HomeMy WebLinkAbout1992 10-19 EDAP Work Session EDA WORK SESSION
7 p.m.
EARLE BROWN HERITAGE CENTER
C BARN
MONDAY, OCTOBER 19, 1992
1. Call to Order: 7 p.m.
2. Roll Call
3. *Discussion Items:
a. Business Retention /Job Expansion Update
b. Humboldt Avenue Apartments Update
1. 6637 Humboldt Avenue North
2. 6715 -6721 Humboldt Avenue North
C. Current Housing Complaints
d. Redevelopment of Single - Family Lots
e. Mortgage Revenue Refunding Bonds
f. Evergreen Park Manor Apartments
(three- bedroom conversion issue)
4. Other Business
5. Adjournment
* Note: There will be some handouts Monday evening.
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Council Meeting Date 10/19/92
Agenda Item Number 3
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION
ITEM DESCRIPTION:
REDEVELOPMENT OF SINGLE FAMILY LOTS
******************************************* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * **
DEPT. APPROVAL:
Tom Bublitz, Assistant EDA Coordinator R
MANAGER'S REVIEW /RECOMMENDATION:
No comments to supplement this report .Comments below /attached
******************************************* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * **
SUMMARY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attached No )
As the EDA's Scattered Site Acquisition Program continues, the inventory of
single family lots for redevelopment will increase. By the end of 1992, the
EDA will have five (5) lots for redevelopment. Additionally, the Minnesota
Department of Transportation has turned back six (6) single family lots to
the City, so that our total inventory will be eleven (11) lots.
To date, the EDA has had success in developing several of the scattered site
lots, and the quality of housing built on the lots has been very good.
Present redevelopment on the scattered site lots has relied on, for the most
part, a single builder. Also, two (2) of the lots remain unsold, and it is
not realistic to expect builders to build "speculative" houses on these
lots. As a result of the increasing inventory of lots, staff has been
discussing numerous options for single family redevelopment of the scattered
site lots. The purpose of this memorandum is to briefly describe some of
the redevelopment options available for single family lots. The following
list of options is presented to initiate a discussion with the EDA board to
determine what will be the most effective way to proceed with scattered site
redevelopment. This list is not meant to be a thorough examination of the
various options; rather, it is intended to begin the discussion on creating
a more effective redevelopment program.
1. Continue as is with marketing lots to individual builders.
2. Enter into a development agreement with a single developer to build on
the lots.
3. Sell the lots to nonprofit corporations specializing in single family
redevelopment, such as the Greater Minneapolis Housing Corporation
(GMAC) or Habitat for Humanity.
4. Create a nonprofit corporation to develop the lots. The nonprofit
could acquire the property, provide construction financing and
establish a working relationship with a number of builders to develop
the lots.
5. Form a joint powers group with neighboring cities to develop lots in
0 all of the cities participating in the joint powers group.
Staff will be prepared to discuss these options in more detail at the EDA
meeting.
RECOMMENDATION
No action is required on this item. The information is offered for
discussion purposes only.
To Mayor
Members of the City Council
City Manager
From: Phil Cohen
Date: October 15, 1992
Re: Evergreen Park Apartments -3BR Conversion
Precedent for other applications -
Federal Fair Housing Law
Legal Aid Lawsuit against the City of Mpls.
concerning concentrations subsidized housing
as it affects minority populations.
Since the council meeting last Monday, concerns have come to
mind that suggests to me that we need to have these matters
resolved before formally approving the application of
Evergreen Apartments. These are as follows:
PRECEDENT FOR DEALING WITH OTHER APPLICATIONS
The question here would be if this application is approved,
does it open the door for having to approve additional 3BR
conversion proposals?
FEDERAL FAIR HOUSING LAW:
On page 5 of the enclosed copy of the law, it states that a
building or community cannot discriminate based on familial
status- unless it qualifies as housing for older citizens.
LEGAL AID LAWSUIT:
I have attached the "Introduction" to the lawsuit, which
summarizes the allegations that the City of Minneapolis has
been confining public and section 8 housing into areas
of minority population concentration.
SUMMARY
How this all applies to Evergreen Park application, I am not
sure, but if one reviews the Northeast Neighborhood section
of the Maxfield study it clearly shows that this area has
the, greatest concentration of multi- family units in the City
of Brooklyn Center.
In addition from the information provided at the hearing
Monday night, the City of Brooklyn center has greater
,permitted occupany than the apartment owners are proposing.
