The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2020 02-24 CCPCouncil Study Session City Hall Council Chambers February 24, 2020 AGE NDA The City C ounc il requests that attendees turn off cell phones and pagers during the meeting. A copy of the full C ity Council pac ket is available to the public. The packet ring binder is located at the entrance of the council chambers. 1.City Council Discussion of Agenda Items and Questions - 6:15 p.m. 2.M iscellaneous a.Status of Commission Appointments - Council Member Graves - Discussion regarding the Status of Commission appointments. b.J oint School B oard and City Council meeting - March 2, 2020 - Schedule the second joint meeting with the Brooklyn Center School District 286. 3.Discussion of Work S ession Agenda Item as T ime P ermits 4.Adjourn C ouncil Study Session DAT E:2/24/2020 TO :C ity C ouncil F R O M:C urt Boganey, City Manager T H R O U G H :N/A BY:C ornelius L. Boganey, C ity M anager S U B J E C T:S tatus of Commission A ppointments - C ouncil Member G raves B ackground: Councilmember G raves made an inquiry regarding the s tatus of C ommis s ion member appointments follow ing a concern rais ed by a C ommis s ioner w hos e term has expired but has yet to be reappointed. O ne concern raised w as whether or not a Commissioner could legally serve without being reappointed. I n res pons e to this concern, I advised that the language for all of our s tanding advis ory commis s ions provide the following. " U pon expira5on of his or her term of office, a member shall con5nue to s erve un5l his or her s uccessor is appointed and shall be qualified". I have a8ached a memo that describes the current status of Commission vacancies and expired Commissioner terms . S trategic Priories and Values: O pera5onal Excellence AT TA C H M E N TS : D escrip5on U pload D ate Type C ommis s ioner S tatus 2/19/2020 Cover Memo Status of Commissions Below is a chart showing the status of vacancies on our advisory commissions. We are providing this information so you may consider encouraging residents to serve. COMMISSION VACANCIES NO. of VACANCIES DATE OF VACANCY NO. OF APPLICANTS DATE OF APPLICATION Financial 1 1/1/2019 2 8/7/19 and 10/24/19 Housing 1 12/31/2019 1 Park and Recreation 1 8/30/2019 1 1/24/2020 Planning 1 1/1/2019 4 3/7/19, 11/19/19, 12/16/19, and 1/13/2020 We have also received information from the following commissioners expressing they would like to continue serving. Their terms have expired. • Abate Terefe – Financial Commission • Kathie Amdahl – Housing Commission • Travis Bonovsky –Park & Recreation • Gail Ebert - Park & Recreation • Randall Christensen – Planning Commission • Alex Koenig – Planning Commission • John MacMillan – Planning Commission • Stephen Schonning – Planning Commission • Rochelle Sweeney - Planning Commission • Susan Tade – Planning Commission • Jacob Saffert – Sister City Commission • Shaku Samba – Sister City Commission Thank you. ~ Barb C ouncil Study Session DAT E:2/24/2020 TO :C ity C ouncil F R O M:C urt Boganey, City Manager T H R O U G H :N/A BY:C ornelius L. Boganey, C ity M anager S U B J E C T:J oint S chool Board and City Council mee+ng - March 2, 2020 B ackground: At their reques t, our first joint mee+ng with the Brooklyn Center S chool Board was hos ted by the D is trict on November 19, 2020. At that mee+ng, w e iden+fied s everal issues for follow up and agreed that a second mee+ng hosted by the City s hould be scheduled. I recently met with the S chool S uperintendent and Board P resident to plan for the follow up mee+ng. I t w as recommended that w e schedule the next mee+ng for M arch 2, 2020 star+ng at 6:00 p.m. in the C ohen Room of the Community A c+vity C enter. P lease let us know if you concur w ith this recommenda+on. B udget I ssues: There are no budget is s ues to consider. S trategic Priories and Values: O pera+onal Excellence C IT Y C O UNC IL M E E T I NG City Hall Council C hambers February 24, 2020 AGE NDA 1.Informal Open F orum with City Council - 6:45 p.m. Provides an opportunity for the public to address the Counc il on items which are not on the agenda. Open Forum will be limited to 15 minutes, it is not televised, and it may not be used to make personal attac ks, to air personality grievanc es, to make politic al endorsements, or for political c ampaign purposes. C ounc il Members will not enter into a dialogue with presenter. Questions from the Council will be for clarific ation only. Open Forum will not be used as a time for problem solving or reacting to the c omments made but, rather, for hearing the presenter for informational purposes only. 2.Invocation - 7 p.m. 3.C all to Order Regular Business M eeting The C ity Council requests that attendees turn off cell phones and pagers during the meeting. A copy of the full C ity Counc il packet is available to the public. The packet ring binder is located at the entrance of the c ouncil chambers. 4.Roll Call 5.P ledge of Allegiance 6.Approval of Agenda and C onsent Agenda The following items are c onsidered to be routine by the C ity Council and will be enac ted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a C ounc ilmember so requests, in whic h event the item will be removed from the c onsent agenda and c onsidered at the end of C ounc il Consideration I tems. a.A pproval of L icenses - Moti on to approve l icenses as presented b.Resolution Authorizing I ssuance of Conduit Multifamily Housing Revenue Ref unding Bonds Relating to the R E E X erxes Avenue S enior Housing P roject - Motion to Approve a Resol uti on Authorizi ng the Issuance, Sale, and Deli very of Its Condui t Mul ti famil y Housi ng Revenue Refundi ng Bonds Rel ati ng to the REE Xerxes Avenue Seni or Housi ng Project; Approvi ng the Forms of and Authorizi ng the Executi on and Del ivery of the Bonds and Rel ated Documents; Provi di ng for the Securi ty, Ri ghts, and Remedi es wi th Respect to the Bonds; and Granting Approval for Certai n other Acti ons wi th Respect Thereto c.Resolution Accepting B id and Awarding a Contract, I mprovement Project No. 2018-04, 2018 Bridge Rehabilitation Phase 2 - Motion to consi der approval of the l owest responsible bid and award a contract to PCi Roads, Inc. for Improvement Project No. 2018-14, 2018 Bridge Rehabilitation Phase 2. d.Resolution Approving P urchase Agreement for 6000 E wing Avenue as Part of the Brooklyn B oulevard Corridor Project Phase 2 - Motion to consi der approval of the attached resolution approving purchase agreement for 6000 Ewing Avenue as part of the Brooklyn Boulevard Corridor Project Phase 2. e.Resolution Accepting B id and Awarding a Contract, I mprovement Project Nos. 2020-01, 02, 03 and 04, Grandview North A rea S treet, Storm Drainage and Utility I mprovements - Motion to approve the resolution accepti ng the lowest responsible bid and award a contract to R.L. Larson Excavating, Inc., for Improvement Project Nos. 2020-01, 02, 03 and 04, Grandview North Area Street, Storm Drainage, and Utility Improvements. f.Resolution E liminating the P urchase of One Time Use P lastic and S tyrofoam P lates, Utensils, Cups, and S traws with C ity F unds for A ll Buildings - Motion to approve a resoluti on eliminating the purchase of one time use pl astic and styrofoam pl ates, utensils, cups, and straws wi th city funds for al l city buildings g.North Metro Mayors Association J oint P owers Agreement Revised - Adopting revised and amended North Metro Mayors Association Joint Powers Agreement 7.P resentations/P roclamations/Recognitions/D onations a.Hennepin County Sheriff David Hutchinson - Hear and accept the report Hennepin County Sheriff David Hutchinson b.Resolution Recognizing S ue F ogal f or 39 years of S ervice to the C ity of B rooklyn C enter - It i s recommended by the Ci ty Manager that the City Council consider recognizing Accounting Techni cian Sue Fogal for 39 years of service with the City of Brooklyn Center c.Metro Transit P resentation on Brooklyn Center Transit Center I mprovements 8.P ublic Hearings a.A n Ordinance Vacating a P ortion of R ight-of-Way: B rooklyn Boulevard - Motion to consider approval on second readi ng An Ordinance Vacating a Portion of Right-of-Way: Brooklyn Boulevard. - Motion to approve a resoluti on for a summary publ icati on of Ordinance b.Resolution Approving the P rojected Use of F unds for the 2020 Urban Hennepin County Community D evelopment B lock G rant P rogram and A uthorizing Signature of a S ubrecipient A greement with Hennepin County - Motion to open publ ic hearing, take public comment, and close public heari ng - Moti on to approve a resolution approving the projected use of funds for the 2020 Urban Hennepin County Community Development Bl ock Grant program and authorizi ng signature of a subrecipient agreement with Hennepin County c.A n Ordinance Amending Chapter 12 of the C ity Code of Ordinances Regarding Access to Multi-Unit Housing Structures by the United S tates Census Bureau Employees - Motion to open a publi c hearing, take public comment, and close the publ ic hearing. - Adopt Ordinance 2020-03. - Approve a resolution for a summary publication of Ordi nance 2020-03 d.Resolution Adopting a B usiness Subsidy Policy - Motion to open a publi c hearing, take public comment, and close the publ ic hearing. - Motion to adopt a resoluti on adopting a policy and criteri a for granting business subsidies. 9.P lanning C ommission Items 10.C ouncil Consideration Items 11.C ouncil Report 12.Adjournment C ouncil R egular M eeng DAT E:2/24/2020 TO :C ity C ouncil F R O M:C urt Boganey, City Manager T H R O U G H :D r. Reggie Edwards, D eputy C ity M anager BY:A lix Bentrud, D eputy City Clerk S U B J E C T:A pproval of Licens es B ackground: The follow ing bus ines s es /per s ons have applied for C ity licens es as noted. Each busines s /person has fulfilled the requirements of the C ity O rdinance governing respec3v e licens es , submi4ed appropriate applica3ons, and paid proper fees. A pplicants for r ental dwelling licens es are in compliance w ith C hapter 12 of the City C ode of O rdinances , unless comments are noted below the property address on the a4ached rental report. M EC H A N I C A L L I C E N S E P ro M aster P lumbing I nc 9007 J ane R D N L ake Elmo 55042 S I G N H A N G E R L I C E N S E D igital Billboard I nc 16101 Ramsey Blvd N W Ramsey 55303 S trategic Priories and Values: S afe, S ecure, S table C ommunity, O pera3onal Excellence AT TA C H M E N TS : D escrip3on U pload D ate Type Rental C riteria 5/7/2019 Backup M aterial 2-24-2020 Rentals 2/18/2020 Backup M aterial Page 2 of 2 b.Police Service Calls. Police call rates will be based on the average number of valid police calls per unit per year. Police incidences for purposes of determining licensing categories shall include disorderly activities and nuisances as defined in Section 12-911, and events categorized as Part I crimes in the Uniform Crime Reporting System including homicide, rape, robbery, aggravated assault, burglary, theft, auto theft and arson. Calls will not be counted for purposes of determining licensing categories where the victim and suspect are “Family or household members” as defined in the Domestic Abuse Act, Minnesota Statutes, Section 518B.01, Subd. 2 (b) and where there is a report of “Domestic Abuse” as defined in the Domestic Abuse Act, Minnesota Statutes, Section 518B.01, Subd. 2 (a). License Category Number of Units Validated Calls for Disorderly Conduct Service & Part I Crimes (Calls Per Unit/Year) No Category Impact 1-2 0-1 3-4 units 0-0.25 5 or more units 0-0.35 Decrease 1 Category 1-2 Greater than 1 but not more than 3 3-4 units Greater than 0.25 but not more than 1 5 or more units Greater than 0.35 but not more than 0.50 Decrease 2 Categories 1-2 Greater than 3 3-4 units Greater than 1 5 or more units Greater than 0.50 Property Code and Nuisance Violations Criteria License Category (Based on Property Code Only) Number of Units Property Code Violations per Inspected Unit Type I – 3 Year 1-2 units 0-2 3+ units 0-0.75 Type II – 2 Year 1-2 units Greater than 2 but not more than 5 3+ units Greater than 0.75 but not more than 1.5 Type III – 1 Year 1-2 units Greater than 5 but not more than 9 3+ units Greater than 1.5 but not more than 3 Type IV – 6 Months 1-2 units Greater than 9 3+ units Greater than 3 Property AddressDwellingTypeRenewalor InitialOwnerPropertyCodeViolationsLicenseTypePoliceCFS *Final License Type **Previous License Type ***1425 55th Ave NMulti 1 Bldg 4 UnitsRenewal Trung Duong 10 IV 0 IV II1300 67th Ave NBrookside ManorMulti 5 Bldgs 90 UnitsRenewalRoger & Elizabeth Family Properties LLC ‐Met Mitigation Plan202 2.2 per unitIII12 valid calls .14 per unit1121 67th Ave:Theft 3/4/2019, Auto Theft 7/16/2019, Theft 8/23/2019, Burglary 9/4/2019, Disturbance 10/11/2019, Burglary 11/11/2019, Vandalism 11/11/2019, Auto Theft 2/13/20201300 67th Ave N:Burglary 6/24/2019 1306 67th Ave N: Theft 3/25/2019, Burglary 7/20/2019, Auto Theft 12/2/2019III IV3800 66th Ave N Single RenewalNancy Yang / Kayo Investments ‐met mitigation plan9 III 0 III IV3224 67th Ave N Single Renewal Haymat Dasrath 9 III 0 III II5420 Emerson Ave N Single Renewal Christopher Raisch ‐ met action plan 3 II 0 II III5510 France Ave N Single Renewal Kin Chew / Urban Enterprises 19 IV 0 IV II7100 Lee Ave N Single Renewal Selene Avendamo 10 IV 0 IV II5344 Twin Lake Blvd E Single Renewal Takasi Sibuya / John Johansson 0 I 0 I II7012 Unity Ave N Single Renewal Shuxing Sun 9 III 0 III I4118 Woodbine La Single Renewal Ron & Jeanette Blasewitz 0 I 0 I II* CFS = Calls For Service for Renewal Licenses Only (Initial Licenses are not applicable to calls for service and will be listed N/A.)Rental Licenses for Council Approval on February 24, 2020 Property AddressDwellingTypeRenewalor InitialOwnerPropertyCodeViolationsLicenseTypePoliceCFS *Final License Type **Previous License Type ***Rental Licenses for Council Approval on February 24, 2020** License Type Being Issued*** Initial licenses will not showAll properties are current on City utilities and property taxesType 1 = 3 Year Type II = 2 Year Type III = 1 Year C ouncil R egular M eeng DAT E:2/24/2020 TO :C ity C ouncil F R O M:C urt Boganey, City Manager T H R O U G H :N/A BY:M eg Beekman, C ommunity D evelopment D irector S U B J E C T:Res olu*on A uthoriz ing I s s uance of Conduit M ul*family H ousing Revenue Refunding Bonds Rela*ng to the R E E Xerxes Avenue S enior H ous ing P roject B ackground: Real Estate Equi*es, I nc. (R E E) has requested that the C ity issue its revenue refunding bonds in an amo unt up to $38,000,000 to suppo rt the financing o f an 143-unit senior rental ho using f acility a nd related a meni*es at 5801 Xerxes Avenue N . R E E submi@ed an applica*on for conduit revenue bond project financing along with the applicable fee. C ity staff and bond a@orney have reviewed the applica*on and concur that it meets the criteria set forth in the C ity ’s conduit debt administra*ve guidelines. A dministra*ve guidelines include: The project is to be compa*ble with the ov er all development plans and objec*ves of the C ity and of the neighborhood in w hich the project is located. The pr oject is in areas of the C ity that the C ity wis hes to dev elop, redevelop, or w hich in any way complements any development plans or policy of the C ity. I t is als o the C ity ’s intent to assist in bus iness expans ions or reloca*ons w ithin the City where it can be s how n that s uch w ould have a s ubs tan*al, favorable impact on employment or tax base, or both. O n O ctober 14, 2019, the City C ouncil held a public hearing and adopted a resolu*on gran*ng R E E the us e of conduit tax-exempt bonds. O n O ctober 3 0 , 2019, the City issued the original bond amount for the project in the principal amount of $9,101,093. R E E is seeking to reuse a por*on of the bonding a utho rity from the C ity o f S t. Paul from the recent Press Apartments pro ject via recycled bonding authority in an amount up to $3,000,000 towards the fi nancing of the senior housing fa c ility in B rooklyn C enter. I n order to facilitate the reuse of bonding a utho rity, a J o int Powers Agreement is needed. T he a@ached resolu*o n also contains a J o int Powers Agreement that related to the ability to “recycle” bo nding authority, as permi@ed under f ederal tax law, rather than using a new alloca *o n of bonding authority. T his allows R E E to “reuse” bo nding authority from other housing projects in other ci*es for this project in B rooklyn C enter. R E E can also return so me of the alloca*o n rec eived earlier this year and this will free up bonding authority for more affordable housing projects statewide. R E E is now reques*ng conduit revenue refunding bonds in an amount not to exceed $38,000,000 that will allow them to refinance the exis *ng bonding on the pr oject, refund the original bond note w hich w as is s ued on O ctober 30th, and return any outstanding bonds back into the s tatew ide pool. This request will have no impact on the city's ability to leverage future debt or bonding authority. B udget I ssues: The total adminis tra*v e fee that the C ity will r eceive for the is s uance w ill be approximately $95,000. The Bonds will not cons *tute a char ge, lien, or encumbrance, legal or equitable, upon any pr oper ty of Brooklyn Center. The is s uance of the Bonds w ill not affect the City ’s credit ra*ng. S trategic Priories and Values: Targeted Redevelopment AT TA C H M E N TS : D escrip*on U pload D ate Type Res olu*on v2 2/19/2020 Resolu*on Le@er 634301v2BR291-396 Council Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ___________ AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE, SALE, AND DELIVERY OF ITS CONDUIT MULTIFAMILY HOUSING REVENUE REFUNDING BONDS RELATING TO THE REE XERXES AVENUE SENIOR HOUSING PROJECT; APPROVING THE FORMS OF AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION AND DELIVERY OF THE BONDS AND RELATED DOCUMENTS; PROVIDING FOR THE SECURITY, RIGHTS, AND REMEDIES WITH RESPECT TO THE BONDS; AND GRANTING APPROVAL FOR CERTAIN OTHER ACTIONS WITH RESPECT THERETO WHEREAS, the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota (the “City”), is a home rule charter city duly organized and existing under its Charter and the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 462C, as amended (the “Act”), the City is authorized to carry out the public purposes described in the Act by issuing revenue bonds and notes or other obligations to finance or refinance multifamily housing developments located within the City, and as a condition to the issuance of such revenue obligations, adopt a housing program providing the information required by Section 462C.03, subdivision 1a, of the Act; and WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes, Section 471.656, as amended, authorizes a municipality to issue obligations to finance the acquisition or improvement of property located outside of the corporate boundaries of such municipality if the obligations are issued under a joint powers agreement between the municipality issuing the obligations and the municipality in which the property to be acquired or improved is located. Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 471.59, as amended, by the terms of a joint powers agreement entered into through action of their governing bodies, two municipalities may jointly or cooperatively exercise any power common to the contracting parties or any similar powers, including those which are the same except for the territorial limits within which they may be exercised and the joint powers agreement may provide for the exercise of such powers by one or more of the participating governmental units on behalf of the other participating units; and WHEREAS, in the issuance of the City’s revenue obligations and in the making of a loan to finance or refinance a multifamily housing development, the City may exercise, within its corporate limits, any of the powers that the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency may exercise under Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 462A, as amended, including without limitation under the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 475, as amended; and WHEREAS, Brooklyn Center AH II, LLLP, a Minnesota limited liability limited partnership (“Borrower”), has requested that the City issue its revenue refunding bonds, pursuant to the Act, in an aggregate amount not to exceed $38,000,000, in one or more series, at one time or from time to time (the “Bonds”) and lend the proceeds thereof to the Borrower to (i) refund the Multifamily Housing Revenue Note (REE Xerxes Avenue Senior Housing Project), Series 2019 (the “Prior Note”) issued by the City on October 30, 2019 in the original aggregate principal amount of $9,101,093, the proceeds of which were used to finance the acquisition, construction, and equipping of an approximately 143-unit senior rental housing facility and related amenities to be located at 5803 Xerxes Avenue North in the City (formerly the northern portion of the property at 5801 Xerxes Avenue North) (the “Project”); (ii) fund one or more reserve funds to secure the timely payment of the Bonds, if necessary; (iii) pay interest on the Bonds during the 634301v2BR291-396 construction of the Project, if necessary; (iv) pay the costs of issuing the Bonds; and (v) provide additional funds to finance a portion of the costs of the acquisition, construction and equipping of the Project; and WHEREAS, Section 146(i)(6) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”) permits the reuse of bonding authority for affordable housing projects and treats the reuse as a refunding for tax purposes if: (i) the “refunding” occurs within 4 years after the original bonds were issued, (ii) the “refunding” bonds are issued within 6 months after the principal payment of the original bonds, and (iii) the “refunding” bonds mature within 34 years of the original issue date; and WHEREAS, the Borrower has represented to the City that the Bonds will meet the requirements of Section 146(i)(6) of the Code with respect to the reuse of a portion of the bonding authority from the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of the City of Saint Paul, Minnesota (the “HRA”) Multifamily Housing Revenue Bonds (Pioneer Press Apartments Project), Series 2017B issued by the HRA in the original aggregate principal amount of $14,000,000 and Multifamily Housing Revenue Note (Pioneer Press Apartments Project), Series 2017C issued by the HRA in the original aggregate principal amount of $9,000,000 (collectively the “HRA Bonds”); and WHEREAS, in order to better leverage public funding by recycling bonding authority as permitted by Section 146(i)(6) of the Code, the City and the HRA wish to enter into a Joint Powers Agreement, pursuant to which the HRA consents to the issuance of the Bonds to finance, in part, the construction, acquisition, and equipping of the Project, all in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Sections 471.59 and 471.656, as amended, and Section 147(f) of the Code. The City will use up to $3,000,000 of recycled bonding authority from the HRA Bonds, pursuant to the Joint Powers Agreement, in order to finance a portion of the Project; and WHEREAS, the City has approved a housing program providing the information required by Section 462C.03, subdivision 1a of the Act (the “Housing Program”) regarding the issuance by the City of one or more revenue bonds in the maximum principal amount of $38,000,000 to be loaned to the Borrower to finance the acquisition, construction and equipping of the Project; and WHEREAS, a notice of public hearing (the “Public Notice”) was published in accordance with the Act and Section 147(f) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”), with respect to: (i) the required public hearing under the Code; (ii) the required public hearing under Section 462C.04, subdivision 2, of the Act; (iii) the Housing Program; and (iv) approval of the issuance of the Bonds and on October 14, 2019, the City Council conducted a public hearing on the date hereof at which a reasonable opportunity was provided for interested individuals to express their views, both orally and in writing; and WHEREAS, the Bonds will be issued pursuant to this Resolution and the Bonds and the interest on the Bonds: (i) shall be payable solely from the revenues pledged therefor under the Loan Agreement, the Indenture, the Funding Loan Agreement and the Project Loan Agreement (all as hereinafter defined); (ii) shall not constitute a debt of the City within the meaning of any constitutional or statutory limitation; (iii) shall not constitute nor give rise to a pecuniary liability of the City or a charge against its general credit or taxing powers; (iv) shall not constitute a charge, lien, or encumbrance, legal or equitable, upon any property of the City other than the City’s interest in the Loan Agreement and the Project Loan Agreement; and (v) shall not constitute a general or moral obligation of the City; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council (the “Council”) of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota (the “City”), as follows: 1. Findings. The City acknowledges, finds, determines, and declares that the issuance of the Bonds is authorized by the Act and is consistent with the purposes of the Act and that the issuance of the 634301v2BR291-396 Bonds, and the other actions of the City under the Indenture, the Loan Agreement, the Project Loan Agreement, the Funding Loan Agreement, and this resolution constitute a public purpose and are in the interests of the City. The Project constitutes a “qualified residential rental project” within the meaning of Section 142(d) of the Code, and a “multifamily housing development” authorized by the Act, and furthers the purposes of the Act. In authorizing the issuance of the Bonds for the financing and refinancing of the Project and the related costs, the City’s purpose is and the effect thereof will be to promote the public welfare of the City and its residents by providing or preserving affordable multifamily housing developments for low or moderate income residents of the City and otherwise furthering the purposes and policies of the Act. 2. Financing Structure. The Borrower has requested that the City issue, sell, and deliver the Bonds pursuant to a Trust Indenture, dated on or after April 1, 2020 (the “Indenture”), between the Issuer and U.S. Bank National Association, a national banking association (the “Trustee”), as the Multifamily Housing Revenue Refunding Bonds (REE Xerxes Avenue Senior Housing Project), Series 2020 to be purchased by Dougherty & Company, LLC (the “Underwriter”) pursuant to the Purchase Contract, dated on or after the date this Resolution is approved (the “Purchase Contract”), among the Underwriter, the City, and the Borrower and the proceeds derived from the sale of the Bonds will be loaned by the City to the Borrower to refinance the Prior Note and finance a portion of the cost of the Project pursuant to the terms of a Loan Agreement, dated on or after April 1, 2020, by and between the Borrower and the City (the “Loan Agreement”). Pursuant to the Loan Agreement the City will loan the proceeds of the Bonds and transferred, unexpended proceeds of the Prior Note to the Borrower. The Borrower’s repayment obligations under the Loan Agreement will be evidenced by a Promissory Note delivered by the Borrower to the Issuer (the “Promissory Note”), which will be assigned by the Issuer to the Trustee pursuant to an assignment (the “Assignment of Note”) and will be secured by a mortgage granting a mortgage lien on the Project or a portion thereof (the “Mortgage”) to be delivered by the Borrower to the Issuer and assigned to the U.S. Bank National Association, a national banking association, as construction lender, pursuant to an assignment of mortgage (the “Assignment of Mortgage”) and, upon conversion from construction to permanent financing, to the Trustee, acting as the Fiscal Agent for Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation, a shareholder-owned government-sponsored enterprise (“Freddie Mac”), as the permanent mortgage lender. The payments to be made by the Borrower under the Loan Agreement are fixed so as to produce revenue sufficient to pay the principal of, premium, if any, and interest on the Bonds when due. When executed, the right, title and interest of the City in, to and under, among other things, the Loan Agreement (except as therein provided) will be assigned to the Trustee pursuant to the Indenture. The Bonds shall bear interest at the rates, shall be numbered, shall be dated, shall mature, shall be subject to redemption prior to maturity, and shall be in such form and have such other details and provisions as may be prescribed in the Indenture, as executed in accordance with Sections 8 and 16. The Trustee is hereby appointed as the Paying Agent and the Bond Registrar for the Bonds. 3. Conversion. Pursuant to the Indenture, the Bonds will convert from construction financing to permanent financing (the “Conversion”). Upon the satisfaction of certain conditions to Conversion set forth in the Indenture (i) the Bonds shall be subject to mandatory tender, (ii) the purchase price of the Bonds shall be paid with amounts on deposit in with the Trustee on behalf of Freddie Mac as the permanent mortgage lender, and (iii) the Bonds shall be converted to a physical Multifamily Note with designation as Multifamily Housing Revenue Refunding Note (REE Xerxes Avenue Senior Housing Project), Series 2020 (the “Governmental Note”) which shall be purchased by NorthMarq Capital, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company (the “Freddie Mac Seller/Servicer”). In connection with Conversion, the Funding Loan Agreement, dated on or after April 1, 2020 (the “Funding Loan Agreement”), by and between the City, U.S. Bank National Association, a national banking association, in its capacity as fiscal agent (the “Fiscal Agent”) will be executed and will replace and supercede the Indenture and the Project Loan Agreement, dated on or after April 1, 2020 (the “Project Loan Agreement”) by and between the City, the Fiscal Agent 634301v2BR291-396 and the Borrower will be executed and will replace and supercede the Loan Agreement. Additionally, at conversion, the Borrower will issue a project note (the “Project Note”) to the City to secure its obligations under the Project Loan Agreement to be endorsed by the City to the Fiscal Agent. 4. Authorization of Bonds. The Bonds shall bear interest at the rates, shall be designated, shall be numbered, shall be dated, shall mature, shall be in the aggregate principal amount, shall be subject to redemption prior to maturity, shall be in such form, and shall have such other terms, details, and provisions as are prescribed in the Indenture, in substantially the form now on file with the City, with any necessary and appropriate variations, omissions, and insertions (including changes to the aggregate principal amount of the Bonds, the stated maturity of the Bonds, the interest rate or rates on the Bonds and the terms of redemption of the Bonds) as are approved as evidenced by the execution thereof as provided in Sections 8 and 16. The City hereby authorizes the Bonds to be issued in an amount not to exceed $38,000,000, subject to the availability of adequate bonding authority under Section 146 of the Code, in whole or in part, as “tax- exempt bonds,” the interest on which is excludable from gross income for federal and State of Minnesota income tax purposes; provided that, if necessary, certain Bonds may be issued as taxable obligations. The Council hereby authorizes and directs the execution of the Bonds in accordance with the terms of the Indenture, and hereby provides that the Indenture shall provide the terms and conditions, covenants, rights, obligations, duties, and agreements of the owners of the Bonds, the City, and the Trustee as set forth therein. The Trustee is hereby appointed as the Paying Agent and the Bond Registrar for the Bonds. All of the provisions of the Bonds, when executed as authorized herein, shall be deemed to be a part of this Resolution as fully and to the same extent as if incorporated verbatim herein and shall be in full force and effect from the date of execution and delivery thereof. The Bonds shall be substantially in the form in the Indenture on file with the City, which form is hereby approved, with such necessary and appropriate variations, omissions, and insertions (including changes to the aggregate principal amount of the Bonds, the stated maturities of the Bonds, the interest rates on the Bonds and the terms of redemption of the Bonds) as the Mayor and the City Manager (the “City Officials”), in their discretion, shall determine. The execution of the Bonds with the manual or facsimile signatures of the City Officials and the delivery of the Bonds by the City shall be conclusive evidence of such determination. Upon Conversion, the Governmental Note shall bear interest at the rates, shall be designated, shall be numbered, shall be dated, shall mature, shall be in the aggregate principal amount, shall be subject to redemption prior to maturity, shall be in such form, and shall have such other terms, details, and provisions as are prescribed in the Funding Loan Agreement, in substantially the form now on file with the City, with necessary and appropriate variations, omissions, and insertions (including changes to the aggregate principal amount of the Governmental Note, the stated maturity of the Governmental Note, the interest rates on the Governmental Note and the terms of redemption of the Governmental Note) as are approved as evidenced by the execution thereof as provided in Section 8. Pursuant to the Funding Loan Agreement, the City will assign its rights to the basic payments and certain other rights and interests under the Project Loan Agreement, the Project Loan, the Project Note, and certain moneys and securities held by the Fiscal Agent in the funds and accounts established under the Funding Loan Agreement to the Fiscal Agent. 5. Limitation of Liability. The Bonds and the Governmental Note shall be special, limited revenue obligations of the City payable solely from the revenues provided by the Borrower pursuant to the Loan Agreement, the Project Loan Agreement, and other funds pledged pursuant to the applicable Financing Documents; the City does not pledge its general credit or taxing powers or any funds of the City to the payment of the Bonds or the Governmental Note. No provision, covenant or agreement contained in the aforementioned documents, the Bonds, the Governmental Note or in any other document relating to the Bonds or the Governmental Note, and no 634301v2BR291-396 obligation therein or herein imposed upon the City or the breach thereof, shall constitute or give rise to a general or moral obligation of the City or any pecuniary liability of the City or any charge upon its general credit or taxing powers. In making the agreements, provisions, covenants, and representations set forth in such documents, the City has not obligated itself to pay or remit any funds or revenues, other than funds and revenues derived from the Loan Agreement and the Project Loan Agreement which are to be applied to the payment of the Bonds and the Governmental Note, as provided therein and as assigned to the Trustee or the Fiscal Agent, under the Indenture or the Funding Loan Agreement, respectively. 6. Compliance with Certain Rental and Occupancy Restrictions as to the Project. To ensure compliance with certain rental and occupancy restrictions imposed by the Act and Section 142(d) of the Code and to ensure compliance with certain restrictions imposed by the City, the Project will be subject to a Regulatory Agreement, dated as of or after April 1, 2020 (the “Regulatory Agreement”), among the City, the Borrower, and the Trustee. 7. Joint Powers Agreement. The Joint Powers Agreement is hereby approved and the Mayor and the City Manager are hereby authorized to execute and deliver such agreement in substantially the form on file with the City, together with such omissions and insertions as do not materially change the substance thereof, or as the Mayor and the City Manager, in their discretion, shall determine are appropriate and in the best interests of the City, and the execution of the Joint Powers Agreement by the Mayor and the City Manager shall be conclusive evidence of such determination. In accordance with the Joint Powers Agreement, the City is authorized to reuse bonding authority from the HRA Bonds in an amount not to exceed $3,000,000. 8. Approval of Forms; Execution. The City Officials are hereby authorized and directed to execute and deliver the Indenture, the Loan Agreement, the Bonds, the Purchase Contract, the Regulatory Agreement, the Joint Powers Agreement, the Assignment of Mortgage, the Assignment, the Project Loan Agreement, the Funding Loan Agreement, the Governmental Note, the assignment of the Project Note, and any consents or such other documents and certificates as are necessary or appropriate in connection with the issuance, sale, and delivery of the Bonds, including without limitation various certificates of the City, the Information Return for Tax-Exempt Private Activity Bond Issues, Form 8038, a letter prepared in accordance with Section 42(m)(2)(D) of the Code evidencing the determination of the City, as the issuer of the Bonds, based on conclusions of a third party analyst, that the amount of tax credits to be allocated to the Project will not exceed the amount necessary for the financial feasibility of the Project and its viability as a qualified low-income housing project, a certificate as to arbitrage and rebate and similar documents (collectively, the “Financing Documents”). All of the provisions of the Financing Documents, when executed and delivered as authorized herein, shall be deemed to be a part of this resolution as fully and to the same extent as if incorporated verbatim herein and shall be in full force and effect from the date of execution and delivery thereof. The Financing Documents shall be substantially in the forms currently on file with the City, which are hereby approved, with such necessary and appropriate variations, omissions and insertions as do not materially change the substance thereof, and as the City Officials, in their discretion, shall determine, and the execution thereof by the City Officials shall be conclusive evidence of such determination. 9. Bond Opinion. The City hereby authorizes Kennedy & Graven, Chartered, as bond counsel, to prepare, execute, and deliver its approving legal opinions with respect to the Bonds. 10. Official Statement. The City has not participated in the preparation of the Official Statement relating to the offer and sale of the Bonds (the “Official Statement”), and has made no independent investigation with respect to the information contained therein, including the appendices thereto, and the City assumes no responsibility for the sufficiency, accuracy, or completeness of such 634301v2BR291-396 information, except for the information under the captions “THE ISSUER” and “ABSENCE OF LITIGATION—The Issuer.” Subject to the foregoing, the City hereby consents to the distribution and the use by the Underwriter of the Official Statement in connection with the offer and sale of the Bonds. The Official Statement is the sole material consented to by the City for use in connection with the offer and sale of the Bonds. 11. Council Authority; No Personal Liability. Except as otherwise provided in this resolution, all rights, powers, and privileges conferred and duties and liabilities imposed upon the City or the City Council by the provisions of this resolution or of the aforementioned documents shall be exercised or performed by the City or by such members of the City Council, or such officers, board, body or agency thereof as may be required or authorized by law to exercise such powers and to perform such duties. No covenant, stipulation, obligation or agreement herein contained or contained in the aforementioned documents shall be deemed to be a covenant, stipulation, obligation or agreement of any member of the City Council, or any officer, agent or employee of the City in that person’s individual capacity, and neither the City Council nor any officer or employee executing the Bonds or the Governmental Note shall be personally liable on the Bonds or the Governmental Note or be subject to any personal liability or accountability by reason of the issuance thereof. Except as otherwise expressly provided herein, nothing in this resolution or in the aforementioned documents expressed or implied, is intended or shall be construed to confer upon any person or firm or corporation, other than the City, or any holder of the Bonds or the Governmental Note issued under the provisions of this resolution, any right, remedy or claim, legal or equitable, under and by reason of this resolution or any provisions hereof, this resolution, the aforementioned documents, and all of their provisions being intended to be and being for the sole and exclusive benefit of the City, and any holder from time to time of the Bonds or the Governmental Note issued under the provisions of this resolution. 12. Severability. In case any one or more of the provisions of this Resolution, other than the provisions contained Section 5, or of the aforementioned documents, or of the Bonds or the Governmental Note issued hereunder shall for any reason be held to be illegal or invalid, such illegality or invalidity shall not affect any other provision of this resolution, or of the aforementioned documents, or of the Bonds or the Governmental Note, but this Resolution, the aforementioned documents, and the Bonds or the Governmental Note shall be construed and endorsed as if such illegal or invalid provisions had not been contained therein. 13. Validity. The Bonds, when executed and delivered, shall contain a recital that they are issued pursuant to the Act, and such recital shall be conclusive evidence of the validity of the Bonds and the regularity of the issuance thereof, and that all acts, conditions, and things required by the laws of the State of Minnesota relating to the adoption of this resolution, to the issuance of the Bonds, and to the execution of the aforementioned documents to happen, exist, and be performed precedent to the execution of the aforementioned documents have happened, exist, and have been performed as so required by law. 14. Authorization; Direction. The officers of the City, bond counsel, other attorneys, engineers, and other agents or employees of the City are hereby authorized to do all acts and things required of them by or in connection with this resolution, the aforementioned documents, and the Bonds, for the full, punctual, and complete performance of all the terms, covenants, and agreements contained in the Bonds, the aforementioned documents, and this resolution. If for any reason either of the City Officials is unable to execute and deliver the documents referred to in this Resolution, such documents may be executed by any member of the City Council or any officer of the City delegated the duties of such City Officials with the same force and effect as if such documents were executed and delivered by such City Officials. 634301v2BR291-396 15. City Costs. The Borrower shall pay the City’s administrative fee in connection with the issuance of the Bonds, as provided in the Loan Agreement, and pay, or, upon demand, reimburse the City for payment of, any and all costs incurred by the City in connection with the Project and the issuance of the Bonds, whether or not the Bonds are issued, including any costs for attorneys’ fees. The Borrower shall indemnify the City against all liabilities, losses, damages, costs and expenses (including attorney’s fees and expenses incurred by the City) arising with respect to the Project or the Bonds, as provided for and agreed to by the Borrower in the Loan Agreement. 16. Future Amendments. The authority to approve, execute and deliver future amendments to the Financing Documents herein authorized entered into by the City in connection with the issuance of the Bonds and any consents required under the Financing Documents is hereby delegated to the City Officials upon consultation with the City’s Bond Counsel, subject to the following conditions: (a) such amendments or consents do not require the consent of the holder of the Bonds or such consent has been obtained; (b) such amendments or consents to not materially adversely affect the interests of the City; (c) such amendments or consents do not contravene or violate any policy of the City; and (d) such amendments or consents are acceptable in form and substance to the City’s Bond Counsel. The authorization hereby given shall be further construed as authorization for the execution and delivery of such certificates and related items as may be required to demonstrate compliance with the agreements being amended and the terms of this Resolution. The execution of any instrument by the City Officials shall be conclusive evidence of the approval of such instruments in accordance with the terms hereof. In the absence of either of the City Officials, any instrument authorized by this paragraph to be executed and delivered may be executed by the officer of the City or the City authorized to act in his/her place and stead. 17. Governmental Program. The City has established a governmental program of acquiring purpose investments for qualified residential rental projects. The governmental program is one in which the following requirements of §1.148-1(b) of the federal regulations relating to tax-exempt obligations shall be met: (a) the program involves the origination or acquisition of purpose investments; (b) at least 95% of the cost of the purpose investments acquired under the program represents one or more loans to a substantial number of persons representing the general public, states or political subdivisions, 501(c)(3) organizations, persons who provide housing and related facilities, or any combination of the foregoing; (c) at least 95% of the receipts from the purpose investments are used to pay principal, interest, or redemption prices on issues that financed the program, to pay or reimburse administrative costs of those issues or of the program, to pay or reimburse anticipated future losses directly related to the program, to finance additional purpose investments for the same general purposes of the program, or to redeem and retire governmental obligations at the next earliest possible date of redemption; (d) the program documents prohibit any obligor on a purpose investment financed by the program or any related party to that obligor from purchasing Bonds of an issue that finances the program in an amount related to the amount of the purpose investment acquired from that obligor; and (e) the City shall not waive the right to treat the investment as a program investment. 18. Effective Date. This Resolution shall be in full force and effect from and after its approval. 634301v2BR291-396 February 24, 2020 Date Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Councilmember _______________________ and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. C ouncil R egular M eeng DAT E:2/24/2020 TO :C ity C ouncil F R O M:C urt Boganey, City Manager T H R O U G H :N/A BY:D oran Cote, P.E., D irector of P ublic Works S U B J E C T:Res olu,on A ccep,ng Bid and A w arding a Contract, I mprovement P roject No. 2018-04, 2018 Bridge Rehabilita,on P hase 2 B ackground: Bids for the 2 0 1 8 Bridge Rehabilita,on P has e 2 of tw o bridges over S hingle C reek on S hingle Creek Parkway, P roject No. 2018-14, w ere received and opened on February 6, 2020. The bidding results are tabulated below : Bidder:Total Bas e Bid: P C I Roads, L L C $314,328.10 G lobal S pecialty Contractors , I nc. $387,400.00 The updated es ,mated project cost for tw o br idges was $315,0 0 0 .00. O f the tw o bids , the low es t bas e bid of $3 1 4 ,328.1 0 was s ubmi>ed by P C i Roads , L L C of S t. M ichael M N . P C i Roads, L L C has the experience, equipment and capacity to qualify as the low es t res pons ible bidder for the pr oject. S taff checked P Ci Roads L L C ’s refer ences and thos e r eferences w ere pos i,ve. This contr actor has the experience, equipment and capacity to qualify as the low est res pons ible bidder for the pr oject and that they hav e w orked on other s imilar proj ects in the pas t. P C i Roads, L L C is als o currently under contract for the L iC S ta,on 2 Rehabilita,on project. B udget I ssues: The low bid amount of $3 1 4 ,328.1 0 is 0.2 per cent under the cur rent es ,mated cons truc,on cos t of $3 1 5,00 0 . The total es,mated budget in the C apital I mprov ement P r ogr am (C I P ) for rehabilita,on of two bridges w as $240,0 0 0 . The total es ,mated cos t including con,ngencies , administra,on, engineering and legal is $352,900 (s ee a>ached Res olu,on – Costs and Revenues tables ). S trategic Priories and Values: Key Transporta,on I nvestments AT TA C H M E N TS : D escrip,on U pload D ate Type Res olu,on 2/18/2020 Cover Memo Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. _______________ RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID AND AWARDING CONTRACT, IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 2018-14, 2018 BRIDGE REHABILITATION PHASE 2 WHEREAS, pursuant to an advertisement for bids for Improvement Project No. 2018-14, two bids were received, opened and tabulated by the City Engineer on the 6th day of February, 2020. Said bids were as follows: Bidder Total Base Bid Global Specialty Contractors, Inc. $387,400.00 PCi Roads, LLC $314,328.10 WHEREAS, it appears that PCi Roads, LLC of St. Michael, Minnesota is the lowest responsible bidder. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that: 1. The Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized and directed to enter into a contract with PCi Roads LLC of St. Michael, Minnesota, in the name of the City of Brooklyn Center, for Improvement Project No. 2018- 14, according to the plans and specifications therefore approved by the City Council and on file in the office of the City Engineer. 2. The estimated project costs and revenues are as follows: COSTS Estimated per Low Bid Construction Cost $315,000.00 $314,328.10 Engineering and Administrative $ 40,000.00 $ 37,843.00 Contingency $ 20,000.00 $ 728.90 TOTAL $355,000.00 $352,900.00 Amended REVENUES Estimated per Low Bid Street Reconstruction Fund $355,000.00 $325,900.00 RESOLUTION NO. _______________ March 25, 2019 Date Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. C ouncil R egular M eeng DAT E:2/24/2020 TO :C ity C ouncil F R O M:C urt Boganey, City Manager T H R O U G H :N/A BY:D oran M. Cote, P.E., P ublic Works D irector S U B J E C T:Res olu+on A pproving P urchase A greement for 6000 Ew ing Avenue as Part of the Brooklyn Boulevard Corridor P roject P has e 2 B ackground: O n M arch 2 5 , 2019, the C ity Council dir ected staff to proceed w ith the preliminary des ign, environmental documenta+on, easement acquis i+on and final des ign w ork for the Brooklyn Boulev ard C or ridor P roject P has e 2 (Bass L ake Road to I nters tate 94), P roject No. 2021-05. A s iden+fied in the City ’s Capital I mprovements P lan (C I P ), this project is s cheduled to be constructed in 2021. The proposed s tr eet recons truc+on and s treetscape improvements will improve roadw ay s afety, enhance traffic oper a+ons , reduce acces s points and provide impr oved bicycle and pedes trian facili+es for a one-mile s egment of corridor in B rook lyn C enter between Bas s L ake Road (C S A H 1 0 ) and I nter s tate 94. The project w ill enhance bicycle and pedes trian trav el by adding a tr ail, improv ing s idew alks , tr ans it s tops , adding s treetscaping and landscaping, and improving the func+onality of intersec+ons with modified turn lanes and acces s control throughout the corridor. This project consists of P roj ect Nos. 8, 9 and 1 0 fr om the Brooklyn Boulevard C orridor S tudy. A s part of the project it is propos ed to r ealign A dmiral L ane on the w est s ide of Br ookly n Boulevard to line up with 60th Avenue eas t of Brooklyn Boulevard. This propos ed realignment w as included with the approved Br ookly n Boulev ard C orridor S tudy. The realignment w ill make us e of 2 exis +ng vacant Economic D evelopment A uthority (E DA ) ow ned proper+es and 6000 Ew ing Avenue. O n A pril 30, 2019, staff met w ith the ow ner of 6 0 0 0 Ew ing Avenue to dis cus s the poten+al impacts to her property. At the mee+ng, the ow ner as ked if the City w ould be interes ted in acquiring her property. S he cited her adv anced age and diminishing ability to maintain the property as r eas ons for wan+ng to s ell. S taff agreed to obtain an apprais al to deter mine the fair mar ket v alue of the property. S hortly aE er the apprais al w as complete and reviewed by staff, the property ow ner passed away. S taff w as unable to pres ent the appraisal or offer to the owner. W ithin a month of the owner pas s ing, staff was contacted by the ow ner ’s daughter. S he indicated that with her mother ’s passing, s he w ould like to con+nue discussions w ith the C ity about acquiring the property. I n a July 23, 2019 email, the daughter confir med “the estate s +ll w ants to cons ider this s ale to Brooklyn Center.” O n A ugus t 29, 2019, staff pres ented the daughter w ith a L eHer of I ntent to pur chas e her mother ’s property for the appraised value. O n S eptember 6 , 2019, s taff r eceived an email from the property ow ner ’s daughter w hich s tated “We are honored by the respectable offer from Brookly n Center. I t reflects the 6 2 year s of good energy our beau+ful mother has given the city in terms of her volunteering on the Charter C ommis s ion and the H istorical S ociety, w orking as an elec+on j udge, and jus t being a good neighbor and ci+z en. S he would be proud.” O n S eptember 17, 2019 s taff received a s igned LeHer of I ntent agreeing to the apprais ed value offer. S ubs equently, s taff has performed full due diligence on the property including a P has e I Environmental S ite A s s essment (E S A ) and a H azardous Building M aterials I ns pec+on Report (D es truc+ve). There were no s ignificant abnormali+es iden+fied in either report so on N ovember 25, 2019, s taff presented the family a P urchase A greement for the acquis i+on of the property at the appr ais ed value. The P urchase A greement w as signed by the daughter, now ow ner of the property, on J anuary 23, 2020. B udget I ssues: The Brookly n B oulev ar d Corridor P roj ect P hase 2 (Bass L ake Road to I nters tate 94) is iden+fied in the City ’s 2020 C apital I mpr ovement P rogram and the total project cos t is es +mated to be $15,009,000. H ennepin County has es +mated the market value for the parcel to be $207,0 0 0 for taxes payable 2020 (2019 asses s ment). The fair market independently appraised value of the property that w as accepted is $230,000 and the acquisi+on w ould be funded out of the overall project budget. S trategic Priories and Values: Key Transporta+on I nvestments AT TA C H M E N TS : D escrip+on U pload D ate Type Res olu+on 2/18/2020 Cover Memo L oca+on Map 2/18/2020 Cover Memo P urchas e A greement 2/18/2020 Cover Memo Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. _______________ RESOLUTION APPROVING PURCHASE AGREEMENT FOR 6000 EWING AVENUE AS PART OF THE BROOKLYN BOULEVARD CORRIDOR PROJECT PHASE 2 WHEREAS, the City Council has authorized the project titled Brooklyn Boulevard Corridor Project Phase 2 (the “Project”); and WHEREAS, the Project area includes a 1.0-mile segment of Brooklyn Boulevard (County Road 152) between Bass Lake Road (County Road 10) and Interstate 94; and WHEREAS, the Project scope includes reconstruction and streetscape improvements that will improve roadway and intersection safety, enhance traffic operations and provide improved bicycle and pedestrian facilities. The Project will enhance bicycle and pedestrian travel by adding a trail, improving sidewalks and transit stops, adding streetscaping and landscaping and improving the functionality of intersections with modified turn lanes; and WHEREAS, as part of the Project the City needs realign Admiral Lane on the west side of Brooklyn Boulevard to line up with 60th Avenue east of Brooklyn Boulevard: and WHEREAS, the realignment will make use of 2 existing vacant Economic Development Authority (EDA) owned properties and 6000 Ewing Avenue (“Property”) legally described as: Lot 7, Block 1 Pearsons Northport 3rd Addition, according to the recorded plat thereof, County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that acquiring the Property is preferred to attempting to establish an easement over a portion of it as part of the Project; and WHEREAS, the fair market independent appraisal has determined the market value for the Property is $230,000. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that: 1. The City Council hereby approves the Purchase Agreement for the Property to be used as part of the Project. 2. The Mayor and City Manager are authorized to take such actions and execute such documents as may be needed to accomplish the purpose of this Resolution. February 24, 2020 Date Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. Location Map 6000 Ewing Avenue 6000 Ewing Avenue C ouncil R egular M eeng DAT E:2/24/2020 TO :C ity C ouncil F R O M:C urt Boganey, City Manager T H R O U G H :D oran M. Cote, P.E., D irector of P ublic Works BY:M ike A lbers, P.E., C ity Engineer S U B J E C T:Res olu+on A ccep+ng Bid and A w arding a Contract, I mprovement P roject Nos . 2020-01, 02, 03 and 04, G randview North A rea S treet, S torm D rainage and U +lity I mprovements B ackground: Bids for the G randview N orth A rea S treet, S torm D rainage and U+lity I mprov ements, P roj ect Nos. 2020- 01, 02, 0 3 and 04, w er e receiv ed and opened on February 14, 2020. The bidding res ults are tabulated below: B I D D E R: TO TA L B A S E B I D : R.L . L ars on Excava+ng, I nc. $5,074,230.28 Ryan C ontrac+ng Co.$5,263,385.25 S .R. Weidema, I nc.$5,596,684.10 Kuechle U nderground I nc. $5,930,342.16 Northdale C ons truc+on $6,833.396.91 O f the five (5) bids received, the lowes t bid of $5,074,230.28 was s ubmiDed by R .L . L arson Excav a+ng, I nc. of S t. Cloud, M innesota. R .L . L ars on Excav a+ng, I nc. has the experience, equipment and capacity to qualify as the low est responsible bidder for the project. B udget I ssues: The bid amount of $5,074,230.28 is within the 2020 budgeted amount. The total es +mated budget including con+ngencies, adminis tra+on, engineering and legal was $6,2 9 4 ,000.0 0 and is amended to $6,080,894.02, an approximate 3.4 percent decrease (see aDached Res olu+on – C os ts and Revenues tables ). A ddi+onally, $30,224.00 of work was added to the project for the removal of the exis+ng C enter Point Energy gas main, w hich they plan to replace concurr ently with the C ity ’s project. Center Point E ner gy will reimburs e the City for this work that is included in the Contract. S trategic Priories and Values: Key Transporta+on I nvestments AT TA C H M E N TS : D escrip+on U pload D ate Type Res olu+on 2/18/2020 Cover Memo P roject A rea 2/18/2020 Cover Memo Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. _______________ RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID AND AWARDING A CONTRACT, IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NOS. 2020-01, 02, 03 AND 04, GRANDVIEW NORTH AREA STREET, STORM DRAINAGE AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS WHEREAS, pursuant to an advertisement for bids for Improvement Project Nos. 2020-01, 02, 03 and 04, bids were received, opened and tabulated by the City Clerk and Engineer on the 14th day of February, 2020. Said bids were as follows: Bidder Total Base Bid R.L. Larson Excavating, Inc. $5,074,230.28 Ryan Contracting Co. $5,263,385.25 S.R. Weidema, Inc. $5,596,684.10 Kuechle Underground Inc. $5,930,342.16 Northdale Construction $6,833,396.91 WHEREAS, it appears that R.L. Larson Excavating, Inc. of St. Cloud, Minnesota is the lowest responsible bidder. