComprehensivePlan m OG-/9� � aau��rouv i �%*' o; �o aa��eu�ow , �„_,�. o c3 �� 2 m. ¢,� � .�. � i m a � — — � ---� �'HLItl � ��'� O _ � � a � � - � % _ � .— -, - !,! lN38 31IHM , i s' � , � � . / ��0��r�� '_-' 1O � ' _ � aao.�mzm�4� � � : . � ', � . � � ;, �, _,�. -�c� k HlSf19N3 �� -�-dMAdNOSNHOL � �p., � --� ��'r � u61�` ��___ 6. ,- , a' ' � �' �•, 3�` L m� o� >, �' � S' L C � 1j -- 5ava -- ��iana � `—� ,>� a`-= ^`� � N ' z � • � O a��° ¢w � \� � • C� R W L N m� C �' C OT�� E` c' � o C '^ '°- ° m ma m �, / r,vyo�«� �w� ° � s ," � y % o 34tl]Ntl � ` p c d v r _ , ti � �� o 2zr � � � L U A ' , Y� O �. , ��•� OIL s a ,3NAVd .�___', b�v J , ../ r m rn o G 3 v a o" m � .NO1tl39Q3 � �� 'J��J. . �. �/ o N � p �� = N' E n � � � .✓, �, soa>m� aP'a� y Mq /L191i�MNNtl . � _ y ' � . �� / ,,. 1N380N � w a �' c�i '� � 9. � 0 2 Q i '� ' s O 6 i E�.. tn o c o .� NP ll3NAtliS � u � � ; � v ,°� ^ � � '�� -c � '� o 0 � -� 3S£I' �� P � ��. Q E W s° a F� m� m � � ��= n '� � I �� ` ,'1 �'� �� i C7 'NOSNJtlfi ,'NOS�Utlf / \ � �; N �� ' \ U ' Y M � E . � r ' :, l'la. /) V �v�1_.�_� � OJ CO O � ,�3AN�'_�__ -- � �`� ��✓��V '-^ � I� � � N � \ L. � S / A o � }� I �� \� V°° "q� \�� o6d 'a,+\ �. z O 00 � W � T. �.�, 1 : � ; :� ` � -� ,i � . 5�. 1� Q � r tD c�- N /. I 1q T W �`� o:'Na3L53M -' ''-- '- - , � a � �� J ;�°i�: z . � �� ;� i ; Ha��M� � � i � � a . ; al a� � �� A � \ 3 • � o � � m ?, . �. s f �I �, � : t ' / � F �'� Z Q Qi �� !/ zi s� i�. �_ � � i , � � a . aiva � � "� i �.—�_ �,._. .� � �\ � � i /� 3ltlU� i � LL ' ; ��'9� I � , �� ' i � , �I �' � � i � W �� i . •� � --� '=— - � `\ m Q viaoliU i,..l�""� � z� ��'� �'�' < j viaot�in � � �� / o� � i � \�.,, i � °� � ` ,. ; ; z ! i i��'�°*. 3ss� i�,� �-:'''` o S+ w�� ^-- , N019NI%'3l � � q019NIX3l? I � NQIJNIX31 �_,.`�� '� "' � � � � { 7 � � :�. ! \ �6� o � oi � � a Fl a r . ' ( "' � , i i y � ob'� ry W a: L�— � I I =--�—�`" �'''A o '3NIl4WH, �l ��3NpWtlH i �- ��-' �� al � �Y.A �' p r � � �� ' � � �'. ' �� $I i : .a o � � �, ' � : � , a� �: � �4 � ' � 2 �9NI7�3N5 u . � ��' � , : �• i � i__�'� ��, O '� 9Nf1�3N5� ; , 9NIl'13N� al � �,�\� � � � I ,, I � �� ¢I \t v , ' I � ? � ' ' ; �� , i � �� / �' � --- �a E+ /� G �� ,�, 7 ' i I �M31AN� � N ;M31Atlitli� , , �M31ANItlii�f �;_ t -� ` { " � �T� ` A b ; , � , � i�S � �% � � r ONtll3A3lJ i � --- 2 � �' . ' [ , i , r• �• _—__ -y — 8�Q ' --�\ J✓ ' ONtll3A3l� r-- � -- ONtll3A9lT �� -.,/ i� � F �J \, � i(�NIJ3NJ � � �--� NLL38J�� 0 �p, � N � i �� NOK'4 �i '� � , (�.� __"_�"�n ` � �bSF .'_ � � _-- " hr /�-�—_i�—.._. ¢ �? ._......a. .s-. -,._..� ., ,- WtlHl3d�� `�- �';;0 OSiAMH "" I � e. Continue to support the use of state property tax inceniives for affordable rental housing. f. WhentheHousingandRedevelopmentAuthoritydemolishesaffordablehous� ing, it should follow the City's existing replacement housing policy. New affordable housing produdion 3.2. Support new housing opportunities for low-income households through- out tf�e city. Saint Paui is home to many diverse and distinct neighborhoods, each with its own history and sense of community. However, there are concentraiions of low-income housing in Saint Paul. Factors that contribute to this concentration include: rising properiy values and taxes, gentr�cation pressures, high land and development costs across the ciry, and a pre-existing lack of quality affordable rental housing for large families. To meet the goal of dispersing affordable housing, the CityMRA and its partners should: a. Make a good faith effort to allocate subsidy for new mixed-income housing development that includes some new affordable units to ensure a broader geogrephic distribution in the city. While the Ciry may provide incentives or financial assistance to mixed-income projects in all neighborhoods, it should especia(ly strive to do so in stabfe neighborhoods where afforda6le housing is scarce. Projects should be evaluated on the basis of locational choice, and consider the housing rype, tenure, and other neighborhood factors such as transit access, to accomplish the mixed-income housing goal. b. Encourage the acquisition of privately-owned affordable housing and land for affordable housing by nonprofit organizations, land trusts, community development corporations, religious institutions, tenants, or private sector actors committed to affordable housing, thereby protecting it from upward� pressure on prices and rents. This is a prioriry in areas e7cpeded m experience gentrification. c. Requirealldistrictcouncilsand�ity-appointedcitizentaskforcestoplanforthe production and preservation of affordable housing in their area, through dis- trict plans, smatl area plans, station area pfans, or other neighborhood pta nning processes.These plans should show how each neighborhood or planning area will contribute to citywide goals, by identifying key vacant or under-utilized sites for new mixed income housing, and sites that would provide residents of new housing access to transitand active Ifiestyles. d. Consider funding availability in the planning of affordable housing. 33. Provide affordable housing in new production projeds. The Metropolitan Council's projections show that the population of the city will grow by 44,160 people, or 20,891 new households, between 2000 and 2030. The Council also allocates 2,625 affordable housing units to Saint Paul by 2020, defined as affordable to househofds at 60 percent of the AMI (indusive of rental and owner- ship housing). Rental housing is an important part of the city's housing stock, especially given the growing numbers of young sing les and couples, immigrants, and senior populations. As can be seen in many of Saint Pau!'s neighborhoods, a healThy mix of ownership and rental is good for neighborhood stability. For new production, the following affordable housing standards shall hold: • Cityof Saint Paul Comprehensive Plan � � i�� a. For Ciry/HRA-assisted new rental units, at least 30 percent will be affordable to . households earniag 60 percent of the AMI, of which at least one third will be affordable to households earning 50 percent of the AMI, and at least one third will be affordable to households earning 30 percent of the AMI." As wages have stagnated and housing costs have grown in the last several years, the costs of failed homeownership on a household and the surrounding neigh- 7hecity'sHousingPianadoptedinzooz borhood have been highlighted. However, the benefits of homeownership are statedthatatleast2opercentofnew significant, induding ihe provision of a quality place to live, stability for families, housing production would beaffordable and pride. Recognizing that homeownership for households earning up to 30 per- to households at so percentofthe AMi, cent and 50 perwnt of the AMI may not always be sustainable in the long-term, this includinghalfofthisbeingaffordableto Planproposes: households at 3o percent ofthe AMI. The standardappiiedtobothownershipand b. ForCity-assistednewownershipunits,atleast20percentwillbeaffordableto rental housing in the aggregate. �uring househo{ds earning up to 80 percent of the AMi, and an additiona{ 10 percent the 2002-2005 period, this goal was suc- cessfully metand exceeded. �^ will be affordable to households at 60%of the AMI. To ensure that low- to moderate-income households are able to benefit from home- ownership, the plan recommends the following: c. Explore mechanisms to ensure that affordable ownership units that are devel- oped remain affordable for at least 10-15 years, especially m existing stable neighborhoods. d. Supportservicessuchasfinancialcounselingandpre-andpost-purchasetrain- ing; these services are key to the success of homeowners, particularly those with lower incomes. To further assisi in the new production of affordable housing, the City/HRA should: e. Provide adequate zoning/land for multifamily development, again to support o the production ofat Ieast2,625 new units affordableto households earning up � to 60 percent of the AMI. � � f. Explore and implement demonstrated incentive zoning tools, induding den- "_ sity bonuses, parking reductions, and other creative mechanisms, to faci{itate and encourage the marketto produce new affordable housing. g. Support the efforts of partners that have a proven track record in using non- traditional ownership models, such as land trusts, limited equity cooperatives, and others. Emphasis should be on using a scattered site approach to encour- age long-term locational choice, particularly in stable neighborhoods. h. Explore a local trust fund for affordable housing preservation or production. Such a fund would be based on a dedicated stream of revenues from sources such as real estate transaction fees and/or increments and fees drawn from new City/HRA-assisted market-rate housing developments. i. Explorearequirementthatwouldmandatenewhousingdevelopmentsreceiv- ing any City{HRA financial assistance to provide a percentage of affordable housing units, or pay an in-lieu fee. 10. Out ofthe mtal new housmg produced with CiTy/HRA fnancmg during the Housing 5000 period, 2] percent of new production was affordable to incomez at or below 50 perrent of the AMI, and 55 percent of the umts were affordable to inwmez at or below 80 percent oRhe AMI. • n. Typically, the Ciry/HRA ensures that affordable rental housing pro�eas must remain affordable for a minimum of 10 years. Many Low Income Housing Tax Gedrc prqects ensure [hat affordability is mamtamed from 25-40 years. The 60 perv cent AMI level is consistent wrth the Met Counol's defmtion of affordable hous�ng.5ee"Determining Affordable Housmg Need in the Twin Gties 2011-2020, p.4 of htto://www.metrocoun<il.oro/olann'na/houi na/AffHousingNeedJanOb.pdf. 2$ . j. Consider policies to ensure longterm affordability of new ownership housing, including shared appreciation loans and subsidy recapture strategies for projects with City/HRA financial assistance. Such strategies enable the Ciry/HRA to co� tinue assisting the maximum number of households, while still providing some of the benefits of homeownership to low and moderate income households. Rxurrent communication with homeowners is critical for such programs. k. Encourage inYerested local employers to help finance mixed income housing developments in Saint Paul. 3.4. Assist in the preservation and production of homeiess & supportive housing. Providing sufficient permanent supportive and affordable housing is a key solution to long-term homelessness.Over two-thirds of the long-term homeless population is unemployed, over half have reported a serious or persistent mental illness, a third have reported a chemical dependency problem, and 48 percent have reported a chronic health condition. iz Overthe last decade, che issue of home-, tessness has escalated. On a single nighY in 2003, the Wilder Researcb CeMer iden- tified 7,471 men, women and children who were homeless in RamseyCounty (Plan to End Homelessness/Saint Paul- RamseyCounty: Part One: Ending Long- Term Homefessness.5eptember200�. !n 2006, the number of homeless people in Ramsey,COUnry increased tot,495. This number indudes both: 7) the 7,317 persons in "temporary housingprogramS(emergency � � shelters, battered women's shelters and transi[ional housing) on Oc[ober26, 2006, as well as 2j 784 people in"informal arrangements" and/or"unsheltered" on the same date. See http://www.wilder. org/fifeadmiNuser upload/research/ HomelessReg ionallables2006_3-07.pdf The Plan to End Homelessness (2005 and 2006) for Saint Paul-Ramsey County states that by 20i0, Ramsey County and Saint Paul witt need 920 units of permanent sup- portive housing for peoplewho haveexperienced long-term homelessness.The plan also includes a number of rxommendations for City adion. The City is committed to working with Ramsey County, the State of Minnesota, other funders, developers and service providers in the implementation of p(ans to end homelessness. Specifically, the Ciry will seek to do the following: a. Site permanenT supportive and homeless housing to increase Iocational choices in an area, and increase the distribution across the ciry. b. Continue Ciry involvement in groups such as tfie Interagency Stabifizatio� Group, the Saint Paul/Ramsey County Funders Council, and the Heading Home Ramsey Advisory Board. c. Examine and update the existing zoning code to correspond with the cur- rent state and county licensing/registration requirements and group housing programs. d. Reduce the parking requirement for homeless and supportive housing to more accuretely reflect need. e. WorkwithRamseyCountyandotherpartnerstolobbyCongressforfundingto meet the need. f. Encourage non-City funding sources to (continue to) provide resourcesfor sup- portive and homeless housing. 3.5. Challenge and assist the Metropolitan Council and the region's other muni- cipalities to provide their share of affordable housing units. Saint Paul and Minneapolis have always provided more affordable housing units than Their suburban and exurban counterparts, as traditionally, the central cities have served as the first stop for new immigrants and graduatesjustjoining the workforce, and as job hubs of the region. However, in the last three decades, we have seen a gradual dispersal ofjobs into thesuburbs. While some suburban communities have not provided the affordable housing to meet the needs of their growing workforces, tfie central cities have continued to produce new affordabie housing.The two forces combined have led to a regional imbalance between jobs and housing supply, and increased the ralative concentration of low-income housing in the central cities. • 72 "PlantoEndHomelessnen/SaintPaul-RamseyCounty:PartOne:EndingLong-Te:mHomelessrress"Septem6er2005.P74. CityofSainYPauiComprehensivePlan m � i iG� This concentration not only poses challenges to the munidpal governments of the . wntral cities, but also limits opportunities for low-income residents.Often restricted by a lack of reliable personal vehicles and suffering from an insufficient regional trensit system, low-income residents have difficulry accessing jobs in the suburbs, while suburban employers struggle to find workers for entry-level and less-skilled positions. Saint Paul is and will continue to be a leader in affordable housing production. A rewnt Metropolitan Council study indicated that by 2006, the city had already exweded its affordable housing goal for the decade ending 2010.131n the meantime, many of the city's suburban counterparts have fallen short of their requirements. Specific recommendations that the Ciry and its partners support indude: a. Encourage the Metropolitan Council to not only "albcate"affordable housing units to each community in the Comprehensive Plan prowss, but also enforce these standards as a condition for providing housing or improvement funding. Successful applicanu for regional funds should demonstrate the implemen- tation of their plans to produce housing units affordable to households with incomes at or below 60, S0, and 30 percent of the regional median. b. Lobby the Minnesota Legislature to ensure the following: 1. Increased funding for communities to assist them in meeting their afford- abfe housing goals; 2. A strengthening of the Livable Communities Act to make it more likely to have a real impact on the availability of affordable housing throughout the metropolitan region; and 3. Properry tax reform that does not disproportionately impact wntral cities or low-income residents in a negative way. o c Mentor and assist eastern Twin Cities suburbs in providing affordable housing �. units — share expertise, experience, and a sense of common well-being. � 3 3.6. Ensurefairhousing. Bias in the housing market continues to negatively affed racial, ethnic, and religious minorities, people with disabilities, and families with small children.The task ofover- coming bias must be accepted as the joint responsibility of federal, state, county, and city governments in cooperation with private and non-profit sectors. To this end, the City will: a. Promote fair housing choices for all, particularly those from historically disad- vantaged backgrounds. b. Systematically test, identify, analyze, and eliminate discrimination in the hous- ing and lending industries. c. Provide opportunities for inclusive patterns of housing occupancy regardless of race, color, religion, sex, familiar status, disability, and national origin. d. Promote housing that is structurally accessible to and usable by all persons, particularly persons with disabiliYies. e. Enforce Saint Pau1's human rights ordinance with resped to housing discrimination. • 13 TCHOUSingPolicy.orgpaper"Ci4esPlanforPutureHousingGOalswhileLaggmgonCurrentOnes,"May200]. Accessed Dec 7, 2008 at http./hvww.tchousingpoli<y.org/unders[anding�ndex.php?strWebA<non=artide_ detail&intArtidelD=205 1� „ f. Provideeducationalandoutreachprogramsdirxtedtowardshousingprovid- ers, induding landlords, rental agents, real estate sales personnel, mortgage lenders and brokers, property appraisers and property insurers. g. Support efforts of theTwin Cities Metropolitan Area Fair Housing Implemen- tation Council to ensure that Ciry is affirmatively furthering fair housing opportunities and actively removing barriers to fair housing. h. Support the Emerging Markets Homeownership Initiative.”