That. raises the question of the cities zoning codes possibly
contributing to the over concentration of residents in the
multi - family housing units.
There issues set forth have the appearance of a "Catch 22"
position the city could be placed in. The Fair Housing laws
state very clearly that you cannot discriminate against
families. If that is the case not approving the Evergreen
Park application could leave the city open to action under
the Fair Housing Laws.
Evergreen Park Apartments
Page 2
October 15, 1992
If the Legal Aid lawsuit prevails would we then be subject
to action against the city of having concentrations of
subsidized housing (Section 8 and /or Vouchers) in the City
of Brooklyn Center.
And, are the cities own occupancy standards contribution
that over concentration.?
ACTION SUGGESTED:
It would be my suggesting that at the next regular council
meeting of October 26th, the council as part of the
consideration of the Evergreen Park application discuss this
memo and the attachments.
If the council then agrees that there are issues that should
be resolved then they may wish to consider tabling the
application until the first regular council meeting in November.
The tabling would be for the purpose of referring the issues
to city staff and legal counsel for their response.
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development
Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity •
"i r
Fa ir
Its Your Right
IL
gkgg ", vi
4
� y
�7{ '�.�.731CL•I•e.��Q� ���t��T.Y'.�•'�3�:f1Q�i S� ♦sL1'arM^+`a'.
4 .4j
1- . Yom , V
+' f
w Y t
r ^s •.+l'�.a'.7'al�k�"' '.
i
��� ,,r.°rda:fk'�r,`:ti� � ��}1�pr •.tf'►"rs'.7♦Sb7".f�4tS"Ls�'i S�' �..�]3Lh^"'t:`'!�
•FHEO r� IIIIIIII o � W EQUAL HOU SING
The Fair Housing Act The Fair Housing Act prohibits discrimination in
housing because of:
• Race or color
• National origin
• Religion
• Sex
• Familial -status (including children under the age
of 18 living with parents or legal custodians;
pregnant women and people securing custody
of children under 18)
• Handicap
What I lousing Is Covered? The Fair Housing Act covers most housing. In
some circumstances, the Act exempts owner-
occupied buildings with no more than four units,
single- family housing sold or rented without the
use of a broker and housing operated by organi-
zations and private clubs that limit occupancy to
members.
What Is Prohibited? In the Sale and Rental of Housing: No one
may take any of the following actions based on
race, color, national origin, religion, sex, familial
status or handicap:
• Refuse to rent or sell housing
• Refuse to negotiate for housing
• Make housing unavailable
• Deny a dwelling
• Set different terms, conditions or privileges for
sale or rental of a dwelling
• Provide different housing services or facilities
• Falsely deny that housing is available for in-
spection, sale or rental
• For profit, persuade owners to sell or rent
(blockbusting) or
• Deny anyone access to or membership in a
facility or service (such as a multiple listing
service) related to the sale or rental of housing.
1
In Mortgage Lending: No one may take any of Additional Protection If If you or someone associated with you:
the following actions based on race, color YOU [-lave A Disability Have a physical or mental disability (including
national origin, religion, sex, familial status or hearing, mobility and visual impairments,
handicap: chronic alcoholism, chronic mental illness,
AIDS, AIDS Related Complex and mental
• Refuse to make a mortgage loan
• Refuse to provide information regarding loans retardation) that substantially limits one or more
•
Impose different terms or conditions on a loan major life activities
Im
p Have a record of such a disability or
•Discriminate in appraising property Are regarded as having such a disability
• Refuse to purchase a loan or
different terms or conditions for purchasing landlord ma
Set d your y not:
a loan.
• Refuse to,let you make reasonable modifica-
areas, at
Addition: It is illegal for anyone to: tions to our dwelling ,
In Ad Y
I 9 Y g or common use a
your expense, if necessary for the handicapped
Threaten, coerce, intimidate or interfere with person to use the housing. (Where reasonable,
anyone exercising a fair housing right or the landlord may permit changes only if you
assisting others who exercise that right agree to restore the property to its original
Advertise or make any statement that indicates condition when you move.)
a limitation or preference based on race, color, •Refuse to make reasonable accommodations in
national origin, religion, sex, familial status or rules, policies, practices or services if necessary
handicap. This prohibition against discrimina for the handicapped person to use the housing.
tory advertising applies to single - family and
owner- occupied housing that is otherwise Example: A building with a "no pets" policy
exempt from the Fair Housing Act. must allow a visually impaired tenant to keep a
� -• n-=�� ..Y��n
guide dog.