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that 1. The Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized and directed to enter into a contract with R.L. Larson Excavating, Inc. of St. Cloud, Minnesota in the name of the City of Brooklyn Center, for Improvement Project Nos. 2020-01, 02, 03 and 04, according to the plans and specifications therefore approved by the City Council and on file in the office of the City Engineer. 2. The estimated project costs and revenues are as follows: Amended Amended COSTS Estimate (11/5/19) per Low Bid Contract $ 5,151,500.00 $ 5,074,230.28 Lighting $ 49,500.00 $ 26,063.74 Contingency $ 520,500.00 $ 408,100.00 Subtotal Construction Cost $ 5,721,500.00 $ 5,508,394.02 Admin/Legal/Engr. $ 572,500.00 $ 572,500.00 Total Estimated Project Cost $ 6,294,000.00 $ 6,080,894.02 RESOLUTION NO. _______________ Amended Amended REVENUES Estimate (11/5/19) per Low Bid Street Assessment $ 655,062.47 $ 655,062.47 Storm Drainage Assessment $ 218,505.97 $ 218,505.97 Sanitary Sewer Utility $ 1,060,000.00 $ 1,166,211.50 Water Utility Fund $ 784,000.00 $ 772,796.00 Storm Drainage Utility Fund $ 1,261,494.03 $ 1,032,797.03 Street Light Utility $ 60,000.00 $ 33,663.74 Street Reconstruction Fund $ 2,254,937.53 $ 2,170,833.31 CenterPoint Energy $ -0- $ 30,224.00 Miscellaneous (plan sales) $ -0- $ 800.00 Total Estimated Revenue $ 6,294,000.00 $ 6,080,894.02 February 24, 2020 Date Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. §¨¦69 4 59 TH AVE N DUPONT AVE NCOLFAX AVE N60 TH AVE N EMERSON AVE NL IL A C D R N FREMONT AVE N61ST AVE N 62ND AVE N 6 3 R D L N N EARLE BROWN DRGIRARD AVE NHUMBOLDT AVE NLILACDRNProj ect Area Gra nd view Nort h St reet and Utility Improvements Ü Figu re 1 £¤10 0 C ouncil R egular M eeng DAT E:2/24/2020 TO :C ity C ouncil F R O M:C urt Boganey, City Manager T H R O U G H :N/A BY:C ornelius L. Boganey, C ity M anager S U B J E C T:Res olu(on Elimina(ng the P urchase of O ne Time U s e P las(c and S tyrofoam P lates , U tensils, Cups, and S traws with C ity F unds for A ll Buildings B ackground: At the February 10, 2020, City Council work ses s ion, you w ere presented with a Environmental S us tainability Report. At that (me, the C ity C ouncil dis cus s ed addi(onal ini(a(ves for being environmentally res pons ible. The C ity Council agr eed that elimina(ng the us e of one (me plas (c and s tyr ofoam plates, utens ils , cups and s traw s from being purchased w ith city funds was a s tep forw ard for the envir onment. A4ached is a res olu(on for your cons idera(on for this ini(a(ve. B udget I ssues: - None S trategic Priories and Values: Enhanced Community I mage, O pera(onal Excellence AT TA C H M E N TS : D escrip(on U pload D ate Type Res olu(on 2/19/2020 Resolu(on Le4er Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. __________ RESOLUTION ELIMINATING THE PURCHASE OF ONE TIME USE PLASTIC AND STYROFOAM PLATES, UTENSILS, CUPS, AND STRAWS WITH CITY FUNDS FOR ALL CITY BUILDINGS WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center was presented the Environmental Sustainability Report at their February 10, 2020 work session meeting; and WHEREAS, the City Council of Brooklyn Center agreed that the City should lead and set the example as stewards of the environment; and WHEREAS, the City Council of Brooklyn Center agreed eliminating the purchase of one time use plastic and Styrofoam plates, utensils, cups, and straws with city funds for all city buildings was a step forward in being environmentally responsible. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center that one time use plastic and styrofoam plates, utensils, cups, and straws are eliminated from being purchased with city funds for all city buildings effective March 1, 2020 February 24, 2020 Date Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. C ouncil R egular M eeng DAT E:2/24/2020 TO :C ity C ouncil F R O M:C urt Boganey, City Manager T H R O U G H :N/A BY:C ornelius L. Boganey, C ity M anager S U B J E C T:North M etro Mayors A s s ocia)on Joint Powers A greement Revised B ackground: I have a0ached a copy of the revised and amended J oint Pow ers A greement w ith the North M etro Mayors A s s ocia)on. The changes are largely housekeeping ma0ers to bring the current language into alignment w ith current prac)ces. The mos t s ignificant change is the addi)onal of the City of F ridley to the membership roll. For these changes to take effect all members must adopt the revis ed agreement. A pproval is recommended. B udget I ssues: - None S trategic Priories and Values: O pera)onal Excellence AT TA C H M E N TS : D escrip)on U pload D ate Type N M M A J PA R E V I S E D 2/19/2020 Cover Memo J PA M arkup 2/19/2020 Cover Memo 1 2019 AMENDED AND RESTATED JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT FOR A COALITION OF METROPOLITAN COMMUNITIES THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into by and between the cities of Andover, Anoka, Blaine, Brooklyn Center, Brooklyn Park, Champlin, Circle Pines, Coon Rapids, Dayton, Fridley, Mounds View, Maple Grove, New Brighton, New Hope, Ramsey, Spring Lake Park, which cities are all of the current members (hereinafter collectively referred to as the “Current Members”) of the North Metro Mayors Association, a Minnesota joint powers organization (hereinafter referred to as the “Coalition”). WHEREAS, the Current Members determined in 2010 that it was in the best interest of the public to amend the joint powers agreement of the Coalition; and WHEREAS, the Current Members determined in 2019 that it is the best interest of the public to amend the Amended and Restated JPA of the Coalition as hereinafter set forth. NOW THEREFORE, pursuant to the authority granted by Minnesota Statutes, Section 471.59, the parties hereto agree that the Original Joint Powers Agreement and Amended and Restated JPA is amended and restated as follows: 1) NAME OF ORGANIZATION. The parties hereby create a joint powers organization to be known as the North Metro Mayors Association (hereinafter referred to as the “Coalition”). 2) MEMBERS. Entities authorized to be parties to a joint powers agreement by Minnesota Statutes, Section 471.59 may join the Coalition as members upon approval of a majority of the Member Cities, approval by resolution of the governing body of the entity, execution of a copy of this Agreement and filing of an executed copy of the resolution and agreement with the Coalition. 3) PURPOSE. The purpose of the Coalition is to promote transportation and economic development and to assist governmental units in providing government services and conducting government functions effectively and efficiently. 4) BOARD OF DIRECTORS. The governing body of the Coalition shall be its Board of Directors. Each member shall appoint two (2) directors. Each director shall have one (1) vote. Board Members shall hold office at the pleasure of the appointing member and shall remain in office until replaced. A majority of the Member Cities shall constitute a quorum of the Board. 5) COMMITTEES. The Board of Directors shall appoint an Operating Committee. The Operating Committee shall have authority to manage the affairs and business of the 2 Coalition between Board meetings, but at all times, shall be subject to the control and direction of the Board. The Operating Committee shall meet as needed at a time and place to be determined by the Chair of Operating Committee. The Board may establish such other committees, task forces or working groups as it deems appropriate. 6) MEETINGS. The Coalition shall meet on call of the President, the Executive Director or chair of the Operating Committee. 7) FINANCIAL MATTERS. Coalition funds may be expended consistent with the annual operating budget adopted by the Board. Other legal instruments shall be executed by Coalition officers with authority granted by the Board. The Board shall have no authority to expend funds in excess of the Coalition funds or incur any debt. The financial contribution of the members in support of the Coalition shall be determined annually by the Board. Each of the members shall, by February 2 of each year, pay to the Coalition an amount as annually determined by the Board. The Board may authorize changes in the member assessment for all members upon majority vote. The annual member assessment levy shall be determined by October 1 of the preceding year. Special member assessments may be made upon Board approval by majority vote for a project and program not budgeted, however, members shall retain the right to participate in such project or program in their sole discretion. The Board may receive financial contributions from counties, non-profit organizations, private associations, entities or financial institutions. The Board may make such counties, non-profit organizations, associations, entities or institutions associate members. Associate members may send representatives to Board meetings, but shall not be entitled to representation on the Board or have any voting rights. 8) BYLAWS. The Board of Directors shall adopt such bylaws and procedures as it deems appropriate for the administration of the Coalition and the conduct of its meetings. Such bylaws may be adopted and amended only by a majority vote of all Member Cities. 9) OFFICERS. At the first meeting of the Board of Directors in each year, the Board will elect from its members a President, a Vice President, a Treasurer and a Secretary and such other officers as it deems necessary to conduct its meetings and affairs. The offices of Treasurer and Secretary may be held by the same person. 10) POWERS. A. The Coalition may employ such persons as it deems necessary to accomplish its 3 purposes. B. The Coalition may contract with any members, other governmental units or other entities to accomplish its purposes. C. The Coalition may contract for space, equipment and supplies to carry on its activities. D. The Coalition shall designate one or more national or state banks or trust companies authorized by Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 118A or 427, to receive deposit of public monies to act as depositories for the Coalition’s funds. No funds may be disbursed without the signatures of an authorized officer. E. The Coalition shall purchase such insurance as it deems appropriate but shall purchase liability insurance in at least the amount of potential liability for political subdivisions under Minnesota Statutes, Section 466.04. F. The Coalition may undertake programs and contract with members, and with any non-members authorized to enter into joint powers agreements under Minnesota Statutes, Section 471.59, to provide services to those contracting parties including, but not limited to, joint purchasing of supplies, other products, equipment and services; provided, however, that the Coalition may provide such services to individual members or to non-members only when the program is self-supporting and will not result in any non-participating member incurring expenses or in expenditure of any of the Coalition funds derived from membership contributions without the approval of the Board. 11) WITHDRAWAL. Any member may withdraw from the Coalition effective on January 1 of any year by giving written notice to the Coalition prior to October 15 of the preceding year. 12) TERMINATION. The Coalition shall be dissolved if less than three (3) members remain, or by mutual signed agreement of all of the members. Upon termination, remaining assets of the Coalition shall be distributed to the members still remaining at the time of termination, pro rated according to their respective contributions for the year of termination. 13) NOTICES. All notices or other communications required to be given to the Coalition shall be sufficiently given and shall be deemed given when delivered or mailed by registered or certified mail, postage prepaid. 14) AMENDMENTS. This Agreement may be amended and become effective only by written agreement entered into by all members in good standing. 15) MULTIPLE EXECUTION. This Agreement may be executed simultaneously in any number of counterparts, each of which counterparts shall be deemed to be an original 4 and all such counterpart shall constitute but one and the same instrument. An originally executed counterpart shall be filed with the Executive Director, North Metro Mayors Association, 1000 Westgate, Suite #201, St. Paul, MN 55114. 16) EFFECTIVE DATE. This Agreement shall be in full force and effect upon receipt by the Executive Director, North Metro Mayors Association, 1000 Westgate, Suite #201, St. Paul, MN 55114, of an executed copy hereof. Upon receipt of all such documents, the previous Joint Powers Agreement 2010 and Amended and Reinstated JPA shall be superseded and replaced by this Agreement, and the Coalition will promptly mail a copy of the fully executed agreement to each of the Current Members. [The remainder of this page intentionally left blank.] 5 CITY OF ANDOVER By: And by: CITY OF ANOKA By: And by: CITY OF BLAINE By: And by: CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER By: And by: 6 CITY OF BROOKLYN PARK By: And by: CITY OF CHAMPLIN By: And by: CITY OF CIRCLE PINES By: And by: CITY OF COON RAPIDS By: And by: 7 CITY OF DAYTON By: And by: CITY OF FRIDLEY By: ________________________________ And by:_____________________________ CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW By: And by: CITY OF MAPLE GROVE By: And by: CITY OF NEW BRIGHTON By: And by: 8 CITY OF NEW HOPE By: And by: CITY OF RAMSEY By: And by: CITY OF SPRING LAKE PARK By: And by: 1 2019 AMENDED AND RESTATED JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT FOR A COALITION OF METROPOLITAN COMMUNITIES THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into by and between the cities of Andover, Anoka, Blaine, Brooklyn Center, Brooklyn Park, Champlin, Circle Pines, Coon Rapids, Dayton, Fridley Mounds View, Maple Grove, New Brighton, New Hope, Ramsey, Spring Lake Park, which cities are all of the current members (hereinafter collectively referred to as the “Current Members”) of the North Metro Mayors Association, a Minnesota joint powers organization (hereinafter referred to as the “Coalition”). WHEREAS, the Current Members determined in 2010 that it was in the best interest of the public to amend the joint powers agreement of the Coalition; and WHEREAS, the Current Members determined in 2019 that it is the best interest of the public to amend the Amended and Restated JPA of the Coalition as hereinafter set forth. NOW THEREFORE, pursuant to the authority granted by Minnesota Statutes, Section 471.59, the parties hereto agree that the Original Joint Powers Agreement and Amended and Restated JPA is amended and restated as follows: 1) NAME OF ORGANIZATION. The parties hereby create a joint powers organization to be known as the North Metro Mayors Association (hereinafter referred to as the “Coalition”). 2) MEMBERS. Entities authorized to be parties to a joint powers agreement by Minnesota Statutes, Section 471.59 may join the Coalition as members upon approval of a majority of the Member Cities, approval by resolution of the governing body of the entity, execution of a copy of this Agreement and filing of an executed copy of the resolution and agreement with the Coalition. 3) PURPOSE. The purpose of the Coalition is to promote transportation and economic development and to assist governmental units in providing government services and conducting government functions effectively and efficiently. 4) BOARD OF DIRECTORS. The governing body of the Coalition shall be its Board of Directors. Each member shall appoint two (2) directors. Each director shall have one (1) vote. Board Members shall hold office at the pleasure of the appointing member and shall remain in office until replaced. A majority of the Member Cities shall constitute a quorum of the Board. 5) COMMITTEES. The Board of Directors shall appoint an Operating Committee. The Operating Committee shall have authority to manage the affairs and business of the 2 Coalition between Board meetings, but at all times, shall be subject to the control and direction of the Board. The Operating Committee shall meet as needed at a time and place to be determined by the Chair of Operating Committee. The Board may establish such other committees, task forces or working groups as it deems appropriate. 6) MEETINGS. The Coalition shall meet on call of the President, the Executive Director or chair of the Operating Committee. 7) FINANCIAL MATTERS. Coalition funds may be expended consistent with the annual operating budget adopted by the Board. Other legal instruments shall be executed by Coalition officers with authority granted by the Board. The Board shall have no authority to expend funds in excess of the Coalition funds or incur any debt. The financial contribution of the members in support of the Coalition shall be determined annually by the Board. Each of the members shall, by February 2nd of each year, pay to the Coalition an amount as annually determined by the Board. The Board may authorize changes in the member assessment for all members upon majority vote. The annual member assessment levy shall be determined by October 1st of the preceding year. Special member assessments may be made upon Board approval by majority vote for a project and program not budgeted, however, members shall retain the right to participate in such project or program in their sole discretion. The Board may receive financial contributions from counties, non-profit organizations, private associations, entities or financial institutions. The Board may make such counties, non-profit organizations, associations, entities or institutions associate members. Associate members may send representatives to Board meetings, but shall not be entitled to representation on the Board or have any voting rights. 8) BYLAWS. The Board of Directors shall adopt such bylaws and procedures as it deems appropriate for the administration of the Coalition and the conduct of its meetings. Such bylaws may be adopted and amended only by a majority vote of all Member Cities. 9) OFFICERS. At the first meeting of the Board of Directors in each year, the Board will elect from its members a President, a Vice President, a Treasurer and a Secretary and such other officers as it deems necessary to conduct its meetings and affairs. The offices of Treasurer and Secretary may be held by the same person. 10) POWERS. A. The Coalition may employ such persons as it deems necessary to accomplish its 3 purposes. B. The Coalition may contract with any members, other governmental units or other entities to accomplish its purposes. C. The Coalition may contract for space, equipment and supplies to carry on its activities. D. The Coalition shall designate one or more national or state banks or trust companies authorized by Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 118A or 427, to receive deposit of public monies to act as depositories for the Coalition’s funds. No funds may be disbursed without the signatures of an authorized officer. E. The Coalition shall purchase such insurance as it deems appropriate but shall purchase liability insurance in at least the amount of potential liability for political subdivisions under Minnesota Statutes, Section 466.04. F. The Coalition may undertake programs and contract with members, and with any non-members authorized to enter into joint powers agreements under Minnesota Statutes, Section 471.59, to provide services to those contracting parties including, but not limited to, joint purchasing of supplies, other products, equipment and services; provided, however, that the Coalition may provide such services to individual members or to non-members only when the program is self-supporting and will not result in any non-participating member incurring expenses or in expenditure of any of the Coalition funds derived from membership contributions without the approval of the Board. 11) WITHDRAWAL. Any member may withdraw from the Coalition effective on January 1 of any year by giving written notice to the Coalition prior to October 15 of the preceding year. 12) TERMINATION. The Coalition shall be dissolved if less than three (3) members remain, or by mutual signed agreement of all of the members. Upon termination, remaining assets of the Coalition shall be distributed to the members still remaining at the time of termination, pro rated according to their respective contributions for the year of termination. 13) NOTICES. All notices or other communications required to be given to the Coalition shall be sufficiently given and shall be deemed given when delivered or mailed by registered or certified mail, postage prepaid. 14) AMENDMENTS. This Agreement may be amended and become effective only by written agreement entered into by all members in good standing. 15) MULTIPLE EXECUTION. This Agreement may be executed simultaneously in any number of counterparts, each of which counterparts shall be deemed to be an original 4 and all such counterpart shall constitute but one and the same instrument. An originally executed counterpart shall be filed with the Executive Director, North Metro Mayors Association, 1000 Westgate, Suite #201, St. Paul, MN 55114. 16) EFFECTIVE DATE. This Agreement shall be in full force and effect upon receipt by the Executive Director, North Metro Mayors Association, 1000 Westgate, Suite #201, St. Paul, MN 55114, of an executed copy hereof. Upon receipt of all such documents, the previous Joint Powers Agreement 2010 and Amended and Reinstated JPA shall be superseded and replaced by this Agreement, and the Coalition will promptly mail a copy of the fully executed agreement to each of the Current Members. [The remainder of this page intentionally left blank.] 5 CITY OF ANDOVER By: And by: CITY OF ANOKA By: And by: CITY OF BLAINE By: And by: CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER By: And by: 6 CITY OF BROOKLYN PARK By: And by: CITY OF CHAMPLIN By: And by: CITY OF CIRCLE PINES By: And by: CITY OF COON RAPIDS By: And by: CITY OF DAYTON By: 7 And by: CITY OF FRIDLEY By: And by: CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW By: And by: CITY OF MAPLE GROVE By: And by: CITY OF NEW BRIGHTON By: And by: CITY OF NEW HOPE 8 By: And by: CITY OF RAMSEY By: And by: CITY OF SPRING LAKE PARK By: And by: C ouncil R egular M eeng DAT E:2/24/2020 TO :C ity C ouncil F R O M:C urt Boganey, City Manager T H R O U G H :N/A BY:C ornelius L. Boganey, C ity M anager S U B J E C T:H ennepin County S heriff D avid H utchinson B ackground: S heriff H utchins on w ill provide a s hort verbal presenta/on regarding H ennepin C ounty S heriff's departments ac/vi/es . B udget I ssues: - None S trategic Priories and Values: S afe, S ecure, S table C ommunity C ouncil R egular M eeng DAT E:2/24/2020 TO :C ity C ouncil F R O M:C urt Boganey, City Manager T H R O U G H :N/A BY:M ark Ebens teiner, F inance D irector S U B J E C T:Res olu(on Recognizing S ue Fogal for 39 years of S ervice to the City of Brooklyn Center B ackground: P lease find a2ached, a C ity C ouncil res olu(on expres s ing apprecia(on to A ccoun(ng Technician S ue Fogal for 39 years of service with the City of Brooklyn Center. S ue Fogal s tarted with the City of Brooklyn Center F inance D epartment on June 9, 1980 and w ill re(re on February 28, 2020. O ver the years of dedicated service S ue has been instrumental in ens uring the accounts payable proces s ran s moothly. S he has s uperbly supported staff and has been a valuable asset to the both the finance department and the city. B udget I ssues: None S trategic Priories and Values: O pera(onal Excellence AT TA C H M E N TS : D escrip(on U pload D ate Type Res olu(on 2/19/2020 Resolu(on Le2er Excerpt from C ouncil Policies 2/19/2020 Backup M aterial Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. _______________ RESOLUTION EXPRESSING RECOGNITION AND APPRECIATION TO SUE FOGAL FOR OVER 39 YEARS OF DEDICATED PUBLIC SERVICE TO THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER WHEREAS, Sue Fogal was hired as an Accounting Clerk in the Finance Department on June 9, 1980; and WHEREAS, Sue Fogal currently serves as an Accounting Technician and during the more than 39 years with Fiscal and Support Services, Sue provided superb administrative support to the staff, including filling in and backing up utility billing, and directly supported the department’s mission; and WHEREAS, Sue Fogal has diligently worked with Finance Directors Paul Holmlund, Charlie Hansen, Doug Sell, Dan Jordet, Nate Reinhardt, and Mark Ebensteiner over her 39-year tenure; and WHEREAS, Sue Fogal has worked in three finance systems during her career including Geminus, IFAS, and JD Edwards, and has been a key contributor to the integrity of the data and software, collaborating with LOGIS during the implementations and upgrades; and WHEREAS, Sue Fogal has been consistent and dependable in the daily operations of the accounts payable process with city staff and vendors throughout her career; and WHEREAS, Sue Fogal has been instrumental in implementing and updating the automated accounts payable system – including training department users and vendors, working with LOGIS to maintain system and troubleshooting any issues that arise. Sue’s dedication, pride in her work and willingness to learn have had a direct impact on the success of the system and new processes; and WHEREAS, Sue Fogal was a key contributor in organizing accounts payable documents for record retention in Laserfiche scanning; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center wishes to recognize the dedication and professionalism Sue has displayed in discharging her duties and the positive impact she has made on the City and its citizens. RESOLUTION NO. _______________ NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, upon the recommendation of the City Manager, that we recognize the retirement of Sue Fogal on February 28, 2020 with more than 39 years of service and express sincere appreciation for her dedicated public service. February 28, 2020 Date Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. Except from Council Policies 2.94 Employee Service Recognition Program The City of Brooklyn Center’s Employee Service Recognition Program is to recognize City employees for years of service to the City. Effective January 1, 1997, the City of Brooklyn Center’s Employee Service Recognition Program will include recognition of part-time City employees for their years of service to the City. The program recognizes all regular full- time and part-time employees who work 20 or more hours a week year round for the City of Brooklyn Center and part-time Fire Department employees retiring in good standing. The recognition is accomplished by the presentation of awards by the City Manager or by the Department Director. Awards are for recognition of years of service as follows: Five Years Awards such as City of Brooklyn Center sweatshirt and a personalized letter from the City Manager are given to employee. 10 Years Awards such as an engraved paperweight or engraved key chain and a personalized letter from the City Manager are given to the employee. 15 Years Awards such as an engraved letter opener, pocket knife, or desk clock and a personalized letter from the City Manager are given to the employee. 20 Years Awards such as an engraved desk set and a personalized letter from the City Manager are given to the employee. Council recognizes years of employment at a Council meeting. 25 Years Awards such as an engraved wall clock or wrist watch and a personalized letter from the City Manager are given to the employee. Council recognizes years of employment at a Council meeting. 30 Years Awards such as an engraved weather instrument and a personalized letter from the City Manager are given to the employee. Council recognizes years of employment at a Council meeting. Awarded Upon Retirement to Employee Who Has Completed Ten Years or More of Service: Awarded personalized Council resolution giving thanks for the work and dedication of the retiring employee mounted on a plaque presented by the City Manager. Employee Service Recognition Program is funded through the budget. Reference: City Council Resolution No. 97-25; Amended Res. 2019-006 C ouncil R egular M eeng DAT E:2 /24/2 0 2 0 TO :C ity Council F R O M:C ur t Boganey, C ity M anager T H R O U G H :N/A BY:M eg B eekman, Community D ev elopment D irector S U B J E C T:M etro Trans it P resenta+on on B rook lyn C enter Trans it C enter I mpr ovements B ackground: Representa+v es fr om M etro Transit will be pr es ent to go ov er planned improv ements to the Brooklyn Center Transit C enter and ans w er ques+ons about the upcoming project. AT TA C H M E N TS : D escrip+on Upload D ate Ty pe M etro Trans it P r es enta+on 2/21/2020 Backup M aterial Brooklyn Center Transit Center Renovation Brooklyn Center City Council Update February 24, 2020 BCTC Renovation-Location N BCTC Renovation •Why is the building being renovated? –Opened in 2004, deteriorating plaza concrete, accessibility concerns –Safety and security issues made worse with long hallways and waiting areas on west and east ends –Interior renovation will provide improved passenger amenities –Opportunity to reprogram interior spaces to support changing use, such as MTPD daily use –Introduction of C Line in 2019 and planned D Line in 2022, as well as planned adjacent development BCTC Renovation —Existing Conditions Add canopies on east/west ends Exterior plaza concrete to be replaced Replace damaged fence panels BCTC Renovation —Existing Conditions Long hallways create safety & security concerns Wood slats added to ceiling to provide warmer atmosphere Remote public waiting areas BCTC Renovation —Outreach Efforts •Significant interest in extended hours for bathrooms + general facilities •Pre-C Line survey: 30% interest in increased staff presence, both MTPD and general staff •Transfer hub used to commute, access public/medical services, and shopping needs •Most common origin-destination: BC<->MPLS BCTC Renovation —Outreach Efforts BCTC Renovation—Project Description •Exterior elements: –Replacing plaza concrete –Adding canopies on west and east ends –Landscape reintroduced into plaza •Interior spaces: –Public waiting area consolidated to building center, softened with finishes and warmer ceiling material at lower height –Renovating public restrooms –Providing additional space for bus operators and MTPD on west and east ends BCTC Renovation —Renderings Looking northwest BCTC Renovation —Renderings Looking east BCTC Renovation —Renderings Public waiting area BCTC Renovation —Renderings Public waiting area BCTC Renovation —Renderings Public waiting area BCTC Renovation—Artwork Opportunity •Metro Transit and Brooklyn Center working to utilize space in public waiting area for artwork •Open space unprogrammed on wall in public waiting area for yet to be determined artwork •Metro Transit and Brooklyn Center working to determine the artwork medium, as well as funding and ownership/maintenance BCTC Renovation—Schedule & Staging •Construction Schedule –Plans complete –Quarter 1 2020 –Construction begins –Quarter 2 2020 –Construction complete –Quarter 4 2020 •Construction Staging –Plaza concrete work completed in stages, proposing temporarily relocating four gates to Northway Drive to limit impacts to transit users –Interior facility closed to public, bus operators and MTPD during construction BCTC Renovation—Questions •Questions? Alicia Vap, Metro Transit alicia.vap@metrotransit.org C ouncil R egular M eeng DAT E:2/24/2020 TO :C ity C ouncil F R O M:C urt Boganey, City Manager T H R O U G H :D oran M. Cote, P.E., D irector of P ublic Works BY:M ike A lbers, P.E., C ity Engineer S U B J E C T:A n O rdinance Vaca-ng a Por-on of Right-of-Way: Brooklyn Boulevard B ackground: O n May 9, 2016, the City Council directed s taff to proceed with the preliminary design, environmental documenta-on, easement acquis i-on and final des ign w ork for the Brooklyn Boulev ard C or ridor P roject P has e 1 (49th Avenue to Bas s Lake Road), P roject No. 2018-05, S P 109-020-013. The City of Brooklyn Center ow ns a fee interes t in cer tain lands located adj acent to Brook lyn Boulevard, legally described in the aBached Exhibit A . The s ubject ar ea for vaca-on w as for merly used for a s ec-on of roadw ay that was r emoved as par t of the Boulev ard C orr idor P roject P has e 1 . This vacated area w ould be us ed to mi-gate the los s of par king on the Br ookdale C ovenant Church property due to the installa-on of a new s ignal at Trunk H ighway 100 S outh Ramp and the extens ion of Lilac D rive North. The property owner w ill be required to dedicate a drainage and u-lity eas ement over the v acated por-on of the right-of-way to maintain access to the exis-ng u-li-es w ithin the vacated area. Consistent w ith the City Charter, at its J anuary 13, 2 0 2 0 , mee-ng, the City Council approv ed the first reading of this ordinance and no-ce of the P ublic H earing w as published in the official new s paper on January 23, 2 0 2 0 . The second reading and P ublic H earing are scheduled for February 24, 2 0 2 0 . I f adopted by the City Council, the ordinance w ould be effec-ve aFer thirty days follow ing legal publica-on. B udget I ssues: There are no budget is s ues to consider. S trategic Priories and Values: Key Transporta-on I nvestments AT TA C H M E N TS : D escrip-on U pload D ate Type O rdinance 2/19/2020 O rdinance Res olu-on 2/19/2020 Resolu-on LeBer CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held on the 24nd day of February, 2020, at 7:00 p.m. or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard at the City Hall, 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway, to consider an ordinance vacating certain public right-of-way adjacent to Brooklyn Boulevard. Auxiliary aids for persons with disabilities are available upon request at least 96 hours in advance. Please contact the City Clerk at 763-569-3300 to make arrangements. ORDINANCE NO. 2020-01 AN ORDINANCE VACATING A PORTION OF RIGHT-OF-WAY: BROOKLYN BOULEVARD WHEREAS, The City of Brooklyn Center owns a fee interest in certain lands originally acquired for highway purposes, all of which are located adjacent to Brooklyn Boulevard, legally described in the attached Exhibit A (the “Subject Right-of-Way”); WHEREAS, the Subject Right-of-Way is no longer needed for a public purpose; and WHEREAS, after due notice and a public hearing, the City Council has determined that it is in the public interest to vacate the Subject Right-of-Way pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, sections 412.851. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Article I. The above recitals are hereby adopted as findings and incorporated into this Ordinance. Article III. The Subject Right-of-Way is hereby vacated. Article IV. This ordinance shall be effective after adoption and thirty days following its legal publication. Article V. Upon the ordinance becoming effective, the City Clerk is directed to prepare a Notice of Completion of Vacation Proceedings and to record it with the Hennepin County Recorder or Hennepin County Registrar of Titles, as appropriate. Adopted this 24th day of February, 2020. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ City Clerk Date of Publication_________________________ Effective Date_____________________________ EXHIBIT A Legal Description All that part of the Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 10, Township 118, Range 21, Hennepin County, Minnesota, lying east of the following-described “Parcel A” and lying west of the following described “Line A” and lying between the northerly boundary line of "Parcel A” extended East and the southern-most boundary line of "Parcel A” extended East, to wit: “Parcel A” being all that part of the Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 10, Township 118, Range 21, Hennepin County, Minnesota, described as follows: Beginning at the point of intersection of the Southeasterly line of the right-of way of State Trunk Highway Number 100 with a line drawn East from a point on the West line of said Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter, distant 518 feet South of the Northwest corner of said Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter; thence East 64.2 feet to the Southwesterly line of the right-of-way of County Road Number 152, formerly State Highway Number 152; thence Southeasterly along said right-of-way line of County Road Number 152, formerly State Highway Number 152, a distance of 600 feet; thence West 200 feet; thence Northwesterly parallel with said right-of- way line of County Road Number 152, formerly State Highway Number 152, a distance of 150 feet; thence West 292.50 feet to said right-of-way line of State Trunk Highway Number 100; thence Northeasterly along said right-of-way line of State Trunk Highway Number 100 a distance of 493.9 feet, more or less, to the point of beginning. “Line A” being described as follows: commencing at the northeast corner of said Section 10; thence westerly along the north line of said Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter a distance of 623.78 feet; thence Southwesterly deflecting left 58°55’00” for a distance of 289.80 feet to the point of beginning of said “Line A”; thence southeasterly deflecting to the left 52°34’45” for a distance of 718.00 feet; thence southeasterly deflecting to the right 8°49’11” for a distance of 163.64 feet to the point of intersection with the easterly prolongation of the south line of said “Parcel A” and there terminating. Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER HENNEPIN COUNTY RESOLUTION NO. _______ RESOLUTION APPROVING SUMMARY PUBLICATION FOR ORDINANCE 2020-01; WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center has adopted the above referenced ordinance vacating a portion of right-of-way of Brooklyn Boulevard; and WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes, section 412.191, subdivision 4 allows publication by title and summary in the case of lengthy ordinances or those containing maps or charts; and WHEREAS, the City Council believes that the following summary would clearly inform the public of the intent of Ordinance 2020-01. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that: the following summary of Ordinance 2020-01 shall be published in the official newspaper in lieu of the entire ordinance. SUMMARY PUBLICATION Ordinance 2020-01 An Ordinance Vacating a Portion of Right-of-Way; Brooklyn Boulevard This ordinance is for vacating a portion of Right-of-Way on Brooklyn Boulevard. The vacation is for the reconstruction of Brooklyn Boulevard Phase II. A complete ordinance amendment is available at city hall or available online. February 24, 2020 ______________________ Date Mayor ATTEST: ____________________ City Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. C ouncil R egular M eeng DAT E:2/24/2020 TO :C ity C ouncil F R O M:C urt Boganey, City Manager T H R O U G H :M eg Beekman, C ommunity D evelopment D irector BY:J esse A nders on, D eputy D irector of Community D evelopment S U B J E C T:Res olu+on A pproving the P rojected Use of F unds for the 2020 Urban H ennepin County C ommunity D evelopment Block G rant P rogram and A uthoriz ing S ignature of a S ubrecipient A greement w ith H ennepin C ounty B ackground: I t is recommended that the City C ouncil conduct the P ublic H earing and accept input from the public regarding us e of funds for 2020 Urban H ennepin C ounty Community D evelopment B lock G rant P rogram. S taff has prepared a resolu+on alloca+ng funds as discussed at the February 10, 2020, w ork s ession. H ome O wnership/D own Payment A ssistance The program guidelines s et up a maximum of $7 ,500 per loan. Therefore, it w ould be an+cipated that the proposed funds of $100,000 would benefit 13-14 households . H ennepin County Rehab P rogram D etails S taff rev iewed the last five years of the pr ogr am. T he av er age cost per hous ehold for the pas t 5 years is $16,173. Brooklyn C enter has allocated $395,426 in the pas t five years, of that $2 9 1 ,122.9 2 has been expended. F urther, five loans are in process with up to $30,000 allocated for each. T he actual loans maybe less, how ev er the cap is s et at $3 0 ,000. Therefore, it would be an+cipated that the pr opos ed funds of $158,000 would benefit 9-10 households . D emographics I ncome C ount <30 5 30-50 4 50-80 9 14 out of 18 were people of color/minority Rental Rehab funds Requirements: City s taff dis cus s ed the rental rehab requirements and expenditures with H ennepin County H ousing S taff. The following requirements w ere noted: Requires 51% of residents to be at 80% A M I or below. Requires reloca+on benefits bas ed on the Uniform reloca+on act. There could be res idents that can’t s tay due to the cons truc+on or they don’t qualify for the 80% income requirements . Relocated tenants would be paid the difference betw een current rent and comparable unit for 42 - 60 months. Typically ci+es have to hire a reloca+on cons ultant Tracking of who is there before rehab, during, and aDer. Use of federal funds triggers P revailing Wage requirements are required for all contractors hired for renova+ons. Brooklyn Park Rental Rehab F unds. The C ity of Brooklyn Park prev ious ly allocated C D B G funding to do r enov a+on work at a 4-unit apartment that is owned by the C ity of Brooklyn Park . The units are s pecifically used to as s is t r ecently or persistently homeless. The C ity of Br ookly n Park does not allocate C D B G funds tow ar ds mul+-family rental hous ing on an ongoing bas is or for any other programs. F urther, the Council reques ted informa+on about the city's one-+me C D B G alloca+on for S hingle Creek Tow ers , now know n as the C res t. S hingle Creek Tow ers received $175,000 in C D B G funding in 2003. These funds were combine w ith other affordable hous ing funds and res ulted in an approximately $4.9 million dollar rehabilita+on of the property. A s part of the s ubs idy, the property w as required to keep 96 of the 122 units affordable at or below 60% of the ar ea median income. C urr ently, the building is owned and operated by A eon and has a L ow-I ncome Rental Clas s ifica+on (L I R C ) for 100% of the 122 units at 60% A M I or below. The 2003 reques t for funding is aJached. General C D B G Informaon: C D B G funds are prov ided by the U.S . D epartment of H ous ing and Urban D ev elopment (H U D ) to help with community development ac+vi+es that benefit low and moderate income persons. The funds are primarily intended for bricks and mortar improvements , as oppos ed to public service ac+vi+es . H ennepin C ounty r eceives C D B G funds directly fr om H U D as part of a cons olidated pool of funds, w hich is adminis tered on behalf of par+cipa+ng s uburban H ennepin C ounty communi+es . Bloomington, Eden P rairie, Minnetonka and P lymouth do not par+cipate in the cons olidated pool and receiv e C D B G funds directly from H U D. Brooklyn Center is cons idered a D irect A lloca+on C ity and is a sub-recipient of the funds through H ennepin C ounty. C D B G S tatutory and A dministrave Requirements The Federal A uthoriz ing S tatute for the C D B G program requires that each funded C D B G ac+v ity meet one of three na+onal objec+ves: 1. Benefi+ng low income persons 2. P reven+ng or elimina+ng slums and/or blight 3. Mee+ng urgent community needs The Feder al L aw als o s pecifies that each r ecipient receiv ing funds mus t ins ure at least 70 percent of the C D B G expenditures during the program year be us ed for ac+v i+es benefi+ng low and/or very low income pers ons . Each city must meet this requirement at the local level. A s part of the administra+on of the C D B G funds, H ennepin C ounty adopts a 5-year funding plan, w hich further defines the priority needs of the program and clarifies what ac+vi+es are eligible for funding. This year H ennepin C ounty will adopt a new 5-year funding plan. W hile a new plan has not yet been finalized, H ennepin C ounty has provided a draD to ci+es . O verall, the priority needs are around con+nuing what’s w orking, w hile shiDing the focus to preserving affordability and reducing dis pari+es in hous ing stability. These include: P riority Need 1: Focus home ownership ac+vi+es on crea+on; on preserving affordability of home ow ners hip; on reducing dis pari+es P riority Need 2: Rehab mul+family rentals (especially for smaller N O A H / duplexes ) P riority Need 3: I ncreas e funding and impact of emergency assistance / homeless preven+on P riority Need 4: I ncreas e rental ins pec+ons (code enforcement) P riority Need 5: Create deeply affordable senior rentals 2020-2021 C D B G A llocaon We do not yet know the exact amount of C D B G alloca+on for the 2 0 1 9 -2 0 2 0 cycle. T herefore, w e have been advis ed by H ennepin C ounty to us e the es+mate of $258,000 for the purpos es of determining the alloca+on of funds. H ow ev er, this alloca+on amount could be adj us ted once H U D pr ovides final amounts . H ennepin County r eceives the lump s um from H U D and determines the alloca+on among the par+cipa+ng ci+es based on a formula that takes into account popula+on and need. Public H earing The aJached P ublic H earing no+ce was published in the February 13, 2020 edi+on of the Brooklyn C enter S un Pos t new s paper. H ennepin C ounty requires a P ublic H earing be held r egar ding the us e of C D B G funds . F urther, the 2 0 2 0 C D B G programs must be s ubmiJed to H ennepin C ounty by February 29, 2020. F unding for the 2020 C D B G pr ogr am would be made available by J uly 1 , 2 0 2 0 and C D B G funds mus t be spent no later than July 1, 2021. Resoluon A res olu+on has been prepared for City Council’s considera+on to approve the 2020 C D B G program. Total preliminary City A lloca+on for C D B G P r ogr am Year 2020 is es +mated $258,0 0 0 . The follow ing alloca+on is bas ed on the w ork s ession discussion. C D B G A cvity City Council Requested A llocaon H ome Rehabilita+on P rogram $158,000 D ow n Payment/H ome Buyer A s s is tance $100,000 Total C D B G F unds $258,000 The res olu+on included w ith this memorandum als o authoriz es signature of a S ubrecipient A greement, w hich is the agreement betw een H ennepin County and the C ity of Brooklyn C enter r ela+v e to C D B G funds . This agreement is a s tandardized agreement developed by H ennepin County and w ill be s ubmiJed aDer approval of the C ity ’s 2020 C D B G program. A2achments Resolu+on P ublic H earing No+ce Rehab 5 Year S ummary 2003 F unding Request for S hingle Creek Towers B udget I ssues: C D B G funds are exclus ively federal dollars. The C i+es 2019 Budget includes C D B G grant funds for Code Enforcement A c+vity. W ith $75,000 allocated for C ode Enforcement from the 2019-2020 C D B G funds , all code enforcement allocated funds will be expended in 2019. S trategic Priories and Values: Resident Economic S tability, S afe, S ecure, S table C ommunity AT TA C H M E N TS : D escrip+on U pload D ate Type Res olu+on 2/11/2020 Resolu+on LeJer No+ce of P ublic H earing 2/11/2020 Backup M aterial H C Rehab 5 Year S ummary 2/12/2020 Backup M aterial S hingle C reek Tow er Reques t for F unding 2/13/2020 Backup M aterial Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION APPROVING PROJECTED USE OF FUNDS FOR 2020 URBAN HENNEPIN COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM, AUTHORIZING SIGNATURE OF SUBRECIPIENT AGREEMENT WITH HENNEPIN COUNTY WHEREAS, the City of Brooklyn Center, through execution of a Joint Cooperation Agreement with Hennepin County, is cooperating in the Urban Hennepin County Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program; and WHEREAS, the City of Brooklyn Center has developed a proposal for the use of Urban Hennepin County CDBG funds made available to it; and WHEREAS, the City of Brooklyn Center held a Public Hearing on February 11, 2019 to obtain the view of citizens on housing and community development needs and priorities and the City’s proposed use of $258,000 from the 2020 Urban Hennepin County Community Development Block Grant; and WHEREAS, the City of Brooklyn Center, through execution of a Joint Cooperation Agreement with Hennepin County, is a Subrecipient community in the Urban Hennepin County Community Development Block Grant Program; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the Subrecipient Agreement between the City of Brooklyn Center and Hennepin County, the City agrees to assume certain responsibilities for the utilization of Community Development Block Grant funds; and WHEREAS, a notice to solicit public comment was published and comments were solicited for a period of 10 days, ending on February 13, 2020. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center that it approves the following project(s) for funding from the 2019 Urban Hennepin County Community Development Block Grant Program and authorizes submittal of the proposal to Urban Hennepin County. Project Budget Home Rehabilitation Program (Rehabilitation of Private Property) $158,000 Housing Purchase Assistance $100,000 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council hereby authorizes and directs the Mayor and its’ City Manager to execute the Subrecipient Agreement and any required Third Party Agreement on behalf of the City to implement the 2020 Community Development Block Grant Program. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that should the actual amount of FY2020 CDBG available to the city be different from the preliminary amount provided to the City, the City Council hereby authorizes the city manager to adjust the following activity budget(s) at this rate: Project Budget Adjustment Home Rehabilitation Program (Rehabilitation of Private Property) 100% Housing Purchase Assistance 0% Date Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. -Public Notice Ad Proof- Ad ID: 1020524 Copy LIne: Grant Program-PH PO Number: Start: 02/13/20 Stop: 02/13/2020 Total Cost: $107.10 # of Lines: 39 Total Depth: 4.42 # of Inserts: 1 Ad Class: 150 Phone # (763) 691-6000 Email: publicnotice@ecm-inc.com Rep No: SE700 Date: 02/04/20 Account #: 413069 Customer: CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER ~ Address: 6301 SHINGLE CREEK BROOKLYN CENTER Telephone: (612) 569-3440 Fax: (763) 569-3494 This is the proof of your ad scheduled to run on the dates indicated below. Please proof read carefully if changes are needed, please contact us prior to deadline at Cambridge (763) 691-6000 or email at publicnotice@ecm-inc.com Ad Proof Enlarged Publications: SP Brooklyn Ctr/Brooklyn Park Contract-Gross Ad: 1 $107.10 CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER2020 URBAN HENNEPIN COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Notice is hereby given that the City of Brooklyn Center in cooperation with Hennepin County, pursuant to Title I of the Housing and Commu- nity Development Act of 1974, as amended, is holding a Public Hearing on February 24, 2020, at 7 p.m. or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, at the Brooklyn Center City Hall, 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway, Brooklyn Center, Minnesota. The Public Hearing is about the housing and community develop- ment needs and the City’s proposed use of the estimated 2020 Urban Hennepin County Community Development Block Grant Program plan- ning allocation of $258,000. The Public Hearing is being held pursuant to MS 471.59. The City of Brooklyn Center is proposing to undertake the following activities with 2020 Urban Hennepin County CDBG funds starting on or about July 1, 2020. Activity Budget Rehab of Private Property $158,000 Housing Purchase Assistance $100,00 For additional information about the priorities, proposed activities, level of funding and program performance, contact the City of Brooklyn Center at 763-569-3300 or the Hennepin County Housing Department at 612-348-2205. Auxiliary aids for persons with disabilities are available upon request at least 96 hours in advance. Please contact the City Clerk at 763-569- 3300 to make arrangements. Published in the Sun Post February 13, 2020 1020524 Brooklyn Center since start of 2015 Program Year (7/1/2015) PY Allocation (Funding Year)PI Address Loan total (Calendar Year)Scope summary 2015 $63,589 $800 6219 Quail Ave N Emergency $20,000.00 Bath, siding, egress window 5906 Vincent Ave N Emergency $16,000.00 Windows, safety, eletrical, paint 2016 $62,162 $43,560 3224 Mumford Rd Emergency $9,800.00 Windows (lead-based paint) 6225 Chowen Ave N Emergency $10,000.00 Update electrical service, entry doors 3706 53rd Ave N Emergency $6,359.35 Roof 3018 65th Ave N Emergency $3,693.00 furnace 6606 Dupont Ave N $30,000.00 Siding/trim, gutters, windows, ext doors, code updates 2017 $67,235 6907 Regent Ave N $20,000.00 Roof, windows, ext doors, plumbing/code repairs 4401 Winchester Lane $30,000.00 Windows, kitchen, ceiling repair, code repairs 6201 Bryant Ave N $29,930.00 Water damage repairs and baths, radon, egress 3918 58th Ave N Emergency $8,347.30 Roof 2712 64th Ave N Emergency $750.00 Water heater 2018 $89,800 $19,078 3212 Poe Rd $25,000.00 Bathroom work, water damage 6225 Chowen Ave N Emergency $4,431.00 Fall hazard, driveway 2019 $112,640 5734 Irving Ave N $30,000.00 Water damage and bathrooms; flooring 6825 Dupont Ave N $29,850.00 Kitchen, plumbing/electrical repairs, ext doors 5725 Emerson Ave N Emergency $9,927.27 Mold and water intrusion 5818 June Ave N Emergency $7,035.00 HVAC Totals $395,426 $63,438 $291,122.92 Demographics Loans in process/under construction Committed Income Count 3113 Ohenry Rd $30,000.00 <30 5 5344 Morgan Ave N $30,000.00 30-50 4 6413 Noble Ave N $30,000.00 50-80 9 3207 Quarles Rd $30,000.00 3713 72nd Ave N $30,000.00 2 applications in progress Number of Closed Loans 18 Total fund spend 291,122.92$ Average Per Household 16,173.50$ 14 out of 18 were people of color/minority *Loans may use multiple year fundsing and are show based on calendar year and not on allocation year. 2003 URBAN HENNEPIN COUNTY CDBG PROGRAM REQUEST FOR FUNDING (Use one form per project) A. GENERAL INFORMATION 1. Community: Brooklyn Center 2. Project Name: Shingle Creek Tower 3. Contact Person/Phone No. Tom Bublitz, 763-569-3433 B. PROJECT DATA 1. Funding Request $175,000 2. Is this a request to fund an existing CDBG-funded project? X Yes No 3. Leveraged Funds: (What other public or private funds does project include? If none, indicate w/check here - None:____) Amount $5,200,000 Source - Housing Revenue Bonds with HUD 221 (d)(4) Mortgage Insurance Amount $760,000 Source - HUD IRP Loan Amount $2,000,000 Source - Equity Investment (Tax Credits) Amount $750,000 Source - MHFA Preservation Rental Investment Fund (PARIF) Amount $400,000 Source - Hennepin County Affordable Housing Incentive Fund (AHIF) 4. Project Location: Address 6221 Shingle Creek Parkway 5. Project Description: (Describe the project in as much detail as possible and identify what, if any, alternative funding sources have been considered for this project.) Amcon, a large Minnesota based construction contractor, is proposing to purchase Shingle Creek Tower, provide major renovation to the building and maintain it as affordable rental housing. Shingle Creek Tower is a 122 unit apartment building (77 one bedroom and 45 two bedroom units) located at 6221 Shingle Creek Parkway in Brooklyn Center. The building was completed in 1974 and was financed with the assistance of a Federal subsidized loan under the authority of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) 236 Housing Program. In return for the 236 program loan, the rental owners were obligated to maintain rents at certain levels through the term of the loan. As with HUD section 236, and many other project based federal subsidies funded in the 1970’s, the terms of the program loans are now ending and owners can convert the properties to market rate rental housing. Amcon proposes to purchase the property, renovate and maintain it as affordable housing for income eligible and qualified residents to remain in the property. This will allow income eligible residents to remain in the building. Amcon’s purchase and renovation of the property contemplates numerous sources of funds to complete the purchase and rehabilitation, including assumption of the Housing Revenue Bonds previously approved by the City when the Boisclair Corporation proposed a similar acquisition and renovation of the property. Ninety-six (96) of the 122 units in the project are proposed to be tax credit units eligible at 60% of median income. Along with Housing Revenue Bond financing, tax credits and CDBG funds, funding will also be provided from the State of Minnesota (MHFA) and Hennepin County through its Affordable Housing Incentive Fund (AHIF). 6. Consolidated Plan Priorities: Using the list provided, identify what priority(ies) the project will meet. (Note: If a proposed project is a low Urban County priority, you must explain why it has a higher priority in your community.) The project meets two of nine highest priorities, as identified in the five year consolidated plan for the years 2000 - 2004. The priorities are as follows:  Preserve the existing affordable housing supply.  Improve housing owned or rented by households with income below 50% of median income. 7. Describe anticipated results/accomplishments projects will have. (number of persons/households to be assisted/served, number of housing units to be rehabbed/built, etc.) Shingle Creek Tower has 122 units of affordable housing. The property was originally financed using the HUD 236 program to keep rents affordable. The plan for renovating Shingle Creek Tower includes the following:  96 of the 122 units will be tax credit units eligible to households at 60% of median income. Two of units will be used as caretaker and manager units with the remainder rented as market rate units at the same rents as tax credit units.  The property will receive a substantial renovation which will address all structural deficiencies in the building. The actual dollar amount for the rehabilitation will be approximately $4.9 million.  The present demographic makeup of the project shows that 97% of the current residents have incomes below 60% of the county median income and over 70% of residents have incomes below 50% of the county median income. 8. Describe how project will assist community in achieving Livable Communities Act goals. (if applicable) One of the goals in the city’s Livable Community Act Action Plan includes the support of projects assisted with housing revenue bonds. The goal is to assist in acquisition and rehabilitation of multi-family housing developments through the issuance of housing revenue bonds. 9. Implementation Schedule: (For the time period to , identify the major project tasks to be performed and when they will occur.) Date Task Month/Date Property Acquisition 7/31/2003 Start Rehabilitation 9/30/2002 10. Budget: Specify total project budget by major project component -i.e.; administration, planning, construction, acquisition, direct grants, public service.) BUDGET/SOURCE OF FUNDS Component CDBG Other Acquisition of Real Property $175,000 $ 0 Administration $ 0 $ 0 Maintenance $ 0 $ 0 Operating $ 0 $ 0 Taxes $ 0 $ 0 Debt Service $ 0 $ 0 Construction Costs $ 0 $ 0 Fees $ 0 $ 0 Financing and Carrying Charges $ 0 $ 0 Project Budget $175,000 Total Project Budget (Acquisition) $3,325,000 Note: $150,000 in CDBG funds have been allocated from 2001 CDBG Program and $175,000 from the 2002 CDBG Program. The $175,000 allocation from the 2003 program represents the final payment on this project. C ouncil R egular M eeng DAT E:2/24/2020 TO :C ity C ouncil F R O M:C urt Boganey, City Manager T H R O U G H :N/A BY:D r. Reggie Edwards, D eputy C ity M anager S U B J E C T:A n O rdinance A mending C hapter 12 of the City Code of O rdinances Regarding A ccess to M ul.