` • 14.TheEmergingMarketsHomeownershipinrtiativeisacoilaboativepartnershipmdosethehomeownenhipgap . among mmmunities of mlor in ffie State of Minnesota.The goal is to mnnect mortgage and real escate pmfeuionals with Minnesota's growing and diveae ethni<populations acrossthe s[ate and assure 40,000 new emerging market homeowners by 20R. Cityof5aintPaul ComprehensivePlan � Implementation pG ��y Resources for housing investment are increasingly limited, so the Ciry must be strategic about the types of housing projects to assist—financially and otherwise. This plan has identified three key funding priorities, including: 1. The rehabifitation of housing, 2. The preservation of existing affordable housing, and to a lesser extent, 3. The production of new housing units affordable to low and moderate income households While this plan recognizes that the costs of redevelopment in Saint Paul may demand scarce resources from the public sector, such financial assistance is contingent upon the development meeting the strategies, objectives, and policies outlined in this plan. The City/HRA wil! be the principal actor in the adion steps identified below, including many that do not have significant financial implications. The City/HRA will actively work with its partners in both the public and private sectors to implement this plan and leverage resourws. Key action steps for the City/HRA A. Develop an Annual Housing Action Plan. The Department of Planning and Economic Development shoufd convene, on an annual basis, a task force of representatives from key public agencies, private funders, for-profit and non-profit developers, and housing/nelghborhood advocates. The charge of the taskforce is to develop and recommend to the City Council, by October 1 of each year, a Housing Action Plan. It should do the following: s • • Identify expiring Section 8/236 contracts and low income housing tax credit S projects, and define actions to be taken to ensure their preservation � � • With the participation of neighborhood partners, set goa{sfor the rehabilitation � of existing housing units, and develop a strategy that is tailored to the neigh- borhoods where intensive rehabilitation will occur, induding: • Properties identified for Basic and Necessary and energy-efficiency improvements • Any properties identified for exterior improvements, including renovations of historic properties (the City/HRA should not be the main funder) • Vacant and/or problem properties identified for demolition. The decision to demolish a property should be based upon a set of agreed-upon criteria such as those outlined in policy 23. • Perform an evaluation of the effectiveness of the ordinance which now requires Certificate of Occupancy for one- and two-family rental homes (§40.04), in addressing the level of code compliance of these properties • Set cirywide goals for the production of housing units by income/priw range and tenure. Such goals should be informed by an analysis of housing choices based upon available demographic and housing data • Supportthe Planning Commission on keyzoning studies, induding: � The viabiliry of accessory units, particularly in housing dependent seniors and the area's workforce The viability and applicability of a density bonus and/or other incentive tools for affordable housing production 29 B. Re-convenetheHousingCoordinationTeam. The Department of Planning and Economic Development should convene � Housing Coordination Team composed of representatives of key public agen cies with housing responsibilities, as well as community representatives, and be convened periodically as needed . It will be responsible for monitoring the City/HRA's progress toward meeting its goals, as identified in this Housing Plan and the Housing Adion Plan C. Carry out an inventory of housing conditions, and coordinate rehabili- tation programs and resources with community partners. Policy 2.2 in Strategy2 instructs the City and its partners to periodically carry out an inventory of housing conditions. The City/HRA should begin preparing for this as soon as possible, drawing upon stafffrom departments of Planning and Economic Development and the SafeTy and Inspections, as well as community partners in the district council system and CDCs, and groups such as Historic Saint Paul. Such an inventory will inform where rehabilitation assistance is needed most, and the type of assistance needed, as well as federa! housing funding applications. New tech- nologies that will greatlyfacilitate the surveying process shoufd be utilized. D. Partner with organizations that have constituencies in need of mixed income affordable housing, particularly in site acquisition. Two of the top three priorities of this plan are to preserve existing affordable hous- ing and, to a lesser extent—given the greater cost—encourage the produdion of new housing afforda6le to low and moderate income people.There a re many orga- nizations that the City/H RA has partnered with in the past and could partner with in the future that share such a mission. Communiry Development Corporations, non- profit groups, the Public Housing Agency, churches, senior organizations, ethnic� chambers of commerce, fabor unions, and empioyers shoufd atl be fully engaged by the City/HRA in the development of mixed income housing projects, particu- larly in terms of providing community-6ased input, and leveraging resources for site acquisition and other key housing activities. E. Engage in ongoing data collection to inform housing activities and investments. Given the limited amount of resources, the City/HRA must ensure that its new housing investmenu in rehabilitation, affordable housing, and redevelopment are informed by the best data available. Key data points to track and/or map To inform the activities of ihe Housing Coordination Team and the HRA include: 1. Publicly-assisted affordable housing 2 Median household incomes in neighborhoods (Block Group or CensusTract), and the general concentretion of households earning incomes at or below 30, 50, 60, and 80 percent ofthe metropolitan Area Median Income 3. Rehabilitated housing (investments by the HRA, CDCs, other partners, and to the e�ent possible, private sector): • "Basic & Necessary" Improvements • Majorenergy-efficiencyimprovements • 6cterior improvements 4. Areas with less vibrant housing markets (every ten years, based on Census and other sources) � Cityof5aintPaul ComprehensivePlan � • � � 3� 09 ��I 5. A Central Corridor "score card" for housing constructed and substantially rehabilitated in the Corridor, including a web-based mapping product that provides current information on housing activity in the corridor. 6. Senior housing options x a � 3 v w a Credits Chris Coleman, Mayor City Council Jay Benanav (to December 2007) Dan Bostrom Melvin Carter Pat Harris Lee Helgen Kathy Lantry Debbie Montgomery (to December 200� Russ Stark Dave Thune Housi ng �omprehensive Plan Task Force ' � JimBel�us*(Chair) HarryMelander , John Buzza /John Slade Gaias Nelson* , John Couchman Marilyn Porter* � � Jim Ercbul Paul Rebholz , Jon Gu�mann Jim Solem � � BeverleyOliverHawkins TerriThao � Alicia Huckleby MissyThompson , Shawn Huckleby MaryTingerthal � ' Susan McCall* Maureen Warren � Marjorie Mangine Linda White Margy Mattlin � * Planning Commission member Saint Paul Planning Commission Brian Alton (Chair} Eduardo Barrera Jim Bellus Jon Commers Bob Cudahy Kathi Donnelly-Cohen Carole Murphy Faricy Erick L Goodlow Stephen D Gordon George E. Johnson Richard J F Kramer * Until January 2008 Yung-Kang Lu Michael Margulies Susan McCall' Gladys Morton Gaius Nelson Marilyn Porter Dennis Rosemark Kristina Smitten BobSpaulding Daniel Ward, II Barbara A Wend Department of Planning and Economic Development Cecile Bedor, Director Larry Soderholm, Planning Administrator Research and Planning Yang Zhang Luis Pereira Gary Peltier City Staff to theTask Force Patricia Lilledahl, Planning and Economic Development Jce Collins, Planning and Emnomic Development Allen Carlson, Planning and Economic Development Kurt Schultz, Planning and Economic Development Marcia Moermond, City Council Research Report Produdion Joan Chinn Cityof5aintPaul ComprehensivePlan 32 C� � � �9-iy� Housing Plan Background Information included: � Changes to the plan recommended by the Comprehensive Planning Committee of the Planning Commission � Staff responses to comments on the public hearing draft � Public comment record PLANNMG COMMISSION CTTY OF SAIN'I' PAUL Christopher B. Coleman, Mayor Date: To: From: Subject: o>-�� Brian Alton, Chair 25 Wesd Founh Street Saint Paul, :NN 55102 Telephone. 651-Z66-6700 Facsimile. 651-228-3220 December 11, 2008 Comprehensive Planning Committee Luis Pereira, luis.pereira@ci.stpaul.mn.us, 651-266-6591 Revisions made to Housing Plan based on Comprehensive Planning Committee discussion of public hearing comments Background R Requested Action The Planning Commission held a public hearing on the Housing Plan, one of six chapters of the Saint Paul Comprehensive Plan, on September 5, 2��8. This memo summarizes the revisions to the plan. Staff recommends that the Committee recommend this revised Housing Plan to the full Planning Commission. The Planning Commission is set to consider this plan on January 2, 2009. Revisions to specific policies 1. Policy 1.1 Previouslv: 1.9. Increase housing choices across the city. Neighborhoods shou/d seek to capture a realistic share of the growing housing market, providing more choices—including tenure, and a range of housing types and income levels. Revised policv 1.1 1.1. Increase housing choices across the city to sunport economicallv-diverse neiqhborhoods Neighborhoods shou/d seek to capture a realistic share of the growing housing market, providing more choices—includinp a mix of rental and ownershin units, tea�-a range of housing types, and diversitv of income levels. 2. Policy 1.2 Previouslv: 1.2. Meet market demand for transit-oriented housing. The crty has recently captured a share of the market of smaller households, focusing primarily on the production of apartments, condominiums, and townhomes. .. Several demographic and economic trends suggest a continuing demand for housing that is well-served by transit and amenities . . . . b. Such housing must be designed to be sensitive to the neighborhood context. Revised oalicv 1.2(bl b. Such housing must be designed to be sensitive to the neighborhood context, includinp the built form and the treatment of natuial aieas and landscanes within the vublic realm. AN AFFIRMATNE ACTION EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER �'i-/q� 3. Policy 1.5(e) Previouslv: 1.5. Prioritize non-financial City/HRA assistance to multifamily and mixed use housing in new construction projects. Such assistance includes, but is not limited to: ... e. A reduced parking requirement for housing located in areas with frequent transit service. The City should consider reducing the requirement for housing /ocated wdhin one fourth of a mile of a street with frequent transit service (See Policy 2.10 of the Transportation chapter). .. Revised oolicv 1.5(e) e. A reduced parking requirement for housing locafed in areas with frequent transit service. �He �s,-�� .;;�;; �,.,. ,,.... «_... ...:. .......:.... �See Policy 2.10 of the Transportation chapter). 4. Policy 3.3 Previouslv: 3.3. Provide affordable housing in new production projects. ... The Council also allocates 2, 625 affordable housing units to Saint Paul by 2020, defined as affordable to households at 60 percent of the AMI (inclusive of rental and ownership housing). ... For new production, fhe following affordable housing standards shall hold: a. For City/HRA-assisted rental units, at least 30 percent will be affordable to households earning 60 percent of the AMI, of which at least one third will be affordable to households earning 50 percent of the AMl, and at least one third will be affordable to households earning 30 percent of the AMI. . Recognizing that homeownership for households earning up to 30 percent and 50 percent of the AMI may not always be sustainable in the long-term, this plan proposes: b. For City-assisted ownership units, at least 30 percent wi/l be affordab/e to households earning up to 60 percent of the AMI. Revised oolicv 3.3(bl b. For City-assisted new ownership units, at least S20 percent will be affordable to households earning up to 69 80 percent of the AMI, " and at least 10 percent will be affordable to households at 60% of the AMI. 6. Policy 2.3 Previouslv: 2.3. Assess the market viability, maintenance needs, and neighborhood context of a house before it receives rehabilitation investment. Assessment criterra include: a. The type and cost-effectiveness of "basic and necessary" improvements ... b. The concentration of units with similar exterior conditions in the vicinity. ... c. Possible synergies befween the housing rehabilitation project and nearby public and private assets . . . . d. Historic significance of fhe property, including any existing historic districts or designations that apply. . . . Revised policv 2.3 2.3. Assess-Realisfical/y weic,�h the market viability, maintenance needs, and neighborhood context ofa houses before +t�eseives providina aublic rehabilrtation funds to them i^ �°°r '„�„�m°^* Assessment criteria mav include: a. The type and cost-effectiveness of "basic and necessary" improvements ... b. The concentration of units with similar exterior conditions in the vicinify. ... c. Possible synergies between the housing rehabilitation project and nearby public and private assets . . . . d. Historic significance of the property_ ,-;�;,,�';;y ^ '^+'^^ F'^'^°:^ �'"^'.;^'^ ^� a9�/ 4� 7. Policy 2.14 Previouslv: 2.14. Promote existing and p�oven public and nonprofit programs and tax incentives to encourage rehabilitation of owner-occupied homes in areas with less vibrant housing markets Such programs provide financing or incentives to purchase substandard homes, rehabilitate the homes and then either occupy them or sell the homes to irst-time homebuyers. Revised oolicv 2.14 2.14. Promote existing and innovative new programs and #a* incentives #e that encourage rehabilitation of esvaeF-eeet+,eied 1-3 unit residential properties l�sr�es in areas with /ess vibrant housing markets Such programs provide financing or incentives te for the purchase and rehabilitation of substandardhomes, tvpicallvforowneroccunancv.�^ �°^z..`..`....`�'"�°• „,r,o„, ,., cn/I ihn r,,..,,,.� .,, v;.�f t;..,o a...,,�a . � Wh2lE dpAlOpl18f8, fh@ CIfV 1118V support the deconversion of a buildina that was previouslv divided into multiple units back to its oriainal condition. 9. Policy 2.15 Previouslv: 2.15. Cooperate with the lender community to revitalize areas with high concentrations of vacant housing and foreclosures a. Engage lenders with a stake in the foreclosure issue rn Saint Paul, potentially as an opportunity to recover some of their losses by selling some of their properties at a discount to City partners working to rehabilitate vacant housing. b. Make use of the City/HRA's Socially Responsible Investment Fund and other tools to ensure that community lenders are accountable to neighborhoods in the vicinity. Revised policv 2.15 2.15. 6eep^��.�2 ��„�'" Enaaae the investor and lender communiti� to revitalize areas with high concentrations of vacant housing and foreclosures a. Engage vacant nropertv owners le�lers with a stake in the foreclosure issue in Saint Paul, potentially as an opportunity to recover some of their losses by selling some of their properties at a discount to City partners working to rehabilitate vacant housing. b. Make use of a!I available th�City/HRA's ^•� tools to ensure that �aEaaEsrederEv owners of vacant properties mainfain their properties to Citv standards."�enders tHe-viEi�rit3�. 10. Policy 2.16 Previouslv: 2.16. Market programs to new homebuyers a. Continue City/HRA programs for first-time homebuyers, especially to households with stable incomes Revised oolicv 2.16(al a. Continue City/HRA and other programs for first-time homebuyers, especially to households with stable incomes 11. Policy 2.17 Previousiv: 2. 97. Support creativity in the construction of neighborhood infill housing by proactively developing zoning and design guidelines a. Develop, with broad public inpuf, citywide infill housing design standards so that infill housing fits well within the existing Saint Paul neighborhood context. Neighborhood groups should be directly involved. o� �� b. Explore, via a zoning study, the potential for accessory units in existing neighborhoods. Accessory units may provide a solution for the changing demographics, allowing the elder/y fo age in place while providing more affordable housing opportunrtres for singles and couples. c. Encourage the development of attached single family and neighborhood-sensitive multifamily infill housing on vacant /ots within neighborhoods to increase housing choices. Revised oolicv 2.17 2.17. Support creativity in the construction of neighborhood infil/ housing by proactively developing zoning and design guidelines a. Develop, with broad public input, citywide infil/ housing design standards so that infi/l housing fits well within the existing Sainf Paul neighbo�hood context. Neighborhood groups should be directly involved. b. Explore, via a zoning sfudy, the potential for accessory units in existing neighborhoods. Accessory units may provide a solution for the changing demographics, allowing the elderly to age in place while providing more affordable housing opportunities for singles and couples. c. Encourage the development of attached single family and neighborhood-sensitive multifamily in�ll housing at avpropriate /ocations as idenfified in the Land Use Plan and smaii area nians to increase housing choices. 