Example: An apartment complex that offers
tenants ample, unassigned parking must honor
a request from a mobility - impaired tenant for a
resgrved space near her apartment if necessary
to assure that she can have access to her
apartment.
However, housing need not be made available to
a person who is a direct threat to the health or
safety of others or who currently uses illegal
drugs.
2 � 3
. ... __.._._.....
Requirements for New Buildings: In buildings Housing Opportunities Unless a building or community qualifies as
that are ready for first occupancy after March 13, For Families housing for older persons, it may not discriminate
1991, and have an elevator and four or more based on familial status. That is, it may not
units: discriminate against families in which one or more
children under 18 live with:
• Public and common areas must be accessible
to persons with disabilities • A parent
• Doors and hallways must be wide enough for • A person who has legal custody of the child or
wheelchairs children or
• All units must have: • The designee of the parent or legal custodian,
An accessible route into and through the unit with the parent or custodian's written_ permis-
- Accessible light switches, electrical outlets, ( sion.
thermostats and other environmental controls
Reinforced bathroom walls to allow later Familial status protection also applies to pregnant
installation of grab bars and women and anyone securing legal custody of a
Kitchens and bathrooms that can be used by child under 18.
people in wheelchairs.
Exemption: Housing for older persons is exempt
If a building with four or more units has no
elevator �,:�,�,� from the prohibition against familial status
March 13, 1991, b
11991,these standards apply to ground discrimination if:
floor units. The HUD Secretary has determined that it is
-y'la specifically designed for and occupied by
_Ct These requirements for new buildings do not elderly persons under a Federal, State or local
z'i'�; z replace any more stringent standards in State or government program or
local law. It is occupied solely by persons who are 62 or
older or
• It houses at least one person who is 55 or older
in at least 80 percent of the occupied units; has
significant services and facilities for older
persons; and adheres to a published policy
statement that demonstrates an intent to house
persons who are 55 or older. The requirement
fr significant services and facilities is waived if
" providing them is not practicable and the
housing is necessary to provide important
housing opportunities for older persons.
"` •r,; A transition period permits residents on or before
September 13, 1988 to continue living in the
ti ri sat yy, housing, regardless of their age, without interfer-
ing with the exemption.
I
4 � 5
ou Think Your Rights HUD is ready to help with any problem of housing What Happens When You HUD will notify you when it receives your com-
e Been Violated discrimination. if you think your rights have been File A Cornplaint? plaint. Normally, HUD also will:
violated, you may fill out the Housing Discrimina-
tion Complaint Form in this brochure, write HUD a • Notify the alleged violator of your complaint and
letter or telephone the HUD Hotline. You have permit that person to submit an answer
one year after an alleged violation to file a • Investigate your complaint and determine
complaint with HUD, but you should file it as soon whether there is reasonable cause to believe
as possible. the Fair Housing Act has been violated
• Notify you if it cannot complete an investigation
What to Tell HUD: within 100 days of receiving your complaint
• Your name and address Conciliation: HUD will try to reach an agree-
• The name and address of the person your ment with the person your complaint is against
complaint is against (the respondent) (the respondent). A conciliation agreement must
• The address or other identification of the protect both you and the public interest. If an
housing involved agreement is signed, HUD will take no further action on your complaint. However, if HUD has
• h short description of the alleged violation (the
event that caused you to believe your rights reasonable cause to believe that a conciliation
agreement is breached, HUD will recommend that
were violated)
• The dates) of the alleged violation the Attorney General file suit.
Complaint Referrals: If HUD has determined
Where to Write: Send the Housing Discrimina- that your State or local agency has the same fair
tion Complaint Form or a letter to the HUD housing powers as HUD, HUD will refer your
regional office nearest you (addresses on the
Complaint Form) or to: complaint to that agency for investigation and
notify you of the referral. That agency must begin
Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity work on your complaint within 30 days or HUD
U.S. Department of Housing and may take it back.
Urban Development
Room 5204 What If You Need Help If you need immediate help to stop a serious
Washington, D.C. 20410 -2000
Q u ick l y ? problem that is being caused by a Fair Housing
Where to Call: If you wish, you may use the Act violation, HUD may be able to assist you as
toll -free Hotline number: 1- 800.669 -9777. (In soon as you file a complaint. HUD may authorize
x �
Washington, D.C. call 708-0836.) the Attorney General to go to court to seek
j .�c#". - g temporary or preliminary relief, pending the
outcome of your complaint, if:
If You Are Disabled: HUD also provides:
' •Irreparable harm is likely to occur without
A toll -free TDD phone for the hearing impaired: HUD's intervention
1-800-927-92
75. in Washington, D.C., call ri .X„ .+
JYf `t ( 9 } There is substantial evidence that a violation of„
708-0836.) the Fair Housing Act occurred
';•tir'�. ", ,,� Interpretersa
� `' �f Tapes and braille materials Example: A builder agrees to sell a house but,
1,� / !�?� }x' • ASSISIanCC In reading. comp leting forms
g p 3 after learning the buyer is black, fails to keep the
agreement. The buyer files a complaint with HUD.