-U nit H ousing S tructures by the U nited S tates C ensus Bureau Employees B ackground: I n 2019, the C ity of Brooklyn C enter es tablished par.cipa.on in the 2020 Cens us by becoming a C omplete Count C ommi4ee (C C C). The C ity als o aligned with the City of Brooklyn Park to lead the Brooklyns 2020 Cens us Coali.on. The purpos e of the C C C and the Brooklyns 2020 C ensus C oali.on is to conduct ac.vi.es or efforts in order to increas e par.cipa.on by Brooklyn C enter residents in the 2020 C ensus. I n M ay, 2019, staff presented informa.on on the 2020 Cens us to the C ity C ouncil including: its purpose, .meline, challenges and efforts of the City. O ne of the challenges pres ented w as achieving high or full par.cipa.on in the 2020 Cens us by historically under-counted popula.ons . H istorically, under-counted popula.ons include: veterans, people w ith dis abili.es, homeless, renters , college students , immigrants , people of color, seniors, people living in poverty, and children under age five. Renters is one of the specific his torically under-counted popula.ons that the C ity is focused on increasing par.cipa.on. The S tate has developed template ordinance language for local units of government that would require property ow ners of mul.-unit hous ing to permit acces s to their proper.es by census bureau employees for purposes of gaining greater par.cipa.on in the 2020 C ensus by renters and/or reaching residents w ho have not yet par.cipated in the 2020 Cens us . The ci.es of Edina and Brooklyn Park have ini.ated an ordinance amendment proces s in order to permit census bureau employees access to mul.-unit housing (s ee a4ached copies of policies for by ci.es). A4ached for the review of C ouncil is a dra< ordinance amendment of the Brooklyn Center City Code of O rdinances regarding access to mul.-unit housing s tructures by United S tates Cens us Bureau employees. B udget I ssues: None. S trategic Priories and Values: Enhanced Community I mage, O pera.onal Excellence AT TA C H M E N TS : D escrip.on U pload D ate Type O rdinance 2/19/2020 O rdinance Res olu.on 2/18/2020 Resolu.on Le4er 633579v1BR291-4 CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER ORDINANCE NO. 2020-03 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTERS 12 OF THE CITY CODE OF ORDINANCES REGARDING ACCESS TO MULTI-UNIT HOUSING STRUCTURES BY UNITED STATES CENSUS BUREAU EMPLOYEES THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: ARTICLE I. Brooklyn Center City Code Section 12-1302 is hereby amended by renumbering it to 12-1303 and creating a new Section 12-302 as follows: Section 12-1302. ACCESS TO MULTI-UNIT HOUSING STRUCTURES BY UNITED STATES CENSUS BUREAU EMPLOYEES. 1. Declaration; Purpose. a. The United States Constitution directs a decennial census count of all persons living in the United States. b. Complete, accurate census data is of critical importance to all residents of Brooklyn Center for equal political representation, fair distribution of federal and state funding, and sound planning and investment in infrastructure, real estate, business development, and public policy and programming. c. During the decennial census, the United States Census Bureau conducts Non- Response Follow-up Operations (“NRFU”), when employees of the United States Census Bureau visit households that have not yet submitted a census form. d. Renters and others who live in multi-unit housing structures have historically been at higher risk of being undercounted in the decennial census, with the number of renter households in an area being the most influential variable affecting an area's census self- response rate; in other words, the more renters in an area, the lower the self response rate of that area. e. The risk of an undercount is compounded in areas with high concentrations of communities that have been consistently undercounted in the past and who are more likely to be renters, including low income households, communities of color, Native American/American Indian communities, immigrants and refugees, and young people. f. Multi-unit housing structures can be difficult for Census Bureau employees to enter due to security barriers. 633579v1BR291-4 g. It is critical that Census Bureau employees have access to multi-unit housing structures during the decennial census, so they can reach households that have not yet participated. h. 13 U.S. Code § 223 authorizes Census Bureau employees to access “any hotel, apartment house, boarding or lodging house, tenement, or other building”. 2. Prohibition. It is unlawful for a person, either directly or indirectly, to deny access to an apartment building, dormitory, nursing home, manufactured home park, other multi-unit structure used as a residence, or an area in which one or more single-family dwellings are located on private roadways, to employees of the United States Census Bureau who display current, valid Census Bureau credentials and who are engaged in official census counting operations during the Census Bureau’s standard operational hours of 9:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. during the decennial census. 3. Census materials. Census Bureau employees granted access must be permitted to leave census materials in an orderly manner for residents at their doors, except that the manager of a nursing home may direct that the materials be left at a central location within the facility. 4. Exceptions. This Section does not prohibit any of the following: a. Denial of admittance into a particular apartment, room, manufactured home, or personal residential unit; b. Denial of permission to visit certain persons for valid health reasons, in the case of a nursing home or a registered housing with services establishment providing assisted-living services meeting the requirements of Minnesota Statutes, section 144G.03, subdivision 2; c. Limiting visits to a reasonable number of census employees; d. Requiring a prior appointment or notification to gain access to the structure; or e. Denial of admittance to or expulsion of an individual employee from a multi-unit housing structure for good cause. 5. Written reason. A person denying a Census Bureau employee access to a multi-unit housing structure shall, upon request of the Census Bureau employee, provide the City a written reason within 72 hours of the denial that identifies the specific basis under this Section for denying access. Providing a false basis for denying a Census Bureau employee access shall constitute a violation of this Section. An owner or tenant denying access to their dwelling unit under paragraph 4.a of this Section is not required to state a reason or provide a written reason for the denial. 633579v1BR291-4 Section 12-1303. PENALTIES. Any person or responsible party who violates any provision in Sections 12-101 through 12-1302 is subject to the penalty provided under Section 12-1205 of this Code. Nothing in this Chapter however is deemed to limit other remedies or civil penalties available to the City under this Code or state law. Each day that a violation continues shall be deemed a separate punishable offense. No provision of this Chapter designating the duties of any official or employee of the City shall be so construed as to make such official or employee liable for the penalty provided in this Section because of failure to perform such duty, unless the intention of the City Council to impose such penalty on such official or employee is specifically and clearly expressed in the Section creating the duty. ARTICLE III. Effective Date. This ordinance shall become effective after adoption and upon thirty days following its legal publication. Adopted this 24th day of February, 2020. ____________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _________________________ City Clerk Date of Publication: March 5, 2020 Effective Date: April 4, 2020 Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER HENNEPIN COUNTY RESOLUTION NO. _______ RESOLUTION APPROVING SUMMARY PUBLICATION FOR ORDINANCE 2020-03; WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center has adopted the above referenced ordinance concerning an amendment to Chapter 12 of the City Ordinances; and WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes, section 412.191, subdivision 4 allows publication by title and summary in the case of lengthy ordinances or those containing maps or charts; and WHEREAS, the City Council believes that the following summary would clearly inform the public of the intent of Ordinance 2020-03. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that: the following summary of Ordinance 2020-03 shall be published in the official newspaper in lieu of the entire ordinance. SUMMARY PUBLICATION Ordinance 2020-03 An Ordinance Amending Brooklyn Center City Code, Chapter 12 on February 24, 2020. Section 12-1302; Access to multi-unit housing structures by United States Census Bureau employees. Establishing language that would allow U.S. Census Bureau employees into multi-unit housing structures to conduct business. It requires a written reason to the City for any person denied access to a multi-unit housing structure, within 72 hours of the denial. It must include the specific basis for denying access. January 13, 2020 ______________________ Date Mayor ATTEST: ____________________ City Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. C ouncil R egular M eeng DAT E:2/24/2020 TO :C ity C ouncil F R O M:C urt Boganey, City Manager T H R O U G H :M eg Beekman, C ommunity D evelopment D irector BY:J immy L oyd, Economic D evelopment Coordinator S U B J E C T:Res olu+on A dop+ng a Busines s S ubs idy Policy B ackground: The C ity has an exis +ng Busines s S ubs idy Policy; however, it is narrow in scope and does not include many elements that can be useful in guiding policy decis ions about the us e of public subsidy for development projects, and significant busines s s ubs idy reques ts . I n order to develop a more robus t, useful, and clear Bus iness S ubsidy Policy, staff has asked Ehlers and A s s ociates , the City's public finance cons ultant, to take the C ity C ouncil through a series of dis cus s ions that w ill iden+fy clear parameters for the use of public s ubs idy. The firs t dis cus s ion took place in M arch and included a brief presenta+on from Ehlers , which provided background informa+on and an overview of public finance policies . Ehlers introduced homework at that mee+ng, w hich they asked each member of the City Council to complete. The second dis cus s ion took place in A pril at a City Council work ses s ion and involved a more in-depth dis cus s ion among the Council members regarding their res pons es to the homew ork and their values around the use of public s ubs idy. Based on that convers a+on, Ehlers prepared a dra; policy for the us e of busines s s ubs idies which conforms to state statutes and also responds to the s pecific needs of Brooklyn C enter. The third dis cus s ion w as in S eptember and was an opportunity for Ehlers to pres ent the dra; Busines s S ubs idy Policy w hich res ponded to the Council's direc+on from the previous mee+ng. The C ouncil gave feedback on the policy, w hich has since been modified based on that discussion. This is the presenta+on of the final dra; of policy to be adopted by the City of Brooklyn Center. A<ached is a memo from Ehlers with a background on the ra+onal for the new policy. Ehlers will be pres ent at the mee+ng to provide a presenta+on on the policy. I n order to adopt a bus iness subsidy policy it is required for the City Council to hold a public hearing. No+ce w as published in the February 13, 2020 edi+on of the S un Post. A<ached to this memo is the Bus iness S ubsidy Policy for cons idera+on. B udget I ssues: There are no budget is s ues to consider at this +me. S trategic Priories and Values: Targeted Redevelopment, O pera+onal Excellence AT TA C H M E N TS : D escrip+on U pload D ate Type M emo from Ehlers , dated February 14, 2020 2/17/2020 Backup M aterial Bus iness S ubsidy Policy 2/17/2020 Backup M aterial Res olu+on 2/17/2020 Resolu+on Le<er Memo To: Meg Beekman, AICP – Community Development Director From: Jason Aarsvold and Stacie Kvilvang, Ehlers Date: February 14, 2020 Subject: Public Hearing and Adoption of Business Subsidy & Public Financing Policy On April 8, 2019 the Council met in a work session to review and discuss the key provisions that would serve as the basis for the City’s Business Subsidy Policy and Public Financing Criteria. The goal was to have a policy in place the meets state statutory requirements, but also reflects desired City-specific requirements for the use of public assistance tools. Using the feedback received from City Council members, Ehlers worked with City staff to develop a draft policy for Council consideration. The City Council reviewed a draft of this policy in September 2019 and provided additional direction and feedback for revisions. Attached to this memorandum is a final policy that incorporates Brooklyn Center’s specific objectives and qualifications as well as standard best practice language. The City Council is required to hold a public hearing to formally adopt the policy. Upon formal approval, Ehlers will submit the policy to the Department of Employment and Economic Development (DEED) as required by Statute. Approval of the policy does not mean any projects are entitled to receive City assistance. Every future project defined as a business subsidy will require a Business Subsidy Agreement. The Business Subsidy Agreement outlines the amount and public purpose of the subsidy, job and wage goals, requirements for continued operation, and recapture requirements (if goals are not met). These business subsidy agreements must be reviewed and approved by the City Council using this policy as a guide in giving consideration. For that reason, the policy is set up to provide flexibility and not to be overly prescriptive. Please contact either of us at 651-697-8500 with any questions. Brooklyn Center Business Subsidy Criteria and Public Financing Policy Page 1 City of Brooklyn Center and Brooklyn Center Economic Development Authority Business Subsidy & Public Financing Policy November 2019 INTRODUCTION: This Policy is adopted for purposes of the business subsidies act, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Sections 116J.993 through 116J.995 (the “Statutes”). Terms used in this Policy are intended to have the same meanings as used in Statutes. Subdivision 3 of the Statutes specifies forms of financial assistance that are not considered a business subsidy. This list contains exceptions for several activities, including redevelopment, pollution clean-up, and housing, among others. By providing a business subsidy, the city commits to holding a public hearing, as applicable, and reporting annually to the Department of Employment and Economic Development (“DEED”) on job and wage goal progress. 1. PURPOSE AND AUTHORITY A. The purpose of this document is to establish criteria for the City of Brooklyn Center (“City”) and the Brooklyn Center Economic Development Authority (“EDA”) for the granting of business subsidies and public financing for private development within the City. As used in this Policy, the term “City” shall be understood to include the EDA. These criteria shall be used as a guide in processing and reviewing applications requesting business subsidies and/or City public financing. B. The City's ability to grant business subsidies is governed by the limitations established in the Statutes. The City may choose to apply its Business Subsidy Criteria to other development activities not covered under this statute. City public financing may or may not be considered a business subsidy as defined by the Statutes. C. Unless specifically excluded by the Statutes, business subsidies include grants by state or local government agencies, contributions of personal property, real property, infrastructure, the principal amount of a loan at rates below those commercially available to the recipient of the subsidy, any reduction or deferral of any tax or any fee, tax increment financing (TIF), abatement of property taxes, loans made from City funds, any guarantee of any payment under any loan, lease, or other obligation, or any preferential use of government facilities given to a business. Brooklyn Center Business Subsidy Criteria and Public Financing Policy Page 2 D. These criteria are to be used in conjunction with other relevant policies of the City. Compliance with the Business Subsidy Criteria and City Public Financing Guidelines shall not automatically mean compliance with such separate policies. E. The City, at its sole discretion, may deviate from the job and wage goals criteria outlined in Sec. 5, Subd. D, E, and F below by documenting in writing the reason(s) for the deviation. The documentation shall be submitted to DEED with the next annual report. F. The City may amend this document at any time. Amendments to these criteria are subject to public hearing requirements contained in the Statutes. 2. CITY’S OBJECTIVE FOR THE USE OF PUBLIC FINANCING A. As a matter of adopted policy, the City may consider using public financing which may include tax increment financing (TIF), tax abatement, bonds, and other forms of public financing as appropriate, to assist private development projects. Such assistance must comply with all applicable statutory requirements and accomplish one or more of the following objectives: 1. Remove blight and/or encourage redevelopment in designated redevelopment/development area(s) per the goals and visions established by the City Council and EDA. 2. Expand and diversify the local economy and tax base. 3. Encourage additional unsubsidized private development in the area, either directly or indirectly through secondary “spin-off” development. 4. Offset increased costs for redevelopment over and above the costs that a developer would incur in normal urban and suburban development (determined as part of the But-For analysis). 5. Facilitate the development process and promote development on sites that could not be developed without this assistance. 6. Retain local jobs and/or increase the number of diverse quality jobs. 7. Reduce the unemployment rate within the City and encourage created jobs are filled by local residents. 8. Provide opportunities for small businesses and/or entrepreneurs and promote resident economic stability. 9. Meet other uses of public policy, as adopted by the City Council or EDA from time to time, including but not limited to promotion of quality urban design, quality architectural design, energy conservation, sustainable building practices, and decreasing the capital and operating costs of local government. Brooklyn Center Business Subsidy Criteria and Public Financing Policy Page 3 3. PUBLIC FINANCING PRINCIPLES A. The guidelines and principles set forth in this document pertain to all applications for City public financing regardless of whether they are considered a Business Subsidy as defined by the Statutes. The following general assumptions of development/redevelopment shall serve as a guide for City public financing: 1. All viable requests for City public financing assistance shall be reviewed by staff, and, if staff so designates, a third party financial advisor who will inform the City of its findings and recommendations. This process, known as the “But For” analysis is intended to establish the project would not be feasible but for the City assistance. 2. The City shall establish mechanisms within the development agreement to ensure that adequate checks and balances are incorporated in the distribution of financial assistance where feasible and appropriate, including but not limited to: a. Third party “but for” analysis b. Establishment of “look back provisions” c. Establishment of minimum assessment agreements 3. TIF and abatement will be provided on a pay-as-you-go-basis. Any request for upfront assistance will be evaluated on its own merits and may require security to cover any risks assumed by the City. 4. The City will set up TIF districts in accordance with the maximum number of statutory years allowable. However, this does not mean that the developer will be granted assistance for the full term of the district. 5. The City shall elect to have the fiscal disparities contribution come from inside applicable TIF district(s) to eliminate any impact to the existing tax payers of the community. 6. Public financing will not be used to support speculative commercial, office or housing projects. In general the developer should be able to provide market data, tenant letters of commitment or finance statements which support the market potential/demand for the proposed project. 7. Public financing will generally not be used to support retail development. The City may consider projects that include a retail component provided they meet a Desired Qualification as identified in Sec. 4.2 Subd. C of this policy. 8. Public financing will not be used in projects that would give a significant competitive financial advantage over similar projects in the area due to the use of public subsidies. Developers should provide information to support that assistance will not create such a Brooklyn Center Business Subsidy Criteria and Public Financing Policy Page 4 competitive advantage. Priority consideration will be given to projects that fill an unmet market need. 9. Public financing will not be used in a project that involves a land and/or property acquisition where the price is in excess of the fair market value. 10. TIF and Abatement will not be utilized for the construction of Warehouse/distribution, commercial storage, discount motel or Fortune 1,000 companies. 11. The developer shall pay all applicable application fees and pay for the City and EDA’s fiscal and legal advisor time as stated in the City’s Public Assistance Application. 12. The City may consider waiving fees including, but not limited to, park dedication fees, and SAC charges. The City may consider using SAC credits, to the extent they are available, to off-set a project’s SAC expenses. 13. The developer shall proactively attempt to minimize the amount of public assistance needed through the pursuit of grants, innovative solutions in structuring the deal, and other funding mechanisms. 14. All developments are subject to execution and recording of a Minimum Assessment Agreement. 4. PROJECTS WHICH MAY QUALIFY FOR PUBLIC FINANCING ASSISTANCE A. All new applications for public financial assistance that are considered by the City must meet each of the following minimum qualifications. However, it should not be presumed that a project meeting these qualifications will automatically be approved for assistance. Meeting the qualifications does not imply or create contractual rights on the part of any potential developer to have its project approved for assistance. 4.1 MINIMUM QUALIFICATIONS/REQUIREMENTS: A. In addition to meeting the applicable requirements of State law, the project shall meet one or more of the public financing objectives outlined in Sec. 2. B. The developer must demonstrate to the satisfaction of the City that the project is not financially feasible “but for” the use of tax increment or other public financing. C. The project is, or will be through the City approval processes, consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinances, Design Guidelines or any other applicable land use documents. Brooklyn Center Business Subsidy Criteria and Public Financing Policy Page 5 D. Prior to approval of a financing plan, the developer shall provide any requested market and financial feasibility studies, appraisals, soil boring, private lender commitment, and/or other information the City or its financial consultants may require in order to proceed with an independent evaluation of the proposal. E. The developer must provide adequate financial guarantees to ensure the repayment of any public financing and completion of the project. These may include, but are not limited to, assessment agreements, letters of credit, personal deficiency guarantees, guaranteed maximum cost contract, etc. F. Any developer requesting public financial assistance must be able to demonstrate a previous capability for successful development, as well as specific capability regarding the type and size of the development proposed, unless for a use specified in Sec. 4.2 Subd. C (9-10). Public financing shall not be used when the developer’s credentials, in the sole judgment of the City, are inadequate due to previous history relating to completion of projects, general reputation, and/or bankruptcy, or other problems or issues considered relevant to the City. G. The developer, or its contractual assigns, shall retain ownership of any portion of the project long enough to complete it, stabilize its occupancy, establish project management and/or needed mechanisms to ensure successful operation. 4.2 DESIRED QUALIFICATIONS: A. Projects providing a high ratio of private investment to City public investment shall receive priority consideration. Private investment includes developer cash, government and bank loans, conduit bonds, tax credit equity, and land if already owned by the developer. B. Proposals that significantly increase the amount of property taxes paid after redevelopment will receive priority consideration. C. Proposals that encourage the following will receive priority consideration: 1. Implements the City’s vision and values for a City-identified redevelopment area 2. Provides significant improvement to surrounding land uses, neighborhoods, and/or the City 3. Attracts or retains an employer within the City providing over 50 jobs 4. Provides increased quality and higher paying jobs 5. Promotes multi-family housing investment that meets the following City goals: Brooklyn Center Business Subsidy Criteria and Public Financing Policy Page 6 a. Increase housing choice within the community; diversify existing housing stock; and provide options that do not currently exist b. Provide clean, safe, and affordable housing units c. Include housing as part of City special purpose projects, such as the Opportunity Site, or other priority City redevelopment areas. d. Multi-family housing with high-amenities considered luxury and/or market rate 6. Provides opportunity for the attraction and retention of sit-down restaurants 7. Fulfils workforce needs by hiring local residents and partnering with the City and local community organizations for targeted recruitment of residents, job training and mentorship programs. 8. Offers employment opportunities for local residents with safe working conditions and access to comprehensive benefit packages 9. Provides opportunities for small businesses and/or entrepreneurs 10. Projects that promote resident economic stability 11. Redevelops a blighted, contaminated and/or challenged area 12. Preserves and/or stabilizes a major commercial or industrial node 13. Adds needed public infrastructure such as roads or structured parking 5. BUSINESS SUBSIDY PUBLIC PURPOSE, JOBS AND WAGE REQUIREMENT A. All business subsidies must meet a public purpose with measurable benefit to the City as a whole. B. Job retention may only be used as a public purpose in cases where job loss is specific and demonstrable. The City shall document the information used to determine the nature of the job loss. C. The creation of tax base shall not be the sole public purpose of a subsidy. D. Unless the creation of jobs is removed from a particular project pursuant to the requirements of the Statutes, the creation of jobs is a public purpose for granting a subsidy. Creation of at least 1 Full Time, or Full Time Equivalent (FTE) jobs is a minimum requirement for consideration of assistance. For purposes of this Policy, FTE jobs must be permanent positions with set hours, and be eligible for benefits. E. Part-Time Equivalent jobs may receive a partial credit and be counted toward the job goals. Brooklyn Center Business Subsidy Criteria and Public Financing Policy Page 7 F. The wage floor for wages to be paid for the jobs created shall be not less than 150% of the State of MN Minimum Wage. The City will seek to create jobs with higher wages as appropriate for the overall public purpose of the subsidy. Wage goals may also be set to enhance existing jobs through increased wages, which increase must result in wages higher than the minimum under this Section. G. After a public hearing, if the creation or retention of jobs is determined not to be a goal, the wage and job goals may be set at zero. 6. SUBSIDY AGREEMENT A. In granting a business subsidy, the City shall enter into a subsidy agreement with the recipient that provides the following information: wage and job goals (if applicable), and recourse for failure to meet goals required by the Statutes. B. The subsidy agreement may be incorporated into a broader development agreement for a project. C. The subsidy agreement will commit the recipient to providing the reporting information required by the Statutes. 7. PUBLIC FINANCING PROJECT EVALUATION PROCESS A. The following methods of analysis for all public financing proposals will be used: 1. Project is deemed consistent with City’s Goals and Objectives 2. Consideration of project meeting minimum qualifications 3. Consideration of project meeting desired qualifications 4. Project meets “but-for” analysis and/or statutory qualifications Please note that the evaluation methodology is intended to provide a balanced review. Each area will be evaluated individually and collectively and in no case should one area outweigh another in terms of importance to determining the level of assistance. Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION ADOPTING A POLICY AND CRITERIA FOR GRANTING BUSINESS SUBSIDIES WHEREAS, The City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota has determined that it is necessary and appropriate to adopt a business subsidy policy and criteria pursuant to the Statutes; and WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes, Sections 116J.993 through 116J.995 (the "Statutes") require the adoption of a policy and criteria for the granting of business subsidies as defined in the Statutes; and, WHEREAS, The City has performed all actions required by law to be performed prior to the adoption and approval of the proposed business subsidies, including the holding of a public hearing on February 24, 2020 upon published notice as required by law on February 13, 2020. BE IT RESOLVED By the City Council (the "Council") of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota (the "City") as that the business subsidy policy and criteria, contained in Exhibit A of this resolution are hereby approved, ratified, established, and adopted and shall be placed on file at City Hall. BE IT FURHTER RESOLVED by the Council that the City Manager is authorized and directed to file a copy of the business subsidy criteria, along with annual reports, to the Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development, pursuant to the Statutes. February 24, 2020 Date Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. RESOLUTION NO. “Exhibit A” E conomic Development Authority City Hall Council Chambers February 24, 2020 AGE NDA 1.Call to Order The City Council requests that attendees turn off cell phones and pagers during the meeting. A copy of the full C ity Counc il packet, including E D A (E conomic Development Authority ), is available to the public. The packet ring binder is located at the entrance of the council chambers. 2.Roll Call 3.Approval of Consent Agenda The following items are considered to be routine by the Economic Development Authority (E D A) and will been acted by one motion. There will be no separate disc ussion of these items unless a Commissioner so requests, in whic h event the item will be removed from the c onsent agenda and considered at the end of Commission Consideration I tems. a.Approval of Minutes - Motion to approve the minutes for: January 13, 2020 b.Resolution A pproving a T I F Development Agreement for the R E E X erxes Avenue S enior Housing P roject - Motion to adopt a resolution approving a TIF Development Agreement (REE Xerxes Avenue Senior Housing Project) c.Resolution A dopting a Business Subsidy Policy Motion to adopt a resolution adopting a policy and criteria for granting business subsidies. 4.Commission Consideration Items a.Resolution A pproving a Preliminary Development A greement with J O Properties - Motion to approve a resolution adopting a Preliminary Development Agreement between the Economic Development Authority of Brooklyn Center and J O Properties. 5.Adjournment Economic Development Authority DAT E:2/24/2020 TO :C ity C ouncil F R O M:C urt Boganey, City Manager T H R O U G H :D r. Reggie Edwards, D eputy C ity M anager BY:Barb S uciu, C ity C lerk S U B J E C T:A pproval of Minutes B ackground: I n accordance with M innesota S tate S tatute 15.17, the official records of all mee4ngs must be documented and approved by the governing body. S trategic Priories and Values: O pera4onal Excellence AT TA C H M E N TS : D escrip4on U pload D ate Type J anuary 13 E DA 2/17/2020 Backup M aterial 01/13/20 -1- DRAFT MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA REGULAR SESSION JANUARY 13, 2020 CITY HALL – COUNCIL CHAMBERS 1. CALL TO ORDER The Brooklyn Center Economic Development Authority (EDA) met in Regular Session called to order by President Mike Elliott at 9:03 p.m. 2. ROLL CALL President Mike Elliott and Commissioners Marquita Butler, April Graves, Kris Lawrence- Anderson, and Dan Ryan. Also present were Executive Director Curt Boganey, Community Development Director Meg Beekman, Police Chief Tim Gannon, and City Attorney Troy Gilchrist. 3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND CONSENT AGENDA Commissioner Ryan moved, and Commissioner Graves seconded to approve the Agenda and Consent Agenda, and the following items were approved: 3a. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. December 2, 2019, meeting minutes 2. December 9, 2019, meeting minutes 3b. RESOLUTION NO. 2020-01 AUTHORIZING AN INTERFUND LOAN FOR ADVANCE OF CERTAIN COSTS IN CONNECTION WITH A TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT Motion passed unanimously. 4. COMMISSION CONSIDERATION ITEMS 4a. RESOLUTION NO. 2020-02 ELECTING OFFICERS FOR THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER 01/13/20 -2- DRAFT Executive Director Curt Boganey requested that the Commissioner’s names be inserted into the Resolution document. He added these include Mayor/President, President Pro Tem/Vice President, Treasurer, and Secretary. Commissioner Graves moved, and Commissioner Lawrence-Anderson seconded to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 2020-02 Electing Officers for the Economic Development Authority in and for the City of Brooklyn Center. Motion passed unanimously. 4b. RESOLUTION NO. 2020-03 OPTING NOT TO WAIVE LIMITED TORT LIABILITY FOR 2O20 Commissioner Ryan moved, and Commissioner Graves seconded to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 2020-03 Opting not to Waive Limited Tort Liability for 2020. Motion passed unanimously. 5. ADJOURNMENT Commissioner Graves moved, and Commissioner Ryan seconded adjournment of the Economic Development Authority meeting at 9:07 p.m. Motion passed unanimously. Economic Development Authority DAT E:2/24/2020 TO :C ity C ouncil F R O M:C urt Boganey, City Manager T H R O U G H :N/A BY:M eg Beekman, C ommunity D evelopment D irector S U B J E C T:Res olu*on A pproving a T I F D evelopment A greement for the R E E Xerxes Avenue S enior H ous ing P roject B ackground: O n July 8, 2019, the C ity created Tax I ncrement F inancing D is trict No. 8, and adopted a T I F plan w hich provides for the use of tax increment financing in connec*on with certain development within the T I F D istrict. The City also authorized the dra:ing of a T I F D evelopment A greement between the E DA and the developer. T I F D is trict No. 8 is a hous ing district that was created to s upport a 270-unit s enior and workforce development in two mul*-family buildings at 5801 Xerxes Avenue N. Real Estate Equi*es is the developer. The firs t T I F reques t and financing was related to 127 units of w orkforce hous ing in to facilitate the cons truc*on of the ini*al building. The developer is now seeking this second request related to the s econd s enior building, w hich is an*cipated to commence cons truc*on this s pring. A@ached to this report is a T I F A s s is tance A greement, dra:ed by the City A@orney, w hich encompasses the terms and condi*ons under which the City approved the crea*on of T I F D istrict No. 8. The terms and condi*ons are s ubs tan*ally in conformance w ith thos e iden*fied in the term s heet, approved by the E DA on June 24, 2019. The general terms of the agreement are as follows: 1 . D eveloper: Brooklyn C enter A H I I , L L L P (or a limited partnership or other en*ty to be formed by or affiliated with Real Estate Equi*es , I nc.) 2 . P roperty: por*ons of P I D 03-118-21-14-0024 (northern por*on of the property at 5801 Xerxes Avenue North in the C ity) 3. D eveloper C ondi*ons: a. Execu*on of D evelopment A greement b. S ecuring necessary financing, including is s uance of conduit revenue bonds by the C ity c. S ite C ontrol d. D elivery of Construc*on P lans 4. E DA C ondi*ons: a. E DA approval of C ons truc*on P lans b. Execu*on of a D evelopment A greement I s s uance of Cer*ficate of Comple*on 5 . M inimum I mprovements: I mprovements to the P roperty will include the cons truc*on of an approximately 143-unit w ork force rental hous ing facility and related ameni*es as approved by the City. 6 . Construc*on S chedule: C ommence cons truc*on by A pr il 30, 2 0 2 0 , and complete by J anuary 31, 2022. For the pur pos e her eof, “C ommence” s hall mean beginning of phys ical improvement to the P roperty, including gr ading, excava*on, or other physical s ite prepara*on w ork; and “C ompleted” s hall mean that the M inimum I mpr ovements are s ufficiently complete for the issuance of a C er*ficate of O ccupancy for all rental hous ing units on the P roperty. U pon Comple*on the E DA s hall issue, if requested by the D eveloper, a “Cer*ficate of Comple*on” in recordable form. 7 . P ublic A s s is tance: S ubject to all terms and condi*ons of the D evelopment A greement, E DA will reimburs e D eveloper for Q ualified C os ts equal of the M inimum I mprov ements in an amount not to exceed $1,850,000. “Q ualifi ed C osts” s hall mean s ite improvement and infr as tr ucture cos ts , and other cos ts eligible in accordance w ith applicable law, incurred in connec*on with the cons truc*on of the M inimum I mprovements on the por*on of the P roperty located in the new T I F D istrict. Payments w ill be made s emiannually, on a pay-as-you-go bas is from 90% of available increments generated by the P roperty ov er a 16-y ear term, with interest at a r ate equal to the les s er of 4.25% per annum or the rate per annum on the D ev eloper ’s financing for the cons truc*on of the P roject un*l the note is fully paid. 8. M inimum I mprovements Value: No Minimum A sses s ment A greement. 9 . A ffordable H ous ing: The P roperty is intended for occupancy by persons or families of low and moderate income. The proj ect w ill be s ubj ect to a D eclara*on of Res tric*ve C ovenants requiring income limita*ons (2 0 % of units at 5 0 % of area median income or 40% of units at 6 0 % of area median income in accordance w ith s tatue s tatute) for the 26-year s tatutory dura*on of the T I F D istrict. 10. J obs : J ob crea*on is not a goal of this project. 11. Fees : T he D eveloper has deposited w ith the E DA the sum of $10,000.00 to pay for the reasonable out-of-pocket legal, financial cons ultant and adminis tra*ve fees as s ociated w ith this trans ac*on. Unexpended funds w ill be returned to the D eveloper and if addi*onal funds ar e needed to pay such expens es the D eveloper w ill deposit such addi*onal funds upon request by the E DA . 12. M is cellaneous: a. Trans fer of the P r oper ty located in the new T I F D is trict or of the D evelopment A greement or T I F N ote Payments w ill be s ubject to E DA consent except for certain limited excep*ons including mortgage financing. b. D eveloper covenants to pay property taxes and maintain customary insurance. B udget I ssues: There are no budget is s ues to consider at this *me. S trategic Priori es and Values: Targeted Redevelopment AT TA C H M E N TS : D escrip*on U pload D ate Type T I F A s s is tance A greement v4 2/19/2020 Backup M aterial Res olu*on D evelopment A greement 2/19/2020 Resolu*on Le@er 635425v4BR291-400 TIF ASSISTANCE AGREEMENT BETWEEN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA AND BROOKLYN CENTER AH II, LLLP This document drafted by: KENNEDY & GRAVEN, CHARTERED (JSB) 470 U.S. Bank Plaza 200 South Sixth Street Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402 (P) 612-337-9300 (F) 612-337-9310 i 635425v4BR291-400 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ARTICLE I DEFINITIONS ............................................................................................................2 Section 1.1. Definitions..............................................................................................2 ARTICLE II REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES ..........................................................6 Section 2.1. Representations and Warranties of the EDA .........................................6 Section 2.2. Representations and Warranties of the Developer .................................6 ARTICLE III UNDERTAKINGS BY DEVELOPER AND EDA..................................................8 Section 3.1. Total Development Costs and Public Costs. ..........................................8 Section 3.2. TIF Note. ................................................................................................8 Section 3.3. Income Restrictions .............................................................................10 Section 3.4. Developer to Pay EDA’s Fees and Expenses ......................................11 Section 3.5. Compliance with Environmental Requirements. .................................11 Section 3.6. Construction Plans. ..............................................................................11 Section 3.7. Commencement and Completion of Construction ...............................12 Section 3.8. Certificate of Completion. ...................................................................13 Section 3.9. Encumbrance of the Development Property. .......................................13 Section 3.10. Business Subsidy Act ...........................................................................14 Section 3.11. Right to Collect Delinquent Taxes. ......................................................14 Section 3.12. Review of Taxes. .................................................................................14 Section 3.13. Project Rents ........................................................................................15 ARTICLE IV EVENTS OF DEFAULT ........................................................................................16 Section 4.1. Events of Default Defined. ..................................................................16 Section 4.2. Remedies on Default ............................................................................16 Section 4.3. No Remedy Exclusive..........................................................................17 Section 4.4. No Implied Waiver ..............................................................................17 Section 4.5. Indemnification of EDA. .....................................................................17 Section 4.6. Reimbursement of Attorneys’ Fees. ....................................................18 ARTICLE V ADDITIONAL PROVISIONS ................................................................................19 Section 5.1. Restrictions on Use ..............................................................................19 Section 5.2. Reports .................................................................................................19 Section 5.3. Limitations on Transfer and Assignment. ............................................19 Section 5.4. Conflicts of Interest..............................................................................20 Section 5.5. Titles of Articles and Sections .............................................................21 Section 5.6. Notices and Demands ..........................................................................21 Section 5.7. No Additional Waiver Implied by One Waiver ...................................22 Section 5.8. Counterparts .........................................................................................22 Section 5.9. Law Governing ....................................................................................22 Section 5.10. Term; Termination ...............................................................................22 Section 5.11. Provisions Surviving Rescission, Expiration or Termination ..............22 Section 5.12. Superseding Effect ...............................................................................22 Section 5.13. Relationship of Parties .........................................................................22 Section 5.14. Venue ...................................................................................................22 ii 635425v4BR291-400 EXHIBIT A DESCRIPTION OF TIF DISTRICT .................................................................... A-1 EXHIBIT B LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF DEVELOPMENT PROPERTY ..............................B-1 EXHIBIT C PUBLIC DEVELOPMENT COSTS ......................................................................C-1 EXHIBIT D FORM OF TAXABLE TIF NOTE ....................................................................... D-1 EXHIBIT E TOTAL DEVELOPMENT COSTS ....................................................................... E-1 EXHIBIT F DECLARATION OF RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS .......................................... F-1 EXHIBIT G PERMITTED ENCUMBRANCES ...................................................................... G-1 EXHIBIT H CERTIFICATE OF COMPLETION OF PROJECT ............................................ H-1 1 635425v4BR291-400 TIF ASSISTANCE AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT, made as of the ____ day of April, 2020, by and between the Economic Development Authority of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota (the “EDA”), a public body corporate and politic under the laws of the State of Minnesota, and Brooklyn Center AH II, LLLP, a Minnesota limited liability limited partnership (the “Developer”). WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the EDA was created pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.090 to 469.1081, as amended (the “EDA Act”) and was authorized to transact business and exercise its powers by a resolution (the “Enabling Resolution”) of the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center (the “City”); and WHEREAS, under the EDA Act and the Enabling Resolution, the EDA has all the powers of a housing and redevelopment authority under Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.001 to 469.047, as amended (the “HRA Act”); and WHEREAS, pursuant to the EDA Act and the HRA Act, the EDA has undertaken a program to promote the development and redevelopment of land which is underutilized or characterized by blight within the City, and in connection therewith created the Housing and Redevelopment Project No. 1 (the “Project Area”) and adopted a Redevelopment Plan (the “Redevelopment Plan”); and WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174 through 469.1794, as amended, (the “TIF Act”), the City and the EDA have created, within the Project Area, the Tax Increment Financing District No. 8: Real Estate Equities (a housing district) qualified as a housing tax increment financing district (the “TIF District”), the legal description of which is attached hereto as Exhibit A, and has adopted a tax increment financing plan therefor approved by the City Council of the City on July 8, 2019 (the “TIF Plan”) which provides for the use of tax increment financing in connection with certain development within the Project Area and TIF District; and WHEREAS, the Developer proposes the acquisition, construction and equipping of an approximately 143-unit senior rental housing facility and related amenities to be located at 5803 Xerxes Avenue North in the City (formerly the northern portion of the property at 5801 Xerxes Avenue North) within the TIF District (the “Project”); and WHEREAS, the Developer has requested that the EDA use tax increment financing to assist the Developer with certain costs thereof in order to fill the gap between the Total Development Costs (as hereinafter defined) and the funds available to pay such costs; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and the mutual obligations of the parties hereto, each of them does hereby covenant and agree with the other as follows: 2 635425v4BR291-400 ARTICLE I DEFINITIONS Section 1.1. Definitions. All capitalized terms used and not otherwise defined herein shall have the following meanings unless a different meaning clearly appears from the context: Administrative Costs has the meaning set forth in Section 3.4; Affiliate means a corporation, partnership, joint venture, association, business trust or similar entity organized under the laws of the United States of America or a state thereof which is directly controlled by or under common control with the Developer or any other Affiliate. For purposes of this definition, control means the power to direct management and policies through the ownership of at least a majority of its voting securities, or the right to designate or elect at least a majority of the members of its governing body by contract or otherwise; Agreement means this TIF Assistance Agreement, as the same may be from time to time modified, amended or supplemented; Architect means Kaas Wilson Architects, LLC, in Minneapolis, Minnesota as the architect for the Project; Business Day means any day except a Saturday, Sunday or a legal holiday or a day on which banking institutions in the EDA are authorized by law or executive order to close; Certificate of Completion means a Certificate of Completion with respect to the Project executed by the EDA pursuant to Section 3.9; City means the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota; Completion Date means the date on which the Certificate of Completion with respect to the Project is executed by the EDA pursuant to Section 3.9; Construction Costs means the capital costs of the construction of the Project, including the costs of labor and materials; construction management and supervision expenses; insurance and payment or performance bond premiums; architectural and engineering fees and expenses; property taxes; usual and customary fees or costs payable to the EDA, the City or any other public body with regulatory authority over construction of the Project (e.g. building permits and inspection fees); the developer fee; and all other costs chargeable to the capital account of the Project under generally accepted accounting principles; Construction Documents means the following documents, all of which shall be in form and substance acceptable to the EDA: (a) Evidence satisfactory to the EDA showing that the Project conforms to applicable zoning, subdivision and building code laws and ordinances, including a copy of the building permit for the Project; (b) A copy of the executed standard form of agreement between owner and architect for architectural services for the Project, if any, and (c) A copy of the executed General Contractor’s contract for the Project, if any; 3 635425v4BR291-400 Construction Lender means U.S. Bank National Association, a national banking association, and its successors and assigns; Construction Phase has the meaning given in the Construction Phase Financing Agreement; Construction Phase Financing Agreement means the Construction Phase Financing Agreement dated April 1, 2020 among Construction Lender, Permanent Lender, and Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation; Construction Plans means the plans, specifications, drawings and related documents for the construction of the Project, which shall be as detailed as the plans, specifications, drawings and related documents which are submitted to the building inspector of the City; Conversion Date has the meaning defined in the Indenture; County means Hennepin County, Minnesota; Declaration means the Declaration of Restrictive Covenants in substantially the form attached hereto as Exhibit F; Design Drawings means the floor plans, renderings, elevations and material specifications for the Project prepared by the Architect; Developer means Brooklyn Center AH II, LLLP, a Minnesota limited liability limited partnership, and its authorized successors and assigns; Development Property means the real property legally described in Exhibit B attached to this Agreement; EDA means the Economic Development Authority of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota Event of Default means any of the events described in Section 4.1 hereof; Final Payment Date means the earlier of (i) the date on which the entire principal and accrued interest on the TIF Note has been paid in full; or (ii) February 1, 2037; or (iii) any earlier date this Agreement or the TIF Note is cancelled in accordance with the terms hereof or deemed paid in full; or (iv) the February 1 following the date the TIF District is terminated in accordance with the TIF Act; or (v) the date the EDA cancels the TIF Note upon a written request for termination from the Developer and a determination in the EDA’s sole discretion that such termination will not limit or interfere with the EDA’s ability to pool Tax Increments generated by the TIF District for affordable housing in accordance with the TIF Act (provided that there shall be no payment of any Tax Increments on such date unless it is a regular Payment Date); General Contractor means Big-D Construction Midwest, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company; 4 635425v4BR291-400 Indenture means the Trust Indenture, dated as of April 1, 2020, by and between the City and U.S. Bank National Association, a national banking association (the “Trustee”); Mortgage Lender means: (i) during the Construction Phase, the Construction Lender and (ii) during the Permanent Phase, the Permanent Lender; Mortgage Lender Collateral Assignment means (i) during the Construction Phase, a Collateral Assignment of Development Agreement, Tax Increment Financing Note and Available Tax Increment given by the Developer in favor of the Construction Lender, together with any amendments thereto and (ii) during the Permanent Phase, a Collateral Assignment of Tax Increment Financing Note and Available Tax Increment given by the Developer in favor of the Permanent Lender, together with any amendments thereto; Payment Date means August 1, 2021 and each February 1 and August 1 thereafter to and including the Final Payment Date; provided, that if any such Payment Date should not be a Business Day, the Payment Date shall be the next succeeding Business Day; Permanent Lender means Northmarq Capital, LLC, and its successors and assigns; Permanent Phase means the period from and after the Conversion Date; Permitted Encumbrances means those encumbrances set forth in Exhibit G; Pledged Tax Increments means for any six month period, 90% of the Tax Increments received by the EDA since the previous Payment Date; Project means the construction of an approximately 143 unit senior rental housing facility and related amenities and improvements to be located at 5803 Xerxes Avenue North in the City (formerly the northern portion of the property at 5801 Xerxes Avenue North) within the TIF District; Public Development Costs means the Public Development Costs of the Project identified on Exhibit C attached hereto and any other cost incurred by the Developer, or its assigns, that the EDA determines is eligible for reimbursement with Pledged Tax Increments; Reimbursement Amount means the lesser of (i) $1,850,000 or (ii) the Public Development Costs actually incurred and paid by the Developer; Site Plan means the site plan prepared for the Development Property approved by the City; State means the State of Minnesota; Tax Credit Investor means U.S. Bancorp Community Development Corporation; Tax Increments means the tax increments derived from the Development Property and the improvements thereon which have been received and are permitted to be retained by the EDA in accordance with the TIF Act including, without limitation, Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.177; 469.176, Subd. 4h; and 469.175, Subd. 1a, as the same may be amended from time to time; for 5 635425v4BR291-400 purposes of this definition, “derived from the Development Property and the improvements thereon” means the portion of Tax Increment actually received by the EDA from the TIF District determined by the EDA, in its sole determination, to have been derived from the Development Property; Termination Date means the earlier of: (i) the date the TIF District is terminated in accordance with the TIF Act; or (ii) the date the TIF Note is paid in full; or (iii) the date the EDA cancels the TIF Note upon a written request for termination from the Developer and a determination in the EDA’s sole discretion that such termination will not limit or interfere with the EDA’s ability to pool Tax Increments generated by the TIF District for affordable housing in accordance with the TIF Act; TIF Act means Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.174 through 469.1794, as amended; TIF District means the Tax Increment Financing District No. 8: Real Estate Equities (a housing district) consisting of the property legally described in Exhibit A attached hereto, which was established as a housing district under the TIF Act; TIF Note means the Taxable Tax Increment Revenue Note (REE Xerxes Avenue Senior Housing Project) to be executed by the EDA and delivered to the Developer pursuant to Article III hereof, a form of which is attached hereto as Exhibit D; TIF Plan means the tax increment financing plan approved for the TIF District; Total Development Costs means the costs of the Project as set forth on Exhibit E; Unavoidable Delays means delays, outside the control of the party claiming their occurrence, which are the direct result of strikes, other labor troubles, prolonged adverse weather, acts of God, acts of war or terrorism, fire or other casualty to the Project, litigation commenced by third parties which, by injunction or other similar judicial action or by the exercise of reasonable discretion, directly results in delays, or acts of any federal, state or local governmental unit (other than the City or EDA) which directly result in delays, acts of the public enemy or acts of terrorism and discovery of unknown hazardous materials or other concealed site conditions or delays of contractors due to such discovery. 