12. Policy 3.2 Previouslv: 3.2. Disperse new housing opportunities for low-income households fhroughout the city. Revised oolicv 3.2 32. Bispefse Sunport new housing opportunities for low-income households throughout the city. 13. Policies 3.1(b) and 3.2(d) Previouslv: 3.1. Support the preservation of publicly-assisted and private affordable housing b. Support the application of the low-income housing tax credit (LIHTC) and historic tax credits (where applicable) to maintain existing low-income units. The City/HRA should work with Minnesota Housing, community development corporations, and property owners to continue the provision of low-income housing units in these developments, and to use LIHTCs toward rehabilitation of existing affordable units. Previouslv: 3.2. Disperse new housing opportunities for low-income households throughout the city d. Link planning of affordable housing with funding availability, including STAR and CDBG funds, as well as those from traditional and non-traditional funders. Revised oolicv 3.1(bl b. Support the application of the low-income housing tax credit (LIHTC),, ar�dhistoric tax credits (where applicable), and other aapropriate fundinp sources to maintain existing !ow- income units. The City/HRA should work with Minnesota Housing, community development corporations, and property owners to continue the provision of low-income housing units rn these deve/opments, and to use LIHTCs � on the rehabilitation of existing affordable units. Revised oolicv 3.2(d) 3.2. Disperse new housing opportunities for low-income households throughout the city d. �ipk Consider funding availaBility, '��'��a�^^ cT`^O ^^�' in the alannina of affordable housinq. v9-�9y 14. Policy 3.1(e) Previouslv: 3.1. Support the preservation of publicly-assisted and private affordable housing. With its public, private, non-profit, and philanthropic partners, the City should: ... e. Supporf the re-institution of state property tax credits for affordable rental housing, such as the past 4D tax credits. ... Revised oolicv 3.1(el e. Continue to Ssupport the use re-ius€itutiea-e€ state property tax incentives r�edit&for affordable rental housing�° �° *h^ r��. ^,� :�� ;��;.,, 15. Policy 3.2(a) Previouslv: 3.2. Disperse new housing opportunities for low-income households throughout the city. ... To meet the goal of dispersing affordable housing, the City/HRA and its partners should: a. Allocate subsidy for new housing construction to ensure a broader geographic distribution in the city. In general, mixed-income housing with some affordable units has worked well. The City should provide incentives or �nancial assistance to mixed- income projects including new affordable housing units in stable neighborhoods. In general, the City should limit the amount of �nancial assistance provided to new housing affordable to extreme/y low and very low incomes in areas where similar incomes or tenure patterns are already heavily concent�ated. Projects should be evaluated on the basis of locational choice, and consider the housing type, tenure, and other neighborhood factors such as transit access, to accomplish the mixed-income housing goal. . . . a. Make a qood faith effort to allocate subsidy for new mixed income housing development seas��stiera that includes some new affordable units to ensure a broader geographic distribution in the city. . While the City mav sMedld provide incentives or financial assistance to mixed-income projects ' �ai�s in ail neiahborhoods. it shouid esaecialiv strive to do so in stable ,�,., ...,a , �,. . .,ti,._,. .. ... �,.. ;., ..,.., ....,._.... ,. '�:� ..,,....�,,., ,,, ,.,......,�.,,� ,.. u�i .. , . �j�u . v;��^�� ^^�^� �^^^^^�'-�'��'4Projects should be evaluated on the basis of locational choice, and consider the housing type, tenure, and other neighborhood factors such as transit access, to accomplish the mixed-income housing goal. 16. Policy 3.4(b) 3.4. Assist in the preservation and production of homeless & supportive housing. ... b. Continue City involvement in the Interagency Sfabilization Group and the Saint Paul/Ramsey Counfy Funders Council Revised oolicv 3.4(b) b. Continue City involvement in proups such as the Interagency Stabilization Group� ar�d the Saint Paul/Ramsey County Funders Council, and the Headinq Home Ramsev Advisorv Board. 17. Policy 1.4 1.4. Implement citywide policies for new housing developments to promote sustainability New housing construction anywhere in the city can be inherently more sustainable fhan new housing built on previously undeveloped land on the edge of the metropolitan area, the latter often having high household, social, and public infrastructure costs. ay i9y a. Projects developed with Cify/HRA financial assistance should �esult in reduced greenhouse gas emissions and increased energy, water, and resou�ce usage effciencies above conventional standards in the housing industry. b. For aIl housing developed in the city, policies and other incentive too/s should be created that ensure reduced greenhouse gas emissions and increased energy, water, and resource usage e�ciencies above conventional standards in the industry. ... Revised policv 1.4 1.4. Implement citywide policies for new housing developments to promote sustainability New housing construction aRyrovheFe in the city can be inherently more susfainable than new housing built on previously undeveloped land on the edge of fhe mefropolitan area, the latter often having high househo(d, social, and public infrastructure costs. 0 PLANNING COMMISSION crrY oF san�r PauL, Christopher B. Coleman, b7¢yor Date: To: From: Subject: n� i�YQ Briaa Alton, Chair 25 R'est Founh Street Samt Paul, M�V»102 Telephone: 65I-266-6700 FacsimFle: 6� I -228-3120 September 29, 2008 Comprehensive Planning Committee Luis Pereira, luis.pereira@ci.stpaul.mn.us, 651-266-6591 Review of public hearing comments on the Housing Plan Background The Planning Commission held a public hearing on the Housing Plan, one of six chapters of the Saint Paul Comprehensive Plan, on September 5, 2008. Two people spoke, both in support of the plan with some specific revisions. In addition, four letters and emails were received, all in support of the plan but with some specific revisions. This memo summarizes the issues raised and presents staff comments/recommendations for the Committee to consider as it forwards the Housing Plan to the full Planning Commission. Overview of public hearing comments The comments focused on a number of issue areas: ways that the housing needs of new population can be met, the new construction of housing in the city, city goals for the production of new units affordable to fow and moderate income households, the preservation of affordable housing, housing rehabilitation, infill housing development, homeownership in city neighborhoods, neighborhood revitalization, the foreclosure and vacant housing crises, and how to protect rteighborhoods from displacement. Comments on specific policies 1. Policy 1.1 1.9. Increase housing choices across the city. Neighborhoods should seek to capture a realistic share of the growing housing market, providing more choices—including tenure, and a range of housing types and income levels. Comment. Tom Dimond suggested that additional language be added to this policy that discouraged "economic segregation of the city and Metro area,° as well as the language to show that the City supports "an all-incomes housing strategy for all 17 districts:' The Saint Paul Public Housing Agency remarked that "tenure" is an odd word choice, and that "sustainability' might be another aspect of housing to be incfuded in ihis policy. Staff comment. This policy is about providing housing choices for a broad range of people, including a diversity of ages, family sizes, and household incomes in all city neighborhoods. The suggestion to include Ianguage in this policy to discourage economic segregation and support an all-incomes housing strategy is consistent with past and current City policy to encourage a diversity of incomes in neighborhoods and support housing options for households at all income levels. While the plan's introduction says that Saint Paul `continues to embrace ... an all-incomes AN AFFIAMATNE ACTION EQUAL OPPOATUMTY EMPLOYER ps iyY housing strategy," it does not currently appear in any policy of the current draft. The plan does have another policy about dispersing funding for affordable housing more broadly across neighborhoods, but it does not currently have a policy about economic integration. Both of these changes would strengthen the plan. While it is correct that the use of word "tenure" in this policy is odd, there are already other policies in the draft that support sustainability in the housing stock. Staff recommendation. Amend policy 1.1 to read as follows: 1.1. Increase housing choices across the city to support economical/v-diverse neivhboihoods Neighborhoods shou(d seek to capture a realistic share of the growing housing market, providing more choices—inc/udina a mix of rental and ownershin units, �;;�-a„� range of housing types, and diversitv of income levels. The Citv supaorts economic intearafion in alI 2. Policy 1.2 1.2. Meet market demand for transit-oriented housing. The city has recenfly capfured a share of the market of smaller households, focusing primarily on the production of apartments, condominiums, and townhomes. .. Several demographic and economic trends suggest a continuing demand for housing that is well-served by transit and amenities . . . . 6. Such housing must be designed to be sensitive fo the neighborhood context. Comment. The Tri-Area Block Club suggested that new development must be cognizant of sensitive natural areas throughout the city, i�cluding areas in the North End near Loeb Lake, Willow Reserve, and Trillium. Staff comment. Given that much of the new housing to be added citywide will be constructed on redeveloped sites along commercial corcidors and close to existing, relativefy lower-density, predominantly residential city neighborhoods, careful design must be followed so that the new development fits in well and is sensitive to the neighborhood context and character. While policy 1.6 states that projects receiving City/HRA financial assistance should follow best practices in green building and design, it is not specific to the protection of sensitive natural areas. In addition, policy 1.2(b)'s very general language about sensitivity to the neighborhood character was written largely with scale, massing, and architectural motivations in mind, rather than environmental ones. Policy 1.2{b) could be expanded to highlight the environmental aspect of neighborhood sensitivity, particularly in light of the fact there are several key (re)development opportunities near the city's riverfront, within the Mississippi River Critical Area. Staff recommendation. Amend policy 1.2(b) to read as follows: b. Such housing must be designed to 6e sensitive to the neighborhood context, includin_q a careful treatment of natural areas and landscapes within the aublic realm. 3. Policy 1.5(d) 1.5. Prioritize non-financia/ City/HRA assistance to mulfifamily and mixed use housing rn new construction projects. Such assistance includes, but is not limited to: .... d. Appropriate zoning incentives and variances. One potential model is to provide a density bonus for housing projects that make some percentage of units affordable fo households at 30, 50, 60, and/or 80 percenf of the area median income. Comment. The Housing Preservation Project argues that "without an explicit policy that requires developers to include affordable units in return for incentives from the City sufficient to make the affordable units economically feasible (density bonuses, fee waivers, regulatory relief, etc.), the City may be left powerless to ensure mixed income housing at or near high demand station areas ." [of the Central Corridor]. Staff comment. The Fiousing Task Force did not recommend that any housing development be 2 f�i-�9 y required to include a certain percentage of affordable units, as suggested by HPP. Task Force members were concerned that setting such a requirement would stifle the housing market in Saint Paul, and instead opted for mod�ed affordability goals and a continued City/HRA commitment to finance housing affordable to low and moderate income households, including a careful tracking of housing activities along and near the Central Corridor (policy 1.7). The plan does suggest that the City explore the possibility of a density bonus and/or accessory units as ways of providing affordable housing along and near the Central Corridor, a place where current plans call for greater development densities. An additional reason that a project-by-project affordability requirement is not supported in the plan is that such a requirement would unnecessarily tie the City/HR,4's hands and limit its ability to 'negotiate with developers. The negotiated approach has yielded resufts for the city in terms of affordable housing, as the table and discussion in item #5 below suggests. Staff recommendation. No change. 4. Policy 1.5(e) 1.5. Prioritize non-financia� City/HRA assistance to multifami�y and mixed use housing in new construction projects. Such assistance includes, but is not limited to: ... e. A reduced parking requirement for housing located in areas with frequent tiansit service. The City should consider reducing the requirement for housing �ocated within one fourth of a mile of a street with frequent transit service (See Po/icy 2.10 of the Transportation chapter). .. Comment. The Tri-Area Block Cfub argues that there would be negative implications if the parking requirement for housing located within '/< mile of streets with frequent transit service were reduced, citing Rice Street as an example. It says that this change would "intrude too far into residential areas and impact the [neighborhood] character," pointing to small lots and increased rental units as evidence that there is not enough space for �ehicles. It also comments that it is unrealistic to assume that people will give up their cars. Staff comment. Policy 1.5(e) was written with the neighborhoods along Central Corridor and high-frequency transit routes in mind, places in which it is realistic to assume that residents and workers can or eventually will be able to rely on transit either partia{ly or entirely for their daily trips, reducing the need for a vehicle. Census 2000 data showed a high percentage of Central Corridor-census tract households with either zero or one vehicle. From a real estate development standpoint, a loca! housing developer told the Housing Task Force that the high cost of providing 1.5 off-street parking spaces per dwelling unit can make it difficult to finance a housing project, including the inclusion of important amenities such as semi-public open spaces and streetscape amenities. High park+ng requirements for development i� areas well-served by transit also has the effect of passing on to people the cost burden of paying for off-street spaces, whether or not the residents choose to own a car. Given the concern about parking problems in neighborhoods near the Central Corridor, it is appropriate to consider parking mitigation strategies with new development. Staff recommendation. No change. 