'.°[;'�• HUD may authorize the Attorney General to go to
�'' ` "s;r •`' I court to prevent a sale to any other buyer until
HUD investigates the complaint.
6 7 1191
it Happens After A If, after investigating your complaint, HUD finds In Addition You May File Suit: You may file suit, at your
tplaint Investigation? reasonable cause to believe that discrimination expense, in Federal District Court or State Court
occurred, it will inform you. Your case will he within two years of an alleged violation. If you
heard in an administrative hearing within 120 cannot afford an attorney, the court may appoint
days, unless you or the respondent want the case one for you. You may bring suit even after filing a
to be heard in Federal district court. Either way, complaint, if you have not signed a conciliation
there is no cost to you. agreement and an Administrative Law Judge has
not started a hearing. A court may award actual
The Administrative Hearing: if your case goes and punitive damages and attorney's fees and
to an administrative hearing HUD attorneys will costs.
litigate the case on your behalf. =You may
intervene in the case and be represented by your
Other Tools to Combat Housing
own attorney if you wish. An Administrative Law Discrimination:
Judge (ALJ) will consider evidence from you and
the respondent. If the ALJ decides that discrimi- If there is noncompliance with the order of an
nation occurred, the respondent can be ordered: Administrative Law Judge, HUD may seek
temporary relief, enforcement of the order or a
• To compensate you for actual damages, restraining order in a United States Court of
including humiliation, pain and suffering. Appeals.
• To provide injunctive or other equitable relief, for The Attorney General may file a suit in Federal
example, to make the housing available to you. District Court if there is reasonable cause to
• To pay the Federal Government a civil penalty believe a pattern or practice of housing
to vindicate the public interest. The maximum discrimination is occurring.
penalties are $10,000 for a first violation and
h's, . $50,000 for a third violation within seven years. For Further Information:
s =� • To pay reasonable attorney's fees and costs.
Y 't The purpose of this brochure is to summarize
t = R•r` Federal District Court: If you or the respondent your right to fair housing. The Fair Housing Act
choose to have our case decided in Federal
y and HUD's regulations contain more detail and
District Court, the Attorney General will file a suit technical information. If you need a copy of the
and litigate it on your behalf. Like the ALJ, the law or regulations, contact the HUD regional office
.._ District Court can order relief, and award actual nearest ou or:
:^ damages, attorney's fees and costs. In addition, Y
el
the court can award punitive damages. ���-`1 "�'x Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity
�51`t c� w t?�a:`•r'�':;•:��x g Q
Room 5116
Department of Housing and Urban Development
,Y±f 451 Seventh Street, S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20410 -2000
(202) 708 -2878
8 � q
�q nitlaji�ftE I rte�xr
DI�1CT O.
r1TNIF -S=
1cV o an, n teG ivens, Mai Yang.
Charlotte Brown, Vanessa
mteng, Josephine, Hill, Joyce Charles, Marlene Halioway, Denise Evans
a Marshall, Lucinda Hopldns, Patricia Scott, Jacqueline Trass, and
T
e similarly T
nee Madison, on behalf of themselves and all oth •m y situated, S U MMONS I N A CIVIL ACTION
e Minneapolis Branch of the National Association for the Advancement
Colored People (NAACP), Plaintiffs,
• CASE NUMBER: Civil No. 4 -92 -712
m in his official capacity as Secretary of the Department of Housing
ick Kr
P
,
rd Urba Development, ment Lomas T. Feeney, to his official capacity as Feld
.ffice Manager of the Minneapolis -St. Paul Office of the Department of
sousing and Urban Development, the United States Department of Housing
ad Urban Development, Cora McCorvey, in her official capacity as Executive
)irector of the Minneapolis Public Housing Authority, the Minneapolis rev 2 (j. 97
ublic H y
•n Authority, in and for the City of Minneapolis, a public body
Housing
)rporate and politic, the Minneapolis Community Development Agency, a
ublic body corporate and politic, and the City of Minneapolis, a public body
wporatC and polit „ at p.,.nc,n:,
Defendants.