6 635425v4BR291-400 ARTICLE II REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES Section 2.1. Representations and Warranties of the EDA. The EDA makes the following representations and warranties: (1) The EDA is a public body corporate and politic organized and existing under the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota and has the power to enter into this Agreement and carry out its obligations hereunder. (2) The EDA has taken the actions necessary to establish the TIF District as a “housing district” within the meaning of Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 11. (3) The development contemplated by this Agreement is in conformance with the development objectives set forth in the Redevelopment Plan and the TIF Plan. (4) The EDA makes no representation or warranty, either express or implied, as to the Development Property or its condition, or that the Development Property shall be suitable for the Developer’s purposes or needs. (5) No member of the Board of Commissioners, or officer of the EDA, has either a direct or indirect financial interest in this Agreement, nor will any member of the Board of Commissioners, or officer of the EDA, benefit financially from this Agreement within the meaning of Minnesota Statutes, Sections 412.311 and 471.87. Section 2.2. Representations and Warranties of the Developer. The Developer makes the following representations and warranties: (1) The Developer is a Minnesota limited liability limited partnership duly and validly organized and existing in good standing under the laws of the State, and has power and authority to enter into this Agreement and to perform its obligations hereunder and is not in violation of any provision of the laws of the State. (2) The construction of the Project would not be undertaken by the Developer, and in the opinion of the Developer would not be economically feasible within the reasonably foreseeable future, without the assistance and benefit to the Developer provided for in this Agreement. (3) Neither the execution and delivery of this Agreement, the consummation of the transactions contemplated hereby, nor the fulfillment of or compliance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement is prevented, limited by or conflicts with or results in a breach of, the terms, conditions or provision of any contractual restriction, evidence of indebtedness, agreement or instrument of whatever nature to which the Developer is now a party or by which it is bound, or constitutes a default under any of the foregoing. (4) The Developer understands that the EDA or the City may subsidize or encourage the development of other developments in the City, including properties that compete with the Development Property and the Project, and that such subsidies may be more favorable than the 7 635425v4BR291-400 terms of this Agreement, and that neither the EDA nor the City has informed the Developer that development of the Development Property will not be favored over the development of other properties. 8 635425v4BR291-400 ARTICLE III UNDERTAKINGS BY DEVELOPER AND EDA Section 3.1. Total Development Costs and Public Costs. (1) The Developer’s estimate of the Total Development Costs of the Project and sources of revenue to pay such costs are set forth on Exhibit E attached hereto. (2) Based on the Developer’s representation that the Total Development Costs for the Project are approximately $33,563,476, that the sources of revenue available to pay such costs, excluding the tax increment assistance contemplated herein, is $31,713,476, and that the Developer is unable to obtain additional private financing for the estimated Total Development Costs, the EDA has agreed to provide tax increment financing subject to the terms and conditions as hereinafter set forth. The Developer must provide the EDA copies of all executed financing documents related to financing the Total Development Costs of the Project. (3) The parties agree that the Public Development Costs to be incurred by the Developer are essential to the successful completion of the Project. The Developer anticipates that the Public Development Costs for the Project which are identified on Exhibit C attached hereto will be at least $1,850,000. (4) As of January 2, 2021, the estimated market value of the Development Property, as improved, is expected to be at least $___________. (5) The Developer has acquired or has entered into a purchase agreement pursuant to which it will acquire fee title to the Development Property, and will cause the Project to be constructed in accordance with the terms of this Agreement, the Redevelopment Plan, and all local, state and federal laws and regulations including, but not limited to, environmental, zoning, energy conservation, building code and public health laws and regulations. (6) The Developer will obtain, or cause to be obtained, in a timely manner, all required permits, licenses and approvals, and will meet, in a timely manner, all requirements of all applicable local, state, and federal laws and regulations which must be obtained or met for the construction and operation of the Project. (7) The Total Development Costs shall be paid by the Developer, and the EDA shall reimburse the Developer for the Public Development Costs in the Reimbursement Amount solely through the issuance of the TIF Note as provided herein. Section 3.2. TIF Note. (1) The TIF Note will be originally issued to the Developer, as provided in Section 3.2(2), in a principal amount equal to the Reimbursement Amount and shall be dated as of its date of issuance. The principal of the TIF Note and interest thereon shall be payable on a pay-as-you- go basis solely from the Pledged Tax Increments as provided below. 9 635425v4BR291-400 (2) The TIF Note shall be issued, in substantially the form attached hereto as Exhibit D and interest will commence to accrue on the TIF Note only when: (A) the Developer shall have submitted written proof and other documentation as may be reasonably satisfactory to the EDA of the exact nature and amount of the Public Development Costs incurred by the Developer, together with such other information or documentation as may be reasonably necessary and satisfactory to the EDA to enable the EDA to substantiate the Developer’s tax increment expenditures per Exhibit C and/or to comply with its tax increment reporting obligations to the Commissioner of Revenue, the Office of the State Auditor or other applicable official; (B) the EDA shall have received evidence that the Declaration has been recorded against the Development Property; (C) the Developer shall have obtained from the City a certificate of occupancy for all residential units in the Project and a Certificate of Completion as provided in this Agreement; (D) the Developer shall have paid all of the EDA’s Administrative Costs required to have been paid as of such date in accordance with Section 3.4 hereof; and (E) the Developer is in material compliance with each term or provision of this Agreement required to have been satisfied as of such date. The documentation provided in accordance with Section 3.2(2)(A) shall include specific invoices for the particular work from the contractor or other provider and shall include paid invoices, copies of remittances and/or other suitable documentary proofs of the Developer’s payment thereof. (3) Subject to the provisions thereof, the TIF Note shall bear simple, non-compounding interest at the rate equal to the lesser of 4.25% per annum or the rate per annum on the Permanent Phase financing for the Project. Interest shall be computed on the basis of a 360 day year consisting of twelve 30-day months. Principal and interest on the TIF Note will be payable on each Payment Date; however, the sole source of funds required to be used for payment of the EDA’s obligations under this Section and correspondingly under the TIF Note shall be the Pledged Tax Increments received in the 6-month period preceding each Payment Date. The principal amount of TIF Note shall be the Reimbursement Amount. On each Payment Date the Pledged Tax Increment shall be credited against the accrued interest then due on the TIF Note and then applied to reduce the principal. In the event the Pledged Tax Increments are not sufficient to pay the accrued interest, the unpaid accrued interest shall be carried forward without interest. All Tax Increments in excess of the Pledged Tax Increments necessary to pay the principal and accrued interest on the TIF Note are not subject to this Agreement, and the EDA retains full discretion as to any authorized application thereof. To the extent that the Pledged Tax Increments are insufficient through the Final Payment Date, to pay all amounts otherwise due on the TIF Note, said unpaid amounts shall then cease to be any debt or obligation of the EDA whatsoever. (4) No interest will accrue during any period in which payments have been suspended pursuant to Section 4.2. (5) Any interest accruing on Pledged Tax Increments held by the EDA pending payment to the Developer on the TIF Note shall accrue to the account of the TIF District. (6) The TIF Note shall be a special and limited obligation of the EDA and not a general obligation of the City or the EDA, and only Pledged Tax Increments shall be used to pay the principal of and interest on the TIF Note. (7) The EDA’s obligation to make payments on the TIF Note on any Payment Date shall be conditioned upon the requirement that (A) there shall not at that time be an Event of 10 635425v4BR291-400 Default that has occurred and is continuing under this Agreement that has not been cured during the applicable cure period, and (B) this Agreement shall not have been terminated pursuant to Section 4.2, and (C) all conditions set forth in Section 3.2(2) have been satisfied as of such date. (8) The TIF Note shall be governed by and payable pursuant to the additional terms thereof, as actually executed, in substantially the form set forth in Exhibit D. In the event of any conflict between the terms of the TIF Note and the terms of this Section 3.2, the terms of the TIF Note shall govern. The issuance of the TIF Note is pursuant and subject to the terms of this Agreement. Section 3.3. Income Restrictions. The Developer hereby represents, covenants and agrees as follows: (1) The Project is intended for occupancy by persons or families of low and moderate income, as defined in chapter 462A, Title II of the National Housing Act of 1934, the National Housing Act of 1959, the United States Housing Act of 1937, as amended, Title V of the Housing Act of 1949, as amended, any other similar present or future federal, state or municipal legislation, or the regulations promulgated under any of those acts; and (2) No more than 20% of the square footage of any building of the Project financed with the proceeds of the TIF Note will consist of commercial, retail or other non-residential uses; and (3) In accordance with the Declaration, commencing on the Completion Date and continuing until the Termination Date, at least 40% of the residential units shall be occupied by or available for rent to persons whose income does not exceed 60% of the area-wide median family income for the standard metropolitan statistical area which includes Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, as that figure is determined and announced from time to time by HUD, as adjusted for family size (“Median Income”); (4) Alternatively, the Developer may elect to satisfy the foregoing affordability requirements by substituting “20% of the residential units” in place of “40% of the residential units” in the preceding paragraph if, for such purposes, the term “Qualifying Tenants” means those persons and families who are determined from time to time by the Developer to have combined adjusted income that does not exceed 50% of the Median Income; and (5) The Developer will provide the EDA an annual certification in the form attached as Exhibit 3 to the Declaration (the “Compliance Certificate”) evidencing compliance with the requirements of paragraph (3) above, and the income verifications from tenants used to meet such requirements. The annual certification shall also include the vacancy rate for the preceding calendar year. The annual certification shall be provided on or before July 1 of each year commencing July 1, 2022, and shall cover the preceding calendar year. (6) The provisions of this Section 3.3 shall be incorporated into the Declaration in substantially the form attached as Exhibit F, and recorded against the Development Property prior to the issuance of the TIF Note. 11 635425v4BR291-400 Section 3.4. Developer to Pay EDA’s Fees and Expenses. The Developer will pay all of the EDA’s reasonable Administrative Costs (as defined below) and must pay such costs to the EDA within 30 days after receipt of a written invoice from the EDA describing the amount and nature of the costs to be reimbursed. For the purposes of this Agreement, the term “Administrative Costs” means out of pocket costs incurred by the EDA together with staff and consultant (including reasonable legal, financial advisor, etc.) costs of the EDA, all attributable to or incurred in connection with the establishment of the TIF District and the TIF Plan and review, negotiation and preparation of this Agreement (together with any other agreements entered into between the parties hereto contemporaneously therewith) and review and approvals of other documents and agreements in connection with the Project. In addition, certain engineering, environmental advisor, legal, land use, zoning, subdivision and other costs related to the development of the Development Property are required to be paid, or additional funds deposited in escrow, as provided in accordance with the City’s planning, zoning, and building fee schedules. The parties agree and understand that Developer deposited with the EDA $10,000 toward payment of the EDA’s Administrative Costs. If such costs exceed such amount, then at any time, but not more often than monthly, the EDA will deliver written notice to Developer setting forth any additional fees and expenses, together with suitable billings, receipts or other evidence of the amount and nature of the fees and expenses, and Developer agrees to pay all fees and expenses within 30 days of EDA’s written request. Any unused amount of such deposit shall be returned to the Developer. Section 3.5. Compliance with Environmental Requirements. (1) The Developer shall comply with all applicable local, state, and federal environmental laws and regulations, and will obtain, and maintain compliance under, any and all necessary environmental permits, licenses, approvals or reviews. (2) The EDA makes no warranties or representations regarding, nor does it indemnify the Developer with respect to, the existence or nonexistence on or in the vicinity of the Development Property or anywhere within the TIF District of any toxic or hazardous substances or wastes, pollutants or contaminants (including, without limitation, asbestos, urea formaldehyde, the group of organic compounds known as polychlorinated biphenyls, petroleum products including gasoline, fuel oil, crude oil and various constituents of such products, or any hazardous substance as defined in the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act of 1980 (“CERCLA”), 42 U.S.C. §§ 961-9657, as amended) (collectively, the “Hazardous Substances”). (3) The Developer agrees to take all necessary action to remove or remediate any Hazardous Substances located on the Development Property to the extent required by and in accordance with all applicable local, state and federal environmental laws and regulations. Section 3.6. Construction Plans. (1) Prior to the commencement of construction of the Project, the Developer will deliver to the EDA the Construction Plans, Construction Documents and a sworn construction cost statement certified by the Developer and the General Contractor (the “Sworn Construction Cost Statement”) all in form and substance acceptable to the EDA. The Construction Plans for the Project shall be consistent with the Redevelopment Plan, this Agreement, and all applicable State 12 635425v4BR291-400 and local laws and regulations and the Site Plan and Design Drawings previously submitted to the EDA. The City’s building official and the Executive Director of the EDA, on behalf of the EDA shall promptly review any Construction Plans upon submission and deliver to the Developer a written statement approving the Construction Plans or a written statement rejecting the Construction Plans and specifying the deficiencies in the Construction Plans. The City’s building official and the Executive Director of the EDA on behalf of the EDA shall approve the Construction Plans if: (i) the Construction Plans substantially conform to the terms and conditions of this Agreement; (ii) the Construction Plans are consistent with the goals and objectives of the Redevelopment Plan and the TIF Plan; (iii) the Construction Plans comply with the Site Plan and Design Drawings; and (iv) the Construction Plans do not violate any applicable federal, State or local laws, ordinances, rules or regulations. If the Construction Plans are not approved by the EDA, then the Developer shall make such changes as the EDA may reasonably require and resubmit the Construction Plans to the EDA for approval, which will not be unreasonably withheld, unreasonably conditioned or unreasonably delayed. If the EDA has not rejected the Construction Plans in writing within 30 calendar days of submission, such Construction Plans shall automatically be deemed approved by the EDA but only if the Construction Plans provided to the EDA are complete and final and meet all requirements necessary for the City to issue a building permit. (2) No changes shall be made to the Construction Plans for the Project without the EDA’s prior written approval, unless the aggregate of such changes do not increase or decrease the Total Development Costs by more than 10%. No changes which materially alter (a) the Project’s site plan, (b) exterior appearance, (c) construction quality, or (d) exterior materials included in the final Design Drawings and Construction Plans shall be made without the EDA’s prior written consent. The approval of the EDA will not be unreasonably withheld, conditioned or delayed. If an amendment or prior written approval from the EDA is necessary with respect to a change in the Construction Plans, if the EDA has not rejected such amendment in writing within 30 calendar days of submission of such amendment, the amendment to Construction Plans shall automatically be deemed approved by the EDA but only if such amendment provided to the EDA is complete and final and meets all requirements necessary for the City to issue a building permit or determine compliance with an applicable building permit. (3) The approval of the Construction Plans, or any proposed amendment to the Construction Plans, by the EDA does not constitute a representation or warranty by the EDA that the Construction Plans or the Project comply with any applicable building code, health or safety regulation, zoning regulation, environmental law or other law or regulation, or that the Project will meet the qualifications for issuance of a certificate of occupancy, or that the Project will meet the requirements of the Developer or any other users of the Project. Approval of the Construction Plans, or any proposed amendment to the Construction Plans, by the EDA will not constitute a waiver of an Event of Default. Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed to relieve the Developer of its obligations to receive any required approval of the Construction Plans from any City department. Section 3.7. Commencement and Completion of Construction. Subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement and to Unavoidable Delays, the Developer will commence construction of the Project by April 30, 2020 and shall substantially complete the Project by January 31, 2022. Notwithstanding the foregoing, failure of the Developer to commence 13 635425v4BR291-400 construction or substantially complete the Project shall not be an Event of Default hereunder unless the Developer fails to commence construction of the Project by June 30, 2020 or the Developer fails to obtain a certificate of occupancy for the Project by July 31, 2022. The Project will be constructed by the Developer on the Development Property in conformity with the Construction Plans approved by the EDA. Prior to completion, upon the request of the EDA, and subject to applicable safety rules, the Developer will provide the EDA reasonable access to the Development Property. “Reasonable access” means at least one site inspection per week during regular business hours. During construction, marketing and rentals of the Project, the Developer will deliver progress reports to the EDA from time to time as reasonably requested by the EDA. Section 3.8. Certificate of Completion. The Developer shall notify the EDA when construction of the Project has been substantially completed. The EDA shall, within 20 days after such notification, inspect the Project in order to determine whether the Project has been constructed in substantial conformity with the approved Construction Plans. If the EDA determines that the Project has not been constructed in substantial conformity with the approved Construction Plans, the EDA shall deliver a written statement to the Developer indicating in adequate detail the specific respects in which the Project has not been constructed in substantial conformity with the approved Construction Plans and Developer shall have a reasonable period of time to remedy such deficiencies. The EDA shall re-inspect the Project within a reasonable period of time after receiving notice that such deficiencies have been remedied in order to determine whether the Project has been constructed in substantial conformity with the approved Construction Plans and this Agreement. Within a reasonable period of time after determining that the Project has been constructed in substantial conformity with the approved Construction Plans, the EDA will furnish to the Developer a Certificate of Completion substantially in the form attached hereto as Exhibit H certifying the completion of the Project. The Certificate of Completion issued for the Project shall conclusively satisfy and terminate the agreements and covenants of the Developer in this Agreement solely with respect to construction of the Project. The issuance of a Certificate of Completion under this Agreement shall not be construed to relieve the Developer of any approval required by any City department in connection with the construction, completion or occupancy of the Project nor shall it relieve the Developer of any other obligations under this Agreement. Section 3.9. Encumbrance of the Development Property. Until the Final Payment Date, without the prior written consent of the EDA, neither the Developer nor any successor in interest to the Developer will engage in any financing or any other transaction creating any mortgage or other encumbrance or lien upon the Development Property, or portion thereof, whether by express agreement or operation of law, or suffer any encumbrance or lien to be made on or attach to the Development Property except for the purpose of obtaining funds only to the extent necessary for financing or refinancing the acquisition and construction of the Project (including, but not limited to, land and building acquisition, labor and materials, professional fees, development fees, real estate taxes, reasonably required reserves, construction interest, organization and other direct and indirect costs of development and financing, costs of constructing the Project, and an allowance for contingencies) including without limitation regulatory agreements and land use restriction agreements in connection with such financings; provided, however, this provision shall not be considered a waiver of the requirements of Section 5.3 with respect to any Transfer of the TIF Note in connection with any such financing or refinancing nor shall anything contained in this Section prohibit the Developer from making transfers in accordance with Section 5.3. The EDA hereby consents to any mortgages securing the Developer’s construction financing for the Project 14 635425v4BR291-400 and to the succession of the mortgagee thereunder (or any assignee of the mortgagee) or any purchasers at or after foreclosure thereof, by the successful bidder at the sale, to title to the Development Property, and to any other Permitted Encumbrances set forth in Exhibit G; provided, however, this provision shall not be considered a waiver of the requirements of Section 5.3 with respect to any Transfer of the TIF Note in connection with any such mortgage. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the TIF Note shall be terminated by the EDA in the event that any mortgagee (or any assignee of the mortgagee) or any purchasers at or after foreclosure thereof, by the successful bidder at the sale, to the title to the Development Property, terminates the Declaration, in accordance with its terms, or does not otherwise comply with the Declaration. Section 3.10. Business Subsidy Act. The subsidy granted to the Developer pursuant to this Agreement is assistance for housing and therefore the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Section 116J.993 to 116J.995 do not apply. No portion of the tax increment assistance shall be used to construct any commercial space. Section 3.11. Right to Collect Delinquent Taxes. The Developer acknowledges that the EDA is providing substantial aid and assistance in furtherance of the Project through reimbursement of Public Development Costs. To that end, the Developer agrees for itself, its successors and assigns, that in addition to the obligation pursuant to statute to pay real estate taxes, it is also obligated by reason of this Agreement, to pay before delinquency all real estate taxes assessed against the Development Property and the Project. The Developer acknowledges that this obligation creates a contractual right on behalf of the EDA through the Termination Date to sue the Developer or its successors and assigns, to collect delinquent real estate taxes related to the Development Property and any penalty or interest thereon and to pay over the same as a tax payment to the county auditor. In any such suit in which the EDA is the prevailing party, the EDA shall also be entitled to recover its costs, expenses and reasonable attorney fees. Section 3.12. Review of Taxes. (1) The Developer agrees that prior to the Termination Date it will not cause a reduction in the real property taxes paid in respect of the Development Property through: (i) willful destruction of the Development Property or any part thereof; or (ii) willful refusal to reconstruct damaged or destroyed property. The Developer also agrees that it will not, prior to the Termination Date, apply for an exemption from or a deferral of property tax on the Development Property pursuant to any law, or transfer or permit transfer of the Development Property to any entity whose ownership or operation of the property would result in the Development Property being exempt from real property taxes under State law; provided, however, the Developer may apply for and obtain designation of the Development Property as low-income rental property classified as “4d” under Minn. Stat. 273.13, subdivision 25 (“4d Classification”). (2) Other than 4d Classification, the Developer shall notify the EDA within 10 days of filing any petition to seek reduction in market value or property taxes on any portion of the Development Property under any State law (referred to as a “Tax Appeal”). If as of any Payment Date, any Tax Appeal is then pending, the EDA will continue to make payments on the TIF Note but only to the extent that the Pledged Tax Increment relates to property taxes paid with respect to the market value of the Development Property not being challenged as part of the Tax Appeal as determined by the EDA in its sole discretion and the EDA will withhold the Pledged Tax Increment 15 635425v4BR291-400 related to property taxes paid with respect to the market value of the Development Property being challenged as part of the Tax Appeal as determined by the EDA in its sole discretion. The EDA will apply any withheld amount to the extent not reduced as a result of the Tax Appeal promptly after the Tax Appeal is fully resolved and the amount of Pledged Tax Increment, as applicable, attributable to the disputed tax payments is finalized. (3) If the Development Property qualifies for 4d Classification and Minn. Stat. 273.13, subdivision 25 or any applicable successor statute is amended to reduce the 4d Classification tax rate, the Developer acknowledges that the amount of Tax Increments may be negatively impacted. Section 3.13. Project Rents. The Developer covenants and agrees that during the Qualified Project Period (as defined in the Declaration) it will not increase the rent charged to any tenant of a rental unit within the Project during such tenant’s lease term and, at any rate, will not increase the rent charged to any tenant more than once in any 6-month period. 16 635425v4BR291-400 ARTICLE IV EVENTS OF DEFAULT Section 4.1. Events of Default Defined. The following shall be “Events of Default” under this Agreement and the term “Event of Default” shall mean whenever it is used in this Agreement any one or more of the following events: (1) Failure by the Developer to timely pay any ad valorem real property taxes assessed with respect to the Development Property. (2) Subject to Unavoidable Delays, failure by the Developer to commence construction of the Project by June 30, 2020, and to proceed with due diligence to substantially complete the construction of the Project pursuant to the terms, conditions and limitations of this Agreement and obtain a certificate of occupancy from the City by July 31, 2022. (3) Failure of the Developer to observe or perform any other material covenant, condition, obligation or agreement on its part to be observed or performed under the Declaration, or this Agreement, including, without limitation, compliance with the requirements set forth in Section 3.3 hereof. (4) If, prior to the Completion Date, the Developer shall (a) file any petition in bankruptcy or for any reorganization, arrangement, composition, readjustment, liquidation, dissolution, or similar relief under the United States Bankruptcy Act of 1978, as amended or under any similar federal or state law; or (b) be adjudicated a bankrupt or insolvent; or if a petition or answer proposing the adjudication of the Developer, as a bankrupt or its reorganization under any present or future federal bankruptcy act or any similar federal or state law shall be filed in any court and such petition or answer shall not be discharged or denied within 90 days after the filing thereof; or a receiver, trustee or liquidator of the Developer, or of the Project, or part thereof, shall be appointed in any proceeding brought against the Developer, and shall not be discharged within 90 days after such appointment, or if the Developer, shall consent to or acquiesce in such appointment. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary set forth in this Agreement the lenders providing construction or permanent financing for the Project, the general partner and any limited partner of the Developer shall have the right, but not the obligation, to cure an Event of Default during the cure period provided for the Developer. Section 4.2. Remedies on Default. Whenever any Event of Default referred to in Section 4.1 occurs and is continuing, the EDA, as specified below, may take any one or more of the following actions after the giving of 30 days’ written notice to the Developer, but only if the Event of Default has not been cured within said 30 days; provided that if such Event of Default cannot be reasonably cured within the 30 day period, and the Developer has provided assurances reasonably satisfactory to the EDA that it is proceeding with due diligence to cure such default, 17 635425v4BR291-400 such 30 day cure period shall be extended for a period deemed reasonably necessary by the EDA to effect the cure, but in any event not to exceed 180 days: (1) The EDA may suspend its performance under this Agreement and the TIF Note until it receives assurances from the Developer, deemed reasonably adequate by the EDA, that the Developer will cure its default and continue its performance under this Agreement. Interest on the TIF Note shall not accrue during the period of any suspension of payment. (2) The EDA may terminate this Agreement and/or cancel the TIF Note. (3) The EDA may take any action, including legal or administrative action, in law or equity, which may appear necessary or desirable to enforce performance and observance of any obligation, agreement, or covenant of the Developer under this Agreement. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary set forth in this Agreement the lenders providing construction or permanent financing for the Project, the general partner and any limited partner of the Developer shall have the right, but not the obligation, to cure an Event of Default during the cure period provided for the Developer. If the EDA has been provided a notice address, the EDA agrees to give the applicable Mortgage Lender the same notice provided to the Developer of any Event of Default hereunder that occurs prior to the termination of the applicable Mortgage Lender Collateral Assignment and opportunity to cure the same, as further set forth in the applicable Mortgage Lender Collateral Assignment. If the EDA has been provided a notice address, the EDA agrees to give the Tax Credit Investor the same notice provided to the Developer of any Event of Default hereunder and opportunity to cure the same. Section 4.3. No Remedy Exclusive. No remedy herein conferred upon or reserved to the EDA is intended to be exclusive of any other available remedy or remedies, but each and every such remedy shall be cumulative and shall be in addition to every other remedy given under this Agreement or now or hereafter existing at law or in equity or by statute. No delay or omission to exercise any right or power accruing upon any default shall impair any such right or power or shall be construed to be a waiver thereof, but any such right and power may be exercised from time to time and as often as may be deemed expedient. Section 4.4. No Implied Waiver. In the event any agreement contained in this Agreement should be breached by any party and thereafter waived by any other party, such waiver shall be limited to the particular breach so waived and shall not be deemed to waive any other concurrent, previous or subsequent breach hereunder. Section 4.5. Indemnification of EDA. (1) The Developer releases from and covenants and agrees that the City and the EDA, and their governing bodies’ members, officers, agents, including the independent contractors, consultants and legal counsel, servants and employees thereof (for purposes of this Section, collectively the “Indemnified Parties”) shall not be liable for and agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the Indemnified Parties against any loss or damage to property or any injury to or death 18 635425v4BR291-400 of any person occurring at or about or resulting from any defect in the Project, or any other loss, cost expense, or penalty, except to the extent caused by any willful misrepresentation or any willful or wanton misconduct of the Indemnified Parties. (2) Except for any willful misrepresentation or any willful or wanton misconduct of the Indemnified Parties, the Developer agrees to protect and defend the Indemnified Parties, now and forever, and further agrees to hold the Indemnified Parties harmless from any claim, demand, suit, action or other proceeding whatsoever by any person or entity whatsoever arising or purportedly arising from the actions or inactions of the Developer (or if other persons acting on its behalf or under its direction or control) under this Agreement, or the transactions contemplated hereby or the acquisition, construction, installation, ownership, and operation of the Project; including, without limitation, any pecuniary loss or penalty (including interest thereon at the rate of 5% per annum from the date such loss is incurred or penalty is paid by the EDA or the City) as a result of the Project failing to cause the TIF District to qualify as a “housing district” under Section 469.174, Subdivision 11, of the Act, or to violate limitations as to the use of Tax Increments as set forth in Section 469.176, subd. 4d. (3) All covenants, stipulations, promises, agreements and obligations of the EDA contained herein shall be deemed to be the covenants, stipulations, promises, agreements and obligations of the EDA or the City and not of any governing body member, officer, agent, servant or employee of the EDA or the City, as the case may be. Section 4.6. Reimbursement of Attorneys’ Fees. If the Developer shall default under any of the provisions of this Agreement, and the EDA shall employ attorneys or incur other reasonable expenses for the collection of payments due hereunder, or for the enforcement of performance or observance of any obligation or agreement on the part of the Developer contained in this Agreement, the Developer will within 30 days reimburse the EDA for the reasonable fees of such attorneys and such other reasonable expenses so incurred. 19 635425v4BR291-400 ARTICLE V ADDITIONAL PROVISIONS Section 5.1. Restrictions on Use. The Developer agrees for itself, its successors and assigns and every successor in interest to the Development Property, or any part thereof, that the Developer and such successors and assigns shall operate, or cause to be operated, the Project as an affordable senior rental housing development in accordance with this Agreement and the Declaration until the Termination Date. Section 5.2. Reports. The Developer shall provide the EDA reports in a timely manner with such information about the Project as the EDA may reasonably request for purposes of satisfying any reporting requirements imposed by law on the EDA. Section 5.3. Limitations on Transfer and Assignment. (1) Except as provided in Sections 3.9 and 5.3(5), the Developer will not sell, assign, convey, lease or transfer in any other mode or manner (collectively, “Transfer”) this Agreement, the TIF Note, or the Development Property or the Project, or any interest therein, without the express written approval of the EDA, which consent will not be unreasonably withheld, conditioned or delayed. The EDA shall, within 20 days after such a written request for approval of a Transfer, deliver a written statement to the Developer indicating whether the Transfer is approved or specifying the additional conditions to be satisfied in accordance with Section 5.3(3). The provisions of this Section 5.3 apply to all subsequent Transfers by authorized transferees; (2) Notwithstanding clause (3) below, the EDA hereby consents to (A) the Mortgage Lender Collateral Assignment to the Construction Lender during the Construction Phase, upon receipt of (i) an Acknowledgment Regarding TIF Note from the Construction Lender in the form included in Exhibit 2 to the TIF Note, (ii) an executed copy of Mortgage Lender Collateral Assignment between Construction Lender and the Developer, and (iii) reasonable legal fees of the EDA in accordance with clause (4) below and (B) the Mortgage Lender Collateral Assignment to the Permanent Lender during the Permanent Phase, upon receipt of (i) an Acknowledgment Regarding TIF Note from the Permanent Lender in the form included in Exhibit 2 to the TIF Note, (ii) an executed copy of Mortgage Lender Collateral Assignment between Permanent Lender and the Developer, (iii) a termination and release from the Construction Lender of the Construction Lender’s Mortgage Lender Collateral Assignment and (iv) reasonable legal fees of the EDA in accordance with clause (4) below; (3) The EDA shall be entitled to require, as conditions to any approval of any Transfer of this Agreement, the Development Property, the Project, or the TIF Note in connection therewith, which approval will not be unreasonably withheld, conditioned or delayed, that: (a) Any proposed transferee shall have the qualifications and financial responsibility, as determined by the EDA, necessary and adequate to fulfill the obligations undertaken in this Agreement by the Developer; (b) Any proposed transferee, by instrument in writing satisfactory to the EDA shall, for itself and its successors and assigns, and expressly for the benefit of the EDA have 20 635425v4BR291-400 expressly assumed any of the remaining obligations of the Developer under this Agreement and agreed to be subject to all the conditions and restrictions to which the Developer is subject; (c) There shall be submitted to the EDA for review all instruments and other legal documents involved in effecting transfer, and if approved by EDA, its approval shall be indicated to the Developer in writing; (d) Any proposed transferee of the TIF Note shall (i) execute and deliver to the EDA the Acknowledgment Regarding TIF Note in the form included in Exhibit 2 to the TIF Note and (ii) surrender the TIF Note to the EDA either in exchange for a new fully registered note or for transfer of the TIF Note on the registration records for the TIF Note maintained by the EDA; (e) The Developer and its transferees shall comply with such other conditions as are necessary in order to achieve and safeguard the purposes of the Act, the TIF Act and this Agreement; and (f) In the absence of a specific written agreement by the EDA to the contrary, no such transfer or approval by the EDA thereof shall be deemed to relieve the Developer or any other party bound in any way by this Agreement or otherwise with respect to the construction of the Project, from any of its obligations with respect thereto. (4) The Developer agrees to pay all reasonable legal fees and expenses of the EDA, including fees of the City Attorney’s office and outside counsel retained by the EDA to review the documents submitted to the EDA in connection with any Transfer. (5) Nothing contained in this Section shall prohibit the Developer from (i) entering into leases with tenants in the ordinary course of business, (ii) entering into easements or other agreements necessary for the operation of the Project, (iii) entering into easements necessary for the construction of the Project, (iv) admitting or removing limited partners or transferring direct or indirect limited partner interests in the Developer, or interests in the general partner of the Developer, or admitting or removing partners in accordance with the applicable organizational documents, or (v) removing the general partner of the Developer for cause at the direction of the Tax Credit Investor in accordance with the Developer’s partnership agreement and/or in accordance with Developer’s financing document with the applicable Mortgage Lender. Section 5.4. Conflicts of Interest. No member of the governing body or other official of the EDA shall have any financial interest, direct or indirect, in this Agreement, the Development Property or the Project, or any contract, agreement or other transaction contemplated to occur or be undertaken thereunder or with respect thereto, nor shall any such member of the governing body or other official participate in any decision relating to this Agreement which affects his or her personal interests or the interests of any corporation, partnership or association in which he or she is directly or indirectly interested. No member, official or employee of the EDA shall be personally liable to the EDA in the event of any default or breach by the Developer or successor or on any obligations under the terms of this Agreement. 21 635425v4BR291-400 Section 5.5. Titles of Articles and Sections. Any titles of the several parts, articles and sections of this Agreement are inserted for convenience of reference only and shall be disregarded in construing or interpreting any of its provisions. Section 5.6. Notices and Demands. Except as otherwise expressly provided in this Agreement, a notice, demand or other communication under this Agreement by any party to any other shall be sufficiently given or delivered if it is dispatched by registered or certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, or delivered personally, and (a) in the case of the Developer is addressed to or delivered personally to: Brooklyn Center AH II, LLLP 579 Selby Avenue Saint Paul, Minnesota 55102 Attn: Patrick Ostrom With a copy to: Winthrop & Weinstine, P.A. 225 South Sixth Street, Suite 3500 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402-4629 Attention: Jeffrey Drennan, Esq. and a copy to: NorthMarq Capital, LLC 3500 American Blvd West, #500 Bloomington, MN 55431 Attn: Servicing Department and a copy to: U.S. Bancorp Community Development Corporation 1307 Washington Avenue, Suite 300 St. Louis, MO 63103 Attn: Director of Affordable Housing Asset Management and a copy to: Applegate & Thorne‐Thomsen 425 S. Financial Place, Suite 1900 Chicago, IL 60605 Attn: Ben Applegate, Esq. (b) in the case of the EDA is addressed to or delivered personally to the EDA at: Economic Development Authority of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota Brooklyn Center City Hall 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 Attn: City Finance Director or at such other address with respect to any such party as that party may, from time to time, designate in writing and forward to the other, as provided in this Section. 22 635425v4BR291-400 Section 5.7. No Additional Waiver Implied by One Waiver. If any agreement contained in this Agreement should be breached by either party and thereafter waived by the other party, such waiver shall be limited to the particular breach so waived and shall not be deemed to waive any other concurrent, previous or subsequent breach hereunder. Section 5.8. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of which shall constitute one and the same instrument. Section 5.9. Law Governing. This Agreement will be governed and construed in accordance with the laws of the State. Section 5.10. Term; Termination. Except as provided in the Declaration, and unless this Agreement is terminated earlier in accordance with its terms this Agreement shall terminate on the Final Payment Date. Early termination upon a written request from the Developer shall be in the EDA’s sole discretion and upon a determination that such termination will not limit or interfere with the EDA’s ability to pool Tax Increments generated by the TIF District for affordable housing in accordance with the TIF Act. After the Termination Date, if requested by the Developer, the EDA will provide a termination certificate as to the Developer’s obligations hereunder. Section 5.11. Provisions Surviving Rescission, Expiration or Termination. Sections 4.5 and 4.6 shall survive any rescission, termination or expiration of this Agreement with respect to or arising out of any event, occurrence or circumstance existing prior to the date thereof. Section 5.12. Superseding Effect. This Agreement reflects the entire agreement of the parties with respect to the development of the Development Property, and supersedes in all respects all prior agreements of the parties, whether written or otherwise, with respect to the development of the Development Property. Section 5.13. Relationship of Parties. Nothing in this Agreement is intended, or shall be construed, to create a partnership or joint venture among or between the parties hereto, and the rights and remedies of the parties hereto shall be strictly as set forth in this Agreement. All covenants, stipulations, promises, agreements and obligations of the EDA contained herein shall be deemed to be the covenants, stipulations, promises, agreements and obligations of the EDA and not of any governing body member, officer, agent, servant or employee of the City or the EDA. Section 5.14. Venue. All matters, whether sounding in tort or in contract, relating to the validity, construction, performance, or enforcement of this Agreement shall be controlled by and determined in accordance with the laws of the State of Minnesota, and the Developer agrees that all legal actions initiated by the Developer or EDA with respect to or arising from any provision contained in this Agreement shall be initiated, filed and venued exclusively in the State of Minnesota, Hennepin County, District Court and shall not be removed therefrom to any other federal or state court. S-1 635425v4BR291-400 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the EDA has caused this Agreement to be duly executed in its name and on its behalf, and the Developer has caused this Agreement to be duly executed in its name and on its behalf, on or as of the date first above written. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA By _________________________________ Its President By _________________________________ Its Executive Director This is a signature page to the TIF Assistance Agreement. S-2 635425v4BR291-400 BROOKLYN CENTER AH II, LLLP, a Minnesota limited liability limited partnership By: Brooklyn Center AH II, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company Its: General Partner By: REE Brooklyn Center AH II, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company Its: Manager By: William R. Bisanz Its: President This is a signature page to the TIF Assistance Agreement. A-1 635425v4BR291-400 EXHIBIT A DESCRIPTION OF TIF DISTRICT The area encompassed by the TIF District shall also include all street or utility right-of-ways located upon or adjacent to the property described below: Originally: Tract B, Registered Land Survey No. 1262, Hennepin County, Minnesota. Being Registered Land as is evidenced by Certificate of Title No. 1432398 Which has been re-platted as: Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, Northway Crossing Addition Being Registered Land as evidenced by Certificates of Title Nos. 1496796 and _______ B-1 635425v4BR291-400 EXHIBIT B LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF DEVELOPMENT PROPERTY Lot 1, Block 1, Northway Crossing, according to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota. Being Registered Land as is evidenced by Certificate of Title No. 1496796. C-1 635425v4BR291-400 EXHIBIT C PUBLIC DEVELOPMENT COSTS Land acquisition Site grading and improvements Underground and above ground utilities All rental housing construction costs eligible for reimbursement under the TIF Act D-1 635425v4BR291-400 EXHIBIT D FORM OF TAXABLE TIF NOTE No. R-1 [$1,850,000] UNITED STATES OF AMERICA STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN CITY BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA TAXABLE TAX INCREMENT REVENUE NOTE (REE XERXES AVENUE SENIOR HOUSING PROJECT) ___________, 20___ The Economic Development Authority of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota (the “EDA”), hereby acknowledges itself to be indebted and, for value received, hereby promises to pay the amounts hereinafter described (the “Payment Amounts”) to Brooklyn Center AH II, LLLP, a Minnesota limited liability limited partnership or its registered assigns (the “Registered Owner”), the principal amount of _______________ and 00/100 Dollars [($1,850,000)], but only in the manner, at the times, from the sources of revenue, and to the extent hereinafter provided. This Note is issued pursuant to that certain TIF Assistance Agreement, dated as of April ____, 2020, as the same may be amended from time to time (the “TIF Assistance Agreement”), by and between the EDA and Brooklyn Center AH II, LLLP (the “Developer”). Unless otherwise defined herein or unless context requires otherwise, undefined terms used herein shall have the meanings set forth in the TIF Assistance Agreement. This Note shall bear simple, non-compounding interest at the rate equal to the lesser of 4.25% per annum or the rate per annum on the Permanent Phase financing for the Project; provided that no interest shall accrue on this Note during any period that an Event of Default has occurred, and such Event of Default is continuing, under the TIF Assistance Agreement and EDA has exercised its remedy under the TIF Assistance Agreement to suspend payment on the Note. Interest shall be computed on the basis of a 360-day year of twelve 30-day months. The amounts due under this Note shall be payable on August 1, 2021 and on each February 1 and August 1 thereafter to and including the earliest of (i) the date on which the entire principal and accrued interest on the TIF Note has been paid in full; or (ii) February 1, 2037; or (iii) any earlier date the TIF Assistance Agreement or this Note is cancelled in accordance with the terms of the TIF Assistance Agreement or deemed paid in full; or (iv) the February 1 following the date the TIF District is terminated in accordance with the TIF Act or (v) the date the EDA cancels the TIF Note upon a written request for termination from the Developer and a determination in the EDA’s sole discretion that such termination will not limit or interfere with the EDA’s ability to pool Tax Increments generated by the TIF District for affordable housing in accordance with the TIF Act (provided that there shall be no payment of any Tax Increments on such date unless it is a regular Payment Date) (the “Final Payment Date”) or, if the first should not be a Business Day D-2 635425v4BR291-400 (as defined in the TIF Assistance Agreement) the next succeeding Business Day (collectively, the “Payment Dates”). On each Payment Date, the EDA shall pay by check or draft mailed to the person that was the Registered Owner of this Note at the close of the last business day preceding such Payment Date an amount equal to 90% of the Tax Increments (as hereinafter defined) received by the EDA during the 6-month period preceding such Payment Date (“Pledged Tax Increments”). “Tax Increments” are the tax increments derived from the Development Property (as defined in the TIF Assistance Agreement) and the improvements thereon which have been received and are permitted to be retained by the EDA in accordance with the Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.174 through 469.1794, as the same may be amended or supplemented from time to time (the “TIF Act”) including, without limitation, Minnesota Statutes, Section 469. 469.177; 469.176, Subd. 4h; and 469.175, Subd. 1a, as the same may be amended from time to time; for purposes of this definition, “derived from the Development Property and the improvements thereon” means the portion of Tax Increment actually received by the EDA from the TIF District determined by the EDA, in its sole determination, to have been derived from the Development Property. Payments on this Note shall be payable solely from the Pledged Tax Increments. All payments made by the EDA under this Note shall first be applied to accrued interest and then to principal. If Pledged Tax Increments are insufficient to pay any accrued interest due, such unpaid interest shall be carried forward without interest. This Note shall terminate and be of no further force and effect following the Final Payment Date defined above, or any date upon which the EDA shall have terminated the TIF Assistance Agreement under Section 4.2 thereof or on the date that all principal and interest payable hereunder shall have been or deemed paid in full, whichever occurs earliest. This Note may be prepaid in whole or in part at any time without penalty. The EDA makes no representation or covenant, express or implied, that the Pledged Tax Increments will be sufficient to pay, in whole or in part, the amounts which are or may become due and payable hereunder. There are risk factors in the amount of Tax Increments that may actually be received by the EDA and some of those factors are listed on the attached Exhibit 1. The Registered Owner acknowledges these risk factors and understands and agrees that payments by the EDA under this Note are subject to these and other factors. The EDA’s payment obligations hereunder shall be further subject to the conditions that (i) no Event of Default under Section 4.1 of the TIF Assistance Agreement shall have occurred and be continuing at the time payment is otherwise due hereunder, including without limitation failure to obtain the Compliance Certificate in accordance with Section 3.3 of the TIF Assistance Agreement and deliver the Declaration (as defined therein), and (ii) the TIF Assistance Agreement shall not have been terminated pursuant to Section 4.2, and (iii) all conditions set forth in Section 3.2(2) of the TIF Assistance Agreement have been satisfied as of such date. Any such suspended and unpaid amounts shall become payable, without interest accruing thereon in the meantime, if this Note has not been terminated in accordance with Section 4.2 of the TIF Assistance Agreement and said Event of Default shall thereafter have been cured in accordance with Section 4.2. If pursuant to the occurrence of an Event of Default under the TIF Assistance Agreement the EDA elects, in accordance with the TIF Assistance Agreement to cancel and rescind the TIF Assistance D-3 635425v4BR291-400 Agreement and/or this Note, the EDA shall have no further debt or obligation under this Note whatsoever. Reference is hereby made to all of the provisions of the TIF Assistance Agreement, for a fuller statement of the rights and obligations of the EDA to pay the principal of this Note and the interest thereon, and said provisions are hereby incorporated into this Note as though set out in full herein. THIS NOTE IS A SPECIAL, LIMITED REVENUE OBLIGATION AND NOT A GENERAL OBLIGATION OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA (THE “CITY”) OR THE EDA AND IS PAYABLE BY THE EDA ONLY FROM THE SOURCES AND SUBJECT TO THE QUALIFICATIONS STATED OR REFERENCED HEREIN. THIS NOTE IS NOT A GENERAL OBLIGATION OF THE CITY OR THE EDA, AND THE FULL FAITH AND CREDIT AND TAXING POWERS OF THE CITY AND THE EDA ARE NOT PLEDGED TO THE PAYMENT OF THE PRINCIPAL OF OR INTEREST ON THIS NOTE AND NO PROPERTY OR OTHER ASSET OF THE CITY OR THE EDA, SAVE AND EXCEPT THE ABOVE-REFERENCED PLEDGED TAX INCREMENTS, IS OR SHALL BE A SOURCE OF PAYMENT OF THE EDA’S OBLIGATIONS HEREUNDER. The Registered Owner shall never have or be deemed to have the right to compel any exercise of any taxing power of the EDA or the City or of any other public body, and neither the EDA nor any person executing or registering this Note shall be liable personally hereon by reason of the issuance or registration thereof or otherwise. This Note is issued by the EDA in aid of financing a project pursuant to and in full conformity with the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota, including the TIF Act. This Note may be assigned only as provided in Section 5.3 of the TIF Assistance Agreement and subject to the assignee executing and delivering to the EDA the Acknowledgment Regarding TIF Note in the form included in Exhibit 2. Additionally, in order to assign the Note, the assignee shall surrender the same to the EDA either in exchange for a new fully registered note or for transfer of this Note on the registration records maintained by the EDA for the Note. Each permitted assignee shall take this Note subject to the foregoing conditions and subject to all provisions stated or referenced herein. IT IS HEREBY CERTIFIED AND RECITED that all acts, conditions, and things required by the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota to be done, to have happened, and to be performed precedent to and in the issuance of this Note have been done, have happened, and have been performed in regular and due form, time, and manner as required by law; and that this Note, together with all other indebtedness of the EDA outstanding on the date hereof and on the date of its actual issuance and delivery, does not cause the indebtedness of the EDA to exceed any constitutional or statutory limitation thereon. D-4 635425v4BR291-400 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Economic Development Authority of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota by its Board of Commissioners has caused this Note to be executed by the manual signatures of its President and Executive Director and has caused this Note to be issued on and dated as of the date first written above. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA By____________________________ Its President By____________________________ Its Executive Director Signature Page for Tax Increment Revenue Note (REE Xerxes Avenue Senior Housing Project) D-5 635425v4BR291-400 CERTIFICATION OF REGISTRATION It is hereby certified that the foregoing Note, as originally issued on the date first written above, was on said date registered in the name of Brooklyn Center AH II, LLLP, a Minnesota limited liability limited partnership, and that, at the request of the Registered Owner of this Note, the undersigned has this day registered the Note in the name of such Registered Owner, as indicated in the registration blank below, on the books kept by the undersigned for such purposes. NAME AND ADDRESS OF REGISTERED OWNER DATE OF REGISTRATION SIGNATURE OF EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR Brooklyn Center AH II, LLLP 579 Selby Avenue Saint Paul, Minnesota 55102 Attn: Patrick Ostrom _________, 20__ ___________________ ____________________ ____________________ ____________________ ____________________ _________, 20__ ___________________ ____________________ ____________________ ____________________ ____________________ _________, 20__ ___________________ D-6 635425v4BR291-400 Exhibit 1 to Taxable TIF Note RISK FACTORS Risk factors on the amount of Tax Increments that may actually be received by the EDA include but are not limited to the following: 1. Value of Project. If the contemplated Project (as defined in the TIF Assistance Agreement) constructed in the tax increment financing district is completed at a lesser level of value than originally contemplated, they will generate fewer taxes and fewer tax increments than originally contemplated. 2. Damage or Destruction. If the Project is damaged or destroyed after completion, their value will be reduced, and taxes and tax increments will be reduced. Repair, restoration or replacement of the Project may not occur, may occur after only a substantial time delay, or may involve property with a lower value than the Project, all of which would reduce taxes and tax increments. 3. Change in Use to Tax-Exempt. The Project could be acquired by a party that devotes it to a use which causes the property to be exempt from real property taxation. Taxes and tax increments would then cease. 4. Depreciation. The Project could decline in value due to changes in the market for such property or due to the decline in the physical condition of the property. Lower market valuation will lead to lower taxes and lower tax increments. 5. Non-payment of Taxes. If the property owner does not pay property taxes, either in whole or in part, the lack of taxes received will cause a lack of tax increments. The Minnesota system of collecting delinquent property taxes is a lengthy one that could result in substantial delays in the receipt of taxes and tax increments, and there is no assurance that the full amount of delinquent taxes would be collected. Amounts distributed to taxing jurisdictions upon a sale following a tax forfeiture of the property are not tax increments. 6. Reductions in Taxes Levied. If property taxes are reduced due to decreased municipal levies, taxes and tax increments will be reduced. Reasons for such reduction could include lower local expenditures or changes in state aids to municipalities. For instance, in 2001 the Minnesota Legislature enacted an education funding reform that involved the state increasing school aid in lieu of the local general education levy (a component of school district tax levies). 7. Reductions in Tax Capacity Rates. The taxable value of real property is determined by multiplying the market value of the property by a tax capacity rate. Tax capacity rates vary by certain categories of property; for example, the tax capacity rates for residential homesteads are currently less than the tax capacity rates for commercial and industrial property. In 2001 the Minnesota Legislature enacted property tax reform that lowered various tax capacity rates to D-7 635425v4BR291-400 “compress” the difference between the tax capacity rates applicable to residential homestead properties and commercial and industrial properties. 8. Changes to Local Tax Rate. The local tax rate to be applied in the tax increment financing district is the lower of the current local tax rate or the original local tax rate for the tax increment financing district. In the event that the Current Local Tax Rate is higher than the Original Local Tax Rate, then the “excess” or difference that comes about after applying the lower Original Local Tax Rate instead of the Current Local Tax Rate is considered “excess” tax increment and is distributed by Hennepin County to the other taxing jurisdictions and such amount is not available to the EDA as tax increment. 9. Legislation. The Minnesota Legislature has frequently modified laws affecting real property taxes, particularly as they relate to tax capacity rates and the overall level of taxes as affected by state aid to municipalities. 10. Affordable Housing Declaration. The TIF District will cease to qualify as a housing tax increment financing district and the TIF Note will terminate if the Project ceases to be operated in accordance with the Declaration required by and defined in the TIF Assistance Agreement defined in the attached Note. 11. Hennepin County’s Sharing Factor. In determining the amount of tax increment generated by the development property, Hennepin County uses a Sharing Factor when there are multiple parcels of land in the tax increment financing district. This may result in a lower amount of tax increment attributable to the development property than if the development property was the only parcel in the district. In addition, the Sharing Factor is not consistent with the method that the EDA will use to determine Pledged Tax Increments. D-8 635425v4BR291-400 Exhibit 2 to Taxable TIF Note ACKNOWLEDGMENT REGARDING TIF NOTE The undersigned, ______________ a ___________ (“Note Holder”), hereby certifies and acknowledges that: A. On the date hereof the Note Holder has [acquired from]/[made a loan (the “Loan”) [to/for the benefit] of] Brooklyn Center AH II, LLLP (the “Developer”) [secured in part by] the Taxable Tax Increment Revenue Note (REE Xerxes Avenue Senior Housing Project), a pay-as- you-go tax increment revenue note (the “Note”) in the original principal amount of $1,850,000 [dated __________, 20___ of]/[to be issued by] the Economic Development Authority of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota (the “EDA”). B. The Note Holder has had the opportunity to ask questions of and receive from the Developer all information and documents concerning the Note as it requested, and has had access to any additional information the Note Holder thought necessary to verify the accuracy of the information received. In determining to [acquire the Note]/[make the Loan], the Note Holder has made its own determinations and has not relied on the EDA or information provided by the EDA. C. The Note Holder represents and warrants that: 1. The Note Holder is acquiring [the Note]/[an interest in the Note as collateral for the Loan] for investment and for its own account, and without any view to resale or other distribution. 2. The Note Holder has such knowledge and experience in financial and business matters that it is capable of evaluating the merits and risks of acquiring [the Note]/[an interest in the Note as collateral for the Loan]. 3. The Note Holder understands that the Note is a security which has not been registered under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or any state securities law, and must be held until its sale is registered or an exemption from registration becomes available. 4. The Note Holder is aware of the limited payment source for the Note and interest thereon and risks associated with the sufficiency of that limited payment source. 5. The Note Holder is [a bank or other financial institution] / [the owner of the property from which the tax increments which are pledged to the Note are generated]. D. The Note Holder understands that the Note is payable solely from certain tax increments derived from certain properties located in a tax increment financing district, if and as received by the EDA. The Note Holder acknowledges that the EDA has made no representation or covenant, express or implied, that the revenues pledged to pay the Note will be sufficient to pay, in whole or in part, the principal and interest due on the Note. Any amounts which have not been D-9 635425v4BR291-400 paid on the Note on or before the final maturity date of the Note shall no longer be payable, as if the Note had ceased to be an obligation of the EDA. The Note Holder understands that the Note will never represent or constitute a general obligation, debt or bonded indebtedness of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota (the “City”), the EDA, the State of Minnesota, or any political subdivision thereof and that no right will exist to have taxes levied by the City, the EDA, the State of Minnesota or any political subdivision thereof for the payment of principal and interest on the Note. E. The Note Holder understands that the Note is payable solely from certain tax increments, which are taxes received on improvements made to certain property (the “Project”) in a tax increment financing district from the increased taxable value of the property over its base value at the time that the tax increment financing district was created, which base value is called “original net tax capacity”. There are risk factors in relying on tax increments to be received, which include, but are not limited to, the following: 1. Value of Project. If the contemplated Project constructed in the tax increment financing district are completed at a lesser level of value than originally contemplated, they will generate fewer taxes and fewer tax increments than originally contemplated. 2. Damage or Destruction. If the Project is damaged or destroyed after completion, their value will be reduced, and taxes and tax increments will be reduced. Repair, restoration or replacement of the Project may not occur, may occur after only a substantial time delay, or may involve property with a lower value than the Project, all of which would reduce taxes and tax increments. 3. Change in Use to Tax-Exempt. The Project could be acquired by a party that devotes it to a use which causes the property to be exempt from real property taxation. Taxes and tax increments would then cease. 4. Depreciation. The Project could decline in value due to changes in the market for such property or due to the decline in the physical condition of the property. Lower market valuation will lead to lower taxes and lower tax increments. 5. Non-payment of Taxes. If the property owner does not pay property taxes, either in whole or in part, the lack of taxes received will cause a lack of tax increments. The Minnesota system of collecting delinquent property taxes is a lengthy one that could result in substantial delays in the receipt of taxes and tax increments, and there is no assurance that the full amount of delinquent taxes would be collected. Amounts distributed to taxing jurisdictions upon a sale following a tax forfeiture of the property are not tax increments. 6. Reductions in Taxes Levied. If property taxes are reduced due to decreased municipal levies, taxes and tax increments will be reduced. Reasons for such reduction could include lower local expenditures or changes in state aids to municipalities. For instance, in 2001 the Minnesota Legislature enacted an education funding reform that D-10 635425v4BR291-400 involved the state increasing school aid in lieu of the local general education levy (a component of school district tax levies). 7. Reductions in Tax Capacity Rates. The taxable value of real property is determined by multiplying the market value of the property by a tax capacity rate. Tax capacity rates vary by certain categories of property; for example, the tax capacity rates for residential homesteads are currently less than the tax capacity rates for commercial and industrial property. In 2001 the Minnesota Legislature enacted property tax reform that lowered various tax capacity rates to “compress” the difference between the tax capacity rates applicable to residential homestead properties and commercial and industrial properties. 8. Changes to Local Tax Rate. The local tax rate to be applied in the tax increment financing district is the lower of the current local tax rate or the original local tax rate for the tax increment financing district. In the event that the Current Local Tax Rate is higher than the Original Local Tax Rate, then the “excess” or difference that comes about after applying the lower Original Local Tax Rate instead of the Current Local Tax Rate is considered “excess” tax increment and is distributed by Hennepin County to the other taxing jurisdictions and such amount is not available to the EDA as tax increment. 9. Legislation. The Minnesota Legislature has frequently modified laws affecting real property taxes, particularly as they relate to tax capacity rates and the overall level of taxes as affected by state aid to municipalities. 10. Affordable Housing Declaration. The TIF District will cease to qualify as a housing tax increment financing district and the TIF Note will terminate if the Project ceases to be operated in accordance with the Declaration required by and defined in the TIF Assistance Agreement defined below. 11. Hennepin County’s Sharing Factor. In determining the amount of tax increment generated by the development property, Hennepin County uses a Sharing Factor when there are multiple parcels of land in the tax increment financing district. This may result in a lower amount of tax increment attributable to the development property than if the development property was the only parcel in the district. In addition, the Sharing Factor is not consistent with the method that the EDA will use to determine Pledged Tax Increments. F. The Note Holder acknowledges that the Note was issued as part of a TIF Assistance Agreement between the EDA and the Developer dated April ____, 2020 (“TIF Assistance Agreement”), and that the EDA has the right to suspend payments under this Note and/or terminate the Note upon an Event of Default under the TIF Assistance Agreement. G. The Note Holder acknowledges that the EDA makes no representation about the tax treatment of, or tax consequences from, the Note Holder’s acquisition of [the Note]/[an interest in the Note as collateral for the Loan]. WITNESS our hand this ___ day of _______, 20__. D-11 635425v4BR291-400 Note Holder: _________________________ By ________________________ Name: __________________ Its ________________________ E-1 635425v4BR291-400 EXHIBIT E TOTAL DEVELOPMENT COSTS F-1 635425v4BR291-400 EXHIBIT F DECLARATION OF RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS THIS DECLARATION OF RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS, dated April ____, 2020 (the “Declaration”), by BROOKLYN CENTER AH II, LLLP, a Minnesota limited liability limited partnership (the “Developer”), is given for the benefit of the ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA, a public body corporate and politic organized under the laws of the State of Minnesota (the “EDA”). RECITALS WHEREAS, the EDA and the Developer entered into that certain TIF Assistance Agreement, dated April ____, 2020, (the “Contract”); and WHEREAS, pursuant to the Contract, the Developer is obligated to cause construction of an approximately 143-unit senior rental housing facility and related amenities (the “Project”) to be located on the property described in EXHIBIT 1 hereto (the “Property”), and to cause compliance with certain affordability covenants described in Section 3.3 of the Contract; and WHEREAS, Section 3.3 of the Contract requires that the Developer cause to be executed an instrument in recordable form substantially reflecting the covenants set forth in Section 3.3 of the Contract; and WHEREAS, the Developer intends, declares, and covenants that the restrictive covenants set forth herein will be and are covenants running with the Property for the term described herein and binding upon all subsequent owners of the Property for the term described herein, and are not merely personal covenants of the Developer; and WHEREAS, capitalized terms in this Declaration have the meaning provided in the Contract unless otherwise defined herein. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the promises and covenants hereinafter set forth, and of other valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the Developer agrees as follows: 1. Term of Restrictions. (a) Occupancy Restrictions. The term of the Occupancy Restrictions set forth in Section 3 of this Declaration will commence on the date a certificate of occupancy is issued by the City for all residential units on the Property and continue through the Termination Date defined below (the “Qualified Project Period”). (b) Termination of Declaration. This Declaration shall terminate upon the earlier of (i) December 31, 2046, or (ii) the date the TIF District is terminated in accordance with the TIF Act, or F-2 635425v4BR291-400 (iii) the date (A) the TIF Note is paid in full or the EDA cancels the TIF Note upon a written request for termination from the Developer and (B) the EDA determines, in its in sole discretion, that such termination will not limit or interfere with the EDA’s ability to pool Tax Increments generated by the TIF District for affordable housing in accordance with the TIF Act. In addition, in the event of foreclosure or transfer of title by deed in lieu of foreclosure, upon completion of the foreclosure and expiration of the applicable redemption period, or recording of a deed in lieu of foreclosure, any mortgagee (or any assignee of the mortgagee) or any purchasers at or after foreclosure thereof, by the successful bidder at the sale, to the title to the Development Property, may terminate this Declaration, by providing written notice to the EDA and by filing a termination document in the applicable real property records in Hennepin County, and thereafter this Declaration shall be of no further force and effect; provided, however, that the preceding provisions of this sentence shall cease to apply and the restrictions contained herein shall be reinstated if, at any time subsequent to the termination of this Declaration as the result of the foreclosure, or the delivery of a deed in lieu of foreclosure, or a similar event, the Developer or any related person (within the meaning of Section 1.103-10(e) of the Treasury Regulations) obtains an ownership interest in the Project for federal income tax purposes. Each of the events set forth in the first two paragraphs of this Section 1(b) are referred to individually and collectively herein as the “Termination Date”. The Developer acknowledges, on behalf of itself and its successors and assigns that, upon any termination of this Declaration prior to the payment in full of the TIF Note, the EDA will terminate the TIF Note. (c) Removal from Real Estate Records. After the Termination Date of this Declaration, the EDA will, upon request by the Developer or its assigns, file any document appropriate to remove this Declaration from the real estate records of Hennepin County, Minnesota. 2. Project Restrictions. (a) The Developer represents, warrants, and covenants that all leases of residential units to Qualifying Tenants (as defined in Section 3(a)(i) hereof) will contain clauses, among others, wherein each individual lessee: (1) Certifies the accuracy of the statements made in its application and Eligibility Certification (as defined in Section 3(a)(ii) hereof); and (2) Agrees that the family income at the time the lease is executed will be deemed a substantial and material obligation of the lessee’s tenancy; that the lessee will comply promptly with all requests for income and other information relevant to determining low or moderate income status from the Developer or the EDA, and that the lessee’s failure or refusal to comply with a request for information with respect thereto will be deemed a violation of a substantial obligation of the lessee’s tenancy. (b) The Developer will permit any duly authorized representative of the EDA to inspect the books and records of the Developer pertaining to the income of Qualifying Tenants residing in the Project. F-3 635425v4BR291-400 3. Occupancy Restrictions. The Developer represents, warrants, and covenants that: (a) Qualifying Tenants. Throughout the Qualified Project Period, at least 40% of the residential units will be occupied (or treated as occupied as provided herein) or held vacant and available for occupancy by Qualifying Tenants. “Qualifying Tenants” means those persons and families who are determined from time to time by the Developer to have combined adjusted income that does not exceed 60% of the median income for the standard metropolitan statistical area which includes Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, as that figure is determined and announced from time to time by HUD, as adjusted for family size (the “Median Income”) for the applicable calendar year. For purposes of this definition, the occupants of a residential unit will not be deemed to be Qualifying Tenants if all the occupants of such residential unit at any time are “students,” as defined in Section 152(f)(2) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”), not entitled to an exemption under the Code. The determination of whether an individual or family is of low or moderate income will be made at the time the tenancy commences and on an ongoing basis thereafter, determined at least annually. If during their tenancy a Qualifying Tenant’s income exceeds 140% of the Median Income, the next available residential unit (determined in accordance with the Code and applicable regulations) (the “Next Available Unit Rule”) must be leased to a Qualifying Tenant or held vacant and available for occupancy by a Qualifying Tenant. If the Next Available Unit Rule is violated, the residential unit will not continue to be treated as a Qualifying Unit. Alternatively, the Developer may elect to satisfy the foregoing affordability requirements by substituting “20% of the residential units” in place of “40% of the residential units” in the preceding paragraph if, for such purposes, the term “Qualifying Tenants” means those persons and families who are determined from time to time by the Developer to have combined adjusted income that does not exceed 50% of the Median Income. (b) Certification of Tenant Eligibility. As a condition to initial and continuing occupancy, each person who is intended to be a Qualifying Tenant will be required annually to sign and deliver to the Developer a Certification of Tenant Eligibility substantially in the form attached as EXHIBIT 2 hereto, or in any other form as may be approved by the EDA (the “Eligibility Certification”), in which the prospective Qualifying Tenant certifies as to having a qualifying low or moderate income. In addition, the Qualifying Tenant will be required to provide whatever other information, documents, or certifications are deemed necessary by the EDA to substantiate the Eligibility Certification, on an ongoing annual basis, and to verify that the tenant continues to be a Qualifying Tenant within the meaning of Section 3(a) hereof. Eligibility Certifications will be maintained on file by the Developer with respect to each Qualifying Tenant who resides in a residential unit or resided therein during the immediately preceding calendar year. (c) Lease. The form of lease to be utilized by the Developer in renting any residential units in the Project to any person who is intended to be a Qualifying Tenant will provide for termination of the lease and consent by the person to immediate eviction for failure to qualify as a Qualifying Tenant as a result of any material misrepresentation made by the person with respect to the Eligibility Certification. F-4 635425v4BR291-400 (d) Annual Report. The Developer covenants and agrees that during the term of this Declaration, it will prepare and submit to the EDA on or before July 1 of each year, a certificate substantially in the form of EXHIBIT 2 hereto, executed by the Developer, (a) identifying the tenancies and the dates of occupancy (or vacancy) for all Qualifying Tenants in the Project, including the percentage of the residential units of the Project which were occupied by Qualifying Tenants (or held vacant and available for occupancy by Qualifying Tenants) at all times during the year preceding the date of the certificate; (b) describing all transfers or other changes in ownership of the Project or any interest therein; and (c) stating, that to the best knowledge of the person executing the certificate after due inquiry, all the residential units were rented or available for rental on a continuous basis during the year to members of the general public and that the Developer was not otherwise in default under this Declaration during the year. (e) Notice of Non-Compliance. The Developer will immediately notify the EDA if at any time during the term of this Declaration fewer dwelling units in the Project than the percentage set forth in Section 3(a) above are occupied or available for occupancy as required by the terms of this Declaration. 4. Transfer Restrictions. Except as provided in 1(b), the Developer covenants and agrees that the Developer will cause or require as a condition precedent to any conveyance, transfer, assignment, or any other disposition of the Project prior to the termination of the Occupancy Restrictions provided herein (the “Transfer”) that the transferee of the Project pursuant to the Transfer assume in writing, in a form acceptable to the EDA, all duties and obligations of the Developer under this Declaration, including this Section 4, in the event of a subsequent Transfer by the transferee prior to expiration of the Occupancy Restrictions provided herein (the “Assumption Agreement”). The Developer will deliver the Assumption Agreement to the EDA prior to the Transfer. 5. Enforcement. (a) The Developer will permit, during normal business hours and upon reasonable notice, any duly authorized representative of the EDA to inspect any books and records of the Developer regarding the Project with respect to the incomes of Qualifying Tenants. (b) The Developer will submit any other information, documents or certifications requested by the EDA which the EDA deems reasonably necessary to substantiate the Developer’s continuing compliance with the provisions specified in this Declaration. (c) The Developer acknowledges that the primary purpose for requiring compliance by the Developer with the restrictions provided in this Declaration is to ensure compliance of the property with the housing affordability covenants set forth in Section 3.3 of the Contract, and by reason thereof, the Developer, in consideration for assistance provided by the EDA under the Contract that makes possible the construction of the Project (as defined in the Contract) on the Property, hereby agrees and consents that the EDA will be entitled, for any breach of the provisions of this Declaration, and in addition to all other remedies provided by law or in equity, to enforce specific performance by the Developer of its obligations under this Declaration in a state court of competent jurisdiction. The Developer hereby further specifically acknowledges that the EDA cannot be adequately compensated by monetary damages in the event of any default hereunder. F-5 635425v4BR291-400 (d) The Developer understands and acknowledges that, in addition to any remedy set forth herein for failure to comply with the restrictions set forth in this Declaration, the EDA may exercise any remedy available to it under Article IV of the Contract. 6. Indemnification. The Developer hereby indemnifies, and agrees to defend and hold harmless, the EDA from and against all liabilities, losses, damages, costs, expenses (including attorneys’ fees and expenses), causes of action, suits, allegations, claims, demands, and judgments of any nature arising from the consequences of a legal or administrative proceeding or action brought against them, or any of them, on account of any failure by the Developer to comply with the terms of this Declaration, or on account of any representation or warranty of the Developer contained herein being untrue. 7. Agent of the EDA. The EDA will have the right to appoint an agent to carry out any of its duties and obligations hereunder, and will inform the Developer of any agency appointment by written notice. 8. Severability. The invalidity of any clause, part or provision of this Declaration will not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. 9. Notices. All notices to be given pursuant to this Declaration must be in writing and will be deemed given when mailed by certified or registered mail, return receipt requested, to the parties hereto at the addresses set forth below, or to any other place as a party may from time to time designate in writing. The Developer and the EDA may, by notice given hereunder, designate any further or different addresses to which subsequent notices, certificates, or other communications are sent. The initial addresses for notices and other communications are as follows: To the EDA: Economic Development Authority of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota Brooklyn Center City Hall 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 Attn: Finance Director To the Developer: Brooklyn Center AH II, LLLP 579 Selby Avenue Saint Paul, Minnesota 55102 Attn: Patrick Ostrom 10. Governing Law. This Declaration is governed by the laws of the State of Minnesota and, where applicable, the laws of the United States of America. 11. Attorneys’ Fees. In case any action at law or in equity, including an action for declaratory relief, is brought against the Developer to enforce the provisions of this Declaration, the Developer agrees to pay the reasonable attorneys’ fees and other reasonable expenses paid or incurred by the EDA in connection with the action. F-6 635425v4BR291-400 12. Declaration Binding. This Declaration and the covenants contained herein will run with the real property comprising the Project and will bind the Developer and its successors and assigns and all subsequent owners of the Project or any interest therein, and the benefits will inure to the EDA and its successors and assigns until the Termination Date of this Declaration as provided in Section 1(b) hereof. F-7 635425v4BR291-400 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Developer has caused this Declaration of Restrictive Covenants to be signed by its respective duly authorized representatives, as of the day and year first written above. BROOKLYN CENTER AH II, LLLP, a Minnesota limited liability limited partnership By: Brooklyn Center AH II, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company Its: General Partner By: REE Brooklyn Center AH II, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company Its: Manager By: William R. Bisanz Its: President STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) SS. COUNTY OF _______ ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _______________, 2020, by ____________, the _______ of Brooklyn Center AH II, LLLP, a Minnesota limited liability limited partnership. Notary Public THIS INSTRUMENT WAS DRAFTED BY: Kennedy & Graven, Chartered (JSB) 470 U.S. Bank Plaza 200 South Sixth Street Minneapolis, MN 55402 (612) 337-9300 F-8 635425v4BR291-400 This Declaration is acknowledged and consented to by: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA By Its President By Its Executive Director STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) SS. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _____________, 2020, by _____________________________, the President of the Economic Development Authority of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota a public body corporate and politic organized under the laws of the State of Minnesota, on behalf of said EDA. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) SS. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _____________, 2020, by ____________________, the Executive Director of the Economic Development Authority of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, a public body corporate and politic organized under the laws of the State of Minnesota, on behalf of said EDA. Notary Public F-9 635425v4BR291-400 EXHIBIT 1 TO DECLARATION OF RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS Lot 1, Block 1, Northway Crossing, according to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota. Being Registered Land as is evidenced by Certificate of Title No. 1496796. F-10 635425v4BR291-400 EXHIBIT 2 TO DECLARATION OF RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS Certification of Tenant Eligibility TENANT INCOME CERTIFICATION Initial Certification Recertification Other _______________ Effective Date: _________________________ Move-in Date: __________________________ (MM/DD/YY): _________________________ PART I. DEVELOPMENT DATA Property Name: ____________ Apartments Address: ___________________, Brooklyn Center, Minnesota County: Hennepin Unit Number: ________________ BIN #: _______________ # Bedrooms: ___________ PART II. HOUSEHOLD COMPOSITION HH Br # Last Name First Name & Middle Initial Relationship to Head of Household Date of Birth (MM/DD/YY) F/T Student (Y or N) Social Security or Alien Reg. No. 1 HEAD 2 3 4 5 6 PART III. GROSS ANNUAL INCOME (USE ANNUAL AMOUNTS) HH Br # (A) Employment or Wages (B) Soc. Security / Pensions (C) Public Assistance (D) Other Income TOTAL $ $ $ $ Add totals from (A) through (D) above TOTAL INCOME (E): $ F-11 635425v4BR291-400 PART IV. INCOME FROM ASSETS HH Mbr# (F) Type of Asset (G) C/I (H) Cash Value of Asset (I) Annual Income from Asset TOTALS: $ $ Enter Column (H) Total Passbook Rate if over $5,000 $________________ x 2.00 % = (J) Imputed Income Enter the greater of the total column I, or J: imputed income TOTAL INCOME FROM ASSETS (K) $ $ (L) Total Annual Household Income from all sources [Add (E) + (K)] $ HOUSEHOLD CERTIFICATION & SIGNATURES The information on this form will be used to determine maximum income eligibility. I/we have provided for each person(s) set forth in Part II acceptable verification of current anticipated annual income. I/we agree to notify the landlord immediately upon any member of the household moving out of the unit or any new member moving in. I/we agree to notify the landlord immediately upon any member becoming a full-time student. Under penalties of perjury, I/we certify that the information presented in this Certification is true and accurate to the best of my/our knowledge and belief. The undersigned further understands that providing false representations herein constitutes an act of fraud. False, misleading or incomplete information may result in the termination of the lease agreement. _________________________ Signature ____________________ (Date) _________________________ Signature ____________________ (Date) _________________________ Signature ____________________ (Date) _________________________ Signature ____________________ (Date) PART V. DETERMINATION OF INCOME ELIGIBILITY TOTAL ANNUAL HOUSEHOLD INCOME FROM ALL SOURCES From Item (L) on page 1 Current Income Limit per Family Size: $ _________________ Household Income at Move-in $__________________ Household Meets Income Restriction at: 60% 50% 40% 30% ___% RECERTIFICATION ONLY: Current Income Limit x 140% $ __________________________________ Household income exceeds 140% at recertification: Yes No Household Size at Move-in: _____________ $ F-12 635425v4BR291-400 PART VI. RENT Not Applicable PART VII. STUDENT STATUS ARE ALL OCCUPANTS FULL-TIME STUDENTS? yes no If yes, enter student explanation** (also attach documentation) Student explanation: 1. TANF assistance 2. Job training program 3. Single parent/dependent child 4. Married/joint return* *Exception for married/joint return is the only exception available for units necessary to qualify tax-exempt bonds. PART VIII. PROGRAM TYPE Mark the program(s) listed below (a. through e.) for which this household’s unit will be counted toward the property’s occupancy requirements. Under each program marked, indicate the household’s income status as established by this certification/recertification a. Tax Credit b. HOME c. Tax Exempt d. AHDP e. ____________ (Name of Program) See Part V above. Income Status Income Status Income Status Income Status ≤ 50% AMGI ≤ 60% AMGI ≤ 80% AMGI ≤ 0I ** 50% AMGI 60% AMGI 80% AMGI 0I ** ≤ 50% AMGI ≤ 80% AMGI ≤ 0I ** __________ __________ ≤ 0I ** ** Upon recertification, household was determined over income (OI) according to eligibility requirements of the program(s) marked above. SIGNATURE OF OWNER / REPRESENTATIVE Based on the representations herein and upon the proofs and documentation required to be submitted, the individual(s) named in Part II of this Tenant Income Certification is/are eligible under the provisions of Section 42 of the Internal Revenue Code, as amended, and the Regulatory Agreement (if applicable), to live in a unit in this Project. ________________________________________________ ________________ SIGNATURE OF OWNER / REPRESENTATIVE DATE Enter 1-4 F-13 635425v4BR291-400 INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLETING TENANT INCOME CERTIFICATION This form is to be completed by the owner or an authorized representative. Part I – Development Data Check the appropriate box for Initial Certification (move-in), Recertification (annual recertification), or Other. If Other, designate the purpose of the recertification (i.e., a unit transfer, a change in household composition, or other state-required recertification). Move-in Date Enter the date the tenant has or will take occupancy of the unit. Effective Date Enter the effective date of the certification. For move-in, this should be the move-in date. For annual recertification, this effective date should be no later than one year from the effective date of the previous (re)certification. Property Name Enter the name of the development. County Enter the county (or equivalent) in which the building is located. BIN # Enter the Building Identification Number (BIN) assigned to the building (from IRS Form 8609). Address Enter the unit number. Unit Number Enter the unit number. # Bedrooms Enter the number of bedrooms in the unit. Part II – Household Composition List all occupants of the unit. State each household member’s relationship to the head of the household by using one of the following coded definitions: H Head of household S Spouse A Adult co-tenant O Other family member C Child F Foster child L Live-in caretaker N None of the above Enter the date of birth, student status, and Social Security number or alien registration number for each occupant. If there are more than seven occupants, use an additional sheet of paper to list the remaining household members and attach it to the certification. F-14 635425v4BR291-400 Part III – Annual Income See HUD Handbook 4350.3 for complete instructions on verifying and calculating income, including acceptable forms of verification. From the third party verification forms obtained from each income source, enter the gross amount anticipated to be received for the 12 months from the effective date of the (re)certification. Complete a separate line for each income-earning member. List the respective household member number from Part II. Column (A) Enter the annual amount of wages, salaries, tips, commissions, bonuses, and other income from employment; distributed profits and/or net income from a business. Column (B) Enter the annual amount of Social Security, Supplemental Security Income, pensions, military retirement, etc. Column (C) Enter the annual amount of income received from public assistance (i.e., TANF, general assistance, disability, etc.) Column (D) Enter the annual amount of alimony, child support, unemployment benefits, or any other income regularly received by the household. Row (E) Add the totals from columns (A) through (D) above. Enter this amount. Part IV – Income from Assets See HUD Handbook 4350.3 for complete instructions on verifying and calculating income from assets, including acceptable forms of verification. From the third party verification forms obtained from each asset source, list the gross amount anticipated to be received during the 12 months from the effective date of the certification. List the respective household member number from Part II and complete a separate line for each member. Column (F) List the type of asset (i.e., checking account, savings account, etc.) Column (G) Enter C (for current, if the family currently owns or holds the asset), or I (for imputed, if the family has disposed of the asset for less than fair market value within two years of the effective date of (re)certification). Column (H) Enter the cash value of the respective asset. Column (I) Enter the anticipated annual income from the asset (i.e., savings account balance multiplied by the annual interest rate). F-15 635425v4BR291-400 TOTALS Add the total of Column (H) and Column (I), respectively. If the total in Column (H) is greater than $5,000, you must do an imputed calculation of asset income. Enter the Total Cash Value, multiply by 2% and enter the amount in (J), Imputed Income. Row (K) Enter the Greater of the total in Column (I) or (J) Row (L) Total Annual Household Income from All Sources Add (E) and (K) and enter the total F-16 635425v4BR291-400 EXHIBIT 3 TO DECLARATION OF RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS Certificate of Continuing Program Compliance Date: ___________________ The following information with respect to the Project located at __________________, Brooklyn Center, Minnesota (the “Project”), is being provided by Brooklyn Center AH II, LLLP (the “Owner”) to the Economic Development Authority of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota (the “EDA”), pursuant to that certain Declaration of Restrictive Covenants, dated April __, 2020 (the “Declaration”), with respect to the Project: (A) The total number of residential units which are available for occupancy is 143. The total number of these units occupied is _________________. (B) The vacancy rate at the Project in the last 12 months is ___%. (C) The following residential units which are included in (B) above, have been re-designated as residential units for Qualifying Tenants since _______________, 20___, the date on which the last “Certificate of Continuing Program Compliance” was filed with the EDA by the Owner: Unit Number Previous Designation of Unit (if any) Replacing Unit Number ___________ _________________ _________________ ___________ _________________ _________________ F-17 635425v4BR291-400 (D) The following residential units are considered to be occupied by “Qualifying Tenants,” as the term is defined in the Declaration based on the information set forth below (for a total of at least 56 units): Unit Number Last Name of Tenant Number of Persons Residing in the Unit Number of Bedrooms Total Adjusted Gross Income Date of Initial Occupancy Date Vacated and Held for Qualifying Tenants, if Applicable 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 [expand to cover 56 units] (E) The Owner has obtained a “Certification of Tenant Eligibility,” in the form provided as EXHIBIT 2 to the Declaration, from each Tenant named in (D) above, and each such Certificate is being maintained by the Owner in its records with respect to the Project. Attached hereto is the most recent “Certification of Tenant Eligibility” for each Tenant named in (D) above who signed such a Certification since ______________, 20___, the date on F-18 635425v4BR291-400 which the last “Certificate of Continuing Program Compliance” was filed with the EDA by the Owner. (F) In renting the residential units in the Project, the Owner has not given preference to any particular group or class of persons (except for persons who qualify as Qualifying Tenants); and none of the units listed in (D) above have been rented for occupancy entirely by students, no one of which is entitled to file a joint return for federal income tax purposes. All of the residential units in the Project have been rented pursuant to a written lease, and the term of each lease is at least 12 months. (G) The information provided in this “Certificate of Continuing Program Compliance” is accurate and complete, and no matters have come to the attention of the Owner which would indicate that any of the information provided herein, or in any “Certification of Tenant Eligibility” obtained from the Tenants named herein, is inaccurate or incomplete in any respect. (H) The following transfers or other changes in ownership of the Project or any interest therein have occurred in the last 12 months: [None] or [describe___________________] (I) To the best knowledge of the person executing this certificate after due inquiry, all the residential units were rented or available for rental on a continuous basis during the year to members of the general public. (J) The Owner certifies that as of the date hereof ___% of the residential dwelling units in the Project are occupied or held open for occupancy by Qualifying Tenants, as defined and provided in the Declaration. (K) The Project is in continuing compliance with the Declaration. F-19 635425v4BR291-400 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto affixed my signature, on behalf of the Owner, on ____________________, 20__. BROOKLYN CENTER AH II, LLLP, a Minnesota limited liability limited partnership By: Brooklyn Center AH II, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company Its: General Partner By: REE Brooklyn Center AH II, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company Its: Manager By: William R. Bisanz Its: President G-1 635425v4BR291-400 EXHIBIT G PERMITTED ENCUMBRANCES The liens, charges and encumbrances on title to the Development Property listed on Schedule B to the title policy issued on the date hereof by Guaranty Commercial Title, Inc., as issuing agent for Old Republic National Title Insurance Company H-1 635425v4BR291-400 EXHIBIT H CERTIFICATE OF COMPLETION OF PROJECT __________, 20___ WHEREAS, the ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA a public body corporate and politic organized under the laws of the State of Minnesota (the “EDA”), and Brooklyn Center AH II, LLLP, a Minnesota limited liability limited partnership (the “Developer”) have entered into a TIF Assistance Agreement (the “TIF Assistance Agreement”), dated April ____, 2020; and WHEREAS, the TIF Assistance Agreement requires the Developer to construct a Project (as that term is defined in the TIF Assistance Agreement); WHEREAS, the Developer has constructed the Project in a manner deemed sufficient by the EDA to permit the execution of this certification in accordance with Section 3.9 of the TIF Assistance Agreement; NOW, THEREFORE, this is to certify that the Developer has constructed the Project in accordance with the TIF Assistance Agreement. The remaining covenants of the Developer under the TIF Assistance Agreement are not intended to run with title to the Development Property or bind successors in title to the Development Property. H-2 635425v4BR291-400 The EDA has, as of the date and year first above written, set its hand hereon. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA By ____________________________ Its Executive Director STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) SS. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _____ day of ___________, 20__, by ____________________, the Executive Director of the Economic Development Authority of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, a public body corporate and politic organized under the laws of the State of Minnesota. _________________________________ Notary Public 633928v2BR291-400 Commissioner _____________________ introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: EDA RESOLUTION NO.______________ RESOLUTION APPROVING A TIF DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (REE XERXES AVENUE SENIOR HOUSING PROJECT) WHEREAS, the EDA has received a proposal from Brooklyn Center AH II, LLLP (the “Developer”) that the EDA assist the Developer in the construction of an approximately 143-unit senior rental housing facility and related amenities (the “Project”) to be located on the northern portion of the property at 5803 Xerxes Avenue North in the City (formerly the northern portion of the property at 5801 Xerxes Avenue North), within Tax Increment Financing District No. 8: Real Estate Equities (a housing district) (the “TIF District”); and WHEREAS, the EDA has caused to be prepared the TIF Assistance Agreement for the Project by and between the EDA and the Developer (the “Development Agreement”) setting forth the terms and conditions under which the EDA will provide assistance for the Project. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Commissioners (the “Board”) of the Economic Development Authority of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota (the “EDA”), as follows: Section 1. EDA Approval; Further Proceedings. 1.01. The EDA hereby approves the Development Agreement substantially in accordance with the terms set forth in the form presented to the Board, together with any related documents necessary in connection therewith, including without limitation all documents, exhibits, certifications or consents referenced in or attached to the Development Agreement including without limitation the TIF Note as defined therein (collectively, the “Development Documents”) and hereby authorizes the President and Executive Director to negotiate the final terms thereof and, in their discretion and at such time as they may deem appropriate, to execute the Development Documents on behalf of the EDA, and to carry out, on behalf of the EDA, the EDA’s obligations thereunder when all conditions precedent thereto have been satisfied. 1.02. The approval hereby given to the Development Documents includes approval of such additional details therein as may be necessary and appropriate and such modifications thereof, deletions therefrom and additions thereto as may be necessary and appropriate and approved by legal counsel to the EDA and by the officers authorized herein to execute said documents prior to their execution; and said officers are hereby authorized to approve said changes on behalf of the EDA. The execution of any instrument by the appropriate officers of the EDA herein authorized shall be conclusive evidence of the approval of such document in accordance with the terms hereof. This Resolution shall not constitute an offer and the Development Documents shall not be effective until the date of execution thereof as provided herein. EDA RESOLUTION NO._______________ 2 633928v2BR291-400 1.03. In the event of absence or disability of the officers, any of the documents authorized by this Resolution to be executed may be executed without further act or authorization of the Board by any duly designated acting official, or by such other officer or officers of the Board as, in the opinion of the City Attorney, may act in their behalf. Upon execution and delivery of the Development Documents, the officers and employees of the EDA are hereby authorized and directed to take or cause to be taken such actions as may be necessary on behalf of the EDA to implement the Development Documents, including without limitation the issuance of the pay-as-you-go tax increment revenue note thereunder, when all conditions precedent thereto have been satisfied, and reserving funds for the payment thereof in the applicable tax increment accounts. 1.04. The Board hereby determines that the execution and performance of the Development Documents will help realize the public purposes of the Act. February 24, 2020 Date President The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Commissioner and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. Economic Development Authority DAT E:2/24/2020 TO :C ity C ouncil F R O M:C urt Boganey, City Manager T H R O U G H :M eg Beekman, C ommunity D evelopment D irector BY:J immy L oyd, Economic D evelopment Coordinator S U B J E C T:Res olu+on A dop+ng a Busines s S ubs idy Policy B ackground: The C ity has an exis +ng Busines s S ubs idy Policy; however, it is narrow in scope and does not include many elements that can be useful in guiding policy decis ions about the us e of public subsidy for development projects, and significant busines s s ubs idy reques ts . I n order to develop a more robus t, useful, and clear Bus iness S ubsidy Policy, staff has asked Ehlers and A s s ociates , the City's public finance cons ultant, to take the C ity C ouncil through a series of dis cus s ions that w ill iden+fy clear parameters for the use of public s ubs idy. The firs t dis cus s ion took place in M arch and included a brief presenta+on from Ehlers , which provided background informa+on and an overview of public finance policies . Ehlers introduced homework at that mee+ng, w hich they asked each member of the City Council to complete. The second dis cus s ion took place in A pril at a City Council work ses s ion and involved a more in-depth dis cus s ion among the Council members regarding their res pons es to the homew ork and their values around the use of public s ubs idy. Based on that convers a+on, Ehlers prepared a dra; policy for the us e of busines s s ubs idies which conforms to state statutes and also responds to the s pecific needs of Brooklyn C enter. The third dis cus s ion w as in S eptember and was an opportunity for Ehlers to pres ent the dra; Busines s S ubs idy Policy w hich res ponded to the Council's direc+on from the previous mee+ng. The C ouncil gave feedback on the policy, w hich has since been modified based on that discussion. S tatute requires the adop+on of the bus iness subsidy policy by both the C ity C ouncil and E DA . The C ity Council is required to hold a public hearing prior to adop+on, which was formally no+ces and scheduled for February 24, 2020. Following clos e of the public hearing, the City Council can take formal ac+on. Following adop+on by the City Council the E DA may take ac+on on the plan. A<ached to this memo is the Bus iness S ubsidy Policy for cons idera+on. B udget I ssues: There are no budget is s ues to consider at this +me. S trategic Priories and Values: Resident Economic S tability, Targeted Redevelopment, O pera+onal Excellence AT TA C H M E N TS : D escrip+on U pload D ate Type M emo from Ehlers dated February 14, 2020 2/17/2020 Backup M aterial F inal P ublic S ubsidy Policy 2/14/2020 Exhibit Res olu+on 2/17/2020 Resolu+on Le<er Memo To: Meg Beekman, AICP – Community Development Director From: Jason Aarsvold and Stacie Kvilvang, Ehlers Date: February 14, 2020 Subject: Public Hearing and Adoption of Business Subsidy & Public Financing Policy On April 8, 2019 the Council met in a work session to review and discuss the key provisions that would serve as the basis for the City’s Business Subsidy Policy and Public Financing Criteria. The goal was to have a policy in place the meets state statutory requirements, but also reflects desired City-specific requirements for the use of public assistance tools. Using the feedback received from City Council members, Ehlers worked with City staff to develop a draft policy for Council consideration. The City Council reviewed a draft of this policy in September 2019 and provided additional direction and feedback for revisions. Attached to this memorandum is a final policy that incorporates Brooklyn Center’s specific objectives and qualifications as well as standard best practice language. The City Council is required to hold a public hearing to formally adopt the policy. Upon formal approval, Ehlers will submit the policy to the Department of Employment and Economic Development (DEED) as required by Statute. Approval of the policy does not mean any projects are entitled to receive City assistance. Every future project defined as a business subsidy will require a Business Subsidy Agreement. The Business Subsidy Agreement outlines the amount and public purpose of the subsidy, job and wage goals, requirements for continued operation, and recapture requirements (if goals are not met). These business subsidy agreements must be reviewed and approved by the City Council using this policy as a guide in giving consideration. For that reason, the policy is set up to provide flexibility and not to be overly prescriptive. Please contact either of us at 651-697-8500 with any questions. Brooklyn Center Business Subsidy Criteria and Public Financing Policy Page 1 City of Brooklyn Center and Brooklyn Center Economic Development Authority Business Subsidy & Public Financing Policy November 2019 INTRODUCTION: This Policy is adopted for purposes of the business subsidies act, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Sections 116J.993 through 116J.995 (the “Statutes”). Terms used in this Policy are intended to have the same meanings as used in Statutes. Subdivision 3 of the Statutes specifies forms of financial assistance that are not considered a business subsidy. This list contains exceptions for several activities, including redevelopment, pollution clean-up, and housing, among others. By providing a business subsidy, the city commits to holding a public hearing, as applicable, and reporting annually to the Department of Employment and Economic Development (“DEED”) on job and wage goal progress. 1. PURPOSE AND AUTHORITY A. The purpose of this document is to establish criteria for the City of Brooklyn Center (“City”) and the Brooklyn Center Economic Development Authority (“EDA”) for the granting of business subsidies and public financing for private development within the City. As used in this Policy, the term “City” shall be understood to include the EDA. These criteria shall be used as a guide in processing and reviewing applications requesting business subsidies and/or City public financing. B. The City's ability to grant business subsidies is governed by the limitations established in the Statutes. The City may choose to apply its Business Subsidy Criteria to other development activities not covered under this statute. City public financing may or may not be considered a business subsidy as defined by the Statutes. C. Unless specifically excluded by the Statutes, business subsidies include grants by state or local government agencies, contributions of personal property, real property, infrastructure, the principal amount of a loan at rates below those commercially available to the recipient of the subsidy, any reduction or deferral of any tax or any fee, tax increment financing (TIF), abatement of property taxes, loans made from City funds, any guarantee of any payment under any loan, lease, or other obligation, or any preferential use of government facilities given to a business. Brooklyn Center Business Subsidy Criteria and Public Financing Policy Page 2 D. These criteria are to be used in conjunction with other relevant policies of the City. Compliance with the Business Subsidy Criteria and City Public Financing Guidelines shall not automatically mean compliance with such separate policies. E. The City, at its sole discretion, may deviate from the job and wage goals criteria outlined in Sec. 5, Subd. D, E, and F below by documenting in writing the reason(s) for the deviation. The documentation shall be submitted to DEED with the next annual report. F. The City may amend this document at any time. Amendments to these criteria are subject to public hearing requirements contained in the Statutes. 