5. Policy 3.3 3.3. Provide affordable housing in new production projects. ... The Council also allocates 2, 625 affordable housing units to Saint Paul by 2020, defined as affordable to households at 60 percent of the AMI (inclusive of rental and ownership housing). ... For new production, the following affordable housing standards shall hold: a. For City/HRA-assisted rental units, at least 30 percent will be affordable to households earning 60 percent of the AMI, of which at least one third will be affordable to households earning 50 percent of the AMI, and at least one third will be affordable fo households a� �yv earning 30 percent of the AMI. ... Recognizing that homeownership for households earning up to 30 percent and 50 percent of the AMI may not always be sustainable in the long-term, this plan proposes: b. For City-assisted ownership units, at least 30 percent wrll be affordable to households earning up to 60 percent of the AMI. Several comments were received from various organizations about policy 3.3, as enumerated below. Comment #1. Vic Grossman of MICAH commented on a previous Housing Plan draft that had defined an ownership unit at 80°l0 of the household AM1 as affordabfe. Grossman stated that this was not in compliance with the Metropolitan Council's definition of an °affordable unit," defined as affordable to households earning 60% of the AMI during the 2011-2020 period. Staff comment #1. The preliminary draft of the Housing Plan did define an ownership unit at 80% of household AMI as affordable, but the goal was changed later in the pubiic hearing draft to define an ownership unit at 60% of household AMI as affordable. Policy 3.3 of the current draft does meet the Metropolitan Council's definition of affordable units on the re�tal side. The Metropolitan Council's allocation of affordable units does not say that a City cannot assist housing development for households earning incomes higher than 60% of AMI, but the implication is that such housing will not count towards meeting the City's share of "affordable° housing, as allocated by the Council. It is staff's opinion that housing for households earning 60-115% of AMI, i.e. "low- moderate" income levels, is an important part of an all-incomes housing strategy, also worthy of City support. Comment #2. The Housing Preservation Project questioned whether the City would be able to meet the Metropolitan Council's allocation to Saint Paul of 2,625 housing units affordable to households at 60% of the Area Median Income (AMI) through the applicatio� of a City policy to City-assisted units only. Staff comment #2. If implemented, the draft City goais should achieve the Met Council's allocation of affordable units within 10 years, assuming that the City/HRA is equipped with adequate resources and there is sufficient market demand. (f Housing 5000 production is an indicator of what is possible going forward (see figure below), during years 2002-05 36°/a of City- assisted rental units were produced affordable to 50% of the AMI, and 68% of City-assisted rental units were produced affordable to 60% of the AMl (cumulative). That is, the draft City goal would have been more than met (at least 30% of total) at a lower level of AMI (50% of AMI and below). The City would not have complied with the draft goal during Housing 5000 on the ownership side; that is, it would have fallen short of a minimum of 30% of ownership units affordable to 60% of the AMI (only 13% of ownership units were created at 60% of the AMI). In sum, past production would suggest that if left unchanged, the draft City goals could achieve the Metropolitan Council's allocation, but mainly through the production of rental units. ��f q � Housing 5000 Production with City/HRA financing (2002-2005) Units affordable to households at: Total 30% of AMI 50� of AMI � 60°l0 of AMI 80% of AMI* Ownership units 1,534 30 167 199 382 % oftotal 2% 11%f 13% 25% Rental units 2,695 558� 983 1,821I 1,930 % oftotal 21%� 36% 68%� 72% Total units w/ City/HRA � � I financing 4,229� 588� 1,150� 2,020� 2,312 % Oftot8l 14% 27%� 48% 55% All Housing 5000 units ; 5,371 600 1,171 2,047 2,350 % oftot3l 11% 22% 38% 44% *Unit totals and percentages are cumulative, i.e., the total number of units (and percentages) affordable at 60% of the AMI indude those affordable at 50 and 30%of the AMt. An important caveat to the above is that Housing 5000 was a five year period that emphasized new housing production over other types of housing activities. Housing 5000 placed a high demand on the HRA's flexible housing resources, many of which are not available today. Comment #3. The Metropolitan Consortium of Community Developers (MCCD), representing Twin Cities' community development organizations, questioned whether the percentage goals for new City-assisted affordable housing production were economically realistic without the provision of resources (subsidies) to help meet the targets. Staff comment #3. The percentage goals proposed should not in and of themselves result in an increased subsidy need; a greater subsidy need may result from the high cost of new construction (land, materials, labor, and redevelopment costs). The rental goal is not proposed to change much from the existing adopted goal, but the homeownership goal is set at a higher percentage of AMl (60% of AMI) than the existing ownership goal (50% of the AMI). This Iatter change would theoretically reduce the average level of subsidy needed to produce an affordable ownership unit to meet the City goal. However, PED housing project manager staff opinion is that while the draft rental production goal appears feasible given a consideration of past production and the provision of adequate resources firom the state and federal governments, the draft ownership production goal is unrealistic. Given the high cost of new construction, the only actor that is likely able to create ownership housing at the 50% of AMI level in today's market is Habitat for Humanity. Producing ownership housing at the 60% of AMI level is also dififlcuit in today's market, likely to demand a minimum subsidy of at least $50,000 per unit (assuming low- or no-cost land and a$195,000 minimum construction cost). Finally, community development corporations most often focus on constructing ownership housing affordable to households eaming 80% - 115°la of the AMt, and Minnesota Housing's first time homebuyer programs have income eligibility limits set at 80% of the AMI. These actors specialize in affordable housing production and affordable housing finance, respectively, and the draft ownership production goai reflects their positions. Given the above, a modi�ed goal is recommended below that is more in line with economic reaiity. The City/HRA wifi continue to fund the new production of housing affordable to low and moderate income households, and it expects that nonprofit community developers will continue being important players and partners in creating such housing. Comment #4. MICAH recommends that the City's targets for affordable rental and ownership �-�9y housing be based on what workers earning the median salaries of common service sector occupations in Minnesota can pay (no more than 30% of their income on housing), i.e. the following target AMI levels: a. Rentat units: 20°fo of the AMI ($16,000), which is 30°Jo of Saint Paul Median lncome ($400 rents) b. Ownership units: 30°10 of the AMI {$23,500), wh+ch is 50°!0 04 Saint Pau! Median Income ($85,000 purchase price) Staff comment #4. Recent economic trends - including stagnant wages and overly-appreciated housing prices - have resulted in a reduction in housing affordability and more cost-burdened households across the income spectrum (notwithstanding the recent slump in the housing market). While there is current data (such as the attachment submitted by MICAH) and projections (W ilder Research's East Metro Housing Needs study) that demonstrate the curcent and ongoing need for housing affordable to households earning up to 20% and 30% of the AMI through 2020, the City has multiple housing demands that it must also address. These include, but are not limited to, the preservation of existing affordable housing, addressing problems in neighborhoods with high numbers of vacant and foreclosed homes, and the rehabilitation of housing with deferred maintenance needs. Devoting much ofi the Citys housing resources to new housing for households at 20% and 30% of the AMI could compromise the Citys ability to meet these other important goals. Several important actors specialize in the provision or production of deeply-affordable housing, including the Saint Paul Public Housing Agency, and a variety of nonprofit organizations. The City will continue to partner with and support the activities of such actors. In sum, the draft City new production goals were based on a consideration of recent affordable housing production in the city, including levels of affordability achieved, construction costs, and subsidies needed. The Housing Task Force also reflected upon the recent foreclosure crisis in setting the ownership production goal. The plan recognizes that the City must consider resource constraints, balance multiple housing goals, and support other actors that specialize in the provision and development of deeply-affordable housing. Staff recommendation. Amend 3.3(b) as follows: b. For City-assisted ownership units, at least 30 percent will be affordable fo households earning up to 69 80 percent of the AMI, with 1/3 of these unifs affordable to households at 60% of the AMI. 6. Policy 2.3 2.3. Assess the market viability, maintenance needs, and neighborhood context of a house Before it receives rehabilifation invesiment. Assessment criteria include: a. The type and cost-effectiveness of "basic and necessary" improvements ... b. The concentration of units with similar exterior conditions in the vicinity. ... c. Possible synergies between the housing rehabilitation project and nearby public and privafe assets . . . . d. Historic significance of the property, including any existing historic districts or designations that apply. . . . Comment. The Metropolitan Consortium of Community Developers questions how the criteria in policy 3.2 will be used, whether it will form the basis of a loan approval or dictate the work to be performed in a project intending to use City financial assistance. In addition, MCCD is concerned about the plan's priority of preserving older homes in light of the fact that many are in substandard condition and rehabilitating some of them would be very costly. MCCD requests greater flexibility in terms of allowing demolitions if rehabilitation is not financially feasible. Staff comment. Criteria in policy 2.3 are not intended to be the basis of loan approval nor are they intended to provide very specific guidance on a particular housing rehabilitation project. Rather, they are intended to serve as more general criteria to be considered when the City/HRA, a �r nonprofit community devefopment organization, or a developer in the private market considers rehabilitating a home. Though not expiicitly listed as one of the criteria, policy 2.3 lists °market viabiliry," as the first aspect to be assessed in considering a home with deferred maintenance needs. In addition, the Housing Plan's emphasis on assessing the cost-effectiveness of repairs should reassure MCCD and others in the business that the City acknowledges that some houses cannot realistically be rehabilitated. Also relevant to this point is policy 2.13(a), which endorses selective, neighborhood-informed demolition after a careful examination of criteria listed in policy 2.3. Staff recommendation. No change. 7. Objective: Neighborhood revitalization (policies 2.13 — 2.16) Comment #1. The Tri-Area Block Club commented on the importance of removing blighted, neglected, vacant structures, arguing that vacant lots are preferable to a vacant problem house. It also said that vacant lots could sit empty while rehabilitation/preservation activities are prioritized first. Comment #2. The Tri-Area Block Club argued that the mixed income and market rate housing is essential for neighborhood stability. It suggested that the City look at the median price of housing in each individuaf neighborhood to determine what constitutes market-rate housing in each one. Staff comment. #1-2. The City/HRA is committed to addressing the vacant housing issue, both through current initiatives such as Invest Saint Paul, as well as through the impiementation of longer-term policies such as those under the "Neighborhood revitalization" objective. However, though vacant lots may be preferable to problem properties in some neighborhoods, in others, this may not be the case. The City/HRA is committed to providing housing choices, diversity, and economic integration in all neighborhoods. Staff recommendation. No change. 8. Policy 2.14 2.14. Promote existing and proven public and nonpro�t programs and tax incentives to encourage rehabilitation of owner-occupied homes in areas with less vibrant housing markets Such programs provide financing or incentives to purchase substandard homes, rehabilitate the homes and then either occupy them or sell the homes to first-time homebuye�s. Comment. The Tri-Area Block Club provided several comments about homeownership in Invest Saint Paul neighborhoods. First, it noted that °lasting homeownership" is important for neighborhood stability. Second, it recommended that minimum goals be set for neighborhoods, suggesting a 70% home ownership goal in Invest Saint Paul neighborhoods. Third, it recommended that the City encourage the conversion of duplexes that were originally single family homes back to owner-occupancy single unit properties. Staff comment. Many policies in Strategy 2 of the plan already explicitly or implicitly support homeownership within city neighborhoods, including policies 2.1-2.4, 2.9, 2.11-2.12, 2.14, and 2.16. The ownershiplrental split varies across the city, with some neighborhoods characterized by both a high proportion of rental units and high housing values. Policy 1.1 supports a mix of homeownership and rental units in aIl neighborhoods, but does not specify the exact splif. Given the diversity and variation across the city, it is probably not appropriate for a citywide plan to set goals for a minimum percentage of homeownership units in particular neighborhoods. However, such goals may be more appropriate for district plans. While City staff agrees that homeownership is important for neighborhood stability, the staff is of two minds on the third recommendation of the Tri-Area Block Club that the City encourage the conversion of duplexes that were originally single-family homes back to owner-occupancy single 7 cxj—l9y unit properties. Some PED staff believe that policy 1.1 and the various policies of strategy 2 are sufficient to demonstrate the Cit�s support of homeownership. Other PED staff agree with the Tri-Area Block Club that it is important for the Housing Plan to include some specific language about converting duplexes back to single family homes. One potential solution is to remove the word "owner-occupied' and replace it with the phrase "1-3 unit' [homes], to demonstrate that the City supports the rehabilitation of 1-3 unit properties as first priority, and the selected owner- occupancy of them through implementation of various programs as second priority (the latter as indicated in the subtext below the policy). Finally, City staff recommends that some revised language be added to policy 2.14 to show that the City is also open to innovative new programs for the rehabilitation of homes to be owner- occupied. Staff recommendation Amend 2.14 as follows: 2. 94. Promote existing and innovative new programs and ta� incentives te that encourage rehabilitation of sw+�� 1-3 unit homes in areas with less vibrant housing markets Such programs provide financing or incentives to purchase substandard homes, and rehabilitate the homes for owner occuaancv or sa/e to first- time homebuyers. 9. Policy 2.15 2.15. Cooperate with the lender community to revitalize areas with high concentrations of vacant housing and foreclosures a. Engage lenders with a stake in the foreclosure issue in Saint Paul, potentially as an opportunity fo recover some of their losses by selling some of thei� properties at a discount to City partners working to �ehabilitate vacant housing. b. Make use of the City/HRA's Socially Responsible lnvestment Fund and other tools to ensure thaf community lenders are accounfab�e to neighborhoods in the vicinify. Comment. The Housing Preservation Project comments that it is not only important to cooperate with the lender community on the vacant housing issue in Saint Paul, but to also hold holders of vacant property accountable, employing civil and criminal prosecutions as well as traditional administrative actions. Staff comment. Policy 2.15 was written with the intent of engaging the owners of vacant properties, such as investors and lenders, in a variety of ways. While the CityiHRAwould hope that these property owners woufd be willing to find solutions that benefit all parties, this may not always be the case, and other strategies can be important in addressing this pressing issue. Staff recommendation Amend 2.15 as follows: 2.15. GseN^-�G,-,� ��.:,n^t". Enaa_qe the investor and lender communities to revifa/ize areas with high concentrations of vacant housing and foreclosures a. Engage vacanf propertv owners le�lers with a stake in the foreclosure issue in Saint Paul, potentiaily as an opporfunity to recover some ot their losses by seUing some of their properties at a discount to City partners working to rehabilitate vacant housing. B. Make use of alI available �13e-City/HR.4's �'�" °^^^^^^;'�r„ � ................. c,,.,,� ,..,,� ethe� tools to ensure that vacanf nropertv owners „�m• •^'�., ��=;�;�� are accountable to neighborhoods in the vicinity. 10. Policy 2.16 2.16. Market programs to new homebuyers a. Continue Cify/HRA programs for first-fime homebuye�s, especially to households wifh stabie incomes Comment. The Public Housing Agency suggested that this policy be revised to include references �-iy� to the Minnesota Homeownership Center and the Emerging Markets Homeownership Initiative, both of which, like the City/HRA, provide programs for first-time homebuyers. Staff comment. Given that there are many other nonprofit and public agencies that provide programs for first-time homebuyers, it does not seem essential to single out one or two of them. Staff recommendation. Amend 2.16(a) as follows: a. Continue City/HRA and other programs for first-time homebuyers, especially to households with sta6le incomes 11. Policy 2.17 2.17. Support creativify in the consfruction of neighborhood infill housing by proacfively developing zoning and design guidelines a. Develop, with broad publrc input, citywide in�ll housing design standards so that infill housing fits well wifhin the exisfing Saint Paul neighborhood context. Neighborhood groups should be directly involved. b. Explore, via a zoning study, the potential for accessory units in existing neighborhoods. Accessory units may provide a so�ution for the changing demographics, allowing the elderly to age in place while providrng more affordable housing opportunities for singles and couples. c. Encourage fhe deve�opment of attached sing�e family and neighborhood-sensitive multifamily i�fill housing on vacant lots within neighborhoods to increase housing choices. Severaf organizations had comments about this policy, as follows. Comment #1. MCCD commented that while it agrees that uniformity with infill housing design is a worthy goal, citywide infill design standards could be too restrictive on individual neighborhoods and could interfere with the neighborhood's ability to express its own unique character. Comment #2. HPP agreed with the idea of exploring the potential of accessory units in existing neighborhoods (policy 2.17(b)). It questioned if the concept would apply to existing homes with the potential to carve out distinct rental units as well as to existing and new stand-alone structures such as carriage houses. Comment #3. The Tri-Area Block Club commented that new infill housing must be in conformity with the character of a neighborhood, saying that recently, several houses that are "too large," "ugly," and "not to scale," have been built in the North End. It suggested that citywide design standards be established with community-specific input from district councils and residents. Staff comment. #1-3. Policy 2.17(a) was written with §63.110 of the Zoning Code in mind, which specify "general design guidelines" for the city. Such standards specify how new development should be related to the design of adjacent buildings, how primary building entrances should face the primary abutting public street, how to locate garages on a property, and the provision of a private yard. However, because this section of the code has language stating that such guidelines apply to uses where "site plan review" is required, Department of Safety & Inspections staff has not been applying them to single family and duplex homes (which do not require a site plan review). DSI staff has also stated that some of the standards are hard to measure because they are too subjective. Policy 2.17(a) envisions that some minor amendments could be made to this section of the code that would require the application of these standards, as well as some minor modifications to the standards themselves to stre�gthen them and reduce the (evel of subjectivity. 