Cora McCorvev, Minneapolis Public Housing Authority, Minneapolis Community
Development Agencv. and the City of Minneapolis.
YOU ARE HEREBY SUMMONED and required to file with the Cleric of this Court and serve upon
PLAINTIFF'S ATTORNEY war- -)
Timothy L. Thompson, Attorney at Law James E. Dorsey, Attorney at Law
Legal Aid Society of Minneapolis Fredrikson & Byron, P.A.
430 First Avenue North 1100 International Centre
Suite 300
900 Second Avenue South
Minneapolis, MN 55401 -1780 Minneapolis, IvLN
55402-3397
97
an answer to the complaint which is herewith served upon y ou, within 20 ( twenty) days after service c
this summons upon you, exclusive of the day of service. if you fail to do so, judgment by default will be take
against you for the relief demanded In the complaint.
CLERK
DATE
BY DEPUTY CLERK
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA
FOURTH DIVISION
RECEIVED
JUL 2 7 1992
Lucy Hallman, Shirinice Givens, Mai Yang, Charlotte -- CLERK, U.S. DiST.
Brown, Vanessa Boateng, Josephine Hill, Joyce Charles, MINNEAPOLIS. MN
Marlene Halloway, Denise Evans, Regina Marshall,
7�� 7/4
Lucinda Hopkins, Patricia Scott, Jacqueline Trass, and
Lawrence Madison, on behalf of themselves and all
others similarly situated, and the Minneapolis Branch of
the National Association for the Advancement of
Colored People (NAACP),
Plaintiffs, CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
V. Case No. C- - - 9' 1 - ' ('1
Jack Kemp, P
in his official capacity as Secretary of the
De artment of Housing and Urban Develo ment.
P ,.
Thomas T. Feeney, in his official capacity as Field Office
Manager of the Minneapolis -St. Paul Office of the
Department of Housing and Urban Development, the
United States Depar ►ment of Housing and Urban
Development, Cora McCorvey, in her official capacity as
Executive Director of the Minneapolis Public Housing
Authority, the Minneapolis Public Housing Authority, in t
d
for the City of Minneapolis, a public body corporate
and politic, the Minneapolis Community Development { b
Agency, a public body corporate and politic, and the City
of Minneapolis a public body corporate and politic,
Defendants.
I. INTRODUCTION
1. Plaintiffs, low - income minority families and individuals in Minneapolis
and the Minneapolis Branch of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored
People (NAACP), bring this class action to challenge racial segregation in the administration
of low- income housing programs. Individual plaintiffs and class members are participants
in, and applicants for, federally subsidized Iow- income housing programs in Minneapolis who
have been or likely will be limited to participating in these programs in racially segregated
locations due to the actions of federal and local government defendants. Public Housing in
Minneapolis was originally located, built and operated under a policy of de jure racial
segregation, and neither local defendants nor federal defendants have taken the constitution-
ally and statutorily required steps since then to disestablish the largely one -race projects
caused by de jure segregation. Instead, defendants have administered both the Public
Housing and the Section 8 Housing Programs in ways which reinforce segregated housing
patterns.
2. The City of Minneapolis and the predecessors of the Minneapolis Public
Housing Authority (MPHA), together with the Department of Housing and Urban
Development (HUD) and its predecessors, deliberateiv chose to confine the location of
Family Public Housing rojects to areas of minority concentration in Minneapolis. These
g J ty P
neighborhoods were then and are now burdened with the highest rates of poverty, crime,
deteriorated housing, and unemployment. In many cases these segregated conditions will
dictate the education, employment opportunities, and life aspirations of plaintiff class
members. The Public Housing Scattered Site Program and the Section 8 Existing Housing
C
Program are both designed to provide plaintiffs with opportunities to live in racially
integrated neighborhoods. However, defendants have administered these programs in a
manner which has perpetuated pre - existing segregated housing patterns.
3. HUD has supervised. funded, and participated in the activities of local
r
defendants and their predecessors over the last 54 years and has been well aware of the
segregated manner in which these programs have been administered. HUD's predecessor
deliberately segregated races within the first Public Housing project it establishes in
Minneapolis. Despite its legal obligation to affirmatively further the goals of the Fair
Housing Act, HUD has taken no effective measures to compel defendants to alter these
segregated housing patterns. In addition, HUD has contributed to the perpetuation of
segregation by its own actions.