2. CITY’S OBJECTIVE FOR THE USE OF PUBLIC FINANCING A. As a matter of adopted policy, the City may consider using public financing which may include tax increment financing (TIF), tax abatement, bonds, and other forms of public financing as appropriate, to assist private development projects. Such assistance must comply with all applicable statutory requirements and accomplish one or more of the following objectives: 1. Remove blight and/or encourage redevelopment in designated redevelopment/development area(s) per the goals and visions established by the City Council and EDA. 2. Expand and diversify the local economy and tax base. 3. Encourage additional unsubsidized private development in the area, either directly or indirectly through secondary “spin-off” development. 4. Offset increased costs for redevelopment over and above the costs that a developer would incur in normal urban and suburban development (determined as part of the But-For analysis). 5. Facilitate the development process and promote development on sites that could not be developed without this assistance. 6. Retain local jobs and/or increase the number of diverse quality jobs. 7. Reduce the unemployment rate within the City and encourage created jobs are filled by local residents. 8. Provide opportunities for small businesses and/or entrepreneurs and promote resident economic stability. 9. Meet other uses of public policy, as adopted by the City Council or EDA from time to time, including but not limited to promotion of quality urban design, quality architectural design, energy conservation, sustainable building practices, and decreasing the capital and operating costs of local government. Brooklyn Center Business Subsidy Criteria and Public Financing Policy Page 3 3. PUBLIC FINANCING PRINCIPLES A. The guidelines and principles set forth in this document pertain to all applications for City public financing regardless of whether they are considered a Business Subsidy as defined by the Statutes. The following general assumptions of development/redevelopment shall serve as a guide for City public financing: 1. All viable requests for City public financing assistance shall be reviewed by staff, and, if staff so designates, a third party financial advisor who will inform the City of its findings and recommendations. This process, known as the “But For” analysis is intended to establish the project would not be feasible but for the City assistance. 2. The City shall establish mechanisms within the development agreement to ensure that adequate checks and balances are incorporated in the distribution of financial assistance where feasible and appropriate, including but not limited to: a. Third party “but for” analysis b. Establishment of “look back provisions” c. Establishment of minimum assessment agreements 3. TIF and abatement will be provided on a pay-as-you-go-basis. Any request for upfront assistance will be evaluated on its own merits and may require security to cover any risks assumed by the City. 4. The City will set up TIF districts in accordance with the maximum number of statutory years allowable. However, this does not mean that the developer will be granted assistance for the full term of the district. 5. The City shall elect to have the fiscal disparities contribution come from inside applicable TIF district(s) to eliminate any impact to the existing tax payers of the community. 6. Public financing will not be used to support speculative commercial, office or housing projects. In general the developer should be able to provide market data, tenant letters of commitment or finance statements which support the market potential/demand for the proposed project. 7. Public financing will generally not be used to support retail development. The City may consider projects that include a retail component provided they meet a Desired Qualification as identified in Sec. 4.2 Subd. C of this policy. 8. Public financing will not be used in projects that would give a significant competitive financial advantage over similar projects in the area due to the use of public subsidies. Developers should provide information to support that assistance will not create such a Brooklyn Center Business Subsidy Criteria and Public Financing Policy Page 4 competitive advantage. Priority consideration will be given to projects that fill an unmet market need. 9. Public financing will not be used in a project that involves a land and/or property acquisition where the price is in excess of the fair market value. 10. TIF and Abatement will not be utilized for the construction of Warehouse/distribution, commercial storage, discount motel or Fortune 1,000 companies. 11. The developer shall pay all applicable application fees and pay for the City and EDA’s fiscal and legal advisor time as stated in the City’s Public Assistance Application. 12. The City may consider waiving fees including, but not limited to, park dedication fees, and SAC charges. The City may consider using SAC credits, to the extent they are available, to off-set a project’s SAC expenses. 13. The developer shall proactively attempt to minimize the amount of public assistance needed through the pursuit of grants, innovative solutions in structuring the deal, and other funding mechanisms. 14. All developments are subject to execution and recording of a Minimum Assessment Agreement. 4. PROJECTS WHICH MAY QUALIFY FOR PUBLIC FINANCING ASSISTANCE A. All new applications for public financial assistance that are considered by the City must meet each of the following minimum qualifications. However, it should not be presumed that a project meeting these qualifications will automatically be approved for assistance. Meeting the qualifications does not imply or create contractual rights on the part of any potential developer to have its project approved for assistance. 4.1 MINIMUM QUALIFICATIONS/REQUIREMENTS: A. In addition to meeting the applicable requirements of State law, the project shall meet one or more of the public financing objectives outlined in Sec. 2. B. The developer must demonstrate to the satisfaction of the City that the project is not financially feasible “but for” the use of tax increment or other public financing. C. The project is, or will be through the City approval processes, consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinances, Design Guidelines or any other applicable land use documents. Brooklyn Center Business Subsidy Criteria and Public Financing Policy Page 5 D. Prior to approval of a financing plan, the developer shall provide any requested market and financial feasibility studies, appraisals, soil boring, private lender commitment, and/or other information the City or its financial consultants may require in order to proceed with an independent evaluation of the proposal. E. The developer must provide adequate financial guarantees to ensure the repayment of any public financing and completion of the project. These may include, but are not limited to, assessment agreements, letters of credit, personal deficiency guarantees, guaranteed maximum cost contract, etc. F. Any developer requesting public financial assistance must be able to demonstrate a previous capability for successful development, as well as specific capability regarding the type and size of the development proposed, unless for a use specified in Sec. 4.2 Subd. C (9-10). Public financing shall not be used when the developer’s credentials, in the sole judgment of the City, are inadequate due to previous history relating to completion of projects, general reputation, and/or bankruptcy, or other problems or issues considered relevant to the City. G. The developer, or its contractual assigns, shall retain ownership of any portion of the project long enough to complete it, stabilize its occupancy, establish project management and/or needed mechanisms to ensure successful operation. 4.2 DESIRED QUALIFICATIONS: A. Projects providing a high ratio of private investment to City public investment shall receive priority consideration. Private investment includes developer cash, government and bank loans, conduit bonds, tax credit equity, and land if already owned by the developer. B. Proposals that significantly increase the amount of property taxes paid after redevelopment will receive priority consideration. C. Proposals that encourage the following will receive priority consideration: 1. Implements the City’s vision and values for a City-identified redevelopment area 2. Provides significant improvement to surrounding land uses, neighborhoods, and/or the City 3. Attracts or retains an employer within the City providing over 50 jobs 4. Provides increased quality and higher paying jobs 5. Promotes multi-family housing investment that meets the following City goals: Brooklyn Center Business Subsidy Criteria and Public Financing Policy Page 6 a. Increase housing choice within the community; diversify existing housing stock; and provide options that do not currently exist b. Provide clean, safe, and affordable housing units c. Include housing as part of City special purpose projects, such as the Opportunity Site, or other priority City redevelopment areas. d. Multi-family housing with high-amenities considered luxury and/or market rate 6. Provides opportunity for the attraction and retention of sit-down restaurants 7. Fulfils workforce needs by hiring local residents and partnering with the City and local community organizations for targeted recruitment of residents, job training and mentorship programs. 8. Offers employment opportunities for local residents with safe working conditions and access to comprehensive benefit packages 9. Provides opportunities for small businesses and/or entrepreneurs 10. Projects that promote resident economic stability 11. Redevelops a blighted, contaminated and/or challenged area 12. Preserves and/or stabilizes a major commercial or industrial node 13. Adds needed public infrastructure such as roads or structured parking 5. BUSINESS SUBSIDY PUBLIC PURPOSE, JOBS AND WAGE REQUIREMENT A. All business subsidies must meet a public purpose with measurable benefit to the City as a whole. B. Job retention may only be used as a public purpose in cases where job loss is specific and demonstrable. The City shall document the information used to determine the nature of the job loss. C. The creation of tax base shall not be the sole public purpose of a subsidy. D. Unless the creation of jobs is removed from a particular project pursuant to the requirements of the Statutes, the creation of jobs is a public purpose for granting a subsidy. Creation of at least 1 Full Time, or Full Time Equivalent (FTE) jobs is a minimum requirement for consideration of assistance. For purposes of this Policy, FTE jobs must be permanent positions with set hours, and be eligible for benefits. E. Part-Time Equivalent jobs may receive a partial credit and be counted toward the job goals. Brooklyn Center Business Subsidy Criteria and Public Financing Policy Page 7 F. The wage floor for wages to be paid for the jobs created shall be not less than 150% of the State of MN Minimum Wage. The City will seek to create jobs with higher wages as appropriate for the overall public purpose of the subsidy. Wage goals may also be set to enhance existing jobs through increased wages, which increase must result in wages higher than the minimum under this Section. G. After a public hearing, if the creation or retention of jobs is determined not to be a goal, the wage and job goals may be set at zero. 6. SUBSIDY AGREEMENT A. In granting a business subsidy, the City shall enter into a subsidy agreement with the recipient that provides the following information: wage and job goals (if applicable), and recourse for failure to meet goals required by the Statutes. B. The subsidy agreement may be incorporated into a broader development agreement for a project. C. The subsidy agreement will commit the recipient to providing the reporting information required by the Statutes. 7. PUBLIC FINANCING PROJECT EVALUATION PROCESS A. The following methods of analysis for all public financing proposals will be used: 1. Project is deemed consistent with City’s Goals and Objectives 2. Consideration of project meeting minimum qualifications 3. Consideration of project meeting desired qualifications 4. Project meets “but-for” analysis and/or statutory qualifications Please note that the evaluation methodology is intended to provide a balanced review. Each area will be evaluated individually and collectively and in no case should one area outweigh another in terms of importance to determining the level of assistance. Commissioner introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: EDA RESOLUTION NO. 2020- RESOLUTION ADOPTING A POLICY AND CRITERIA FOR GRANTING BUSINESS SUBSIDIES WHEREAS, The Economic Development Authority of the City of Brooklyn Center (the “Authority”), Minnesota has determined that it is necessary and appropriate to adopt a business subsidy policy and criteria pursuant to the Statutes; and WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes, Sections 116J.993 through 116J.995 (the "Statutes") require the adoption of a policy and criteria for the granting of business subsidies as defined in the Statutes; and, WHEREAS, The City has performed all actions required by law to be performed prior to the adoption and approval of the proposed business subsidies, including the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center holding of a public hearing on February 24, 2020 upon published notice as required by law on February 13, 2020. BE IT RESOLVED By the Economic Development Authority of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota that the business subsidy policy and criteria, contained in Exhibit A of this resolution are hereby approved, ratified, established, and adopted and shall be placed on file at City Hall. BE IT FURHTER RESOLVED by the Authority that the City Manager is authorized and directed to file a copy of the business subsidy criteria, along with annual reports, to the Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development, pursuant to the Statutes. February 24, 2020 Date President ATTEST: City Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. Economic Development Authority DAT E:2/24/2020 TO :C ity C ouncil F R O M:C urt Boganey, City Manager T H R O U G H :M eg Beekman, C ommunity D evelopment D irector BY:J immy L oyd, Economic D evelopment Coordinator S U B J E C T:Res olu+on A pproving a P reliminary D evelopment A greement w ith J O P roper+es B ackground: O n J anuary 27th J O C o mpanies c o ncept plan was presented to the C ity C o uncil for C o ncept Review. T he proposal was fo r a development on f o ur E DA-owned proper+es located at the northwest corner o f 61st Avenue N orth and B rooklyn B oulevard, which total a combined 1.79 acres. T he configuration proposed on the proposed site plan contemplates the redevelopment of the northwest corner of 61st Avenue North and Brooklyn Boulevard into a four story, 83-unit apartment building, although the developer (J O Companies, L LC) has indicated the potential for up to 88 units of housing. T he building would run lengthwise along 61st Avenue North and, as proposed in the concept review, provide 53 surface parking stalls and 76 indoor parking stalls for a total of 129 on-site parking stalls. T his is a ratio of 1.55 parking stalls per unit (83 units) or 1.47 stalls per unit (88 units). As proposed, 51-percent of the units in the development would be three-bedrooms, which is unique given that one and two-bedroom units are the norm in Brooklyn Center. As such, the project would address a gap in larger rental units in the community. As the project is intended to provide housing options to those making 50 to 60% AMI (Area Median Income), the larger three-bedroom units would be attractive for families looking for rental options in Brooklyn Center. T he developer is also seeking project-based Section 8 vouchers for up to 25 percent of the building, which if received would provide housing options at even more deeply affordable rents. T he building amenities being contemplated would include a fitness center, business/community center, as well as in-unit washers and dryers and balconies. T he building would also be pet-friendly. T he developer is exploring opportunities to leverage a direct connection to Wangstad Park, which is located immediately to the west, as well as utilize partnerships with neighboring properties to allow space for community gardens or other community-based amenities. The City of Brooklyn C enter issued a le8er of support to accompany J O C ompanies ' H ennepin County G rant applica+ons, w hich w ere submi8ed on February 6th. The developer s ubmi8ed an ini+al proforma which indicates a total project cos t of approximately $22.5 million. The proforma indicates that there will be a gap in the financing and the developer an+cipates applying for public s ubs idy to make the project feas ible. The project as propos ed would meet the affordability requirements for a housing T I F district, which is the type of T I F district that the property currently is in. A ny request for public s ubs idy would go through the C ity's formal review proces s , including review by the City's public finance cons ultant. A Ber review ing the concept propos al the City Council indicated an opennes s to the project. The developer is now reques+ng a P reliminary D evelopment A greement to allow them +me to conduct a review of the property, obtain financing for the project, prepare appropriate plans , obtain neces s ary C ity approvals for the development, and nego+ate with the E DA on an agreement for the s ale of the P roperty. The P reliminary D evelopment A greement w ould expire on February 28, 2021. O nce the P DA is executed, the next step w ould be for the developer to s ubmit an applica+on for public s ubs idy, which would trigger the C ity and E DA 's formal review process. The E DA and developer will als o need to nego+ate a purchas e agreement for the property, w hich w ould also require a public hearing and approval from the E DA prior to execu+on. B udget I ssues: There are no budget is s ues to consider at this +me. S trategic Priories and Values: Targeted Redevelopment AT TA C H M E N TS : D escrip+on U pload D ate Type P reliminary D evelopment A greement 2/17/2020 Backup M aterial J O Le8er of S upport 2/14/2020 Exhibit J O Companies Concept P lan 2/14/2020 Exhibit Res olu+on 2/18/2020 Resolu+on Le8er 638311v1BR305-1 PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT dated this _____ day of February, 2020, by and between the Economic Development Authority of Brooklyn Center, a Minnesota body corporate and politic, 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway, Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 (the “Authority”) and JO Companies, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company, 12678 74th Avenue North, Maple Grove, MN 55369 (the “Developer”). WHEREAS, the Authority is the fee owner of property located in the City of Brooklyn Center (the “City”) at 6101, 6107 Brooklyn Blvd and 3600 61st Ave North (the “Property”) which Property the Authority is willing to consider selling for purposes of development of an approximately 83-88 unit multi-family affordable housing apartment building (the “Development”); WHEREAS, the Developer desires to explore the possibility of acquiring the Property together with additional adjoining private property (“Additional Property”) to combine with the Property (together, the “Property” and “Additional Property” are referred to herein as the “Development Property”) for development of the Development; WHEREAS, the Authority’s Board of Commissioners has reviewed the Development concept and is interested in development of the Property as proposed by the Developer; WHEREAS, if the Developer is successful in obtaining the necessary financing and commitments to construct the Development and agrees to construct the Development, then the Authority would be willing to enter into an agreement with the Developer for the conveyance of the Property and construction of the Development at a mutually agreed upon price together with other negotiated conditions for conveyance of the Development Property; WHEREAS, Developer has requested that the Authority execute this Preliminary Development Agreement (“PDA”) agreeing to work solely with Developer during the term hereof on negotiations for acquisition of the Development Property by Developer to provide Developer with time to conduct review of the Development Property, obtain financing for the proposed Development, prepare appropriate plans for the Property, obtain necessary City approvals for the Development, and negotiate with the Authority on an agreement for the sale of the Development Property; WHEREAS, the Authority is willing to enter into this PDA for such purposes upon the terms and conditions provided herein. NOW THEREFORE the parties agree as follows: 1. In consideration of the processing of the Development under the terms of this PDA, the Authority agrees that it will negotiate and work solely with Developer on negotiations for sale of the Property to Developer for Developer’s proposed Development until February 28, 2021 (“Term”). 638311v1BR305-1 2 2. During the Term of this PDA, Developer agrees to use its best efforts to: a. make application for Low Income Housing Tax Credits to Minnesota Housing Finance Agency to obtain financing for the development; b. complete site planning and site engineering; c. complete architectural concept plans; d. submit application for a Business Subsidy request to the City and all necessary financial documentation needed for review; e. submit application, and receive all necessary City approvals related to the subdivision and development of the Development Property; f. secure construction financing necessary to construct a project consistent with the terms of this PDA; g. negotiate a Purchase Agreement with the Authority for acquisition and development of the Development Property and construction of an approved Development. 3. During the Term of this PDA, Developer and the Authority agree to use their best efforts to resolve property acquisition issues related to the Development Property and to attempt to bring fruition to the proposed Development through conveyance of the Property and development of the Development Property; provided, however, that the Developer acknowledges that the Authority will not exercise the power of eminent domain with respect to the acquisition of any property in connection with the Development or this PDA. 4. Developer may assign this PDA to an affiliate or Authority approved successor upon written notification and approval by the City. 5. The Developer will provide the Authority with a written progress report on the status of the goals identified in Paragraphs 2 and 3 every 30 days following the date of this PDA. 6. This PDA represents the entire understanding of the parties regarding the Development Area and any amendment to this PDA shall be in writing and be executed by both parties. 7. Both Parties are aware of and acknowledge that contingencies and unknowns presently exist, any one or more of which could make the Development cost prohibitive, and that both parties are expending sums of money and time with full knowledge of the risks involved and that neither party shall be liable for any of the other party’s expenses in any event, except (i) as otherwise provided pursuant to a separate agreement between the parties, (ii) in connection with an application for a Public Subsidy, or (iii) pursuant to required fees or costs related to applications made to the City or under City Code. 8. The parties agree that this PDA is not intended to bind the parties to enter into an agreement for the sale and acquisition of the Property, but is merely intended to set forth the parties’ intent to proceed with the process of (i) negotiating an agreement for the sale of the Development Property and development of the Development Property and (ii) resolving certain pre-development issues related to the Development Property and Development. 638311v1BR305-1 3 9. No approval given by the Authority hereunder or in connection herewith shall be deemed to constitute an approval of the Development for any purpose other than as stated herein and the process outlined in this Agreement shall not be deemed to supersede any concept review, conditional use permit, vacation, subdivision, or other zoning or planning approval process of the Authority or the City relative to the development of real estate. 10. This PDA may be amended by mutual written agreement of the parties. 11. This Agreement may be terminated by the Developer at any time. The Authority may terminate this Agreement if it determines that the Developer is not using their best efforts to progress the Development and bring it to fruition. In either case, notice to terminate shall be provided in writing to the other party. 12. If any portion of this Agreement is held invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of any remaining portion of this Agreement. 13. Notice, demand, or other communication from one party to the other shall be deemed effective if sent by certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested or delivered personally to a party at its address in the first paragraph of this Agreement, or at such other address as such party may designate in writing to the other party. 14. The Authority and Developer agree that this Agreement is intended to be preliminary in nature and will be superseded by one or more definitive contracts, mutually satisfactory to the Authority and the Developer, which shall be negotiated, approved and executed by the Authority and the Developer and no obligation regarding the conveyance of property or provision of any Public Subsidy shall exist with respect to the Development prior the approval and execution of such definitive contract(s). IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Authority has caused this Agreement to be duly executed in its name and behalf and the Developer has caused this Agreement to be duly executed in its name and behalf on or as of the date first above written 638311v1BR305-1 4 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA By__________________________________ Its President By__________________________________ Its Executive Director JO COMPANIES, LLC By__________________________________ Its _________________________________ 638314v1BR305-1 Commissioner _________________ introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: EDA RESOLUTION NO. 2020-____ RESOLUTION APPROVING A PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH JO COMPANIES, LLC WHEREAS, the Economic Development Authority of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota (the “Authority”) has received a proposal from JO Companies, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company (the “Developer”) regarding the development of land owned by the Authority for the creation of a multifamily affordable housing apartment building, which proposal contemplates the Authority's conveyance of the property located at 6101, 6017 Brooklyn Boulevard and 3600 61st Avenue North (the “Authority Property”) to the Developer; and WHEREAS, the Authority’s Board of Commissioners has reviewed the Developer’s development concept and has caused to be prepared a Preliminary Development Agreement to allow the Developer to negotiate the purchase of the Authority Property, conduct due diligence, obtain the necessary financing and commitments to construct the development, apply for, and gain approval from the City for the development and any necessary public subsidy; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Commissioners of the Economic Development Authority of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota (the “Board”), as follows: 1. The EDA hereby approves the Preliminary Development Agreement substantially in accordance with the terms set forth in the form presented to the Board, together with any related documents necessary in connection therewith (collectively, the “Preliminary Development Documents”) and hereby authorizes the President and Executive Director to negotiate the final terms thereof and, in their discretion and at such time as they may deem appropriate, to execute the Preliminary Development Documents on behalf of the Authority, and to carry out, on behalf of the Authority, the Authority’s obligations thereunder. 2. The approval hereby given to the Preliminary Development Documents includes approval of such additional details therein as may be necessary and appropriate and such modifications thereof, deletions therefrom and additions thereto as may be necessary and appropriate and approved by legal counsel to the Authority and by the officers authorized herein to execute said documents prior to their execution; and said officers are hereby authorized to approve said changes on behalf of the Authority. The execution of any instrument by the appropriate officers of the Authority herein authorized shall be conclusive evidence of the approval of such document in accordance with the terms hereof. In the event of absence or disability of the officers, any of the documents authorized by this Resolution to be executed may be executed without further act or authorization of the Board by any duly designated acting official, or by such other officer or officers of the Board as, in the opinion of the City Attorney, may act in their behalf. 3. Upon execution and delivery of the Preliminary Development Documents, the officers and employees of the Authority are hereby authorized and directed to take or cause to be taken such actions as may be necessary on behalf of the Authority to implement the Preliminary 638314v1BR305-1 Resolution No. 2020-________ 4. The Board hereby determines that the execution and performance of the Preliminary Development Documents will help realize the public purposes of the Economic Development Authority Act. February 24, 2020 _________________________________ Date President The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Commissioner and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. Council/E D A Work S ession City Hall Council Chambers February 24, 2020 AGE NDA The City C ounc il requests that attendees turn off cell phones and pagers during the meeting. A copy of the full C ity Council pac ket is available to the public. The packet ring binder is located at the entrance of the council chambers. AC T I V E D I S C US S IO N I T E M S 1.Housing P olicy F ramework (45 minutes) 2.Opportunity S ite Update (30 minutes) P E ND I NG L I S T F O R F UT URE WO RK S E S S IO NS 1.Pending I tems Metro Transit Bus Hub - (upcomi ng CC presentati on) Commemoration of 400 years of Slavery A ctivities -3/9 L ivable Wages -3/9 Use of E D A Owned P roperty -3/9 F ood Trucks - 3/9 Options for Use of A djacent S pace to L iquor Store - 3/9 Discussion of Mayor/City Council roles & responsibilities (CommonSense I nc.) MEMOR ANDUM - C OUNCIL WOR K SESSION DAT E:2/24/2020 TO :C ity C ouncil F R O M:C urt Boganey, C ity Manager T HR O UG H:N/A BY:Meg Beekman, C ommunity Development Director S UBJ EC T:Hous ing P olic y F ramework (45 minutes) Recommendation: - C onsider the proposed housing policy framework, and provide direction relating to housing efforts. Background: Housing and the polic y is s ues related to hous ing have become s ome of the most pressing and important matters fac ing c ommunities today. F or mos t s uburban communities , hous ing c ompris es a s ignificant majority of a cities land us e and tax bas e. Maintaining and preserving a s afe, quality, and des irable housing s toc k is critical to a c ommunity's long term economic health. F urther, a diverse hous ing stock whic h offers a wide range of housing choices and price points ens ures that a c ommunity c an be resilient through economic ups and downs as well as provide housing options for a divers e population throughout their lives. In addition to maintaining a quality and divers e supply of housing, c ommunities are more and more bec oming focus ed on c onc erns regarding livability and acc es s ibility of hous ing. T he Twin C ities Metropolitan Area is currently experience record low vac anc y rates. Acc ording to Marquette Advis ors ’ midyear report from Augus t 2019, the average vac anc y rate across the seven-c ounty metro area is 2.3 perc ent. Experts agree that a balanc ed rental market will typically see an average vacancy rate of around 5 perc ent. T he Twin C ities has been experienc ing rec ord low vacancy rates for s everal years now as are many metro areas throughout the nation. S evere hous ing shortages are being c aused from spikes in c onstruc tion c os ts, c ombined with unprecedented demand for rental hous ing as millennial and baby boomer generations are finding s imilar des ires for lifes tyles that offer more mobility and convenienc e over the debt and maintenance of home owners hip. In addition, as the c os t of living out paces inc omes , for many families , home owners hip may feel out of reach, and renting bec omes the only c hoic e. T he effec t of low vacancy rates over time is inc reas ing rents, a growing interest from outs ide investors , and landlords in a position to be c hoosier about who they rent to. T his has borne out throughout the Twin C ities Metropolitan Area, with the average rent increasing nearly 8 perc ent year over year to a current unprec edented $1,254 per month. In addition, the Metropolitan C ouncil continues to s ee a reduc tion in the number of landlords acc epting S ection 8 vouchers . Ac cording to the Metropolitan C ouncil, landlords are citing the inc reas ed interest for their units from non-voucher holders as the primary reason for the c hange. Yet another impact of the increasing value of rental property is the growing number of investors purchas ing C las s B or C las s C rental properties , which are renting for naturally affordable rents , making cosmetic improvements, and increasing rents so that the units are no longer affordable. Acc ording to the Minnesota Housing P artners hip, the s ales of apartment buildings in the metro area jumped 165 percent between 2010 and 2015. O ften the c hange in owners hip will als o c ome with a change in polic y related to criminal his tory, acc eptance of S ec tion 8 vouc hers, or minimum income requirements, resulting in existing tenants being dis placed from the property. Bro o klyn Center’s Current R ental H o using T he result of the regional trends des cribed above are being felt in Brooklyn C enter. Vacancy rates in the community remain lower than the regional average, hovering around 2 percent. T his is c ommon in communities with more affordable rental units . 35 perc ent of Brooklyn C enter's hous ing stock is comprised of rental units. O f those, about 8 percent are s ingle family homes . T he C ommunity Development Department is preparing a summary report on the rental licens ing program whic h inc ludes a deeper analys is of rental housing in the C ity. T his will be pres ented as part of a s eparate memo. Acc ording to the Metropolitan C ounc il, the following table indicates what is cons idered affordable rents in the Twin C ities Metropolitan Area: *R ents include tenant-paid utilities According to the C ensus American C ommunity Survey indicates average gross rents in Brooklyn C enter: Average rents in Brooklyn C enter are c onsidered naturally oc curring affordable becaus e the market rents, based on the age and c ondition of the units make them affordable at around 50 percent AMI in the metropolitan area. R ents in Brooklyn C enter are lower than the regional average. Approximately 90 percent of all of the hous ing units in Brooklyn C enter are c onsidered naturally oc curring affordable hous ing (NO AH). W hile NO AH properties are c onsidered affordable, they can be at ris k of being los t as market demand inc reas es and rents continue to go up. T hey c an als o experienc e disinvestment over time, caus ing deterioration, los s of value, and mos t importantly poor quality or unsafe living s ituations . At pres ent only 3.7 percent of units are cons idered legally-binding, or subs idized affordable units. S ubs idized affordable units are hous ing units whic h are required to maintain an affordable rent regardles s of s hifts in market demand. Due to their financing s tructure, they also are required to be maintained to a c ertain minimum s tandard. O ne of the goals of affordable housing advoc ates is to preserve exis ting NO AH properties by converting them to legally binding affordable units through NO AH pres ervation programs. With the c onstruc tion of S onder Housing, R eal Es tate Equities will be adding 270 units of legally-binding new affordable housing units to the city. T hes e will be the first new cons truction multi-family hous ing units built in Brooklyn C enter s inc e 1971, and will inc reas e the percentage of legally-binding affordable units to 6 perc ent. The City's 2040 Comprehensive Plan identifies several broad housing goals 2040 Housing & Neighborhood Goals P romote a divers e housing s toc k that provides s afe, s table, and ac cessible hous ing options to all of Brooklyn C enter ’s residents. R ecognize and identify ways to match Brooklyn C enter’s hous ing with the C ity’s c hanging demographics. Explore opportunities to improve the C ity’s housing policies and ordinances to make them more res ponsive to c urrent and future res idents . Maintain the existing housing s toc k in primarily s ingle-family neighborhoods through proper ordinances, inc entive programs and enforc ement. Explore opportunities to incorporate new affordable housing into redevelopment areas that promote s afe, s ecure and ec onomic ally diverse neighborhoods . In addition to thes e goals , the 2040 C omprehens ive P lan identifies implementation s trategies as well as res ourc es and tools for achieving its hous ing goals . T hes e are contained in C hapters 4 and 9, of the Hous ing and Implementation chapters res pectively (attac hed). I ssue Identificatio n As engagement related to the comprehensive plan and various redevelopment s ites have oc curred throughout the c ommunity over the pas t few years, a number of is s ues, c onc erns, and priority areas have bubbled up related to hous ing. Many of these is s ues are identified in the 2040 C omprehens ive P lan. As it relates to housing policy within the C ity of Brooklyn C enter, these is s ues can be categorized into two dis tinct topic areas : 1. Housing choice - W hat is the c ompos ition and c ondition of the current housing s toc k? W hat are the current market demands for housing? How does the city's hous ing stock relate to the market, and does the c ity have enough and the right type to meet c urrent and future need? 2. Affordable housing policies - W hat can the city do to improve livability and ac cessibility to quality affordable housing for residents? W hat bes t practices exist to support an effective approach to addres s ing the need for affordable hous ing in the community? W hat policies are most effec tive to prevent dis placement? In order to addres s these topic areas related to hous ing, s taff is proposing a framework plan which takes a comprehensive review of the C ity's housing policy approac h, with an emphas is in key focus areas bas ed on priorities is s ues which merit spec ial attention. T he overall review would include identifying those housing issues which are currently surfacing in the community and prioritizing those which are most pressing. Issues which have broadly been identified that merit special attention include: Mitigating and preventing displac ement of existing residents as the community redevelops Tenant protections C reating and expanding home ownership opportunities F air housing policy Maintenanc e and preservation of s ingle family housing s toc k Expanding housing options Ho using Po licy Framewo rk In order to gather data and to identify the needs for additional housing choice in the c ommunity, staff is recommending working with a c onsultant to complete a hous ing study. A propos ed sc ope of work for the hous ing study is attached to this memo. T he study would inc lude an analys is of regional trends effecting Brooklyn C enter's hous ing, the c ity's exis ting hous ing stock, current rent trends , market demand and gaps analys is . T he housing study is also proposed to include a tenant and home owner survey in order to ascertain whether residents are satisfied with their current housing options, and what housing choices they anticipate needing/wanting over time. T he results of this analysis will assist with guiding land use and policy decisions as it pertains to housing stock and choice. As it relates to the needs around affordable hous ing, policy approac hes fall into one of three categories: 1) C onstruc tion of new legally-binding units ; 2) P res ervation of NO AH units ; 3) Tenant protections In April 2018, the C ity C ounc il disc ussed s everal pos s ible polic ies to address affordable housing is s ues. T he memo from that dis cus s ion is attac hed to this report. Based on that dis cus s ion, C ounc il direc ted s taff to move forward with a Tenant P rotec tion O rdinance, and in Dec ember 2018, the city adopted one. Additional polic ies whic h addres s affordable hous ing topics are desc ribed below. S taff is s eeking direction on which polic ies C ounc il would like to move forward with, would like additional information on, or would like to wait on. Inclus ionary Hous ing P olic y (C reation P olic y) – T hese are a collec tion of policies which would either enc ourage or require new affordable units to be included as part of new market-rate res idential development projects whic h receive public s ubsidy or other disc retionary C ity approvals . F requently it is in the form of a requirement that a perc entage of units be affordable in a new residential development in exc hange for public s ubsidy of the projec t. New developments s uc h as those in the O pportunity S ite would be required to inc lude a c ertain number of affordable units. Inclus ionary Hous ing polic ies ens ure that new affordable units are added as market-rate units are built, thus ensuring mixed-inc ome c ommunities. C ities s uc h as S t. Louis P ark and Minneapolis have found that in higher rent developments , a c ertain percentage of affordable units c an be required without increasing the need for additional public s ubsidy. T his is due to the higher than average market rents, whic h off-s et the affordable units. In Brooklyn C enter, as is true in communities with lower average rents , the c os t of the affordable units would require additional public s ubsidies in order for a projec t to be financ ially feas ible. Brooklyn P ark rec ently adopted an Inclus ionary Hous ing P olic y. As part of their analys is they concluded that any amount of included affordable would c reate a financ ial gap in the project and require s ubsidy. T he policy ac knowledges this and projects will be looked at on a projec t by project basis to determine if the gap c an be financ ed. C ommunity input on the O pportunity S ite has identified many c ommunity benefits and goals for the redevelopment in addition to affordable hous ing; affordable c ommercial s pace, a cultural c enter, c ivic s pace, event spac e, and a rec reation c enter to name a few. All of these uses would require public s ubsidy in s ome form or another, not to mention the infras tructure needs of the s ite. Identifying affordable hous ing as a singular or primary goal of the development through an inc lusionary hous ing polic y inevitably elevates it above other c ommunity goals for the site. NO AH P res ervation P rogram (P res ervation P olicy) – A preservation program c an be set up in various ways , but essentially how they work is to inc entivize existing NO AH property owners into s etting aside a perc entage of rental units as legally binding affordable for a set period of time. T he C ity would c reate a NO AH pres ervation fund and identify additional funding sources to grow it. S taff would work with existing property owners to provide a modes t s ubsidy for building rehabilitation, which would then be c ombined with a 4D tax classific ation, als o known as the Low Income R ental C lassific ation P rogram (LI R C ), to provide a property tax break, currently amounting to 40%. T he result is the pres ervation of NO AH units through legally binding contrac t. T he tax break would be proportional to the percentage of units which would be affordable, and not apply to the entire building. T he LI R C /4D statute defines eligible properties as those which meet two conditions : the owner of the property agrees to rent and inc ome restrictions (s erving hous eholds at 60% AMI or below) and receives “financ ial assistanc e” from federal, s tate or local government. T his pres ents the pos s ibility of creating a “Loc al 4D” program in whic h qualifying properties rec eive the 4D tax break in return for agreeing to conditions whic h meet certain local government policy goals . T he reduction in property taxes would not decrease the C ity’s revenue from property taxes , as the funds would be dis tributed to all other properties; however, it would reduc e that property’s s hare of loc al property taxes. T he amount of the tax break is a limiting factor as it equates to around $80/unit per year; however, the program may be an incentive for a property owner in a community where the market rents are already cons idered affordable, since they would not need to depres s their rent rates . T he c ity is es timated to have approximately $320,000 of Housing T I F #3 funds when T I F #3 dec ertifies at the end of 2021. T hes e funds could be used to s eed a NO AH pres ervation fund. NO AH pres ervation is a more c os t efficient form of creating legally binding affordable units c ompared with new c onstruc tion, and ensures families are not dis placed from their homes. A NO AH pres ervation program, c ombined with efforts to s upport tenant protec tions c ould be highly effective at addres s ing community concerns about dis placement. F urther, staff c ould begin to work on s etting up such a program in the near term, and begin to identify potential funding s ourc es for it. F air Hous ing P olic y (Tenant P rotection P olicy) - T itle VI I I of the Civil R ights Act establishes federal policy for providing fair housing throughout the United S tates. T he intent of Title VI I I is to assure equal housing opportunities for all citizens. Further, C ities as a recipient of federal community development funds under T itle I of the Housing and C ommunity D evelopment Act of 1974, is obligated to certify that it will affirmatively further fair housing. T he city of Bloomington's F air Housing P olicy is attached as an example. Many other cities within Minnesota have Fair H ousing P olicies that are written very similar to Bloomington's. At present Brooklyn C enter does not have a F air Housing P olicy. I t is staff's recommendation that this be addressed in the near term, and that the H ousing C ommission be tasked with reviewing and recommending a policy to be adopted by the City. R eview R ental Licens ing through the lend of Tenant P rotec tions (Tenant P rotec tion P olic y) - Nearly a third of the C ity's housing units are rental. With vacancy rates hovering near 3 percent, tenants are not in a favorable position when it comes to negotiating with landlords on lease terms or other accommodations. Nearly all of the City's multi-family residential is considered naturally occurring affordable housing (N O AH ). T his is primarily due to its age and condition. Brooklyn C enter hasn't had new multi-family housing constructed since 1971, and so this particular housing type, like most in the City, is aging. M aintenance varies significantly depending on ownership, as does the quality of property management. T herefore, it is important to continue to monitor the City's N O AH properties through a robust rental license program. However, when the rental license program was established tenant protections was not the focus of the program. A review of the City's ordinances, policies, and procedures through the lens of tenant protections would ensure that the program is serving residents as effectively as possible. Community engagement strategies would be necessary to identify problems and potential solutions. Suggested engagement strategies include listening s es s ions with tenants and landlords ; and engaging s takeholders s uc h as Homeline, Housing Justice C enter, AC ER , etc C ity staff have met with AC ER , Homeline, and the Hous ing Jus tic e C enter and dis cus s ed some of the is s ues affecting Brooklyn C enter residents already. In addition, the city's hous ing ins pectors spend a s ignificant amount of time interac ting with tenants and landlords and understand the c omplexities of the is s ues. T hese res ourc es c an be drawn upon to further explore ways to make adjustments to the C ity's ordinances, polic ies , and procedures to ens ure existing residents are provided safe, sec ure, stable hous ing and tenants are afforded protec tions under the law. S taff's recommendation is to move forward with reviewing the city's current polic y and ordinance, and to begin to implement improvements. Tenant input could be inc orporated into the tenant survey that is part of the hous ing study. S ingle F amily Hous ing S tabilization (P reservation P olic y) - Approximately 86 percent of B rooklyn Center's single family housing stock is more then 40 years old. T his is a significant portion of the City's housing, therefore it is important to track the condition of these older homes as they are at-risk of deferred maintenance. At the same time, well maintained older homes can be an important source of entry-level housing. When considering the type and age of housing in Brooklyn C enter, the 2040 C omprehensive plan recommended the following programs: Housing s tudy to as s es s the condition of the C ity's hous ing stock Home O wners hip P rogram Assistanc e P rogram Down P ayment As s is tance Home O wners hip Educ ation Additional Low or No C ost Home improvement funding S taff recommends moving forward with a review of the c ity's single family hous ing programs . T he first part of which would be incorporated into the housing s tudy. R eview of Additional Best P rac tic es to Mitigate and P revent Dis placement - Hous ing S tudy and Impact As s es s ment - As was mentioned above, staff is recommending moving forward with a housing study in the near- term. B ecause issues around the impact of significant development on the city's existing housing, particularly around displacement and gentrification, have been raised in the community, staff is proposing to include within the housing study an impact assessment to evaluate the potential impact of the O pportunity S ite in this way. T he study would include a literature review of existing research on the topic of displacement and gentrification as it may pertain to B rooklyn Center, as well as case studies and best practices from other places that the community might draw from. T he study, as the scope is currently proposed, would assist with providing an informed basis from which policy decisions can be made. T he outcome of the study would allow us to identify additional policies and best practices which may forward the city's priorities around housing policy. Implementation Housing policy is both an urgent and important need in the c ommunity; however, s taff capac ity is als o limited to addres s these is s ues in a timely manner. S ome items identified above c ould be undertaken immediately s uc h as the hous ing study and the creation of a fair housing policy. A NO AH preservation program may be a polic y which c ould als o be addres s ed in the near-term. O ther items will take longer to addres s such as reviewing of the c ity's rental licens ing ordinanc e. T he C ity of Brooklyn P ark currently facilitates a housing s takeholder group with many of the s ame s takeholders which Brooklyn C enter would very likely as k to partic ipate in s imilar c onvers ations . R ather than hold a sec ond meeting each month, Brooklyn P ark staff has sugges ted the two cities c ombine efforts with the group. T his also offers the opportunity to s hare res earch and resources on topic s whic h are likely to be of a s imilar nature in terms of hous ing issues . It may also be valuable to create subject spec ific Housing Task F orc es , over time, as each housing area is addres s ed. T his c an be vetting as work progres s es . Not only would this allow greater community engagement, but also ensure that as various areas of foc us are under review (i.e. tenant protections, single family pres ervation, multi-family preservation) that the right people are at the table to provide input and expertise. T hough, inevitably, task forc es and c ommittees take cons iderable staff time to fac ilitate and manage. Ens uring that any engagement that is done is intentional and on topics where input is warranted is c ritic al. Staff has identified 5 key areas to address over the next 18 months. Other priority areas may arise through continued engagement which would require an adjustment to this framework. Tentative T ime Line 1. Q 1 2020 F air Hous ing P olic y 2. Q 1 2020 Housing S tudy and Impac t Assessment - G aps analysis and identify bes t practices for anti- dis placement 3. Q 2 2020 NO AH P res ervation program 4. Q 4 2020 Tenant P rotections 5. Q 1 2021 S ingle F amily Hous ing S tabilization Next S teps S taff recommends moving forward initially with the Housing C ommis s ion undertaking the review and drafting of a F air Hous ing polic y, which would then go to the C ity C ouncil for final c onsideration. In addition, s taff would rec ommend proceeding with the housing s tudy and impact assessment as the initial step. Policy Issues: W hat hous ing-related is s ues/topic s do you see ris ing to the s urfac e in the community? Are there any major elements you s ee needing to be addres s ed in the hous ing study in order to create a thorough bas eline as s es s ment of the C ity's hous ing stock? S hould staff begin working with the Housing C ommis s ion on developing a F air Housing P olicy? Do you have any questions/concerns with the framework for a Hous ing P olic y P lan as it has been laid out? Is the C ounc il c omfortable with moving forward with the housing s tudy and gaps analys is ? S trategic Priorities and Values: R es ident Ec onomic S tability, S afe, S ec ure, S table C ommunity AT TAC HME N T S: Desc ription Upload Date Type Hous ing F ac t S heet 11/19/2019 Bac kup Material April 9, 2018 - C ity C ouncil Memo - Affordable Hous ing P olic y 11/19/2019 Bac kup Material Hous ing S tudy S c ope of Work 11/19/2019 Bac kup Material Example Hous ing G aps Analys is 11/19/2019 Bac kup Material C hapter 4 - Hous ing 6/10/2019 Bac kup Material C hapter 9 - Implementation C hapter 10/22/2019 Bac kup Material F air Housing P olicy Example 8/16/2019 Bac kup Material Distribution of Naturally O cc urring Affordable Housing Buildings in Hennepin C ounty 11/20/2019 Bac kup Material Brooklyn Center Housing Facts 11,764 total housing units in Brooklyn Center as of 2018 (Source: Metropolitan Council) 37% of all housing units are rental units (single family and multi-family residential) (Sources: Metropolitan Council; US Census; SHC) 70% of housing units are single-family (Source: Metropolitan Council; US Census; SHC) 86% of housing stock is more than 40 years old (over 10,000 units) (Sources:US Census; SHC) 2019 Median Home Values: $198,000 -Brooklyn Center $298,400 -Hennepin County (Source: Hennepin County Assessment Report) 35% of households are housing cost burdened, meaning they pay at least 30% of their incomes on housing (Source: Metropolitan Council) Housing stock fairly homogenous which results in lack of choice (e.g. most homes less than 1,500 SF) 27.6% of housing units are in multi-family residential buildings (Source: Metropolitan Council; US Census; SHC) All of the City's multi- family residential was constructed between 1960 and 1971 Since 2010, 21 single family homes, 34 senior units, and 158 assisted senior units have been constructed 93% of housing units are considered "naturally occurring affordable" with 5% of housing considered "legally binding" affordable (2017) Median Gross Rent(2017): Brooklyn Center -$962 Metro Area -$1,001 (Source: 2013-2017 American Community Survey) Metropolitan Council projects a demand of 2,258 new housing units in Brooklyn Center by 2040 One of the goals of the 2040 Comprehensive Plan is to promote a diverse housing stock that identifies ways to match the City's housing stock with its changing demographics 40% of households in Brooklyn Center have children (well above County and Metro Area) City of Brooklyn Center | Community Development Department | www.cityofbrooklyncenter.org 6301 Shingle Creek Pkwy. Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 | Phone: (763) 569-3300 | Fax: (763) 569-3494 MEMORANDUM – COUNCIL WORK SESSION Our Vision: We envision Brooklyn Center as a thriving, diverse community with a full range of housing, business, cultural and recreational offerings. It is a safe and inclusive place that people of all ages love to call home, and visitors enjoy due to its convenient location and commitment to a healthy environment DATE: April 9, 2018 TO: Curt Boganey, City Manager FROM: Jesse Anderson, Deputy Director of Community Development THROUGH: Meg Beekman, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Affordable Housing Policy Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council consider providing direction to staff regarding potential affordable housing policies for the City. Background: In May of 2017, the City Council received copies of emails forwarded by Councilmember Butler from African Career and Education Resource Inc. (ACER) requesting an opportunity to come before the City Council to discuss concerns about the need for affordable housing in Brooklyn Center. In addition Mayor Willson was in contact with a representative of Community Action Partnership of Hennepin County (CAPHC) regarding the same topic. On July 10, 2017, by consensus the City Council directed staff to invite representatives from ACER and CAPHC to a future work session to present information and have a dialogue on the issue of affordable housing. On August 14, 2017, the City Council received a presentation from ACER and CAPHC regarding the topic of affordable housing. At the presentation ACER and CAPHC advocated that the City consider adopting policies that would address the region’s need for affordable housing, protect tenants, and help preserve naturally occurring affordable housing. The Council directed staff to bring the subject back to a future work session for discussion. Regional Housing Trends: The Twin Cities Metropolitan Area is currently experience record low vacancy rates. According to Marquette Advisors’ midyear report in August 2017, the average vacancy rate across the Twin Cities metro was 2.4 percent. Experts agree that a balanced rental market will typically see an average vacancy rate of around 5 percent. The impact of low vacancy rates over time has increased rents, a growing interest from outside investors, and landlords in a position to be choosier about who they rent to. This has borne out throughout the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area as rents have gone up throughout the region. The average rent at the end of July 2017 had increased 3.1-pecent year over year. In addition, the Metropolitan Council is seeing a reduction in the number of landlords accepting Section 8 MEMORANDUM – COUNCIL WORK SESSION Our Vision: We envision Brooklyn Center as a thriving, diverse community with a full range of housing, business, cultural and recreational offerings. It is a safe and inclusive place that people of all ages love to call home, and visitors enjoy due to its convenient location and commitment to a healthy environment vouchers. According to the Metropolitan Council, landlords are citing the increased interest for their units from non-voucher holders as the primary reason for the change. Yet another impact of the increasing value of rental property is the growing number of investors purchasing Class B or Class C rental properties, which are renting for naturally affordable rents, making cosmetic improvements, and increasing rents so that the units are no longer affordable. According to the Minnesota Housing Partnership, the sales of apartment buildings in the metro area jumped 165 percent between 2010 and 2015. Often the change in ownership will also come with a change in policy related to criminal history, acceptance of Section 8 vouchers, or minimum income requirements, resulting in existing tenants being displaced from the property. The region is also seeing a loss of smaller-sized rental properties (1-4-units). This is due, in part to single family properties converting back into owner-occupied as the market recovers from the recession, but also a growing number of local investors purchasing smaller properties and flipping them. While some of the proposed policies would impact single family rentals, the primary focus of affordable housing advocates and media attention has been on larger properties (40-units or greater). Affordable housing advocates have identified potential policies designed to address these issues. The policies fall into one of three categories; 1) preservation policies designed to preserve naturally occurring affordable housing and prevent it from being flipped; 2) tenant protection policies designed to prevent or mitigate displacement; and 3) creation policies designed to create new, legally-binding, affordable housing that will replace the naturally occurring affordable housing that is being lost. Brooklyn Center’s Current Rental Housing: According to the Metropolitan Council, the following table indicates what is considered affordable rents in the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area: # of Bedrooms 30% AMI 50% AMI 60% AMI 80% AMI Efficiency $474 $791 $949 $1,265 1-Bedroom $508 $848 $1,017 $1,356 2-Bedroom $610 $1,017 $1,220 $1,627 3-Bedroom $705 $1,175 $1,410 $1,880 4-Bedroom $786 $1,311 $1,573 $2,097 *Rents include tenant-paid utilities According to the Metropolitan Council, the following table indicates average rents in Brooklyn Center: # of Bedrooms Survey 5-Year Avg Efficiency $730 $744 1-Bedroom $869 $801 2-Bedroom $1,019 $925 3+ Bedroom $1,281 $1,147 MEMORANDUM – COUNCIL WORK SESSION Our Vision: We envision Brooklyn Center as a thriving, diverse community with a full range of housing, business, cultural and recreational offerings. It is a safe and inclusive place that people of all ages love to call home, and visitors enjoy due to its convenient location and commitment to a healthy environment Brooklyn Center currently has 834 rental license holders. 713 of those are for single family homes. 71 of the licenses are for 2-4-unit properties. 24 are for properties with between 5 and 39 units. 27 licenses are for properties with greater than 40 units. There are approximately 4,300 rental units in the City. The average rents in Brooklyn Center are considered affordable for those making around 50 percent of the Area Median Income. Of the 11,608 total housing units (both rental and owner-occupied) in Brooklyn Center, 89.5 percent are naturally occurring affordable housing. There are currently 402 Section 8 voucher holders in the City. Brooklyn Center currently has five apartment building that are legally-binding affordable housing, Ewing Square Townhomes (23-units), The Crest Apartments (69-units), Unity Place (112-units), Emerson Chalet Apartments (18-units), and The Sanctuary (158-units). Also, Lynwood Apartment (50-units) is currently applying for Certified Low Income Status, which would make it a legally-binding affordable property. This equates to 3.7 percent of the City’s housing stock is legally-binding affordable housing. Anecdotally, a recent phone survey of 34 Brooklyn Center landlords found a current average vacancy rate of 1.3 percent. Rents in Brooklyn Center are currently very affordable compared to the region. Low rents may be contributing to the low vacancy rates. If the vacancy rates are in fact below 2 percent, and they remain that low over time, it would be reasonable to expect rents to increase. However, given the current low rents, even an increase in rents of 20-30 percent would result in rents still considered affordable for those making 60-80% AMI. Affordable Policy Options: Section 8 Ordinance (Tenant Protection) - Prohibiting discrimination against Section 8 voucher holders and other recipients of government programs. The policy would prohibit landlords from denying any tenants’ application based on the applicant receiving government assistance.  Staff surveyed 34 Brooklyn Center apartments and found that 50 percent indicated that they do not accept section 8 vouchers.  Minneapolis recently adopted this ordinance, which allows applicants who feel they have been discriminated against to seek damages through the city’s department of Civil Rights.  The City of Minneapolis has an active lawsuit filed against them by 55 apartment owners over the legality of this ordinance. The lawsuit argues the mandate conflicts with state law and unfairly forces them to comply with requirements of federal housing voucher programs for low-income residents. It also says the law violates the Minnesota Constitution because it reduces their property values, forces landlords to enter into contracts and represents an unnecessary government intervention in their businesses. Landlords also claim that this could cause landlords to increase rent and/or application criteria as to price out Section 8 vouchers.  Staff feels that if the ordinance is upheld by the courts, it could be a useful tool to ensure residents are not discriminated against based on their source of income; however additional review would be necessary related to the enforcement of the ordinance. Staff MEMORANDUM – COUNCIL WORK SESSION Our Vision: We envision Brooklyn Center as a thriving, diverse community with a full range of housing, business, cultural and recreational offerings. It is a safe and inclusive place that people of all ages love to call home, and visitors enjoy due to its convenient location and commitment to a healthy environment recommends that the City monitor the Minneapolis lawsuit then review pending the outcome. Notice of Intent to Sell (Preservation) – Rental property owners must give advanced notice prior to the sale of a rental property. This gives a preservation buyer an opportunity to match the purchase price. It would also give service providers additional time to relocate residents who would be displaced as a result of the sale.  Landlords would be concerned about delaying the closing of a property sale, which could have a negative effect on price. Preservation companies such as Aeon have expressed concerns that this could increase the competition for these properties, and thusly increase sales prices.  Enforcement would be difficult because the penalty would come after the sale has occurred. If the property has sold, the seller no longer has ties to the property so enforcing a citation could be challenging and may not be a deterrent. In a workgroup in St. Louis Park landlords stated that if there was a $1000.00 citation for selling without notice, they would likely still sell the property and pay the citation.  It is unclear who the seller would need to notify of their intent to sell and what would be done with that information once it was known. Who would decide what buyers could have access to the information? Who would be responsible for disseminating the information?  It is possible that this ordinance would dissuade investors, who may opt to purchase property in cities that do not have the additional requirements.  St. Louis Park is looking at an alternative ordinance related to tenant transition/protection would address the need for additional time to relocate tenants.  Staff recommends that the city consider other options such as the tenant transition ordinance. Tenant Transition/Protection Ordinance (Tenant Protection) – This would require a new owner of a naturally occurring affordable housing property to pay relocation benefits to tenants if the new owner increases rent, rescreens existing residents or implements non-renewals without cause within 3 months after the purchase. The ordinance has the effect of freezing lease terms for 90 days after the sale of a property. The purpose is to allow tenants three (3) months to relocate if necessary.  This ordinance wouldn’t interfere with the sale of naturally occurring affordable housing, however; it would provide assistance to the tenants if necessary.  The ordinance would require new buyers to notify tenants within 30 days if substantive changes to the lease are forthcoming, giving tenants time to relocate if necessary.  St. Louis Park adopted the Tenant Protection Ordinance in March of 2018.  The policy could dissuade potential apartment buyers from buying in Brooklyn Center, who may opt to purchase a property in a city without this policy.  Staff recommends that the City review this policy further to determine the legality of it, the enforcement mechanism, and what the specific impacts in Brooklyn Center might be. MEMORANDUM – COUNCIL WORK SESSION Our Vision: We envision Brooklyn Center as a thriving, diverse community with a full range of housing, business, cultural and recreational offerings. It is a safe and inclusive place that people of all ages love to call home, and visitors enjoy due to its convenient location and commitment to a healthy environment Just-Cause Eviction (Tenant Protection) – Also known as Just-Cause Non-Renewal, this would require a landlord to provide a reason if they were going to not renew a tenant ’s lease that was expiring. Currently landlords must provide a just cause for eviction, which a tenant can appeal in court. There is no appeal process available to tenants who lose their housing due to non-renewal of lease.  Landlords see this as taking away a valuable management tool for dealing with problem tenants and have the unintended consequence of increasing the number of evictions filed and strengthening screening standards.  When St. Louis Park conducted their meetings with landlords and the Multi-family Housing Association, this ordinance received the strongest opposition.  The enforcement of this policy would be through the court system and would require a tenant to take legal action against their landlord via a lawsuit.  Of the 34 landlords surveyed by staff, the majority of evictions or non-renewals are the result of non-payment of rent or criminal activity.  The intent of this ordinance would be to protect tenants from being non-renewed in the event a new owner wants to empty a building in order to do a substantial renovation with the goal of increasing rents.  Staff recommends that the City consider other options such as the tenant transition ordinance to protect tenants. Inclusionary Housing Policy (Creation) – These are a collection of policies that could be adopted by the city which would either encourage or require new affordable units to be included as part of new market-rate residential development projects which receive public subsidy or other discretionary City approvals. Frequently it is in the form of a requirement that a percentage of units be affordable in a new residential development in exchange for public subsidy of the project.  New developments such as the Opportunity Site would be required to include a certain number of affordable units.  Inclusionary Housing policies ensure that new affordable units are added as market -rate units are built, thus ensuring mixed-income communities.  Cities such as St. Louis Park and Minneapolis have found that in higher rent developments, a certain percentage of affordable units can be required without increasing the need for additional public subsidy. This is due to the higher than average market rents, which off-set the affordable units. In Brooklyn Center, as is true in communities with lower average rents, it is likely that the cost of the affordable units would require additional public subsidies in order for a project to be financially feasible.  If the Council would like to move forward with this police staff would recommend reviewing the feasibility of future development if an affordable housing policy is adopted. 4D Tax Breaks (Preservation) – Also known as the Low Income Rental Classification Program (LIRC), Minnesota provides a property tax break, currently amounting to 40%, to subsidi zed rental properties under LIRC, commonly referred to as the 4D program. There is the potential, MEMORANDUM – COUNCIL WORK SESSION Our Vision: We envision Brooklyn Center as a thriving, diverse community with a full range of housing, business, cultural and recreational offerings. It is a safe and inclusive place that people of all ages love to call home, and visitors enjoy due to its convenient location and commitment to a healthy environment however, to extend 4D eligibility to certain currently unsubsidized affordable properties, without changing current law. This is because the LIRC/4D statute defines eligible properties as those which meet two conditions: the owner of the property agrees to rent and income restrictions (serving households at 60% AMI or below) and receives “financial assistance” from federal, state or local government. This presents the possibility of creating a “Local 4D” program in which qualifying properties receive the 4D tax break in return for agreeing to conditions which meet certain local government policy goals.  A government agency would need to provide a financial contribution to a rental apartment with a low income agreement placed on the property. The property could then be eligible to apply for 4D status. This would allow a landlord to make physical improvements to the property in exchange for affordable rents.  The reduction in property taxes would not decrease the City’s revenue from property taxes, as the funds would be distributed to all other properties; however, it would reduce that property’s share of local property taxes.  The amount of the tax break is a limiting factor as it equates to around $80/unit per year; however, the program may be an incentive for a property owner in a community where the market rents are already considered affordable, since they would not need to depress their rent rates.  Hennepin County is looking into a rehabilitation program for rental properties which would function similarly to the CDBG housing rehabilitation program, but be County funded.  The City could also look at funding a program for rental housing rehabilitation.  Staff recommends working with the County to determine the feasibility of a County-led program. The City could also review EDA or TIF 3 Housing funds to determine the availability of funds for a city program that would provide rental housing rehab assistance in exchange for a 5-10 year affordability requirement. This could be set up as a per unit matching forgivable loan. Other Policies/Programs  Identify buildings that are at-risk of being flipped. Reach out to owners of at-risk buildings and gauge their short and long-term plans. Help connect them with preservation buyers on a case-by-case basis.  Comprehensive Plan – the City is in the process of updating its Comprehensive Plan. If the preservation and/or creation of affordable housing are a priority for the City, it should be reflected in the City’s Comprehensive Plan.  Education – Work with the Metropolitan Council to provide education on Section 8 voucher programs to dispel some of the negative perceptions of the program. Policy Issues: Does the Council believe that the information presented indicates a need for additional policy actions to address the concerns raised regarding affordable housing and the protection of tenant rights? MEMORANDUM – COUNCIL WORK SESSION Our Vision: We envision Brooklyn Center as a thriving, diverse community with a full range of housing, business, cultural and recreational offerings. It is a safe and inclusive place that people of all ages love to call home, and visitors enjoy due to its convenient location and commitment to a healthy environment Does the Council require additional information regarding these issues before concluding if further policy actions are necessary? Which policies if any would the Council want brought back for further consideration? Which policy does the council consider a higher priority? Strategic Priorities:  Resident Economic Stability Attachments: US Census Bureau Data Metropolitan Council Land use Chart August 14, 2017 Council Work Session Memo August 14, 2017 Council Work Session Minutes Housing Strategies Table Presented at Previous Work-Session Mixed-Income Housing Policies among Neighboring Cities Table Phone Survey of Brooklyn Center Apartments Phone Survey of Brooklyn Center Single Family Property Management Companies: US Census Bureau Data: Metropolitan Council Land Use Chart: Housing Strategies Table Presented at Previous Work-Session Mixed-Income Housing Policies among Neighboring Cities City Policy/Program Type Affordability Requirements Affordability Period Opt-out (alternative) options Enforcement Tool Other Notes St. Louis Park (2015)  City financial assistance for new developments creating at least 10 multi-family units or renovation of an existing multi-family development with at least 10 units.  18% of total units in the development required at 60% AMI or 10% of units required affordable at 50% AMI.  Families may remain in the dwelling unit as long as the income does not exceed 120% AMI.  25 year minimum (considering an increase).  Subject to City Council approval: o Dedication of existing units o Offsite construction near public transit o Participation in construction of affordable units by another developer within the City  Affordable Housing Performance Agreement between City and Developer prior to Zoning Compliance Permit being issued.  Implemented 2015 – 6/7 new developments triggered policy with 1,073 units and 281 affordable units produced.  No development has used an opt-out option.  Units must be located within the development and distributed throughout the building unless approved by City Council. Edina (2015)  Re-zoning or Comprehensive Plan Amendment for all new multi-family development of 20 or more units.  10% of all rentable area at 50% AMI or 20% of all rentable area at 60% AMI.  15 year minimum.  Dedication of existing units equal to 110%, must be equivalent quality.  New construction at a different site.  Participation in construction of affordable units by another developer within the City.  Land use restrictive covenant.  PUD ordinance states development must consider affordability.  City will consider incentives for developments with affordable housing including: Density bonuses, parking reductions, TIF, deferred low interest loans from the Edina Foundation, and Tax Abatement. Golden Valley (policy approved in 2017; ordinance in coming months)  Market rate residential development with 10 or more units and receive: o Conditional Use Permit (ord.) o Planned Unit Development o Zoning Map Amendment (ord.) o Comprehensive Plan Amendment o Or Financial Assistance  15% of total project units at 60% AMI or 10% of project units at 50% AMI.  Families may remain in the dwelling unit as long as the income does not exceed 120% AMI.  20 year minimum.  Equal or greater amount dedication of existing units.  Affordable Housing Performance Agreement.  Mix of policy and ordinance.  City will consider incentives including:  Minimum in 33% reduction in required parking spaces  Minimum of 10% density bonus Brooklyn Park  New market rate residential development with 10 or more units and receive: o Planned Development Overlay (ord. required) o Zoning Map Amendment (ord. required) o Comprehensive Plan Amendment  Or Financial Assistance  15% of units at 60% AMI or 10% of units at 50%AMI or 5% of units at 30%AMI  20 year minimum.  Consider an alternative proposed by developer.  Affordable Housing Performance Agreement.  Mix of policy and ordinance.  Units must be located within the development and distributed throughout the building unless approved by City Council. Minneapolis (2002)  City-assisted housing projects of 10 or more units.  City-assistance includes TIF, condemnation, land buy downs, issuance of bonds to finance project, pass-through funding, and other forms of  Varies based on funding source but generally is either 20% of units at 60% AMI or 20% of units at 50% AMI (AHTF)  15 year minimum.  None.  Only 1-2 projects have taken advantage of the incentive program since 2002.  Currently engaging a consultant to develop an effective system. direct subsidy.  Density bonus and parking reduction incentive Saint Paul (2014)  City/HRA assisted rentals and homeownership.  Rental development in selected zones – density bonus incentive  Rentals – 30% of units affordable to households earning 60% AMI, of which at least one third will be affordable to 50% AMI, and at least one third will affordable to 30% AMI.  Rental - 10 year minimum .  Development Agreement  Voluntary/incentive density bonus is not being used so policy is currently being revised. Minnetonka (2004)  City Assistance  Voluntary/incentive based for all developments.  Rentals – 10% of units at 50% AMI for all developments, 20% of units at 50% AMI if using TIF funding.  30 year minimum.  Considered on a case by case basis.  Development Agreement.  Produced over 500 affordable units since 2004. Eden Prairie  City Assistance  Using a voluntary/incentive based approach for all developments; exploring adopting a policy.  City subsidy – 20% of units at 50% AMI.  Voluntary/incentive – starts at 10% of units at 50% AMI. Woodbury (2012)  Voluntary/incentive based – density bonus policy  20% of units at 80% AMI or negotiated.  15 year minimum. Chaska  All developments that need City approval  30% of units at 80% AMI. Forest Lake (2014)  Voluntary/incentive based – density bonus policy  Negotiable  15% density bonus, flexible parking requirements. Phone Survey of Brooklyn Center Apartments: Apartment Name number of Units number of vacant units Rent for a studio Rent for a 1 bedroom Rent for a 2 bedroom Rent for a 3 bedroom Rent for a 4 bedroom Do you accept section 8 Has rent increased over the past 2years? How much has rent increased? Most common reason for Eviction or non-renewal 4819 Azealia 12 0 750 800 no new yes $15-50 non-renewal 5207 Xerxes 12 0 0 Ave: $750 Ave $850 Yes yes 8% Disturbance 5240 Drew 10 0 845-950 yes no police calls for service The Avenue 36 0 755 929 1075 no yes 5% each month non-payment Beard Ave 24 0 $895 1 fl-$1025, 2-3 fl $1075 Yes (Typically don’t meet criteria) yes 100 - 2bd - 1bd 75 smoke in units, police calls (pattern) Brookside Manor 90 0 garden - $750 2- 3 floor $800 yes yes $20 police calls, disturbance, non-payment Carrington Dr 128 0 $735 $835-855 $945-975 no yes $50 disturbance, illegal activity, cleanliness, non-payment The Crest 122 3 for end of march $755 $935 yes yes 50 non-payment, crime free addendum Crossings - 6201 Lilac - 55+ 81 4 (0 in past few years) 1181-1275 (1bd + den 1081 1190-1750 No (inherited) yes 2-5% rarely - non-payment Crossings - 6125 Lilac - 55+ 65 1150 Earle Brown Farm 120 1 845-920 1010-190 No new ones yes 3% increase disturbance, non-payment Emerson Chalet 18 0 737 870 yes no non-payment, 3 strikes Gateway 252 3 775 850-875-895 995-1045 no yes 50 late payment, police calls, unit maintenance Granite City 72 0 849 949 1139 yes yes 34-55 smoking Granite Peaks 54 0 849 949 1139 no yes 34-55 non-payment Humboldt Courts 36 1 750 900-995 no yes 75-95 non-payment Lynwood - mark 50 0 895-925 1050-1190 yes Yes 2-4% non-payment of rent Melrose Gates 217 0 919-949 1129-1159 1159-1189 2bd+1.5ba 1209-1249 2bd+2ba no yes 100 non-payment River Glen 128 0 900 975-1000 1250 yes yes 50-75 non-payment/late rent Riverwood Estates 84 2 929 999-1050 no yes 40 lease violation Ryan Lake 22 1 800 800-1000 yes yes 75 non-payment Summerset 36 3 700 800-850 1150-1200 yes yes $50 non-payment, lease violations Twin Lake North 276 3 950+ 1105-1225+ yes yes 5% non-payment, behavior Unity Place 112 2 904-909 970 yes yes 30 non-payment Victoria Townhomes 48 4 1340-1400 no yes 40-60 tenant not renew Phone Survey of Brooklyn Center Single Family Property Management Companies: Management Agency number of Units number of vacant units Rent for a studio Rent for a 1 bedroom Rent for a 2 bedroom Rent for a 3 bedroom Rent for a 4 bedroom Rent for a 5 bedroom Do you accept section 8 Has rent increased over the past 2years? How much has rent increased? Most common reason for Eviction or non-renewal Prosperous 40 0 1050 1250 1450 1550 yes yes 2-3% non-payment Urban homes 2 1300 1400 1500 Yes NA Juliana Koi 2 1 1350 no yes 50 NA Kathleen Freitag 4 0 1235-1325 1410-1450 no no non-payment; destruction of property Tyang 1 0 1150 no no NA Michelle Nyarecha 1 0 1170-1250 yes no non-payment; police violations Nazeen 2 0 1000 1200 no yes 5% NA Tracy Hinkemyer 7 1350-2000 no no NA Dan tan 4 0 850-950 yes no non-payment drugs, noise Proposed Scope of Work for Housing Study and Gaps Analysis Understand Existing Conditions and Trends. Use Hennepin County and the Broader Twin Cities MSA as comparison points where that makes sense. Any overview of regional housing trends as well as forecasted regional housing demand will provide context to both the issues faced in Brooklyn Center as well as the market gaps that will surface. This includes attention to: • Housing units by type, tenure, year built, senior/general occupancy, formal affordability status (Costar) • Rent levels and trends, for recently built apartment buildings, and pre-2000 apartment buildings (Costar) • Household housing costs and trends (these are measures of the affordability of Brooklyn Center housing, regardless of affordability status of the development) (Census, ACS) o Reported housing cost o Reported cost as a percentage of household income o Cost-burdened households • Development trends (Costar, Brooklyn Park, Metropolitan Council) Analysis of Likely Impact. • Review of the literature on the impact of major area improvements on property values and rents—including local case studies such as Bottineau Housing Gaps Analysis —and apply the findings to Brooklyn Center’s context. The goal would be to estimate the impact on rents due to the proposed development improvements, above what is happening due to general city-wide market trends, and to estimate how distant from the development improvements the impact extends. • Conduct best practices research to include recent research and studies locally, including the work done by CURA and LISC on the topics of gentrification and displacement. Be sure to incorporate work that has local context. Survey of residents. A survey should be conducted to augment data related to cost-burdened households. Work with the City to conduct a survey of renters in the community. work with the city to identify appropriate questions. Questions may include: • Are you living in your desired area of Brooklyn Center? If not, what are your barriers to living somewhere else? • What drew you to live in this rental property? • Do you share rent with a partner or roommate? • What percentage of your gross annual salary (before taxes are taken out) do you pay for rent? • Do you anticipate your salary increasing steadily over the next 5 (or 10) years? • Has your rent increased over the last 2 years? 5 years? By how much? • Do you live in a studio, 1-br, 2-br, 3-br, or other? • How would you rate you’re the level of service you experience from your landlord/property manager? Has it increased or decreased in the last two years? Best practices research. Look at actions cities have taken, locally and nationally, to mitigate the impact on residential housing costs that stem from area improvements. Goal will be to identify strategies and best practices that are available and could be employed in Brooklyn Center either by the City, or by its development partners as identified in the City/developer development agreements. (Such provisions can be, but need not be, referred to as a community benefits agreement.) BOTTINEAU COMMUNITY WORKS STATION AREA HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS June 2018 Prepared by Blank Page HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction 1 Purpose 1 Report Format 1 Data Resources 2 Characteristics of the Housing Stock 3 Total Housing Units 3 Housing Unit Density 4 Structure Type 4 Household Tenure by Structure Type 6 Vacancy Trends 12 Bedroom Analysis 14 Housing Costs 16 Pricing Trends: Market Rate Rental Housing 16 Pricing Trends: For-Sale Housing 18 Affordability 20 Cost Burden 22 Restricted Housing 23 Development Trends 26 Demographic Characteristics 28 Median Age 28 Household Tenure (owners and renters) 30 Household Size 32 Household Type 33 Length of Residence 35 Race and Ethnicity 36 Household Income 38 HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works Socio-Economic Forecasts 40 Population and Household Forecast 40 Employment forecast 41 Population Projections by Age Group 42 Impacts of New LRT Service 43 Real Estate Agent Interviews 49 Community Stakeholder Interviews and Presentation 53 Gaps Analysis 57 Corridor-Wide Housing Gaps 58 Station Area Housing Gaps 61 Oak Grove Parkway 63 93rd Avenue 65 85th Avenue 67 Brooklyn Boulevard 69 63rd Avenue 71 Bass Lake Road 73 Robbinsdale 75 Golden Valley Road 77 Plymouth Avenue 79 Penn Avenue 81 Van White Boulevard 83 Appendices 85 Community Stakeholder Interview Notes 85 Data Tables 111 HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works 1 INTRODUCTION Purpose The Bottineau Community Works Housing Gaps Analysis evaluates the existing and near term supply of housing along the Bottineau Corridor and compares it to important demographic and economic trends to determine whether there are critical gaps in the supply of housing. The METRO Blue Line Extension is a planned 13-mile light rail transit (LRT) line that will connect downtown Minneapolis to the communities of northwestern Hennepin County, including the neighborhoods of north Minneapolis, and the cities of Golden Valley, Robbinsdale, Crystal, and Brooklyn Park. The LRT will terminate near the Brooklyn Park campus of Target Corporation. The METRO Blue Line Extension will be transformative by vastly increasing the mobility of people who live and work along the Corridor today, but also increasing the Corridor’s accessibility to the entire region. As a result, demand for housing along the Corridor will increase substantially. Therefore, one of the main purposes of this study is to determine not only where existing housing gaps need to be addressed but also understand how future growth pressures may exacerbate those gaps. This second point means using this study to inform appropriate policy responses at the city level (i.e., zoning) in order to position each of the LRT station areas along the Corridor to be able to close any future housing gaps once the transit line is operational. Report Format This report is broken into seven major sections or chapters. The first two sections address characteristics of Bottineau Corridor’s housing stock and household base. These sections mostly consist of data Source: Metropolitan Council HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works2 from the US Census and other relevant secondary sources. It should provide the reader with a solid foundation of objective data with which to assess each station area’s current housing situation. The third section is a brief review of the socio-economic trends affecting the demand for housing through 2040. The fourth through sixth sections step beyond the quantitative analysis presented in the first three sections by providing the reader with qualitative data about the housing stock. It includes a summary of findings from a literature review of LRT impacts on housing costs, interviews with residential real estate agents, and interviews with community stakeholders regarding important housing issues and concerns. The concluding section of the report builds upon the previous six sections. This is the gap analysis, which is an assessment of the types of housing needed in each station area in order to provide a full continuum of housing choice for its residents in a transit-supportive environment. Data Resources The majority of data presented in this report is secondary data from the US Census, including the decennial censuses from 2000 and 2010, and the American Community Survey (ACS), which is a rolling 1-, 3-, and 5-year survey of a statistically significant sample of the US population. For this study, the 2011-2015 American Community Survey was used for many variables. In addition to the US Census, other data sources included each city along the Corridor, Hennepin County, Esri, CoStar, Minneapolis Area Association of Realtors, Twin Cities Senior Housing Guide, Housing Link, and apartment websites. Although these sources generally augmented the US Census data, in many cases they were valuable in either filling in holes not covered by or to corroborate the Census data. Although these sources are judged to be reliable, it is impossible to authenticate all data. The analyst does not guarantee the data and assumes no liability for any errors in fact, analysis, or judgment. The secondary data used in this study are the most recent available at the time of the report preparation. The objective of this report is to gather, analyze, and present as many housing components as reasonably possible within the time constraints agreed upon. The conclusions contained in this report are based on the best judgments of the analysts; Perkins+Will and its project partners make no guarantees or assurances that the projections or conclusions will be realized as stated. It is Perkins+Will’s function to provide our best effort in data aggregation, and to express opinions based on our evaluation. HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works 3 CHARACTERISTICS OF THE HOUSING STOCK Total Housing Units The amount of housing varies significantly from station area to station area. As of data from 2016, the station with the least amount of housing within ½-mile of a station is 93rd Avenue with 265 units and the most is Penn Avenue with nearly 2,300 units. This variation in the number of units is due to a number of reasons. For example, the Oak Grove Parkway station area is mostly vacant and undeveloped. Other station areas are dominated by non-residential land uses; the Brooklyn Boulevard and Bass Lake Road station areas contain large shopping centers; 93rd Avenue has significant industrial and office uses; and the Golden Valley Road and Plymouth Avenue station areas are dominated by Theodore Wirth Park. Generally, though, the number of housing units within a ½-mile radius of a given station tends to decrease from south to north along the Corridor largely because older areas of the Corridor (in the south) were originally developed at higher densities compared to newer areas of the Corridor (in the north). Figure 1: Total Housing Units by Station Area (1/2-Mile Radius)1 Source: US Census, ACS 2011-2015 Estimate 1. The 42nd Ave Station Area noted on all figures has been renamed to “Robbinsdale Station Area” or “Robbinsdale” station. The Station name change has been updated and noted within the text, tables and maps of this report. 42 265 1,263 728 2,058 951 1,879 1,152 1,352 2,290 1,857 0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 Oak Grove Pkwy 93rd Ave 85th Ave Brooklyn Blvd 63rd Ave Bass Lake Rd 42nd Ave Golden Valley Rd Plymouth Ave Penn Ave Van White BlvdHousing UnitsSource: US Census, ACS 2011-2015 Estimate HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works4 Housing Unit Density The density gradient is more obvious when non-residential land uses are subtracted out of the ½-mile radius. Figure 2 shows how density of housing per acre starts high in the Van White Boulevard station area and then decreases rapidly once the station areas are outside of the city of Minneapolis. Most station areas have a residential density of between five and eight units per acre. For comparison purposes, density along the Green Line in Saint Paul between Lexington Avenue and Rice Street ranges between 10 and 14 units per residential acre. Many newer multifamily developments located along either the Blue or Green Lines often have more than 60 units per acre. Figure 2: Housing Units per Acre of Residential Land (1/2-Mile Radius) 1.4 4.5 5.9 5.3 7.7 5.8 7.9 6.1 8.3 10.0 16.2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 Oak Grove Pkwy 93rd Ave 85th Ave Brooklyn Blvd 63rd Ave Bass Lake Rd 42nd Ave Golden Valley Rd Plymouth Ave Penn Ave Van White BlvdHousing UnitsSource: Met Council; SHC; Perkins+Will Structure Type Housing is not monolithic. It often comes in a variety of shapes, sizes, and structure types. The number of housing units in a given building is a basic way to differentiate housing types. There is a great deal of variety among the station areas along the Bottineau Corridor. In several station areas, larger multifamily buildings account for a significant proportion of units, especially in the 63rd Avenue, Robbinsdale, and Van White Boulevard station areas. The presence of large multifamily buildings is also correlated with a higher density of units. The Penn Avenue station area, however, is able to achieve the highest overall density despite having more units in HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works 5 smaller multifamily buildings compared to larger multifamily buildings. Other station areas, however, can often have a dominant housing type, such as Golden Valley Road and Plymouth Avenue, where nearly all of the units are detached, single-family homes. Figure 3: Housing Units by Structure Size (1/2-Mile Radius) 0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 Oak Grove Pkwy 93rd Ave 85th Ave Brooklyn Blvd 63rd Ave Bass Lake Rd 42nd Ave Golden Valley Rd Plymouth Ave Penn Ave Van White BlvdHousing UnitsOther 20+ Unit Bldgs 5-19 Unit Bldgs 2-4 Unit Bldgs Attached (THs) SF Homes Source: US Census, ACS 2011-2015 Estimate Source: US Census, ACS 2011-2015 Estimate Although the detached, single-family house is synonymous with the concept of the American dream, there is no ideal structure type for housing. So many factors influence our housing needs that it is best to assume that a range of housing choices will not only meet the broadest range of needs but also be able to easily respond to changing market and demographic conditions. Figure 4 compares the distribution of the housing types not only among the station areas but also to the Corridor2, each city along the Corridor, Hennepin County, and the Twin Cities metropolitan statistical area3. Although there is a lot of variety in the housing structure types from station area to station area, the Corridor as a whole has a very similar distribution of housing structures compared to the Metro Area. Although the Corridor-wide profile reflects the general historical pattern of building less dense homes in more recently developed areas, it underscores the fact that policy changes will likely be needed to promote/support transit supportive housing development in the station areas. 2. In most cases, and especially when comparing geographies, the Bottineau Corridor is defined as a 1-mile buffer surrounding the planned LRT route. 3. There are a variety of ways to define metropolitan areas. In the Twin Cities, there are two common definitions. The first is the seven core counties that are under the purview of the Metropolitan Council. The second is defined by the US Census and is based on commuter travel sheds. For the Minneapolis-St. Paul region, the Census currently defines the metropolitan area as a 16-county region that also includes portions of Western Wisconsin. This is known as the MSA or Metropolitan Statistical Area. Due to various data sources, this report references both definitions. Because any “metro area” statistics referred to in this report are primarily used as basis to compare a station area or the Bottineau Corridor to a much larger geographic area in order to establish a “norm” or baseline, the authors of this report are comfortable using the two definitions as the availability of data dictates. HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works6 Figure 4: Distribution of Housing by Units in Structure (1/2-Mile Radius) 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%Percentage of Housing UnitsOther 20+ Unit Bldgs 5-19 Unit Bldgs 2-4 Unit Bldgs Attached (THs) SF Homes Source: US Census, ACS 2011-2015 Estimate Source: US Census, ACS 2011-2015 Estimate Household Tenure by Structure Type The type of housing structure is strongly correlated with whether an occupant owns or rents the unit they are living in, also referred to as household tenure. Figure 5 is a series of charts that break down the number of housing units by structure size and type of tenure (i.e., own vs. rent) for each city along the Bottineau Corridor, Hennepin County, and the Twin Cities metro area. It corroborates the fact that the vast majority of owned housing are single-family homes. However, single-family homes represent a significant portion of rented housing as well. Small to medium size structures are generally rented, though outside the Corridor it is more common to find owned units in such structures. Attached or townhome-style housing is more commonly owned, but rented forms are prominent as well. HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works 7 Figure 5: Rented vs Owned Housing by Units in Structure CITY OF BROOKLYN PARK 5,000 0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 Single Family Homes Townhomes 2 to 4 Unit Buildings 5 to 19 Unit Buildings 20 or More Unit Buildings Other Structure Types Households Renter Occupied Owner Occupied CITY OF CRYSTAL 2,000 1,000 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000 Single Family Homes Townhomes 2 to 4 Unit Buildings 5 to 19 Unit Buildings 20 or More Unit Buildings Other Structure Types Households Renter Occupied Owner Occupied CITY OF ROBBINSDALE 1,000 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 Single Family Homes Townhomes 2 to 4 Unit Buildings 5 to 19 Unit Buildings 20 or More Unit Buildings Other Structure Types Households Renter Occupied Owner Occupied Sources: US Census; Tangible Consulting ServicesUnitsUnitsUnits HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works8 CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY 1,000 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000 Single Family Homes Townhomes 2 to 4 Unit Buildings 5 to 19 Unit Buildings 20 or More Unit Buildings Other Structure Types Households Renter Occupied Owner Occupied HENNEPIN COUNTY 100,000 50,000 0 50,000 100,000 150,000 200,000 250,000 300,000 Single Family Homes Townhomes 2 to 4 Unit Buildings 5 to 19 Unit Buildings 20 or More Unit Buildings Other Structure Types Households Renter Occupied Owner Occupied TWIN CITIES MSA 100,000 50,000 0 50,000 100,000 150,000 200,000 250,000 300,000 Single Family Homes Townhomes 2 to 4 Unit Buildings 5 to 19 Unit Buildings 20 or More Unit Buildings Other Structure Types Households Renter Occupied Owner Occupied Sources: US Census; Tangible Consulting ServicesUnitsUnitsUnits HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works 9 Figures 6 and 7 present data on the number of rental units by structure size and the year built. Rented housing tends to have shorter-term occupants compared to owner-occupied housing and, therefore, is more susceptible to wear and tear. The age of the units can be an important indicator of the likely condition of this portion of the housing stock. In Figure 6, which includes data for the entire Bottineau Corridor, the majority of rental housing is in larger multifamily buildings (10 or more units). Within this category, most buildings were built between 1960 and 1979, which means they are now old enough to require major maintenance projects to keep them habitable, such as new roofs, windows, and critical mechanical systems (i.e., furnace, hot water heater, etc.). Among the small structure types, the rental housing stock is even older. For example, among the single- family and duplex/triplex categories, the overwhelming majority of the rental units are more than 50 years old. Figure 6: Rental Housing by Units in Structure and Year Built (1-Mile Corridor) 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000 8,000 9,000 Single Family Townhomes Duplex & Triplex Apartment (4-9 Units) Apartment (10+ Units)UnitsBefore 1940 1940 to 1959 1960 to 1979 1980 to 1999 2000 and Later Source: CoStar;Tangible Consulting ServicesSources: CoStar; Tangible Consulting Services HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works10 Figure 7 on the following two pages is a series of charts that highlights the age and size of rental properties within one mile of each station area. The age and type of rental housing differs significantly from station area to station area. In the Brooklyn Boulevard and 63rd Avenue station areas, there is very little variety of rental housing types. Almost all of the rental housing is in large buildings built between 1960 and 1979. Single-family or attached housing dominates the rental housing stock in the 93rd Avenue, 85th Avenue, Golden Valley Road, and Plymouth Avenue station areas. It is important to note that there are very few rental units that have been built within the last 20 years throughout the Corridor. Only in the Oak Grove Parkway (due to a new development) and the Van White Boulevard station areas are there any significant amounts of newer rental housing. Figure 7: Rental Housing by Units in Structure and Year Built (1-Mile Radius) OAK GROVE PARKWAY 85TH AVENUE 93RD AVENUE BROOKLYN BOULEVARD 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 Single Family Townhomes Duplex & Triplex Apartment (4-9 Units) Apartment (10+ Units) 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 Single Family Townhomes Duplex & Triplex Apartment (4-9 Units) Apartment (10+ Units) 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 Single Family Townhomes Duplex & Triplex Apartment (4-9 Units) Apartment (10+ Units) 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Single Family Townhomes Duplex & Triplex Apartment (4-9 Units) Apartment (10+ Units) Sources: CoStar; Tangible Consulting Services 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000 8,000 9,000 Single Family Townhomes Duplex & Triplex Apartment (4-9 Units) Apartment (10+ Units)UnitsBefore 1940 1940 to 1959 1960 to 1979 1980 to 1999 2000 and Later Source: CoStar;Tangible Consulting Services HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works 11 63RD AVENUE ROBBINSDALE PLYMOUTH AVENUE VAN WHITE BOULEVARD BASS LAKE ROAD GOLDEN VALLEY ROAD PENN AVENUE 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 Single Family Townhomes Duplex & Triplex Apartment (4-9 Units) Apartment (10+ Units) 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 Single Family Townhomes Duplex & Triplex Apartment (4-9 Units) Apartment (10+ Units) 0 200 400 600 800 1,000 1,200 1,400 1,600 Single Family Townhomes Duplex & Triplex Apartment (4-9 Units) Apartment (10+ Units) 0 200 400 600 800 1,000 1,200 1,400 1,600 1,800 Single Family Townhomes Duplex & Triplex Apartment (4-9 Units) Apartment (10+ Units) 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 Single Family Townhomes Duplex & Triplex Apartment (4-9 Units) Apartment (10+ Units) 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 Single Family Townhomes Duplex & Triplex Apartment (4 -9 Units) Apartment (10+ Units) 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 Single Family Townhomes Duplex & Triplex Apartment (4-9 Units) Apartment (10+ Units) Sources: CoStar; Tangible Consulting Services 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000 8,000 9,000 Single Family Townhomes Duplex & Triplex Apartment (4-9 Units) Apartment (10+ Units)UnitsBefore 1940 1940 to 1959 1960 to 1979 1980 to 1999 2000 and Later Source: CoStar;Tangible Consulting Services 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000 8,000 9,000 Single Family Townhomes Duplex & Triplex Apartment (4-9 Units) Apartment (10+ Units)UnitsBefore 1940 1940 to 1959 1960 to 1979 1980 to 1999 2000 and Later Source: CoStar;Tangible Consulting Services 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000 8,000 9,000 Single Family Townhomes Duplex & Triplex Apartment (4-9 Units) Apartment (10+ Units)UnitsBefore 1940 1940 to 1959 1960 to 1979 1980 to 1999 2000 and Later Source: CoStar;Tangible Consulting Services 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000 8,000 9,000 Single Family Townhomes Duplex & Triplex Apartment (4-9 Units) Apartment (10+ Units)UnitsBefore 1940 1940 to 1959 1960 to 1979 1980 to 1999 2000 and Later Source: CoStar;Tangible Consulting Services 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000 8,000 9,000 Single Family Townhomes Duplex & Triplex Apartment (4-9 Units) Apartment (10+ Units)UnitsBefore 1940 1940 to 1959 1960 to 1979 1980 to 1999 2000 and Later Source: CoStar;Tangible Consulting Services HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works12 Vacancy Trends Figure 8 presents data on the general availability of market rate rental housing within the Bottineau Corridor and the broader metro area. The rental market is extremely tight everywhere with very little available units throughout the Corridor or the metro area. The current vacancy rate is just above 2.5% in the Corridor. This is well below what is generally accepted among housing experts as market equilibrium, the point at which supply is high enough to accommodate most households in need of housing, but not so high that land lords are unable to maintain their properties due to low revenues caused by excessive numbers of vacant units. This is an extremely low rate of vacancy. Furthermore, the vacancy rate has been low for many years. The impact of persistently low vacancy is that many households that want to relocate to the area are unable to do so due to a lack of availability. It also means landlords are in a position to raise rents, sometimes excessively. In many cases, this results in the need to combine households, either because of inability to keep up with rising rents or a simple lack of housing options. In either case, it can often result in rapid wear and tear on units not designed for such occupancy conditions. Figure 8: Market Rate Apartments – Average Vacancy Rate 2.0% 2.5% 3.0% 3.5% 4.0% 4.5% 5.0% 5.5% 6.0% 6.5% 7.0% 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 YTDVacancyRate Corridor (1-mi buf.)Hennepin County 7-County Metro Equilibrium Sources: CoStar; Perkins+Will Vacancy data for owner-occupied units is less reliably tracked compared to rental housing. Nevertheless, Figure 9 displays data on the vacancy rate of owned housing from the US Census for each City along the Corridor, Hennepin County, and the Twin Cities metro area. The figure compares the vacancy rate of 2010 (the height of the for-sale housing bust) and 2016. HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works 13 Throughout the region, even owned housing has experienced a decline in vacant units since the beginning of the decade. This is a testament of how the improved economy of the region is creating demand for all types of housing. In Robbinsdale and Golden Valley the vacancy of owned housing is extremely low. In Crystal the rate is on par with the County. The exception is Brooklyn Park. One possible explanation for the shown increase is that Brooklyn Park is the only city along the corridor with significant tracts of vacant land available for traditional subdivision development. During the housing bust, new housing construction dramatically declined, which meant homes newly constructed and not yet occupied were rare. Now with the improved economy, Brooklyn Park has a number of active housing subdivisions. Figure 9: Estimated Vacancy of Owned Housing (2010 and 2016) 3.7% 2.4% 2.8% 1.2% 3.1% 2.4% 4.7% 2.4% 1.1%1.2% 2.4% 1.6% 0.0% 0.5% 1.0% 1.5% 2.0% 2.5% 3.0% 3.5% 4.0% 4.5% 5.0% Brooklyn Park Crystal Robbinsdale Golden Valley Hennepin County Twin Cities MSAVacancy Rate2010 2016 Source: US Census, ACS 2012-2016 Estimate HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works14 Bedroom Analysis The size of individual housing units is important to understand because it is correlated with housing cost and impacts the types of choices households have depending on where they are in their lifecycle. Younger and older households, for example, tend to be smaller and have lower incomes. Therefore, they tend to demand smaller unit types, such as studio, one-, or two-bedroom units. Families with several children and multiple wage earners not only have more people per household but also have higher incomes compared to older and younger households. Figures 10 and 11 display the percentage of housing units in each station area according to the number of bedrooms. Data for owned and rented housing is presented separately because so much of the owner- occupied housing stock is dominated by detached, single-family homes. For comparison purposes, data is also presented for each city along the Corridor, Hennepin County, and the Twin Cities metro area. Owner-occupied housing, regardless of station area, does not have significant percentage of units with two or fewer bedrooms. This is consistent with Hennepin County and the Metro Area. The lack of smaller unit sizes among the owned housing stock is a reflection of lifecycle conditions as noted above. However, it can be a barrier to those who want to access homeownership. The other important finding from Table 10 is that the station areas with the newest housing tend to have a much larger proportion of units with four or more bedrooms. Figure 10: Bedrooms per Housing Unit - Owner-Occupied Housing (1/2-Mile Radius) 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%Percentage of Occupied Housing Units5+Bedrooms 4 Bedrooms 3 Bedrooms 2 Bedrooms 1 Bedroom No Bedrooms Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, ACS 2011-2015 Estimate;Tangible Consulting Services HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works 15 In Figure 11 the percentage of units with more bedrooms is correlated with the presence of rented single-family homes. For example, the Bass Lake Road and Golden Valley Road station areas have more than 50% of their rental housing stock containing three or more bedrooms. These are station areas with a lot of rented single-family homes. Figure 11: Bedroom per Housing Unit – Renter-Occupied Housing (1/2-Mile Radius) Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, ACS 2011-2015 Estimate;Tangible Consulting Services Data from Figures 10 and 11 were further analyzed to generate Table 12 that show the number of persons per bedroom in each station area. The data include both owner- and renter-occupied data. High rates of person per bedroom can signal not only a mismatch between housing need and supply, but also the potential for excessive wear and tear on the housing stock. Across the metro area, the average number of persons per bedroom is 0.92. In areas with an older population, the number of persons per bedroom can be quite low due to empty-nest situations. However, in areas well above the metro area rate is evidence of the lack of supply for larger unit sizes. In particular, the 63rd Avenue, Bass Lake Road, Penn Avenue, and Van White Boulevard station areas have rates well above the metro area rate. 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%Percentage of Occupied Housing Units5+Bedrooms 4 Bedrooms 3 Bedrooms 2 Bedrooms 1 Bedroom No Bedrooms HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works16 Figure 12: Persons per Bedroom (1/2-Mile Radius) 0.84 0.84 0.99 1.20 1.21 1.00 0.82 0.92 1.12 1.14 1.00 0.88 0.87 0.78 0.92 0.92 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, ACS 2011-2015 Estimate;Tangible Consulting Services Housing Costs The cost of housing has profound impact on the ability to afford and access adequate housing. This section provides data from a number of sources and perspectives to better understand the current situation with respect to housing costs in the Bottineau Corridor and within each station area. Pricing Trends: Market Rate Rental Housing As noted previously, the vacancy rate for market rate apartments has been persistently low for many years. This has resulted in sharp increases in the average monthly asking rent. Figure 13 presents this data for buildings more than 20 years old4. Although the average asking rent in the Bottineau Corridor is about 7-8% lower when compared to the metro area average, it nevertheless has experienced an increase of roughly $200 since 2009, which is a 25% increase. 