2.17(b) was written with the intent to broadly explore the question ot accessory units, including, but not necessarily limited to, detached units such as carriage houses/granny flats, as well as attached units and units within existing, larger residential structures. v9-I9 �( The comments of the Tri-Area Block Club are noted. At this point, there is staff and some City Council interest in a zoning study about potential basic infill design standards for citywide application. If such a study were requested, it might focus on questions of basic urban design, such as the number and location of windows and doors on a house, the location and orientation of garages, and the pavi�g of surfaces on lots zoned for 1-3 unit res+dent+al uses. The scope of such a study would need to be determined by either the Planning Commission or City Council, and would likely include mechanisms for input from district councils. Comment #4. The Tri-Area Block Club comments that "splinter parcels" should not be used to °cram in a`shotgun' style house,' but rather, be used to "enhance adjacent properties or provide green space." In addition, the District 6 Land Use Task Force has submitted a position statement about "narrov✓' lots, defined as 25' — 30' infill lots in older neighborhoods such as the North End. The D. 6 Task Force argues that homes on these lots are not viable or appealing in today's market and therefore they are often turned into rental units that are not well-maintained. Solutions offered by District 6 for the 25' — 30' lots include offering the lot to one adjacent property owner, splitting a lot in half and offering it to adjacent property owners, fusing the lot with an adjacent lot and zoning it duplex, or using the lot as a greenspace or community garden. Staff comment. #4. While the Housing Plan contains no specific policy about the use or development of relatively narrow vacant infill lots, policy 2.17(c) encourages the development of attached single family and neighborhood-sensitive multifamily housing on vacant lots within neighborhoods. The concerns noted by District 6 appear to be specific to some areas of the North End neighborhood. If a zoning study about citywide infill standards is requested, staff will note that District 6 is specificafly concerned about the design of new infill on narrow lots, particularly with the question of how well such development fits into the neighborhood. Staff recommendation. No change. 12. Policies 3.1(d) and 3.2(b) 3.1. Support the preservation of publicly-assisted and private affordable housing. With its public, private, non-profit, and philanthropic partners, the City should: ... d. Support the preservation of other low-income housing units under private ownership and management. The City/HRA should actively work with private owners to ensure the long- term affordability of such units, parficularly in stable neighborhoods where there are fewer housing choices for low-income people. .,. 3.2. Disperse new housing opportunities for low-income hauseholds throughout the city. ... b. Encourage the acquisition of privately-owned affordable housing and land for affordable housing by nonprofit organizations, land trusts, community development corporations, churches, tenants, or privafe sector actors committed to affordable housing, thereby protecting it from upward pressure on prices and rents. This is especially encouraged in areas expected to experience gentrification. ... Comment. The Housing Preservation Project recommends that the City engage in a variety of specific steps to ensure that neighborhoods along the Central Corridor are protected from escalating prices and rents (gentrification). HPP recommends that the City and its nonprofit partners secure long-term affordability restrictions for lower cost housing along the corridor, place properties in land trusts, and engage in landbanking. Staff comment. The City and its partners such as the Rondo Land Trust and other community development corporations already engage in activities like those recommended by the HPP, including the application and extension of low-income tax credits (affordability restrictions) to multifamily rental properties, and the use of land trusts in the city. The City a�d its partners will also continue to engage in strategic land acquisition on a citywide basis, and the plan does not contain any language that would limit any of these activities. 10 ��Gy Staff recommendation. No change. 13. Policies 3.1(b) and 3.2(dj 3.1. Supporf the preservafion of publicly-assisfed and private affordable housing b. Support the application of the low-income housing tax credit (LIHTC) and hisforic tax credits (where applicableJ to maintain existing low-income units. The City/HRA should work with Minnesota Housing, community deve%pment corporations, and property owners to continue the provision of low-income housing units in these deve/opments, and to use UHTCs toward rehabilitation of existing affordable units. 3.2. Disperse new housing opportunities for low-income households fhraughouf fhe cify d. Link planning of affordable housing wrth funding availability, including STAR and CDBG funds, as well as those from traditional and non-fraditional funders. Comment. The Public Housing Agency commented that it liked the language in policy 3.2(d), but suggested ihat the plan aiso inciude similar verbiage that would cafl for the linking of affordable housing preservation with funding availability as well. Staff comment. Because policy 3.2 deals with new housing production for low and moderate income households and not with preservation activities, it would be inappropriate to amend this policy. However, Policy 3.1(b) already has language that supports the use of the low-income housing tax credit and historic tax credits for preservation activities, and it could be expanded to be more inclusive of other forms of preservation financing. Staff recommendation. Amend 3.1(b) as follows: b. Support the application of the low-income housing tax credit (LIHTC), a�historic tax credits (where applicable), and other anaroariate fundinv sources to maintain existing low- income units. The CityIHRA should work with Minnesota Housing, community development corporations, and property owners fo continue the provision of low-income housing units in these developments, and to use LIHTCs {etaart-I on the rehabilitation of existing affordable units. 14. Policy 3.1(e) 3. 9. Support the preservation of publicly-assisted and private affordable housing. bVfth its public, private, non-proflt, and philanthropic partners, the City shoutd: ... e. Support the re-institution of state property tax credits for affordable rental housing, such as the past 4D tax credits. ... Comment. The Metropolitan Consortium of Community Developers point out that the property tax credit for affordable rental housing (known as "4D") was reinstated by the State Legislature in 2005. In its reinstated form in 2005, 4D allowed for a reduced property tax for properties where 75°10 of the units met certain afEordability criteria (rent and income restrictions under 1he terms of financial assistance provided by the federal or state governments). 4D was amended in 2008 to lower the 75% threshold of units that meet the affordability criteria to 20% and to allow the local government to serve as a funding source. Staff comment. StafiF was not previously aware that 4D had been reinstated. Staff recommendation. Amend 3.1(e) as foAows: e. , . Continue to support 4(d) property tax legislation. 15. Policy 3.2(a) 3.2. Disperse new housing opportunities for fow-income households throughout the city. ... To meet the goal of dispersing affordable housing, the City/HRA and its partners should: 11 DI-J!`f a. Allocate subsidy for new housing construction to ensu�e a broader geographic distribution in the city. In general, mixed-income housing with some affordable units has worked welL The City should provide incentives or financial assistance to mixed- income p�ojects including new affordable housing units in stable neighboihoods. ln general, the City should limit the amount of financial assistance provided to new housing affordab/e to extremety low and very low incomes in areas where similar incomes or tenure pafferns are already heavily concentrated. Projects should be evaluated on the basis of locational choice, and consider the housing type, tenure, and other neighborhood factors such as transit access, to accomplish the mixed-income housing goal. . . . Comment. The Metropolitan Consortium of Community Developers commented that while it supports the City's goal of ensuring a broader geographic distribution ofi affordable housing, it believes that no particular area should be disadvantaged in terms of receiving City assistance for new projects. Staff comment. The way Policy 3.2(a) is currently written would discourage the City from providing financing to a development with some affordable units in it if it were located in a neighborhood where there is a higher than average concentration of housing affordable to households at extremely low (s30°lo of AMI) and very-Iow (31-50%) incomes. It was not the intent of the policy to be restrictive and put certain neighborhoods (or community developers) at a disadvantage in terms of receiving City financing o4 new devefopment, or to provide a strict litmus test on where new housing developments that include some affordable units could be located. Rather, the policy intent was to provide a general principle for allocating dolfars to mixed income housing devefopments. Staff recommendation. Amend 32(a) as follows: a. Make a aood faith effoR to ellocate subsidy for new housing construction to ensure a broader geographic distribution in the city. In generai, mixed-income housing with some affordable units has worked well. The City mav shevld provide incentives or frnancial assistance to mixed-income projects including new affordable housing units in all neiqhborhoods. but especial/v strive to do so in stable neighborhoods where ��;, ;=�e�--Projects should be eva�uated on the basis of locational choice, and consider fhe housing type, tenure, and other neighborhood factors such as transit access, to accomplish the mixed-income housing goal. 16. Policy 3.4(b) 3.4. Assist in the preservation and production of homeless & supportive housing. ... b. Continue City involvement in the Interagency Stabilization Group and the Saint Paul/Ramsey County Funders Council Comment. The Public Housing Agency recommends that the "Heading Nome Ramsey Advisory Board," be added to the list. Staff comment. Staff agrees with this change, and apologizes for the oversight. Staff recommendation. Amend 3.4(b) as follows: b. Continue City involvement in proups such as the Interagency Stabilization Group� age the Sainf PauVRamsey County Funders Council, and fhe Headinq Home Ramsev Advisorv Board. 12 � i�y 17. Strategy 1. Build upon Saint Paul's strengths in the evolving metropolitan housing market Comment. The Housing Preservation Project (HPP) commented that Minn. Stat. §473.859 calls for sufficient land to be guided at appropriate densities to demonstrate that a city will meet existing and projected local and regional housing needs, including the need of households at low and moderate income levels. This includes a map and table documenting current and future land uses, including net densities of net acreage to be developed, through 2030. Staff comment. Staff is stiil working on residential density and acreage calculations and is in the process of creating a citywide "concept map for development density.° The calculations and map wiil be made available in a later draft of the Land Use Plan. Staff recommendation. No change. 18. Policy 1.4 1.4. Implement cirywide policies for new housing developments to promote sustainability New housing conshuction anywhere in the city can be inherently more sustainable than new housing built on previously undeve%ped land on the edge of the metropolitan area, the latter offen having high household, social, and public infrastrucfure costs. a. Projects developed with City/HRA financial assistance should result in reduced greenhouse gas emissions and increased energy, water, and resource usage efficiencies above conventional standards in the housing industry. b. For alI housing developed in the city, policies and other incentive tools should be created fhat ensure reduced greenhouse gas emissions and increased energy, water, and resource usage e�ciencies above conventional standards in the industry. ... Comment #1. The Metropolitan Consortium of Community Developers applauds the City's efforts to emphasize "green" building standards in the plan, but urges the City to adapt its Building and Zoning Codes prior to setting such standards in order for developers to more realistically meet the green standards. it suggests smaller minimum lot sizes and lower off-street parking requirements are two such changes. Comment #2. Tom Dimond suggests that the word "anywhere" be deleted from the explanatory text below the first line of policy 1.4, and recommends adding the following sentence: "New construction i� the city can also have negative impacts. Encourage new construction were redevelopment is appropriate as an alternative to the loss of green space." Staff comment. The City will soon consider amendments to the Legislative Code related to sustainable building and design practices, including but not limited to possible reductions of parking requirements in areas well-served by transit, incentives for developments where off-street parking is voluntarily reduced, structured, pervious, or heavily landscaped, as well as amendments to the Traditiona{ Neighborhood (TN} zoning districts to ensure sustainable urban development is more easily achieved. The additional sentence suggested by Tom Dimond is not necessary, as the plan puts a priority on the redevelopment of available sites along and near commercial corridors. Few of such sites are existing open spaces. In addition, the City recently adopted an ordinance (§69.511) that requires the dedication of park land (or payment of an in-lieu fee) when development involves platting or a building permit, making unnecessary the discussion of a greater need for green space with more dense devefopment. The deletion of the word "anywhere," makes sense as it does not change the nature of this policy. Staff recommendation Amend 1.4 as follows: 1.4. lmplement citywide policies for new housing developments to promote sustainaBility 13 Cxi /y� New housing construction artyw{�efe in the cify can be inherently more sustainaBle than new housing built on previously undeveloped land on the edge of the metropolrtan area, the latter often having high household, social, and public infrastructure costs. 19. Policy 1.9(c)4 1.9. With other regiona/ jurisdictions, seek legis/ative authority to establish /ocal increment-based financing for spec�c activities within transit corridors. a. The financing source would be the increased value captured in an area with sign�ficant transit investment as defined by each municipality,� ... c. Eligible uses of funds may include: �. New construction of affordab�e housing; 2. Substantial rehabilitation of existing housing; 3. Strategic acquisitio�s of land; 4. Financial assistance to mitigate disproportionate increases in property taxes caused by inc�easing values in the corridor, 5. ... Comment. Tom Dimond suggested that 1.9(c)4 be deleted, arguing that it would be a questionable precedent for the City, and that the State Legislature would be unlikely to support it. Staff comment. Poticy 1.9(cj currently has a list of eight possible uses for the funds collected with this potential increment-based financing tool for transit corridors. The policy says that funds created by this tool mav be empioyed for such uses; it does not that they "shall" or "must' be employed in these ways. Each use is merely one possibility for consideration. Staff recommendation. No change. 