4. By initially creating and /or perpetuating segregated housing patterns in
the Public Housing and Section 8 Existing Housing Programs in Minneapolis, defendants
have violated the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, the
Fair Housing Act of 1968, Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, the Minnesota Constitution,
and other federal and state civil rights and housing statutes and regulations. Plaintiffs seek
declaratory and injunctive relief, damages, and attorneys' fees.
II. JliRISDICTION
5. This court has jurisdiction over this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
§§ 1331, 1343(a)(3) and 1361, and 42 U.S.C. § 3613(a). Civil actions against state and local
defendants are authorized by 42 U.S.C. §§ 1981, 1982, 1983, and 1985(3). Civil actions
against the federal defendants are authorized by, among other sources, 5 U.S.C. § 702, 42
U.S.C. § 3613, and 42 US.C. § 2000d. Declaratory relief is authorized by 28 U.S.C. §§ 2-
and 2202, and jurisdiction over plaintiffs' state law claims is authorized by 28 U.S.C. § 1367.
MIS 11111101 A on
M1 MIR 'M
=12 .11110
m o o n M0 pq
IS ON MINE 1 13111
■. �� �� n■■ Lou ■■■ mom
mom mom In MR moo
'El To
no ::
■_ .t
_ \' �■,�� ■ ..i�J is . �1 �iLR..••.d
�i® �� D ■
SEEM
gill W,
69TH AV
z 68TH AV
ViWi�lir► 110
..
OPEN S AX
67TH AV
PACE
IBM
■ .:
• P L LBL-10-, j
•a
; #1
65TH W
WS
MMrM
MERIN
ma il
OEM 3212a
I Molly
mom 01
a �� •i ��1 ' 1 Imo. �C:� Q�,
---- - - - - -- - - -- -
In addition to Shingle Creek Parkway and Humboldt Avenue North (mentioned
above), inter - neighborhood commuting is found along Dupont Avenue North, Free- ?
way Boulevard, and 69th Avenue North. The latter two streets lead to the
Northwest Neighborhood, and Dupont Avenue North extends into the Southeast
Neighborhood and further south into Minneapolis.
Neighborhood Housing Types and Condition t
The Northeast Neighborhood's housing supply caters to the widest range of in-
come levels of the six Brooklyn Center neighborhoods. Some of the most expen-
sive single - family homes in the city, as well as some of the least expensive
rental units, are located here.
A large portion of the neighborhood's housing stock, roughly 52 percent, is
found in multifamily rental buildings. This is a far greater percentage of
rental housing than in the other five neighborhoods. A significant number of -
these units were built in the 1960's, have lower rents, and cater to lower -
income households. They are among the most poorly maintained properties in
Brooklyn Center, and present unique problems for the Northeast Neighborhood.
The largest concentration of moderate rent units is near or along Humboldt
Avenue North, between 67th and 69th Avenues North. Approximately 330 units in _
20 buildings are located within two blocks east or west of Humboldt Avenue
North, the main north -south thoroughfare in the neighborhood. All or the
buildings were built between 1961 and 1968, and visual inspection reveals main-
tenance problems at certain buildings. Interviews with leasing agents at these -
buildings indicate that many of the units are occupied by very low- income
households under the Section 8 Federal Subsidy Program. These households are
attracted to the units for their moderate rent levels (approximately $400 for a r
one - bedroom unit and $500 for a two - bedroom unit), despite the poor condition
of a number of the units.
The attraction of lower - income groups to these units is understandable. In
addition to their moderate rents, their location is advantageous for households
with limited means of- transportation. The units are within walking distance to
Humboldt Square Shopping Center, two churches, the Brooklyn Center High (-
School /Junior High School complex, and numerous manufacturing jobs in the adja-
cent industrial park. They are also on the MTC bus line, with direct service
to Downtown and South Minneapolis. r
The problem with these buildings is not necessarily the high concentration of
lower - income renters occupying the units; rather, it is the mechanism behind
their slow conversion to low- income housing. Similar to the rental units on
the southernmost blocks of the Southeast Neighborhood, these units are becoming
low - income housing through functional obsolescence and /or deferred maintenance.
It is a trend that is occurring independent of city interaction thus far, and
to allow it to continue will result in the erosion of the city's tax base real
izable from these properties.
A better alternative for providing low- income housing is the Ponds Rental
Townhomes in the Northwest Neighborhood. These units are designed specifically
for lower - income households and offer below market -rate rents. As is mentioned
in the executive summary of this report, the city should consider options for
96-
more active involvement in the management of the properties near the 67th and
Humboldt intersection. The creation of vocational, educational, and youth
f programs for the low- income tenants in the buildings should be considered.