20. Figure P. Publiciy-Assisted Affordable Housing in Saint Paul and Figure Q. Scattered site Public Housing Units in Saint Paul (see map in between pages 19 and 20 of the plan, and table on p. 21 of the plan, respectively) Comment #1. Karen Reid of the Metro Consortium of Community Developers states that Figure P is missing a few buildings that receive Low Income Housing Tax Credits: Homes for Learning, Rio Vista or Bluff Park Homes, Wabasha Terrace, and McLean Terrace. Comment #2. The Public Housing Agency comments that Figure P appears to misstate the size of Dunedin Terrace and Hi-rise (total 232 units). The PHA also comments that Valley Hi-rise (159 units) and Mt. Airy Hi-rise (153 units) appear as one dot, along with Mt. Airy Homes (29S units). One option would be to make the three adjacent projects one dot, with a total of 610 units. Though several months back the PHA verified the number of scattered site public housing units by ward, it is unable to verify this number today. The PHA recommends an edit to the note on Figure P to say that it "operates 405 scattered site housing units across the city...." StafF comment. Staff wi11 review the map and make the edits as suggested. Staff recommendation. Amend Figure P, and delete Figure Q from the plan. 21. Implementation Key Action Step B 8. Re-convene the Housing Coordination Team. . The Department of Planning and Economic Development should convene a Housing Coordination Team • !t shou(d be composed of representatives of key public agencies with housing responsibilities, as well as community representatives, and be convened penodically as needed • It will be responsible for monitoring the City/HRA's progress towa�d meeting its goals, as identified in this Housing Plan and the Housing Action Plan 14 �i��y Comment. The Tri-Area Block Club has suggested that the Housing Coordination Team must a{so be comprised of District Councils and neighborhood residents, not just staff, bankers, and developers. Staff comment. "Community representatives,° are currently referenced in the existing language of the second bullet of Key Action Step B, which is general enough to include representatives of District Councils and other neighborhood organizations. Staff recommendation. No change. 15 os � 9y Public Comment Record: Housing Plan ?. Minutes from the Planning Commission public hearing, September 5, zoo8 Letterfrom the Housing Preservation Project 3. LetterfromTomDimond �;. Letterfrom Vic Grossman, MICAH �, Letterfrom the Metropolitan Consortium of Community Developers 6e Letter from the Tri-Area Block Ciub ,. Letter from the Saint Paul Public Housing Agency � /9�f Saint Paul Planning Commission Central Corridor Resource Center 1080 University Avenue W. Minutes September 5, 2008 A meeting of the Planniiig Commission of the City of Saint Paul was held Friday, September 5, 2008, at 8:30 a.m. in the Central Corridor Resource Center. Commissioners Present: Commissioners Absent: Mmes. Donnelly-Cohen, Lu, Morton; Porter, Smitten, Wencl; and Messrs. Alton, Barrera, Bellus, Commers, Goodlow, Gordon, Kramer, Margulies, Nelson, Spaulding, and Wazd. Ms. *Faricy, and Mr. *7ohnson. *Excused Also Present: Larry Soderholm, Planning Administrator; Allan Torstenson, Donna Drummond, Joan Trulsen, Patty Lilledahl, Penny Simison, Luis Pereira, Jessica Rosenfeld, Kate Reilly, Josh Williams, Greta Alquist, Emily Goodman, and Carol Peshman, Department of Planning and Economic Development staff. I. Approval of minutes August 22„ 2008. MOTION: Commissioner Betlus moved approval of the minutes of August 22, 2008. Commissioner ponnelly-Cohen seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously on a voice vote. II. III. IV. Chair's Announcements Chair Alton had no announcements. Planning Administrator's Announcements Larry Soderholm reported on planning-related business at the City Council. PUBLIC HEARING: Housine Plan — Item from the Comprehensive Planning Cominittee. (Luis Pereira, 651/266-6591) Chair Alfon announced that the City of Saint Paul Planning Commission is holding a public hearing on the Housing Plan. Notice of the public hearing was published in the Legal Ledger on August 7, 2008, and was mailed to the cityv✓ide Farly Notification System list of recipients and other interested parties. Luis Pereu PED planner, spoke about some of the similarities of the draft Housing Plan to the last Housing Plan. Similaz to the last plan, there aze three themes or strategies in the draft, the first being to "build on Saint Paul's strengths in the metro housing market " The second is to r�=r�-iq� "preserve and promote established neighborhoods," and the third is to "ensure the availability of affordable housing across the ciry." Some other similarities to the last plan are ongoing demographic chanaes, housing growth through redevelopment, and regulatory changes. Mr. Pereira also talked about the differences between this plan and the last housing plan. One of the chief differences is that the draft has policies that deal with tlueats to neighborhood vitality due to the foreclosure and vacant housing crises. The draft also has a greater focus on sustainability, energy efficiency and new housing oriented around transit. Another big emphasis in the draft plan is the fact that City/HRA housing funding is increasingly scarce, which implies that difficult choices must be made b ven multiple housing needs. He outlined azeas of possible controversy. These include an emphasis on aggessive housing rehabilitation, increased densities along commercial corridors, and the priority for preservation of existing affordable housing over construction of new affordable units. Another topic that has been controversial is the set of revised goals for the production of new housing units affordable to households earning low and moderate incomes. Unlike the last plan, this plan proposes having different affordable housing goals for the new production of rental and ownership units. Mr. Pereira encouraged people to contact him with questions or comments by noon on Monday, September 8, 2008. The public hearing housing plan draft is posted on the web at www.stgaul. eov/compplan. Chair Alton read the rules of procedure for the public hearing. The following people spoke. Tom Dimond, 2119 Skyway Drive, Saint Paul, MN. Mr. Dimond distributed a handout, containing the points he spoke about. The first one is that economic segregation of the City or Metro area should be discouraged. Second, he believes the plan should encourage private investments in housing, which is the largest factor in maintaining strong neighborhoods--the willingness of fanulies to purchase and make improvements to their own homes. Homeowners aze more inclined to invest in their homes if they believe actions of the City will encourage others in their neighborhood to invest and maintain their homes. Mr. Dimond stated that on page 8, Policy 1.4 says new housing construction anywhere in the city can be inherently more sustainable than housing constructed elsewhere in the region. Mr. Dimond suggested that the word "anywhere" be deleted and to add the sentence, "New construction in the city can also have negative impacts." He also said that on page 10, Policy 19(c)(4) should be deleted, because this is a questionable precedent that the state legislature is unlikely to support. 2. Vic Grossman spoke on behalf of the Ramsey County Chapter of MICAH, a nonprofit group of churches and synagogues engaged in public policy advocacy for affordable housing. Mr. Crrossman had a handout with an attached demographic table that he referred to as he spoke. MICAH approves most of the plan, but they have three concerns or issues about the home ownership and rental goals of the plan. One issue is the apparent noncompliance with Met Council requirements of the goal for new housing production, which the draft sets at 80% of the regional median income for ownership projects. Two other concems aze that neither the home ownership or rental goals reflect short term or long term economic realities. CX1 11'-� Based on these concerns, MICAFi recommended that rental housing goals should be 20% of the AMI, or $16,000, which is 30% of Saint Paul's median household income (a maxunum monthly affordable rent of $400), and 30% of the AMI, or 524,500, which is 50% of Saint Paul's median income (a maximum monthly affordable rent of �613). They also suggest that home ownership goals should be 30% of AMI, or $23,550, which is 50% of Saint Paul's median income (a maYimum monthly affordable purchase price of $85,000), and 50% of AMI, or $39, 250, which is 80% of Saint Paul's median income (a maacimum monthly affordable purchase price of $125,000). Luis Pereira wanted to clarify one thing. Several people in the public may have seen a previous draft, which is slightly different from the public hearing draft presented here today. On home ownership, the home ownership goals for the city were changed at the last meeting. Instead of 30% of city-assisted new production of home ownership units being affordable at 80% of the. AMI, the Housing Task Force changed the goal to 30% of city-assisted homeownership units being affordable to households at 60% of the AMI. Chair Alton asked how was that decision made? Mr. Pereira said that there was a proposal to amend the draft at the last Task Force meeting, and it was voted on and approved by the task force. MOTION: Commissioner Bellus moved to close the public hearing, and leave the record open for written testimony submitted by noon on Monday, September 8, 2008, and to refer the matter back to the Comprehensive Planning Committee for review and recommendation. Cominissioner Spaulding seconded the motion. The ma&on earried unanimousZy on a voice vote. V. Zoning Committee NEW BUSINESS #08-129-235 Mississivgi Market (Victoria Pazkl — Conditional Use Permit for a retail establishment of more than 10,000 sq ft in goss floor azea with variance of TN3 design standazds regazding minimum door and window openings in the primary street fa�ade (50% of length and 30% of area required; 483% of length and 23.8% of azea proposed). 782 Hathaway Street between Perlman and Thurston. (Kate Reilly, 651/266-6618) MOTION: Commissioner Morton moved the Zoning Committee's reeommendation to approve the conditional use permit and variance with a condition. The motion carried on a l5- 0 vote with 2 abstentions (Alton, Smitten). VI. Comprehensive Planning Committee Commissioner Morton reported on their last meeting that they voted on the Critical Area building height limits for the West Side Flats. All of the Critical Area issues deriving from the Commission's public hearing during the suaxuner of 2007 have now been acted on by the Committee, issue by issue. At the next Committee meeting, they intend to review the complete Critical Area zoning overlay package, as approved by the Committee, and recommend action on 0� /GY June 2�, 2008 Lazry Soderholm Planning Administratar St. Paul Planning Commission 25 West Fourth St. 140� City Hall Annex St. Paul, MN 55102 � � Housing Preservation Project A Public Interest Law Firm RE: St. Pau12020 Comprehensive Plan draft — Comments I?ear Mr. 3oderholm: The Housing Preservation Project (HPP) is a pubiic interest law firm based in St. Paul which employs advocacy and legal strategies to preserve and expand the supply of affordable housing. For some yeazs now, one of HPP's interests has been advocating for more effective local government policies to promote more affardable housing production. See, for example, www.TCHousin¢Policy.arg. HPP offers the foliowing comments on Si. Paul's 2020 Comprehensive Plan draft. Land Use Plan Guiding Land for Affordable Housing The Land Use Planning Act (the Act} requires that the Land Use Plan contain standazds, plans and programs to meet existing and projected local and regional housing needs including official controls and land use planning to promote the availability of land for low and moderate income housing. Minn. Stat. § 473.859 subd. 2(c). To flesh out this requirement, Metropolitan Council guidelines call for the comprehensive plan to guide sufficient land at appropriate densities to demonstrate that this requirement can be met. Loca1 Planning Handbook, pgs. 3-9. The Loca1 Planning Handbook sets out a number of requirements to assure that each municipaliry has land use plans demonstrating "residenrial development at appropriate densifies to accommodate the growth forecasted." Pg. .3-6. Requirements include a map and table documenting current land use (pg. 3-2), tables indicating projected land use at 2010, 2020, and 2030 (pg. 3-4) and, using standard Metropolitan Council calculadons of residential development capaoity based on net densities of net acreage to be developed (pg. 3-5), show stages of development in five year mcrements (pg. 3-7). The St. Paul draft plan currendy meets none of these specific requirements. In fact, the draft Pian is inconsistent on a fundamental point. The Land Use Plan states that a central element of the Plan is the Metropolitan Council's grojection of the number of housing units to be developed and that tke Plan "envisions that 26,000 housing unats could be developed citywide by 2030." Pg. 15. Similazly, the Housing Plan ca11s for housing sites 570 Asbury Street, Suite 105 • St. Paul, MN 55104 . tei: 651.642.0102 • fax: 651.642.0051 Dedicated to eepanding and preserving the supply of affordable hovsing in Minnesota and nationwide G9-/9`f for "26,000 new households expected cifywide by 2030." The problem is that these numbers aze twice those actually projected by the Metropolitan Council. T'Ue Council has projected 26,000 new population, and 13,000 new households by 2030. Those Council projections include 7,000 new households added between 2010 and 2020. Thatis the basis for the Council's goal of 2,625 new affordable housing units by 2�20. Either the City's numbers or the Metropolitau Council's numbers aze incorrect, and this inconsistency needs to be resolved. In addition to this critical discrepancy, the draft fails to produce any of the detailed projections required and instead merely states "the densities in Yhe Zoning Code, and those that will result from the study in Policy 1./, are intended to produce the numbers of housing units that will enable Saint Paul to meet the Metropolitan Council's projections." P. 15. This is insufficient to meet clear statutory and Metropolitan Council requirements. We understand that the city is embarking on a study of appropriate zoning and densiTy levels along the Central Corridor, and that it may be premature to get too specific at this point. We do know, however, from other plaiming efforts azound the Central Corridor that projections of housing units for each station area have already been created, and that information should at least be included. In addition, the plan envisions 11,OQ0 housing units by 2030 (if that number is still correct) in azeas of the city other than Central Corridor. Presumably the ciry shouid be ready now to demonstrate the availabiliry of land at designated densities to satisfy that portion of the projected units. Invest St. Paul Program In addition to the activities set out in strategy 1.6, another activity should be partnering with local nonprofits and CDCs to "lock in" affordability over the long term on reacquired formerly foreclosed homes, and to try to negotiate bulk sales at discounted prices. Attaching long term affardability restrictions could prove particularly valuable in azeas facing the prospect of future gentrificadon, such as lower income areas adjacent to the Central Corridor line. Housing Plan General Comments A focus of the Act is assurance that a community's comprehensive plan effectively addresses the community's shaze of the local and regional need for affordable housing. The Act requires an implementation program descxibing "specific actions to be undertaken in stated sequence to implement the comprehensive plan, including official controls which will provide sufficient existing and new housing to meet the city's shaze of the metro area need for low and moderate income housing. Subd. 4(3). The Housing Implementafion section of the draft Plan falls short of this requirement. It lists a number of organizational steps to take to analyze and monitor affordable housing issues but lacks the ctiscussion of "specific actions to be undertaken in stated sequence" which is required. Below are some suggestions for adding specificity to the draft Plan. 2 �i /9� Preliuunarily, however, it is also usefut to point out that the Plauuing Handbook requires tHat the Plan "aclmowledges the community's share of the region's need for low- and moderate-income housing." While the draft Plan acknowledges that the Metropolitan Council has ailocaterl a goal of 2,625 affordable housing units to St. Paul, that is not the same as the City's acknowledgment that the City's goal is at ieast 2,625 new units affordable at or below 60% of area median income betcveen 2011 and 2020. IY s not cleaz how a policy of requirnig thai 30% of city-assisted homeownersiaip units be affordable at 80%, rather than 60% of inedian, fiuthers the Metropolitan Council's affordable housing goal, especially since the curient policy requires that at least 20% of all city-assisted units be affardable at 50% of inedian. Will the City be able to meet the Met Council's 60% AMI goal just through application of its policy for city-assisted units ? If not, how else will the city meet that goal ? The Plan doesn't currently answer this crirical