The other area with a similar supply of marginal rental housing is in the ex-
treme southeast corner of the neighborhood along Willow Lane south of 65th Ave -
nue North. Ten buildings with a total of 102 units dominate the parcels in
this area, adjacent to larger -lot single- family residential homes along the
Mississippi River. All the buildings were built between 1963 and 1967, and
many show worn exteriors, junk - strewn yards, and pothole - filled parking lots.
As with the units near 69th and Humboldt Avenues North, these units attract
lower - income households. The same city policies should be considered regarding
these properties as with the other marginal properties mentioned above.
The Northeast Neighborhood also has a number of well - maintained or newer multi-
family rental projects that are of less concern. They are found along Camden
1 Avenue North on both sides of 66th Avenue North, 70th Avenue North, and
72nd Avenue North. These projects offer comfortable rental alternatives for
families and individuals who work in Brooklyn Center but do not own homes.
The supply of single - family homes in the Northeast Neighborhood should be men-
tioned because it serves as a valuable asset to the city. A number of diverse
and attractive properties contribute to a strong single - family residential base
in the neighborhood. At least 90 percent of the Northeast Neighborhood's
single - family units were built in the 1960's or after, the highest percentage
of the six neighborhoods.
i Undoubtedly, the most desirable single- family homes in the city are found east
of the newly upgraded Highway 252 /West River Road, and north of roughly
66th Avenue North. A good proportion of these homes are on large lots that
front the Mississippi River. Lot sizes are, in many cases, double or triple
the size of the standard Brooklyn Center lot, with homes generally having a
market value in excess of $100,000. Some command a price significantly above
$100,000. Information from the City Assessor's Office shows that these blocks
have a high percentage. -(25 percent or more) of homes categorized as in good or
excellent shape.
1 The other particularly strong single - family area in the Northeast Neighborhood
is an eight- block, rectangular segment bounded roughly by Irving Lane North and
Knox, 73rd and Humboldt Avenues North. In this area, a mixture of split - level,
large rambler and two -story homes presents a very desirable neighborhood image.
Attractive landscaping and meticulous upkeep of the homes are characteristics
of this portion of the Northeast.Neighborhood.
The remainder of the single- family housing in the Northeast Neighborhood is
generally well- maintained. Very few would be considered in fair or poor shape.
Certain isolated units, such as those at 65th and Camden Avenues North, are in
less desirable locations, but generally the neighborhood has an excellent repu-
tation for its single- family housing.
97
O TABLE 17
APARTMENT SURVEY - NORTHEAST NEIGHBORHOOD
Brooklyn Center
April 1989
Number
Receiving
Year No. of Square Rent Per Tenant Rental Occu-
ilding Built Units Unit Mix Rent Feet Sq. Ft. Profile Assistance ap ncy Comment
ookdale 1968 50 8 -1BR $465 -475 940 $.49 —.50 Age 20 -40, 8 100% "Nice neigl
Towers 42 -2BR 540 -575 1,150 .41 —.47 families, hood, Cloi
(lots of shopping.
children) condition.
People are
attracted t
appearance
building."
rle 1972 120 54 -1BR $ 450 720 $ .62 One —third 5 97% "High occu-
Brown 66 -2BR 545 970 .56 seniors, pancy. No
Farms rest are problems it
younger building, t
couples & have notice
singles. some 'probl
( "Resident buildings i
profile is area. No c
getting plaints abc
younger. ") neighborhoc
15 — 1961 16 16 - 2BR $435 - 450 N/A N/A Families, 2 100% Had problen
i721 single filling son
mothers, units in wi
most have ter; three
children vacant for
three montl
Age of bldg
harder to f
units.
Humboldt an
67th - "neg
Live area."
►"'".� r ...,. y r .,,.,� /'�.� 1'""�1 r� 1 ".." 1 (""`.� f "_� t """� f "'" 1 ! "_ i r ._._� r""'r f°-'1( t "� f,....y , ^-�! t—
TABLE 17
APARTMENT SURVEY - NORTHEAST NEIGHBORHOOD
Brooklyn Center
April 1989
(Continued)
Number
Receiving
Year No. of Square Rent Per Tenant Rental Occu-
Built Units Unit Mix Rent Feet Sq. Ft. Profile Assistance ap ncy Comments
rn 1969 102 66 -1BR $395 -410` 676 $.58 -.61 Younger None 100% "Have had prob-
36-2BR 480 -515 890 .54 -.58 couples, (no longer lems with high
single takes Sec- school kids
parents tion 8) loitering.