question, and therefore has not described specific actions which will provide sufficient units to meet the goal Inclusionary Zoning In several places the plan indicates that density bonuses and/or inclusionary zoning (IZ) should be considered, particulazly in connecrion with Central Corridor housing development. The plan should be more forthright about these tool5, as they have the patential to be highly useful means to create mixed income housing along the Corridor. The city's current policy of requirang the inclusion of affordable units when the city provides the deve(oper with funding has generally been effective, as far as it goes, in creating affordable units. However, if a hot mazket develops along the Corridar the possibility exists of substantial residential constnaction with no resort to city funding. Without an expticit policy that requires developers to include affordable units, in return for incenrives from the city sufficient to make the affordable units economically feasible (density bonuses, fee waivers, regulatory relief, etc), the city may be lefr powerless to ensure mixed income housing at or neaz high demand station azeas. Moreover, the plan now repeatedly emphasizes that the city's ability to offer funding for affordable housing is limited, and must be prioritized. Inclusionary zoning (IZ) is a way to help achieve the city's afFardable housing goals relying on development cost savings through regulatory flexibility rather than direct public subsidies, and thus stretches the city's capability of ineeting housing goals. In HPP's experience in examitting the potential of IZ in the Twin Cities suburban context, it is possible to produce housing affordable to households at 50-60% Area Median Income, without public subsidies. Applying IZ along Central Corridor will play out somewhat differently, but should produce roughly compazable results. Some have voiced concern that adoption of IZ could scare off development if a strong mazket does not materialize along Central Corridor. First, an effecrive and workable IZ policy would create the incentives to make inclusion of affordable units financially 3 �y-i��f feasible for the developer without imposing a burden; if done that way, the policy should scaze no one off. Second, in the unlikely event a post-light rail market remains soft, the city could always repeal or modify an IZ policy, whereas if the city waits to see if the hot mazket develops before considering IZ it would be too late. Working out the complexities of IZ takes time; meanwhile, private development could capture the best opportunities without the city having a chance to shape the outcomes. Accessory Units The plan is correct that this is a promising tool which should be explored. It is uncleaz from the plan, however, if consideration is lunited to existing structures only, such as carriage houses or other homes with the potential to carve out distinct apartments. Considerafion should also be given to including accessory units in newly constructed housing. The city of Chaska provided for this in its Clover Ridge development, and St. Paul should look closely at that model. Preservation of Subsidized housing The plan righffully notes that the city should be working to preserve subsidized rental properties at risk of conversion to market rate rents, but is vague as to actions the city should take. There are three cleaz tasks for the city in this azena: carefully track all properties that have use restrictions resulting from receipt of local funding, use the leverage those restrictions provide to insist on continued affordability, and wark with tenant and advocate groups attempting to preserve these properties. In addition, the City should consider also adopting a policy of denying discretionary city funding to owners who have converted theu subsidized St. Paul properties to mazket rate rents. Protecting neighborhoods from displacement The plan notes that the city can encourage acquisition of privately owned affordable housing b3� nonprofrts and sunilaz groups which is at risk of escalating prices and rents due to gentrification. Neighborhoods adjoining Central Conidor aze most at risk of this phenomenon, though there may be other areas of the city as weii. Nonprofit acquisition of unsubsidized yet still affordable apartment buildings can serve several public purposes—immediate protection from gentrification, and creating the possibility that over time the property can become more affordable due to nonprofit ownership. The current foreclosure crisis provides an opportuniry for nonprofit acquisition of lower cost single family homes. Placing such properties in land trusts or othercvise attaching long term affordability restricfions should be pursued, particularly where these homes aze located in azeas threatened or potentially threatened 6y gentrification. Land banking is another strategy that can mitigate the inevitable inereases in land costs along Central Corridor, and the City should be aggressive in securing funding for that purpose, of finding partners who can do so. � 09-1gy A recent study by the Urban Institute emphasizes the urgency of developing anti- displacement strategies for neighborhoods facing gentrification as early as possible. "In The Face of Gentrification: Case Studies of Local EfForts to �tigate DisplacemenY' (2006). The experience of these six lower income communities engaged in various stages of gentrification was that strategies to preserve and expand the affordable housing supply (in part to offset the inevitable loss of affordability as prices and rents escalate) were essential. The other common conclusion from groups in all six azeas was that in each case they wished they had started earlier in developing housing straiegies. This was particuiarly true with respect to land banking. Now is the time to begin putting in place such strategies for neighborhoods along East University Avenue, and the Plan shouid reflect the urgency of that task. Neighborhood Revitalization / Foreclosure Crisis With respect to strategy 2.12, in addition to cooperating with the lender community, it is also necessary to hold the lender commm�ity accountable for the proper maintenance of foreclosed homes in St. Paul. There aze now 2000 vacant foreclosed homes in the city, creating enormous burdens on the city and on neighborhoods. Where lenders in possession of these homes are failing in their basic maintenance responsibilities, the city must employ availabie civiY and criminal prosecutions, as well as traditionai administrative actions. Thank you far the opportunity to offer these comments. Sincerely, � Tim Tho ps Presiden 0 9-i �y Tom Dimond 2119 Skyway Drive Saint Paul, MN 55119 September 4, 2008 RE: Housing Comp Plan Page 7-1.1 — Add — Economic segregaUOn of the Ciry ar Metro area should be discouraged. The City supports an all-incomes housing strategy for atl 17 districts. Page 7— Add - 1.3 Encourage private investments in housing. The largest factor in mainta.iniug strong neighborhoods is the willingness of families to purchase and make nnprovements to their own home. Without significant private investment, maintaining and revitalizing neighborhoods is not possible. Encourage private investment with amenities like parks and trails. Homeowners aze more inclined to invest in their home if they believe actions of the City will encourage others in their neighborhood to invest and maintain their homes. Support Historic Districts, Design Districts, zoning enforcement, removai of incompatible uses and other tools that encourage and support private investment. Page 8- 1.4 Delete "anywhere" and add sentence - New conshucrion in the city can also have negative impacts. Encourage new conshuction where redevelopment is appropriate as an alternative to the loss of green space. Increasing density adds to the need to protect green space for the growing number of residents. Page 10 —19 c. 4. Delete — Ttus is a questionable precedent the Legislattue is unlikely to support. �� Gri-/ 9y T��imoay on The Draft ffousing Plan of T�IE SA1Nfi PAUL COMPREHENS7VE PLAN : Vic Crrossman Ramsey County Chapter �c� My name is Vic Grossman. I am appearing here on behalf of the Ramsey Gounty �hapter of MICAH. We are a non profit group of churches and synagogues engaged in public polipy advocacy for affozdable housing. It is so important that we get it right! By "it" I mean the Housing Plan of the St. Paul Comprehensive Plan. {Hereafter, "'The Plan.'� tltter allneitherthe private sectornorLhe non profi� sector by themselves usually cau provide decent, safe and affordable housittg far the least of us-economically spealdng. There aren't too many I-Iabitat for Humanities azound It takes government to datbe job through its annual housing plans as well as through gap funding loans and grants, iuclusionary housing ordinances and so much more.. While I am statiug the obvious, I do so purposeiy to ask you to view and respond fo IvIICAH's concerns with this Plan tbrough this prism-the prism af govemment being the pmvider of last resort and sometimes being the only provider. While we appmve most of the P1an, we are concemed about both the home ownership and rental goais in The Plau. One issue is the apparent noa compliance ofthe "80% of the regional median for ownership projecY'.(p 10 of the Plan) with Metropolitan Council requirements. Another two of our issues are thatneither the home ownership northe rental goals reflect eitherthe shortterm nor long term economic realities. I will now briefly exptain each of our concems Nnn Compliance According to Page 10 of the Plan "Successful applicants for regional funds should demonstrate a plan to pr housing units affordable to households with incomes below...80% of the regional median for ownership projects. " Contrast that with the following memo MICAH received from Guy Peterson of #he 1vletropolitan Council: o� �� "The current LCA goals negotiated with St. Paul cmd 104 other cities in 1995 or later for the 2010 horizon and presented in the 1998 comprehenszve plans represent the Ieve1 of afjordability that was the Councit's target in 1995--80% ofAMlfor ownership units, 50'� ofAMI for rental units. When new LC.4 goals are negotiated for the time frame of 20I7 to 2020, it is my expectaiion that the Council witl want those goals to be eonsistent with the income target for the housing needs to be identified in the comp plans for the 2011 to 2020 time frame, 60% ofAM7. This income target is for both ownership and rental housing. But teehnieatly at present we still operate in the pre-2011 time frame with the 50% and 80% limit.r. " It ss worth noting that Guy Peterson was assigned to send this memo by the person at Met Council in charge of the unit that zeviews and approves all comp plans . Mr Peterson has at least 25 years at Ivfet CounciI thaf I personally lmow of. Thus while the 80% home ownership goal is valid for a short period of the Plan, it is not expected ta be acceptable to Met Council during most of Tfie Plau's time frame . 5hort and Long T'erm Economic Problems "�he zentat aud houce ownership goals of The P3an do not reflecf the present economic realities o€m�uy wage earners who should be able to afford to pay no more than 30% oftheir income foz C �xo�g. Yet at ttie i�egutning of tt�is economie downtum variQt�s job categories at tFieir satary Ievel woutdhave hadto pay ftom 42 %to 65°/a oftheir incometo rent atwo bedroom apartmen�. Also they wQ��ltavehac�tQ pay from7��oto I23°!o oftheirincometo own attu�eebedroomhouse. (AII oftius is documented in the Attachment #I, Demographic Reference Slt�f: Affordabie Housing.) �i�e home prices may �ttave e€}mmge ciown to some exten� due ta the sub prime erises, rentats have gone up becanse of greatly increased demand. Many of fhese wage earnezs are facing mortgage fc�rectos�e, e�s�aag � aud f�el co�ts and overeictemded eredit And that is even assuming they aze still wotking full time and makmg as much as fihey did before or even working at all. r � � � � q � � � 3 i a s , � a. � • i � ° a . � ' a � � � ' . � r , �.. a + ' i ' � - - � t� i f a � i f . ' a � u'�-��e� . � � �� . ' v:+, w .n� �� , tt� .ut�i• te�u � r�. � � � .1� ..�€ �� '.'� . ' ': a ��- - a� ��.:� � ��' : ��. 9 �., ��. �� ' �� ai� i � �. �- - � - .�� - �u �� : ��e�. u��+ .� .. D9 /9Y The resfaE aud home owaership goaLs of The Pian do not refleef long term economic realities Since T1ie Plan is for #en years one might azgue that because of economic cycles the economy comiagout ofthis downlum w11 ce�tamty be as mhust as before, andthesefore we shoufd nat place much emphasis oa our p�es�t �ic �_ Infhe August 25, 2Q08 issue of T� ou p. 46 it s�ys: � 'l I 't /.I �: 3 4 / ' Ii .I' 1�. I )f: l;.a�' I% 1)�..f' I s 'Ur' i . �V•.: is J ' )' � � f ., � iki ,If I ! J l�h. • / t - y / r i s' 3. al )3.N u�a � ) - .�). a;�� : ss � �l:t : � L,: �r�:� r:u ::X ti".! :: n v I, ••. y; i i li +u ! Y' inY: .• f' i 1 l i' / ' Y) . I f) I ' Y/ i !/J.. 1' .•'l ' .! .4.f . a �:. �t r3.,.;J.� )]� l� - .l.i : J,.' : 9 r ';t.♦ n1.>. l 3 i/:i ' i .li�.:L ",Y/ I . i' ;./ )" .L � fu �II 1 . ! i ... r�'s '� r � :d: - � i;.i:� ia.. i}�. ;3ll..,iin �. ' i 1 % :4i.i-i�3i ' II�J i f' % : G!1 1! t ,:i}i ISti � J � i" ° {.ii #� > �i� '��61 Yi ;Ii<A - '3f' i:,#f. �o:ht - i �, .i33.d -.3a2 :5�. a3'-`.x >d�.kt @Y:95=w :1 .Si!Y.. '" A;. t�i:'sii i � i 1 i r�, n � w' ��t-. . e �..� ` ♦ -�..s .�_n •... r �:n.' 13 s Y.�:j:;:.,. _•.a.i`{; .` s.s:3 F}.� i.�. E. ,.. .i'�:+.� • w. 4 5if f�-eE:' ..l.t. Rr: Y 9 �: � . 5 3 31 _ ii .:i t'f'1::i §-- <� _ 3. .a� 3: .1�.3 i".Al�i �9�� . 33 e:Pi S' � 9 ��'.`.3 3 .;.,-. _ y at �;':i t:. jri:..:p:....� • f '}� yf-i �,� !.. ' �'�i l, �' "i.''� ;ash'e. ?� •� �. 3' 3. '= ' . - - , -_ � - .y. �> -_�. _ ' .13'3 : a�� " " a �-£.n. - # i.9J,'s s.:;. - - •'�'� . d., � _ .3 .j,. .. ,3 i;'�t' 3. .��`-. t ~' 3 .:1i : ..E Y.ii 13- 9�.Si " `:3? _ '-a�:;3ss`�a33�. ?�s ,_ - . �3.� _ _ �" .. 3 ,: .;�. 3 .. �t-: . ::Y : e . a .}�� _ 3.- ! . e � -:- f3.#d�;P •. ii �'3?;:4�i1 .ils5 4i��}';yl�i� ?: , i�"gyxi::2';�� a�Y.:�:-� 3� �li' �'s __ . ._ .�_ _ . _ < t .___ . _ 4._ � ' .:., i � pi � 6. if'iv,ii 4'} _ _ - I><> i�.�. . i..`Y. ..i.� i�i3.w 6� i9y 4 F'ina�Iy so faz I have adc�essed your fiead, but I also wanf to hy to "reaeh yozs fieart". Do you Dear Com*n;sc+ouers want to do pour parY to have each and every St Paulite have decent, safe a� affo��le haasing or �t? Piease Iet yoas heazt speak!. �i.t 7� • : ui Vic Grossman Sxial Justice Advoate 2395 Eiaiversity /ivenue West Suite 210 (65t) 257-3598 Security Building (Between 9am and 2pm) St�F'aul, MN 55N4 a�rigdor�ustamily.net � , � o� i�y Demographic Reference Sheet: Affordable Housing Current Metro Couneil Definition of "Affordabilitv": Rentat Housin . Metro Median PercenF of St Househoid lncome Paut Median AAaximum rent (familv of foEtrl Percerrt of AMI Ineome affnrdable Currenf Metro Area Average Re�t, 2-Bedroom Apartment $947 Home Cvrnershi • Metro MedEan Perc:e�t of St Housefio[d income Pau! Median Maximum (familv of faurl Percent of AMf Income Purchase Price + �.�G Current Metro Area Mediar Qafa Source: Metro Council � aMt Twin eit�s A� Meclian Price: St Paul Mediart Income Median )neome 49AOfl.00 62°k Data SoUrce: Metro Council St PaW's median incame is oniy 62°h of the Twin Cities AMi, which makes using the Metro Area �igures for afEordability problematic. lncome Househohi Irtcame °!o Sf. Paut Max monthly °lo RMt INe�an fincome afi#�rdabie rent ° /a SL PBUI NF2XIR4Uti1 �UfCh3S@ °k AAA# Me�ian Fncwme Price Incame LeveE_ [ AN[f O% /� 2 Sased o[t �%of tncome 3 Based on Metro Average renf of $947 for 2-Bedn7om Apf 4 Based on Metro A2a cunent median home sa/es price of $245,990 ($1,800 permoMhJ o€ St 1'auL• l�ediau Ineame bv Raee ur HovseEw(d tncome by Race asd �Latina Qrigin Iheo�rte /E� 4� Hs�.xeh�ts , �4.�!�3 56°k [.» Saurce: Amerieaa Community Survey 2005, US Censas Bureau StalisfiGCC compiled by 1KICRH (Mebopolifmi beterfaith Couneil on A,j�'otdable Housin�, June ZD07. Paying above 30°� of income for housing requires sacrific6n� other necessities such as food, utilities, c!othing,ortransportation. 