Also had sever-
al evictions
(Sect. 8).
Convenient
area. Police
patrol pa o good.
Good bus ser-
vice."
ok 1967 128 4 -EFF $ 325 440 $ .74 Age 18 -85, N /A, 97% "Nice location.
e 84 -1BR 385 -395 660 .58 -.59 lately more (some) Convenient to
40 -2BR 470 -480 820 .57 -.58 younger highways. Have
people. done extensive
About 40 renovation.
children Need something
in complex, for kids to-do
in neighbor-
hood."°
.e 1964 21 9 -1BR $385 -395 714 $.54 -.55 -------------- - - - - -- See above ---------------------
12 -2BR 470 -480 837 .56 -.57
TABLE 17
APARTMENT SURVEY - NORTHEAST NEIGHBORHOOD
Brooklyn Center
April 1989
(Continued)
Number
Receiving .
Year No. of Square Rent Per Tenant Rental Occu-
Z Built Units Unit Mix Rent Feet Sq. Ft. Profile Assistance a� ncy Comments
1968 54 14 -1BR $ 400 594 $ .67 Families, 10 -11 96% "Convenient
40 -2BR 475 -510 800- 980 .52 -.59 lots of area; near
children Humboldt
Square. Have
had several
evictions.
Need youth
center in
area."
',e 1968 90 90 -2BR $499 -519 N/A N/A A few "Most are 97% "Problems with
seniors, on rental vandalism (Hi-
lots of assistance" Crest). Poorer
children, quality of
single tenants. Hum
mothers boldt and 67th
and 69th Ave-
nues - problem
area."
wn 1967 92 92 -3BR $595 -625 1,300 $ .46 One -half None 98% "Area is in
H's single good condition.
roommates, Have had a lot
one -.half of calls for
families Section 8
vouchers."
TABLE 17
APARTMENT SURVEY - NORTiiGAST NEIGHBORHOOD
Brooklyn Center
,April 1989
(Continued)
Number
Receiving
Year No, of Square Rent Per Tenant Rental Occu-
Built Units Unit Mix Rent Feet Sq. Ft. Profile Assistance panc Comments
1972 80 20 -1BR $420 -430 702 $.60 -.61 Mix - more "Several - 100% "Nice neighbor -
60-2BR 490 -495 970 .51 younger mostly hood; near
(incl.udes persons, younger Evergreen Park.
elect.) but also (single Clean. Good
have some mothers)." condition.
seniors; Recently, two
"increase cars stolen
in number from area.
of chil- People like
dren" location."
40 1971 15 2 -1BR $ 395 600 $ .66 Mostly 9 93% "Some problems
6 -2BR .505 800 .63 single with tenants
er 6 -2BR 505 880 .57 mothers (domestic dis-
1-3BR 650 1,120 .58 putes)'. People
are moving from
North Mpls.
Lots of calls
for 3BR units.
Generally good
location."
at 1971 128 32 -1BR. $425 -440 693 $.61 -.63 Majority 10 -13 100% Residential
'est 96 -2BR 525 911 .54 -.58 are early (several neighborhood;
(includes 20's; quite 2BR va- near Evergreen
elect.) a few chil- cant in Park. No real
ren March, problems in
offered neighborhood
special (usual Friday
to fill) and Saturday
night stuff)."
TABLE 17
APARTMENT SURVEY - NORTHEAST NEIGHBORHOOD
Brooklyn Center
April 1989
(Continued)
Number
Receiving
Year No. of Square Rent Per Tenant Rental Occu-
Built Units Unit Mix Rent Feet Sq. Ft. Profile Assistance ap ncy Comments
9/87 140 53 -1BR $515 -580 600- 627 $.86 -.93 Seniors None (66 occu- "People are
29 -1BR /Den 685 -805 725- 850 .92 -.96 only (age pied, 4 moving from all
s 58 - 2BR /1Ba 780 -995 850 -1,070 .92 -.95 55 & over); more re- over to be near l
(plus most are served) to children.
entry fee/ age 70 Quiet area.
one month and over, Close to Brook -
rent) single dale. Conven-
ient. Need bus'
to downtown.
Building is de-
sirable because
it is concrete
(safe from
tornadoes)."
rveyed 813 98%
Area 1,294 (not in-
cluding
Earle
Brown
Commons)
Maxfield Research Group, Inc.
town" raw" POW" nowa Aw