1 Saurce_ MN Dept of Employmenf ar?d Economic Security � � � � � Me#ropalitan Consortium of Community Developers September 3, 2008 City of St. Paul Planning Commission c/o Luis Pereira 25 West 4�' Street, Suite 1100 City Hall Annex St. Paul, MN 55102 Dear Chair Alton and Commissioners, 3137 Chicago Avenue 612-789-7337 voice www mccdm�.6rg/ Minneapolis, MN 55407 612-822-1489 fax info@mccdmn.org Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the City of St. Paul's Housing Plan, which will be included in the update to St. Paul's Comprehensive Plan. We are writing on behalf of the St. Paul Task Force, part of the Metropolitan Consortium of Community Developers (MCCD). MCCD is an association of 43 nonprofit community developmem organizations working throughout the Twin Cities to build strong, stable communities by leveraging resources for the development of people and places. The St. Paul Task Force is a sub-group of MCCD focusing on the work of St. Paul-based community developers. First, we would like to commend you for your work in drafting the updated Housing Plan. We particularly appreciate your efforts to address the issue of affordable housing. Given the unfolding housing crisis and the rising cost of energy, quality housing that is available and affordable for all of St. Paul's citizens will be of paramount importance in the fuhue, and community development organizations in St. Paul look forward to working with the City to help turn that vision into a reality. Comments Populafion projections: Page 1 of the draft plan discusses the projected population growth for St. Paul and how demand for one- and two-person households is expected to dominate the housing mazket in the future. While some areas of the City may see this kind of growth, we believe that many others will see growth in lazger households. The draft plan does recognize this trend as well; however, in our opinion, the focus on one- and two-person households overshadows growth among larger families. New affordable housing production: On page 21 of the draft, Policy 32A discusses the city's priority of limiting "the amount of fmancial assistance provided to new housing affordable to extremely low and very low incomes in azeas where similar incomes or tenure pattems aze already heavily concentrated." While we support the City's goal of ensuring a broader geographic distribution of affordable housing, our view is that no particular area should be disadvantaged in terms of receiviug City assistance for new projects. In our experience, quality, well-managed affordable housing can actually be a catalyst for the revitalization of neighborhoods and can be one of the first steps to help foster economic diversity. We would also recommend that "Figure P: Publicly- Assisted Affordable Housing" be further delineated to show the locations of housing operated by the St. Paul Public Housing Agency as well as developments that receive I.ow-Income Housing Tax Credits or project-based Section 8. In its current form, the map furthers the unfortut�ate negative nnage that affordable housing often holds in the publids eye by lumping all subsidized housing into one category of "publicly-assisted affordable housing. Percentage standards for affordable housing producrion: We have concems about the percentage standards for affordable housing production at different income levels that the plan lays out (page 22, Policy 33). While the articulated standards are certainly laudable goals, we question whether these standards are economically realistic without the provision of resources that would help meet those tazgets. Given how the current housing mazket is interfering with the ability to obtain credit and is increasing the costs of providing housing, additional subsidies would be required for community developers to reach into these lower income brackets. Rehabilitarion investment criteria: Policy 23 on page 13 outlines criteria that should be considered before a house receives rehabilitation investment. The plan, however, does not indicate how exactly this information will be utilized. What would be the effect of a project confornung or not confornung to the stated criteria? VJould it form the basis of a loan approval7 VJould it dictate the work that should be performed in a project intending to use City financial assistance? Is it just a way to collect information about the projects that use City assistance? More anformation conceming how these criteria will be used would help clarify the intent of establishing them. Coordination of code enforcement with housing rehab loans or other assistance: The language of Policy 2.6 on page 14, which states that code enforcement should be coordinated "with housing rehabilitation loans or other housing rehab assistance, including non-City programs, to improve the energy efficiency of homes," is unclear in its current form. What kind of additional requirements will be placed upon homeowners or community developers under this policy? Would those rehabilitating a home receive technical assistance to help them comply with codes? Would the City mandate that energy efficiency codes be met utilizing City loan funds? Certainly, we support the City's priority of improving the energy efficiency of homes in St. Paul, but more clarification of this policy would help homeowners and community developers understand the wst burdens that may be placed upon them. Development of citywide infill design standards: Policy 2.17A on page 17 calls for the development of citywide infill housing design standards "so that infill housing fits well within the existing St. Paul neighborhood context " We agree that uniformity within infill housing design standards is a worthy goal; however, creating citywide standards would be too restrictive on individual neighborhoods and could interfere with a neighborhood's ability to express its own unique character. Accordingly, we recommend developing infill housing design standards on a neighborhood$y-neighborhood basis. Relationship between zoning & building codes and `�green" standards: We applaud the efforts of the City of St. Paul to put more emphasis on "green" standards in housing design and construction, and this priority is reflected in the Housing Plan. We would urge the City, however, to adapt its zoning and building codes prior to setting "green" standards or goals in order to more realistically meet these standards. For example, the amount of off-street parking required with a development is resulting in the construction of too many impermeable surfaces. Also, allowing for smaller lot sizes would create a smaller building footprint, thus contributing to more sustainable building practices. �F Rehabilitation/demolirion of older homes: While we support the Plan's priority to preserve historic homes in St. Paul, we do t�ave concems about the substandard condition of some of the older homes in the City. Often, the high costs of rel�abilitating such houses prevent community development organlzations from making an investment in them_ In order to provide the housing stock that St. Paul will require in the coming years, more financial resources will be required to rehabilitate the older houses in St. Paul or more fle�bility may be warranted in terms of allowing demolirion of such properties if rehabilitation is not economically feasible. Thank you again for the opportunity to comment on this draft plan. If you have any questions about our comments or if we can provide further information, please feel free to contact us. We look forward to continuing to work with the City as it finalizes the update to the Comprehensive Plan and to working in partnership with the City to help make St. Paul a quality and affordable place to live for all of its citizens. With kind regards, Karen Iteid Jim Roth Chair, St. Paul Task Force Executive Director MCCD MCCD �-/G'-� Date: September 4, 2008 To: St. Paul Plazming Commission c/o Luis Pereira From: Tri Area Block Club 1111 Abell St. St. Paul, MN SSll7 Re: Housing Plan Public Hearing September 5, 2008 The members of the 14-squaze-block Tri Area Block Club, located in St. Paul's North End neighborhood, wish to thank you for the opportunity to submit comment on the Housing Plan chapter of the City Comprehensive Plan. We also acknowledge and appreciate the time and effort that staff and task force members contributed toward this document. Because the North End is an Invest St. Paul neighborhood, we feel the need to reinforce specific points in this chapter and to convey what we consid� to be issues unique to our and similar ISP neighborhoods. Comments are drawn from our experience as advocates to improve the quality of life in our community, as well as from what we perceive to be contriburing factors to obstacles we have faced in those efforts. Preservation & Rehabilitation of Existing Housing Stock • This must be the priority over new development or the result will be even greater numbers of vacant, foreclosed, blighted, tax forfeited, nuisance, problem properties in the future. Neighborhoods such as ours will never recover from the resulting downwazd spiral. The previous trend of concentrating efforts on increasing the number of housing units in the City was at the expense of the existing housing stock and contributed to the present urgency for rehab and reinvestment. Emphasis must be on turning around neighborhoods in the downslide. The importance of fair, consistent code inspection and enfarcement cannot be stressed enough. The Certificate of Occupancy program is needed. Resources and programs to assist with rehab are essenrial and must be marketed to reach those with the greatest need. Oversight of program participation and spending is crucial to assure that the dollars and resources can go farther and assist more people. We recommend assisting owner-occupied properties first, since rental properties aze a business. Affordable Housing • The City of St. Paul, as well as certain neighborhoods within the City, should not bear the brunt of providing affordable housing. We cannot emphasize this enough. It must be dispersed among other municipalities. This would address the disconnect between where jobs are located and where affordable housing is located. �� • An over concentration of affordable/low income housing creates azeas of poverty and need for services. Public housing inventory should not be the only basis for detemiiniug available affordable housing in an area — all housing stock must be factored. • Mixed income and market rate (specific to each neighborhood) housing is essential for neighborhood stability, vitality, and viability. The District 6 Comprehensive Plan references that the North End already has a very high percentage of affordable housing and needs a mix of housing oprions, including market rate, to survive and thrive. The all- incomes housing strategy must apply to ALL neighborhoods. • The City needs to look at the median price for housing and what constitutes market rate housing on a neighborhood-by-neighborhood basis. Market rate for one neighborhood is not always the same for another. • Affordable housing should also afford a quality of life equal to any other standard. This is a social justice issue. Squeezing small houses on undersized lots less than 40 feet wide just to achieve numbers does not elevate the standard of living for the resident or the community. • Figures N and O(Cost Burdened Households & Occupations & Affordability Levels) on page 19 of the plan, must be evaluated from an additional perspective. Does the percent listed for renter-occupied households include subsidized rents? A renter can get more for their 30% if subsidized than an owner-occupied can for their 30%. In addition, the affordability level based on income level will also vary with any benefits received in addition to one's salary. Increase Home Ownership • Lasting home ownership is important not only for individuals seeking to own a home but also to stabilize entire neighborhoods, especially where rental equals ar outweighs owner- occupied properties. The District 6 Comprehensive Plan references the need for a better balance in favor of home ownership. • Ensure fair and equitable access to home ownership. • There needs to be goals set for home ownership. Implement a 70% home ownership goal and also apply the standard to new development. This would benefit ISP neighborhoods. . Address the reasons as to why, in an affordable neighborhood such as the North End, homeownership has decreased rather than increased. . Many duplexes were originally single-family homes that over time, have been converted (many illegally) to duplexes. The City should encourage their conversion to owner occupied single-family homes to accommodate the needs of larger families. New DevelopmenWacant Property • Blighted, neglected, vacant structures should be removed so as not to adversely affect the quality of life in the surrounding neighbarhood. Vacant lots aze preferable to a problem, blighted property and can sit empty while rehab/preservation to existing housing is addressed first. • Preservation of neighborhood character must be considered. This makes St. Paul unique and its neighborhoods desirable to a broad range of people who may wish to move to our City. ��y • Density and intensity are not desirable to everyone. Do not introduce or expand where it is not appropriate. • New projects must be in context and confomuty to the chazacter of the existing neighborhood. Infill housing can pose many issues and problems. The City should monitor plans for infili housing to assure a"good fit." Recently, houses that are too large, not to scale, and overshadow surrounding homes have been built. These can only be described as `�gly" and should not be allowed. • Splinter parcels should be used to enhance adjacent properties or provide green space, gardens, etc. and not to cram in a"shotgun" style house. • There is now and will continue to be a need for senior housing to accommodate those who wish to remain in their own neighborhood. "Scattered site" housing would benefit seniors as well as provide age-diversity for the neighborhood. Vacant or combined parcels could be used to build pockets of 2 to 4 single level town homes or cottages into the existing neighborhood. • Design standards should be established with community specific input from District Councils and residents, as they best know their own area and its needs. • Any proposed new development must not come at the expense of existing housing stock needs. • Fast-track approval processes, a density bonus, and incentives may be good for developers but may not always be best for neighbarhoods and could be counterproductive to improvement efforts. • There are also negative implications to a reduced parking requirement for housing located within '/ mile of a street with frequent transit. For example, in the North End, a`/-mile radius of Rice St (considered a transit corridor) would inhude too far into the residential areas and impact the residential character of the neighborhood. There is already proof in neighborhoods with small lots and increasing rental units that there is not enough space for vehicles. It is unrealistic to assume people will give up their cars. • New development proposals must be cognizant of sensitive natural areas. In the North End, that would include the areas near Loeb Lake, Willow Reserve, and Trillium (reference Fig. L— Opportunity Sites). Caze must be taken when considering any development near these and other natural sites throughout the City. • The Housing Coordination Team must also be comprised of District Councils and those who live in the neighborhoods, not just staff, bankers, trades groups, and developers. �J /9�{ PHA Comments on 2008 Draft Housing Plan — Public Hearing on September 5. 2008 Pg. 2— Introductory narrative should explain/reference the Emerging Markets graph. Pg. 7- Section 1.1 —"Tenure" seems an odd word choice. Another option might be "sustainability." Pg 16. — Section 2.16 and under subheading "Neighborhood housing for changing demographics" — Could reference the MN Homeownership Center and EMHI as organizations working to market progams geared to new homebuyers? Pg. 17 — Section 2.18 — Question regarding the phrasing in the introductory paragraph to this section. The language used could imply that seniors would be encouraged to move out of larger homes so these houses can go to families. We understand this is not the intention, but some might interpret this statement incorrectly. The City map between pages 17 and 18 appears to show only 15 PHA hi-rises (marked as stars). There appears to be a single staz for Mt Airy and Valley hi-rises, instead of two. Pg. 18 — Should the EMHI graph go here? Pg. 20 — The PHA has sold a total of 27 units with replacement. The dot-map between pages 20 and 21 appears to misstate the size of Dunedin Tenace and Hi-Rise (tota1232 units). Again Valley (159 units) and Mt. Airy (153 units) hi-rises appear as one dot, along with Mt. Airy Homes (298 units). The total of the two hi-rises and the family development is 610 units, or Mt Airy could be a separate dot from Valley Pg. 21— Previously informed PED staff that at this time, PHA is unable to verify unit count by ward. Also, PHA has a total of 405 Scattered Site units. Pg. 21 — Section 3.2.D — Like the comment "Link planning of affordable housing with funding availability, including STAR and CDBG funds..." What about including verbiage on preservarion of affordable housing with funding availability, including STAR and CDBG funds? Pg. 23, - Add to Section 3.4, homeless and supportive housing, subd. B, "Continue City invoivement in the Interagency Stabilization Group, and the Saint Paul/Ramsey Funders Council and the Heading Home Ramsey Advisory Board. Pg. 10 — A1 Hester pointed out that there might want to be more clarification added to the explanation on density bonus incentives in the box on the bottom of this page. °� /9y The draft language says, "For developments proposed in the Central Corridor Area of Change and Downtown, developers wanring to access addirional Floor Area Ration...might dedicate 25 percent of the bonus floor azea achieved through a density zoning bonus to affordable units. For example, for every additional square foot of affordable housing created, the developer would have the right to develop four additional square feet of market-rate housing." (emphasis added) The math may be off here, or at least the explanation could be cleazer. - For every four feet of addirionai floor space created, one sq ft is for affordable housing. ThaYs a 1•3 ratio, and 25 percent of the bonus floor azea achieved is dedicated to affordable units. � If adding one sq $ of affordable housing allows the developer to create another four sq ft of market-rate housing, thaYs a 1:4 ratio. 20 percent of the bonus floor area achieved is dedicated to affordable units. The first alternative would create more affordable housing for every 100 sq ft of additional density allowed, while the second alternative would give the developer a bigger incentive.