4. Because there are so few newer rental units in the Bottineau Corridor, it is important to compare data for older properties instead of all properties. Many of the newest rental properties being built today in the Twin Cities metro area are luxury product with pricing significantly above the average. Therefore, to include these newer properties in the analysis would skew the results. HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works 17 For those with lower incomes who are unable to access income-restricted or rent-controlled housing this is a significant increase that undoubtedly has squeezed a number of households out of the market and into dire arrangements. Moreover, since 2012, the annual change has been increasing at a more rapid rate. Figure 13: Average Monthly Asking Rent – Market Rate Apartments More than 20 Years Old $750 $800 $850 $900 $950 $1,000 $1,050 $1,100 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 YTDAverage Monthly RentCorridor (1-mi buf.)Hennepin County 7-County Metro Sources: CoStar; Perkins+Will Figure 14 presents apartment rent trends within ½-mile of each station area. According to the figure, most station areas have an average asking rent well below the County and metro area average asking rent. The Plymouth Avenue and Van White Boulevard station areas are the exceptions. This is due to upscale properties at the periphery of these station areas (one overlooks Wirth Park and another is in the rapidly growing North Loop area). Despite overall lower average rents, several of the station areas have experienced rent increases since 2011 that have exceeded the County or metro area rate of rent growth. This indicates how overall economic conditions can have an outsized impact on area with more affordably priced housing and lower incomes. HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works18 Figure 14: Average Monthly Asking Rent and Percentage Change – Market Rate Apartments More than 20 Years Old (1/2-Mile Radius) 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% $500 $600 $700 $800 $900 $1,000 $1,100 $1,200 $1,300 $1,400 $1,500 Percentage Change in RentMonthly Rent2017 Avg Rent % Change in Avg Rent '11-'17 N/A Sources: CoStar; Perkins+Will Pricing Trends: For-Sale Housing Figure 15 presents a dense set of information characterizing the nature of the for-sale housing market in each station area (1/2-mile radius). It shows the most recent median sales price, the rate of change in the median sales since before the housing bust (2005), the volume of sales in 2017, and the median age of homes sold. Most of the station areas when compared to the metro area have a lower median sales price and have yet to return to their pre-bust pricing (as noted by the dashed line in the graph). The lower median sales price is somewhat reflected in the age of the for-sale housing stock. Several of the station areas have a median age well below that of the metro area. HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works 19 The Van White Boulevard and 93rd Avenue station areas have a higher median sales price than the metro area, which can be explained somewhat by their newer housing stock. However, neither station area has been able to attain their pre-bust pricing. The Penn Avenue station area is the only area whose median sales price has substantially exceeded its pre-bust levels. Home pricing can be influenced by the number of sales in a given area. The fewer the number of sales, the more the median sales price can wildly fluctuate. The station areas with the most number of recorded home sales in 2017 are Robbinsdale and 85th Avenue. Figure 15: Home Sales Statistics by Station Area (1/2-mile radius), Corridor City, and Twin Cities Metro Area Source: Minneapolis Association of Realtors, Multiple Listing Service Figure 16 presents data that focuses on the change in the Median Sales from 2005 (pre-bust) to 2017. Homes located closer to downtown Minneapolis have been able to rebound from the bust more successfully than those located further out. The only exception is the Van White Boulevard station area. However, data for this station area is heavily impacted by a large, upscale condominium building that opened just prior to the housing bust that was saddled with many foreclosures. Therefore, statistically speaking it has a much deeper hole to climb out of compared to other station areas. HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works20 Figure 16: Median Home Sales Price (1/2-Mile Radius) Source: Minneapolis Association of Realtors, Multiple Listing Service Affordability A survey of all rental housing properties with 10 or more units was conducted for an area within one mile of the planned LRT line. Information on individual properties, such as age of building, asking rents, unit mix (i.e., proportion of units that have one, two, or three bedrooms), unit square footages, and the presence of any restrictions (e.g., income or age requirements), were collected and analyzed in support of the gaps analysis. Figure 17 presents data on the number of existing rental units that are affordable5 to households at varying income levels. The income levels are set by the US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and benchmarked against the Twin Cities’ area median income (AMI), which was $90,400 in 2017. The income categories used to determine affordability levels area defined as follows: Extremely Low Income (30% of AMI or less); Very Low Income (31% to 50% of AMI); and Low Income (51% to 80% of AMI). Corresponding to these income levels are HUD rent tables that identify the amount of rent that would be considered affordable at each income level according to unit size (i.e., number of bedrooms). These rent tables were used to analyze the affordability of rental units captured in the housing survey. Based on the above definitions, Figure 17 breaks out units that have some level of rent or income restriction versus those that have no restrictions (i.e., market rate). In the case of market rate units that meet some level of affordability, these are commonly referred to as naturally occurring affordable housing (NOAH). 5. Affordability, as defined here, is based on the assumption that housing costs should not be more than 30% of gross income to allow for other household needs, such as food, clothing, transportation, and healthcare. For example, if monthly housing costs (i.e., gross rent) are $750 per month this would translate to an annual cost ($750 x 12 months) of $9,000. Therefore, if a household should be spending no more than 30% of their income on housing, they would need an annual income of at least $30,000 to afford such a rent.$270,000$205,000$223,900$188,200$194,000$197,500$228,000$169,900$161,050$303,100$229,000$197,500$196,900$260,500$159,000$228,900$264,000$183,000$206,500$178,800$180,500$201,000$241,875$173,000$186,300$260,000$230,000$200,450$204,000$310,000$149,900$246,000$125,000 $150,000 $175,000 $200,000 $225,000 $250,000 $275,000 $300,000 Median Sales Price2005 2017 N/A $478,000 HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works 21 All of the rental housing along the Bottineau Corridor meets some level of affordability with over 80% of the units affordable to households with incomes at or below 60% of AMI. In Brooklyn Park and Robbinsdale very few of the rental units have a restriction. Almost all of the rental housing are naturally occurring affordable housing or NOAH. In Crystal and Minneapolis, the inverse is true in which all or the vast majority of units are restricted with very little NOAH. Not surprisingly, the restricted units tend to concentrate below 60% of AMI, meanwhile the NOAH units are mostly above 50% of AMI. Figure 17: Affordability of Rental Units Based on Income Levels (in Buildings with 10+ Units) MINNEAPOLIS (WITHIN 1 MILE OF CORRIDOR)ROBBINSDALE (WITHIN 1 MILE OF CORRIDOR) CORRIDOR-WIDE (1-MILE BUFFER) 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1,000 30% AMI 50% AMI 60% AMI 80% AMI 100% AMI Not Affordable*Housing UnitsRent Restricted Market Rate (NOAH) Source:CoStar;Tangible Consulting Services 0 200 400 600 800 1,000 1,200 1,400 1,600 1,800 2,000 30% AMI 50% AMI 60% AMI 80% AMI 100% AMI Not Affordable*Housing UnitsRent Restricted Market Rate (NOAH) Source:CoStar;Tangible Consulting Services 0 200 400 600 800 1,000 1,200 1,400 1,600 1,800 2,000 30% AMI 50% AMI 60% AMI 80% AMI 100% AMI Not Affordable*Housing UnitsRent Restricted Market Rate (NOAH) Source:CoStar;Tangible Consulting Services BROOKLYN PARK (WITHIN 1-MILE OF CORRIDOR)CRYSTAL (WITHIN 1 MILE OF CORRIDOR) 0 200 400 600 800 1,000 30% AMI 50% AMI 60% AMI 80% AMI 100% AMI Not Affordable*Housing UnitsRent Restricted Market Rate (NOAH) Source:CoStar;Tangible Consulting Services 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 30% AMI 50% AMI 60% AMI 80% AMI 100% AMI Not Affordable*Housing UnitsRent Restricted Market Rate (NOAH) Source:CoStar;Tangible Consulting Services Sources: CoStar; Tangible Consulting Services HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works22 Naturally Occurring Affordable Housing (NOAH) A simple definition for NOAH is any housing unit that meets some definition of affordability without any restriction on who can live there (other than what a landlord is legally allowed to screen). In most areas, the vast majority of what would be considered affordably priced housing does not have a restriction. Prices are generally set by the market place and what a landlord can achieve in a competitive environment. However, due to the condition of a property, the presence (or lack thereof) of essential unit features, its location, or a glut of available units, many times housing can be priced to be affordable to many households “naturally” or without public subsidy. When markets function under ideal conditions for both renters and landlords, property owners invest in their properties to keep them marketable yet sufficient competition means they are unable to raise prices beyond what the market can comfortably bear. However, NOAH is very susceptible to rapidly changing market conditions. If household growth outpaces housing supply or wage increases are unfairly distributed, landlords of NOAH properties may be able to raise rents to the point that segments of the market are often left unable to afford rent increases. Cost Burden Although many households may be living in housing that meets some definition of affordability, this does not mean that the cost of housing is not a burden (i.e., paying more than 30% of income toward housing costs). Figure 18 presents data on the proportion of owner- and renter-occupied households that are cost burdened for each station area, each city along the Corridor, Hennepin County, and the Twin Cities metro area. From the figure, many of the renters living along the Corridor are more cost burdened than compared to other renters across in the County or across the metro area. This is despite the fact that housing in the Corridor tends to be more “affordable.” Renters in the Brooklyn Boulevard station area are especially burdened with nearly 70% meeting the definition. The figure also shows the cost burden for owner-occupied households. Although the prevalence of being cost burdened is not as high among homeowners, in some station areas nearly one-third of these households would be considered cost burdened. HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works 23 Figure 18: Cost Burdened Households by Tenure (1/2-Mile Radius) 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%Percent of Households by TenureCost - Burdened Owners Cost - Burdened Renters Sources: U.S. Census Bureau; Esri; Tangible Consulting Services; Perkins+Will Restricted Housing Figure 19 displays data on the number of rental units according to the type of restriction (i.e., income- restricted or age-restricted) or lack of restriction (i.e., general-occupancy). Also indicated in the figure is the whether the units have been built since 1983 or are older. Figure 20 is a companion chart showing the same data for the Twin Cities metro area. Nearly 50% of the rental units in the Corridor have some type of restriction. Of these, more than half have been built since 1983. The vast majority of general-occupancy rental units without any restrictions were built before 1983 and are more than 35 years old. This is in contrast to other parts of the metro area in which a much higher proportion of general-occupancy rental units have been built since 1983. HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works24 Figure 19: Restricted Rental Housing (1-Mile Corridor) 0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500 4,000 4,500 Senior -Market Rate Senior -Income- Restricted General Occupancy - Market Rate General Occupancy - Income-Restricted General Occupancy - Mixed-IncomeUnits 1983- Present Pre-1983 Source: CoStar; Tangible Consulting Services; Perkins+Will Figure 20: Restricted Rental Housing (Twin Cities MSA) 0 20,000 40,000 60,000 80,000 100,000 120,000 140,000 160,000 180,000 200,000 Senior -Market Rate Senior -Income- Restricted General Occupancy - Market Rate General Occupancy - Income-Restricted General Occupancy - Mixed-IncomeUnits 1983- Present Pre-1983 Source: CoStar; Tangible Consulting Services; Perkins+Will HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works 25 Many income-restricted properties are funded through multiple sources. Furthermore, many funding sources have an expiration date in which the owners of the properties are no longer required to restrict tenancy to their properties based on income. This is one of the most common ways in which communities can lose housing that is affordable to lower-income households. Based on data from HousingLink.Org and Hennepin County, Table 1 lists each of the income-restricted properties in the Corridor with an expiration date associated with the restriction. In total, just over 2,000 units exist within a mile of the LRT line. Roughly 200 of the units are set to expire within the next five years and unless the property owner decides to reapply to a funding program that supports the restriction, these units are at risk of being priced according to market forces and, thus, may lose their affordability. Table 1: Income-Restricted Properties in which Restrictions are Set to Expire Name Address City Station Area #Units Expiration Year Park Haven 6917 76th Ave N Brooklyn Park Brooklyn Blvd 176 2033 Autumn Ridge 8500 63rd Ave N Brooklyn Park 63rd Ave 366 2037 Kentucky Lane Apts 6910 54th Ave N Crystal Bass Lake Rd 67 2030 Cavanagh Senior Apts 5401 51st Ave N Crystal Bass Lake Rd 130 2044 Bass Lake Court Townhomes 7300 Bass Lake Rd New Hope Bass Lake Rd 60 2019 Bridgeway Apartments 3755 Hubbard Ave N Robbinsdale Robbinsdale 45 2047 Copperfield Hill - The Manor 4200 40th Ave N Robbinsdale Robbinsdale 150 2024 The Commons at Penn Ave 2211 Golden Valley Rd Minneapolis Golden Valley Rd 47 2046 St. Anne’s Senior Housing 2323 26th Ave N Minneapolis Golden Valley Rd 61 2037 Gateway Lofts 2623 W Broadway Ave Minneapolis Golden Valley Rd 46 2040 Broadway Flats 2505 Penn Ave N Minneapolis Golden Valley Rd 102 2047 Lindquist Apartments 1931 W Broadway Ave Minneapolis Golden Valley Rd/ Plymouth Rd 21 2034 West Broadway Crescent 2022-1926 W Broadway Ave Minneapolis Golden Valley Rd/ Plymouth Rd 54 2045 Ripley Gardens 301 Penn Ave N Minneapolis Plymouth Rd/Penn Ave 52 2026 Homewoods 1239 Sheridan Ave N Minneapolis Penn Ave/Van White 35 2024 1618 Glenwood Ave N Minneapolis Penn Ave/Van White 12 2029 Park Plaza Apts 525 Humboldt Ave N Minneapolis Van White/Penn Ave 134 2021 610 Logan Ave N Minneapolis Van White/Penn Ave 12 2040 Heritage Park Apts 1000 Olson Memorial Hwy Minneapolis Van White/Penn Ave 440 2033 Total Units 2,010 Units Set to Expire within 5 Years 194 Sources: HousingLink.Org; Hennepin County HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works26 Development Trends Housing production is an important strategy for maintaining an adequate and healthy stock of housing. New construction replaces obsolete or poorly maintained units. It adds to the supply and meets demand driven by growth. It also introduces new types of housing that meets the needs of ever evolving demographic and economic conditions. Figure 21 displays the number of new housing units constructed in Golden Valley, Robbinsdale, Crystal, and Brooklyn Park from 2004 to 2016. Figure 22 presents the breakdown of those units by structure type. Data for Minneapolis is not included in Figures 21 and 22 for two reasons: 1) data specific to the portion of Minneapolis within or near the Bottineau Corridor is not readily available; and 2) Minneapolis is sufficiently large that including city-wide data would have skewed the numbers and not provided meaningful conclusions. From the Figures 21 and 22, it is evident how much the housing bust from the late 2000s slowed new construction. At the bust’s nadir, less than 100 new units were constructed annually compared to 850 units during the peak in 2005. Although not quite to the pre-bust levels, housing construction is adding significant numbers to the housing stock of Corridor communities. Pre-bust, Brooklyn Park was capturing the majority of housing development. Post-bust, Golden Valley has begun to add significant numbers of new units as well. Although much of this recent development is in the form of larger multifamily buildings, very little of it has been occurring in or near the station areas. Figure 21: Total Housing Units Permitted for Construction in Golden Valley, Robbinsdale, Crystal, and Brooklyn Park from 2004 to 2016 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016Housing UnitsGolden Valley Robbinsdale Crystal Brooklyn Park Source: Metropolitan Council HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works 27 Figure 22: The Structure Type of Housing Units Permitted for Construction in Golden Valley, Robbinsdale, Crystal, and Brooklyn Park from 2004 to 2016 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016Housing UnitsMF (5+ unit bldgs) Townhomes Single-Family Source: Metropolitan Council As previously noted, there has not been a significant amount of multifamily development within 1-mile of the Bottineau Corridor for over 30 years. As the LRT project gets closer to fruition and the market for new rental housing strengthens in suburban areas, there is evidence of new development occurring in the Corridor. In Brooklyn Park, Doran Development opened the first new multifamily project in decades in 2016 and is currently constructing a second phase. There are also two proposals for new multifamily projects in Robbinsdale, which would be the first such development in several decades as well. Although the LRT line is likely a number of years from being operational, it is valuable to compare what level of activity is occurring in the other LRT corridors. Table 2 highlights the number of units currently under construction or have reached some level of approvals to consider them likely developments according to CoStar, a nationally-based provider of commercial real estate information. The existing Green Line in St. Paul and the planned extension into the western suburbs both have well over 2,000 units of housing under development. In contrast, the Blue Line extension has approximately 550 units in development. HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works28 Table 2: Multifamily Units under Development along Metro Area LRT Corridors LRT Line*Units Under Construction Units Proposed**Total Units in Development Blue Line Ext 202 347 549 Blue Line 53 830 883 Green Line Ext 51 2,522 2,573 Green Line 841 1,403 2,244 * Excludes Downtown Minneapolis ** According to CoStar, these are the number proposed units in each corridor that have reached some level of approvals to consider them likely developments. In most cases, this means the proposed project has received approvals from a city. However, it can also be influenced by the track record of the developer. Source: CoStar DEMOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS Median Age The age profile of the population has a direct impact on housing needs. Figure 23 depicts the current median age of the population in each station area, in each community along the Corridor, Hennepin County, and the Twin Cities metro area. Figure 24 depicts the recent and anticipated future trend with respect to aging. Overall, the Corridor is younger than the metro area or Hennepin County. The population in the Van White Boulevard, Penn Avenue, Brooklyn Boulevard, and 63rd Avenue station areas are especially youthful with a median age well below the metro area median. Balancing out some of the more youthful station areas are the Golden Valley Road, Robbinsdale, and Bass Lake Road station areas which are older than the metro area median. The Robbinsdale and Bass Lake Road station areas have multiple senior housing properties which explain the older median in these areas. For the Golden Valley Road station area, the higher median age likely has to do with a more expensive, owner-occupied housing stock relative to nearby neighborhoods, which is a barrier to entry for younger households. Although several station areas experienced a drop in the median age from 2000 to 2010, despite continued aging of the County as a whole, all of the stations are expected to increase their median age in the foreseeable future. An aging population within the station areas will increase demand for certain types of housing and decrease demand for other types. HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works 29 Figure 23: Median Age of Station Areas (1/2-Mile Radius) 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 Median Age Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, ACS 2011-2015 Estimate; Esri;Tangible Consulting Services Figure 24: Aging Trends of Station Areas 2000-2022 (1/2-Mile Radius) 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 Median AgeSources: U.S. Census Bureau; Esri; Tangible Consulting Services; Perkins+Will Sources: U.S. Census Bureau; Esri; Tangible Consulting Services; Perkins+Will HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works30 Household Tenure (owners and renters) Housing tenure is important to track because it provides insight into the potential to respond to a changing age profile or shocks to the economy, such as a recession. For example, many older households often transition out of homeownership into rental housing as they require more assistance with activities of daily living. Figure 25 presents data on the breakdown between owners and renters while Figure 26 presents data on recent and anticipated changes in the homeownership rate. There is wide variation in tenure from station area to station area. Some station areas, such as those at the north end of the Corridor, mostly consist of households that own their housing. Other station areas, such as 63rd Avenue and Van White Boulevard, mostly consist of renters. The recent and future trend, regardless of the station area, is toward lower levels of homeownership. Evidence appears to be growing that younger age groups are not embracing homeownership the way previous generations did. First, mortgage standards have returned to more stringent levels where the barrier to entry is much higher due to substantially larger down payments that are required on the part of mortgagors. Second, with housing no longer seen as a “safe” investment due to the housing bust the nest egg that so many previous generations created through homeownership is no longer seen as attainable. Third, many younger households are now saddled with tremendous student debt and qualifying for, much less affording, a mortgage is much more difficult than compared to previous generations. Finally, with an increasingly digital-based economy, gone are the expectations that one works for a single employer for most of their career. Therefore, homeownership can be viewed as reducing employment flexibility which further depresses demand for for-sale housing. As a result, younger households are starting to choose rental housing as a preferred arrangement rather than a temporary situation prior to homeownership. If these trends persist or become deeply established, the demand for rental housing could remain high for many years. These trends, however, are difficult to predict because of the large impact Federal policies have on homeownership. For instance, if the Federal government revamps Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the two big institutions that help support homeownership, in a way that help loosen lending standards, homeownership may again regain its value to younger generations. Conversely, given the recent changes to the mortgage interest deduction allowed through the Federal tax code, this may have a profound impact on the rental market. HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works 31 Figure 25: Household Tenure by Station Area (1/2-Mile Radius) 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%Percentage of HouseholdsRenter- Occupied Owner- Occupied Source: U.S. Census Bureau, ACS 2011-2015 Estimate Figure 26: Homeownership Rate 2000-2022 (1/2-Mile Radius) 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%Homeownership RateSources: U.S. Census Bureau; Esri; Tangible Consulting Services; Perkins+Will Sources: U.S. Census Bureau; Esri; Tangible Consulting Services; Perkins+Will HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works32 Household Size Figures 27 and 28 present data on household size. Household size has a direct impact on the types of housing needed. Furthermore, data on household size can reveal where the housing stock may be most stressed in meeting the needs of a changing demographic. Within the Corridor, station areas with larger multifamily properties tend to attract smaller households. Conversely, station areas with a higher proportion of single-family homes tend to attract larger households. Exceptions are station areas where the aging of the population has yet to result in a turnover to younger households (e.g., Golden Valley Road) or areas with a high number of larger apartment units that can support families (e.g., Van White Boulevard). Figure 27: Average Household Size by Station Area (1/2-Mile Radius) 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 Persons per HouseholdSources: U.S. Census Bureau, ACS 2011-2015 Estimate; Esri;Tangible Consulting Services; Perkins+Will Figure 28: Household Size Trends 2000-2022 (1/2-Mile Radius) 2.00 2.20 2.40 2.60 2.80 3.00 3.20 3.40 3.60 3.80 Household SizeSources: U.S. Census Bureau; Esri; Tangible Consulting Services; Perkins+WillSources: U.S. Census Bureau; Esri; Tangible Consulting Services; Perkins+Will HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works 33 Household Type Related to household size is household type. Changes in household type can place pressure on the types of rental units needed in a community. For example, increasing numbers of renter households with children will place greater demand for units with three or more bedrooms, not to mention amenities such as play areas and accessibility to nearby schools. Household structure throughout the Corridor is generally similar to the Metro Area and Hennepin County – though the Corridor tends to have slightly more non-traditional families and persons living alone. Within station areas, though, there is significant variation of household types. The Oak Grove Parkway and 93rd Avenue station areas have a high percentage of married couples with families. The Robbinsdale station area has a high percentage of persons living alone. The Van White Boulevard, Penn Avenue, Brooklyn Boulevard, and 63rd Avenue station areas have higher percentages of non-traditional families with children. Recent trends indicate that the proportion of households with children is increasing across the metro area and within most of the station areas. Single-person households, which have different housing needs than households with children, are starting to stabilize after a large increase between 2000 and 2010. Figure 29: Household Type by Station Area (1/2-Mile Radius) 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%Percentage of HouseholdsLiving Alone Non-family (2+ persons) Other Family w/o Children Other Family w/ Children Married-Couple w/o Children Married-Couple w/ Children Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, ACS 2011-2015 Estimate; Esri;Tangible Consulting Services Household Size Figures 27 and 28 present data on household size. Household size has a direct impact on the types of housing needed. Furthermore, data on household size can reveal where the housing stock may be most stressed in meeting the needs of a changing demographic. Within the Corridor, station areas with larger multifamily properties tend to attract smaller households. Conversely, station areas with a higher proportion of single-family homes tend to attract larger households. Exceptions are station areas where the aging of the population has yet to result in a turnover to younger households (e.g., Golden Valley Road) or areas with a high number of larger apartment units that can support families (e.g., Van White Boulevard). Figure 27: Average Household Size by Station Area (1/2-Mile Radius) 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 Persons per HouseholdSources: U.S. Census Bureau, ACS 2011-2015 Estimate; Esri;Tangible Consulting Services; Perkins+Will Figure 28: Household Size Trends 2000-2022 (1/2-Mile Radius) 2.00 2.20 2.40 2.60 2.80 3.00 3.20 3.40 3.60 3.80 Household SizeSources: U.S. Census Bureau; Esri; Tangible Consulting Services; Perkins+WillSources: U.S. Census Bureau; Esri; Tangible Consulting Services; Perkins+Will HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works34 Figure 30: Households with Children 2000-2015 (1/2-Mile Radius) 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%Households with ChildrenSources: U.S. Census Bureau; Tangible Consulting Services; Perkins+WillSources: U.S. Census Bureau; Tangible Consulting Services; Perkins+Will Figure 31: Single-Person Households 2000-2015 (1/2-Mile Radius) 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%Single-Person HouseholdsSources: U.S. Census Bureau; Tangible Consulting Services; Perkins+WillSources: U.S. Census Bureau; Tangible Consulting Services; Perkins+Will HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works 35 Length of Residence Length of residence indicates how much turnover there is in the housing stock. Frequent turnover can result in greater wear and tear on the housing stock. It can also be an indicator of community involvement and participation among residents since it is often difficult to get involved in community issues and concerns when your residence is short term. Longer-term residencies tend to be more associated with owner-occupied housing. This is generally due to the fact that younger and older households, which have a propensity to rent, do so because their expectation is for shorter-term residencies. Also, being more affordable, rental housing tends to accommodate households with financial and/or employment situations that are tenuous, which may precipitate a shorter-term residency. Figure 32: Year Householder Moved into Dwelling Unit by Station Area (1/2-Mile Radius) 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%Percentage of HouseholdsMoved in 2010 or later Moved in 2000 to 2009 Moved in 1990 to 1999 Moved in 1980 to 1989 Moved in 1979 and Earlier Sources: US Census, ACS 2011-2015 Estimate; Esri Figure 33 presents data for Hennepin County and the Twin Cities metro area showing the difference in the percentage of households that moved into their housing unit within the past year between 2010 and 2015. Regardless of whether the unit is owner- or renter-occupied, the trend has been toward far less movement among households in the last six years. This indicates how a tight housing market can not only displace households due to rising rents or other landlord driven circumstances, but that it can cause households to remain in the same home despite changing life circumstances and the inability to find housing that better meets their needs. HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works36 Figure 33: Households that Moved into Dwelling Unit within the Last Year Sources: US Census; Perkins+Will Race and Ethnicity Figures 34 and 35 present data on the race/ethnicity and Hispanic origin of station area residents. Racial and ethnic diversity is very high throughout the Corridor. The number of people of color in the station areas is well above the Metro Area rate. African Americans are an important part of the population base throughout the Corridor. Asian Americans are a significant component to the population in the southern and northern station areas. Figure 34: Race and Ethnicity by Station Area (1/2-Mile Radius) 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%Percentage of PopulationWhite African Amer.Amer. Indian Asian Pacific Islander Other Race Two or More Races Sources: U.S. Census Bureau; Esri; Tangible Consulting Services; Perkins+Will HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works 37 The Hispanic population, which can be of any race, are prominent throughout the Corridor as well. Concentrations of Hispanic persons are in the Van White Boulevard, Bass Lake Road, and 63rd Avenue station areas. Figure 35: Hispanic Origin by Station Area (1/2-Mile Radius) 0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% 14% 16% 18% 20%Percentage of PopulationSources: U.S. Census Bureau; Esri; Tangible Consulting Services; Perkins+Will Critical housing gaps are often correlated with race or ethnicity. Figures 36 and 37 highlight the stark differences in the rate of homeownership throughout the corridor between white households and households of color. Only in station areas where there is an almost complete lack of rental housing (e.g., Oak Grove Parkway, 93rd Avenue, and 85th Avenue) is the homeownership rate between whites and persons of color relatively similar. Otherwise, white households have a rate of homeownership that is typically twice -- sometimes three times -- the rate of households of color. This underscores how housing gaps that fall along race and ethnic lines may not be overcome by simply building more housing, but addressing other issues, such as homeownership assistance, fair housing policies, and similar strategies aimed at equity and equal access to resources. Figure 36: Household Tenure by Station Area for White Households (1/2-Mile Radius) 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%Percentage of HouseholdsRenter- Occupied Owner- Occupied Source: U.S. Census Bureau, ACS 2012-2016 Estimate HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works38 Figure 37: Household Tenure by Station Area for Households of Color (1/2-Mile Radius) 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%Percentage of HouseholdsRenter- Occupied Owner- Occupied Source: U.S. Census Bureau, ACS 2012-2016 Estimate Household Income Household income is important to track because it is strongly correlated with age and also directly affects the spending power of area residents and their ability to afford housing. Figures 36 and 37 display data on median household incomes for each station area, the Corridor, each city along the Corridor, Hennepin County, and the Twin Cities metro area. Except for the Golden Valley Road station area, all of the station areas from Brooklyn Boulevard and southward have median incomes well below the metro area median. Stations at the northern end of the Corridor where the housing consists mostly of newer, larger, owned single-family homes have median incomes above the metro area median. In terms of income trends, there is a great deal of variation throughout the Corridor. By and large, it appears that income trends tend to correlate with whether households are getting younger or much older (i.e., entering retirement). Because homeownership often has a significant financial barrier to entry, rental housing tends to have a larger proportion of lower-income households, though many middle- and higher-income households choose to rent as well. Furthermore, households at the two ends of the age spectrum, younger and older households, often prefer renting because it provides greater flexibility and requires less maintenance. Yet, these same households also have lower incomes because of limited earning potential (i.e., little work experience or retirement). HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works 39 Figure 38: Median Household Income by Station Area (1/2-Mile Radius) $0 $20,000 $40,000 $60,000 $80,000 $100,000 Median Household IncomeSources: U.S. Census Bureau, ACS 2011-2015 Estimate; Esri; Tangible Consulting Services Figure 39: Median Household Income Trends 2000-2022 (1/2-Mile Radius) 0 20000 40000 60000 80000 100000 Median Household Income2000*2013*2015*2017**2022** Sources: * US Census; ** Esri; Tangible Consulting Services HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works40 SOCIO-ECONOMIC FORECASTS Previous sections addressed the current and recent demographic situation for each station area and communities along the Bottineau Corridor. This section presents data of several types of forecasts that provide insight into the potential increase in demand for housing due to population, household, and employment growth. Population and Household Forecast Table 3 presents data on the forecasted population and household growth of each community along the Bottineau Corridor as well as Hennepin County and the Twin Cities Metro Area. With the exception of a small portion of Brooklyn Park, the communities along the Bottineau Corridor are fully developed, which helps explain why their forecasted growth rates do not equal that of the entire Metro Area. The Metro Area figures include both fully developed communities as well as those communities with large tracts of vacant land that can accommodate large scale residential construction. Communities with significant amounts of new residential construction are typically the ones that experience the largest population increases. Table 3: Population and Household Forecasts for Corridor Communities, Hennepin County, & Twin Cities Metro Area Forecast Numeric Change Percentage Change Community 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2010s 2020s 2030s 2010s 2020s 2030s POPULATION Brooklyn Park 67,388 75,781 86,700 91,800 97,900 10,919 5,100 6,100 14.4%5.9%6.6% Crystal 22,698 22,151 22,700 23,200 23,800 549 500 600 2.5%2.2%2.6% Robbinsdale 14,123 13,953 14,750 15,100 15,300 797 350 200 5.7%2.4%1.3% Golden Valley 20,281 20,371 21,300 22,000 22,900 929 700 900 4.6%3.3%4.1% Corridor Communities 124,490 132,256 145,450 152,100 159,900 13,194 6,650 7,800 10.0%4.6%5.1% Minneapolis 382,618 382,578 423,300 439,100 459,200 40,722 15,800 20,100 10.6%3.7%4.6% Hennepin County 1,116,200 1,152,425 1,255,520 1,330,480 1,407,640 103,095 74,960 77,160 8.9%6.0%5.8% 7-County Metro Area 2,642,056 2,849,567 3,160,000 3,459,000 3,738,000 310,433 299,000 279,000 10.9%9.5%8.1% HOUSEHOLDS Brooklyn Park 24,432 26,229 30,000 32,200 34,300 3,771 2,200 2,100 14.4%7.3%6.5% Crystal 9,389 9,183 9,500 9,600 9,700 317 100 100 3.5%1.1%1.0% Robbinsdale 6,097 6,032 6,300 6,600 6,800 268 300 200 4.4%4.8%3.0% Golden Valley 8,449 8,816 9,300 9,600 9,800 484 300 200 5.5%3.2%2.1% Corridor Communities 48,367 50,260 55,100 58,000 60,600 4,840 2,900 2,600 9.6%5.3%4.5% Minneapolis 162,352 163,540 183,800 194,000 204,000 20,260 10,200 10,000 12.4%5.5%5.2% Hennepin County 456,129 475,913 528,090 566,560 600,930 52,177 38,470 34,370 11.0%7.3%6.1% 7-County Metro Area 1,021,454 1,117,749 1,264,000 1,402,000 1,537,000 146,251 138,000 135,000 13.1%10.9%9.6% Sources: US Census; Metropolitan Council; Perkins+Will HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works 41 Although the Bottineau Corridor is mostly developed, the Metropolitan Council expects an important amount of household growth to occur over the next 20-25 years due to redevelopment opportunities of older, underutilized parcels. According to the table, the communities along the Corridor, excluding Minneapolis, can anticipate roughly 3,000 new households each decade. In order to accommodate this new household growth, substantial amounts of new multifamily housing will need to be built because the economic feasibility of replacing non-residential uses with single- family housing is very challenging without substantial public support and subsidy. Employment Forecast Employment growth in and near the Bottineau Corridor will be a key driver of housing demand in the coming decades. According to Table 4, the communities along the Bottineau Corridor are anticipated to add nearly 6000 jobs in the 2020s and 2030s. Even if a small proportion of those new workers want to live along the Corridor it will place a great deal of demand on the local housing supply. If a range of new product types at varying price points is not added to the housing stock, this will result in significant increases in housing costs. Table 4: Employment Forecasts for Corridor Communities, Hennepin County, and Twin Cities Metro Area Forecast Numeric Change Percentage Change Community 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2010s 2020s 2030s 2010s 2020s 2030s EMPLOYMENT Brooklyn Park 23,692 24,084 32,100 36,100 40,200 8,016 4,000 4,100 33.3%12.5%11.4% Crystal 5,638 3,929 4,400 4,640 4,900 471 240 260 12.0%5.5%5.6% Robbinsdale 7,109 6,858 7,000 7,100 7,200 142 100 100 2.1%1.4%1.4% Golden Valley 30,142 33,194 36,000 37,500 38,900 2,806 1,500 1,400 8.5%4.2%3.7% Corridor Communities 66,581 68,065 79,500 85,340 91,200 11,435 5,840 5,860 16.8%7.3%6.9% Minneapolis 308,127 281,732 315,300 332,400 350,000 33,568 17,100 17,600 11.9%5.4%5.3% Hennepin County 877,346 805,089 924,710 981,800 1,038,140 119,621 57,090 56,340 14.9%6.2%5.7% 7-County Metro Area 1,606,263 1,543,872 1,828,000 1,910,000 2,039,000 284,128 82,000 129,000 18.4%4.5%6.8% Sources: US Census; Metropolitan Council; Perkins+Will HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works42 Population Projections by Age Group As presented previously, it is important to understand the age breakdown of the population because there is a strong correlation between one’s age and the type of housing desired. Although long range age forecasts are not available at the municipal level, the Minnesota State Demographer recently released projections for Hennepin County, which are presented in Table 5. According to the table, the age groups under 25 and over 65 will grow substantially through 2030. Therefore, macro demographic trends suggest numeric growth will increase demand for both larger unit types that can accommodate families while at the same time smaller unit styles focused on aging adults wanting to downsize. Table 5: Hennepin County Population Forecast by Age Group Population Age 2010 2020 2030 2040 Numeric Change Percent Change 2010s 2020s 2030s 2010s 2020s 2030s Under 18 Years 261,596 300,118 321,408 334,524 38,522 21,290 13,116 14.7%7.1%4.1% 18 to 24 years 113,300 112,122 137,640 149,718 -1,178 25,518 12,078 -1.0%22.8%8.8% 25 to 34 years 187,523 198,711 212,434 247,227 11,188 13,723 34,793 6.0%6.9%16.4% 35 to 44 years 154,304 169,184 155,538 163,307 14,880 -13,646 7,769 9.6%-8.1%5.0% 45 to 54 years 171,130 160,088 176,320 158,642 -11,042 16,232 -17,678 -6.5%10.1%-10.0% 55 to 64 years 133,758 165,602 161,777 175,103 31,844 -3,825 13,326 23.8%-2.3%8.2% 65 to 74 years 66,516 117,183 145,800 139,920 50,667 28,617 -5,880 76.2%24.4%-4.0% 75 to 84 years 42,476 42,104 68,109 82,280 -372 26,005 14,171 -0.9%61.8%20.8% 85 years and over 21,822 29,259 28,306 47,670 7,437 -953 19,364 34.1%-3.3%68.4% Total Population 1,152,425 1,294,371 1,407,332 1,498,391 141,946 112,961 91,059 12.3%8.7%6.5% Source: Minnesota State Demographer HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works 43 IMPACTS OF NEW LRT SERVICE The planned light rail transit (LRT) in the Bottineau Corridor will provide significantly enhanced transit service for residents and workers near the stations. Access to faster, high-frequency transit will reduce travel costs (in both time and money) and provide transportation flexibility. The result will be greater demand to live and work near a station. Research and experience show that there are a range of additional impacts that can result from new transit service, such as: • Property values tend to increase near transit stations, benefiting homeowners and other property owners. • Station areas may attract new housing and commercial development that would otherwise not occur. • Commercial businesses may benefit from increased visibility and sales. • Investment in existing property tends to increase. • In certain locations the impact on the area is multiplied by the emergence of broader place-making changes, which transform the market context, character and vibrancy of an area, inviting subsequent development and area changes. • Value increases in station areas, and the increased attractiveness of the location for rental households, leads to rent increases in existing rental properties. In order to better understand the potential impact of new LRT service on Blue Line communities, and especially on those living near future station areas, we did additional research on the impacts of new transit service—specifically its impact on property values, property investment, new development, and rent levels. HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works44 The Impact of New LRT Service on Property Values and Property Investment A number of studies have explored the relationship between new LRT transit service, and increases in surrounding property values. Such studies have been conducted in contexts across the country, looking at the question from a range of perspectives. Given that the existing Blue Line and Green Line transit lines offer the closest comparison to the future Blue Line extension, the impacts of those lines are particularly relevant. Fortunately, there have been prominent studies by the Center for Transit Studies (CTS) which have specifically looked at property value impacts from the Hiawatha Light Rail Line (now the Blue Line). Key findings from those reports are summarized below. The Hiawatha Line: Impacts on Land Use and Residential Housing Value (CTS, 2010) This study used property sale records for a period of time before the opening of the Hiawatha (Blue) Line, and after the opening of the Hiawatha Line. It compared the change in sale prices for properties within a half mile of the station to the change in sale prices for properties further distant from the stations. Trends in sale prices were examined for both single family homes and multifamily residential properties. The researchers also looked at whether area investment increased due to the new transit service. They did this by comparing property expenditures, as represented by 2000 to 2007 building permit records, between the period before 2004 and the period after 2004. Key findings of the study included the following: • Before light rail service began in 2004, single family homes in the half mile station area radius sold for an average of 16% lower than homes in the broader area. After 2004, single family homes in the station area sold for an average of 4% higher than homes in the broader area. The value premium that station area homes achieved compared with more distant homes equates to around $5,000 per home. • The increases in home value were significantly diminished for homes on the east side of Hiawatha Avenue. Those homes faced two barriers to accessing the station area—the difficulty of crossing the arterial corridor, and the visual barrier of a set of older industrial properties between the residential neighborhoods and Hiawatha Avenue. HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works 45 • Property sale records showed that multifamily properties increased in value as well, due to the new transit service. The gain in value, after the opening of the transit service, was an estimated $15,755 per multifamily property. • The new transit service prompted additional investment in new home construction and home improvement. • There was an increase of 187% in the number of new single family homes constructed in the station areas. »The aggregate home improvement permit value was 50% higher in the station areas than it was for the comparison area for the 2000 – 2007 period. Impacts of the Hiawatha Light Rail Line on Commercial and Industrial Property Values in Minneapolis (CTS, 2010) This study utilized property sale records from before and after the opening of the Hiawatha (Blue) Line to assess the impact of new LRT service on commercial property values. It found a clear positive impact on property values, which extended out to almost a mile from the station locations. The value appreciation that resulted from the new transit service varied according to the proximity to the station. The closer the property was to the station, the greater the resulting appreciation in property value. The study estimated that, for the average commercial property that is 400 meters (around 1,300 feet) from the station, its value would increase by $6,500 for each meter it was closer to the station. The Impact of New LRT Service on Attracting New Development There is a growing literature that looks at the development that occurs in areas near new transit stations. Questions asked in these studies include: • Why does development occur in some instances, and not in others? • What steps can be taken to increase the likelihood that new development will be attracted to a station area? HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works46 A 2011 study by the Center for Transit Oriented Development (Rails to Real Estate: Development Patterns along Three New Transit Lines, CTOD, 2011) was influential in understanding these dynamics. Moreover, one of the study’s three focus areas included the Hiawatha (Blue) Line, which has particular relevance to this housing gaps analysis. The study documented real estate development patterns in the areas around transit lines in Minneapolis, Denver, and Charlotte. The researchers reviewed development records, and interviewed city planners and developers in each area. The report makes qualitative findings concerning the development that occurred, and why. Key findings from the report are as follows: • Development has occurred on all three lines that may otherwise not have occurred. • The character of development near the stations is shaped by its location, tending to be higher density and more pedestrian oriented than development in other locations. • Developers (and their equity partners) are attracted to station area locations because they are viewed as having the potential to achieve faster absorption rates, higher occupancy rates, and higher sale prices or rents. • Transit station areas in and close to existing employment centers and downtowns are most attractive to developers. • Locations where there are major opportunities for infill development on vacant or lightly developed land are most attractive. • Public actions to surmount barriers and improve the area context can be key to attracting development. HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works 47 The Impact of New LRT Service on Rent Levels in Existing Rental Properties New transit service makes an area more desirable, for both property owners and renters. Because of that, rents can go up with the arrival of the service. That’s relevant in the Bottineau Corridor because communities want to understand how the new transit service might impact renter households in the station areas. There seems, however, to have been less research on the impact of transit service on rent levels than there has been on the impact on property values. Researchers contacted at the University of Minnesota’s Center for Transit Studies were not aware of either local or national research that explores that relationship. And our own internet search didn’t turn up any useful research. There is a local organization that has done some work in this area. Twin Cities LISC (Local Initiatives Support Coalition) has been working with Minneapolis and St. Paul neighborhoods to set goals and monitor change relative to development in the Green Line station areas. The initiative is called “The Big Picture Project.” Their 2016 progress report included a light analysis of rent changes in the corridor. It found a 44% rent increase in the Green Line corridor between 2011 and 2015 compared with a 22% rent increase across Minneapolis and St. Paul. The analysis was based on advertised rent listings, which limits the validity of the findings because new apartment developments are likely to be overrepresented in advertised rent listings. For our purposes, the rent levels in new apartment buildings are less interesting than how rents change for tenants of existing apartment buildings. Given the limitations of existing research, we decided it would be beneficial to look at the question ourselves. We were in a good position to assess the rent impacts of new transit service for two reasons: 1) the Green Line provides a great context for the analysis, since there is an abundance of rental properties in the neighborhoods between the two downtowns; and 2) CoStar data offers a record of rents in most of the large apartment buildings in those neighborhoods, going back to 2000. That allowed us to build a record of rent changes over time, before and after the start of the Green Line service. Using the CoStar platform, we selected all multifamily properties in the CoStar-defined multifamily submarkets between Highway 280 and St. Paul’s Capitol Area. The selected geography excluded multifamily properties in the two downtowns and the area around the University of Minnesota, which are presumably subject to a more complex market context. From that list, we chose developments built before 2000 that had not been the subject of a major renovation since 2000. We eliminated affordable housing developments, which would be restricted in their ability to raise rents. HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works48 The preceding steps yielded an inventory of 376 properties in housing submarkets along the transit corridor. Those properties were divided into 114 properties (station area properties) that are located within a half mile of a Green Line station, and 262 properties (control group) that are not. Figure 38 shows that average rents in the station area properties are lower than the average rents in the control group; and they remain lower over the period of study. Figure 40: Average Asking Rent Central Corridor (Green Line LRT) Submarkets $550 $600 $650 $700 $750 $800 $850 $900 Monthly Asking RentOutside of Station Areas In Station Areas Green Line Construction Source: Tangible Consulting Services; CoStar However, when one focuses not on the rent level, but on how rents changed over time, an interesting pattern emerges. The rent changes were almost identical between the two groups until around 2012. But starting in 2012, the average rent in the station area properties increased more than it did in for control group properties. The simplest explanation is that starting in 2012 the new transit service was cause for charging a rent premium in station area apartment buildings. Figure 41: Rent Growth from 2000 Central Corridor (Green Line LRT) Submarkets -4% 0% 4% 8% 12% 16% 20% 24%Percent Change Since 2000Outside of Station Areas In Station Areas Green Line Construction Source: Tangible Consulting Services; CoStar HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works 49 The analysis indicates that the rent premium associated with the new transit service is around $20 per month for properties located within a half mile of a station compared to those located between a half mile and one mile from a station. This suggests that rent increase due to proximity to LRT service are likely to be higher for properties closer to the stations. REAL ESTATE EXPERT INTERVIEWS In addition to analyzing quantitative housing data, interviews with residential real estate agents and multifamily developers were conducted to better understand the current and future housing needs along the Bottineau Corridor and within each station area. Residential Real Estate Agents Although residential real estate agents typically focus on the buying and selling of detached, single- family homes, which are not usually considered TOD, the prevalence of this housing type and the frequency of sales means that many agents often have a very good understanding of the ever changing housing needs of home buyers and homeowners in a given area. The following is a list real estate agents that primarily work along the Bottineau Corridor and were willing to share their insights and perspectives on the for-sale housing market: • Tom Slupske, RE/MAX Results • Emily Green, Sandy Green Realty • Becky O’Brien, RE/MAX Results • Joe Houghton, RE/MAX Results • Kerby Skurat, RE/MAX Results The overarching perspective of those interviewed was that the for-sale housing market in communities along the Bottineau Corridor is robust. There is a low inventory of properties being sold. Moreover, the housing in most of these communities is available at an affordable price by metropolitan standards. The interviewees offered the following additional considerations: • Sellers: In many cases older people are moving out of their homes. Many would like to remain in the community. This is especially true in Robbinsdale. People who delayed selling their homes due to the housing HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works50 crisis (2006-2010) are now finding it a good time to sell as well. Investors who purchased properties when prices were low are now selling them. • Buyers: Younger people began moving into Robbinsdale a few years ago. Now this trend is happening in Crystal and Brooklyn Park. Affordable homes make it easier for first time homebuyers to move into this area. Those who suffered foreclosures are now back on track. Their credit is repaired, and they are looking to buy. High rents are causing some renters to buy homes instead. Many of the buyers today in this area are first-time homebuyers. People who move into these communities tend to have connections to the area. They are from here and/or they have friends and families here. There are some buyers who are downsizing from other communities, looking for living space all on one floor. • Product Demand: There is demand for larger homes for families. Three- bedroom, two-bath homes are in great demand. Buyers are looking to put down roots here. “Move-in ready” homes are in demand. Two- and three-bedroom townhomes also sell quickly. People will pay a premium for new construction in this area. Many of the homes in these communities, particularly in North Minneapolis and Brooklyn Park are older, not updated, and in some cases, moldy/musty, and sloping. Some buyers are drawn further out to Maple Grove and Rogers in search of larger homes. Senior housing, particularly in Crystal, is lacking. The abundance of mid- century ramblers presents an opportunity. They are one-level, and with some redesign can be good places for seniors to live. More studio and other small apartments are not needed in these communities. New higher end apartment developments have not opened up single family housing for younger buyers as some expected. • Desired Amenities: These communities are desirable places to live. They are near downtown Minneapolis and the amenities, such as parks and the swimming pool in Crystal, draw families. Robbinsdale’s downtown is walkable, has good restaurants, and is very attractive to people. Lower housing prices are also a big draw. It’s an area where a buyer can find a home for less than $200,000. More mid- and higher-end restaurants would increase desirability. HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works 51 • Perceived LRT Impact: LRT may not change the housing market much, and it will take time for impacts to be felt. LRT will have a positive impact on the communities, as it will provide transportation options. It may invite new housing product that includes larger single-family homes. New construction, and housing product that is new and forward-thinking will attract people. Homes close to LRT stations will likely gain desirability, although those adjacent to stations may be less desirable, and will probably be rented. Housing market conditions and availability of financing will continue to be the big influencers. The number of people in these communities that commute via LRT will grow. Multifamily Housing Developers Although the market for owner-occupied single-family housing is a major component of the overall housing market, the Bottineau Corridor also consists of a significant amount of rental housing as well. Moreover, multifamily housing, whether owner- or renter-occupied, tends to also occur at densities much more supportive of TOD. Therefore, in order to gain greater insight into the current and future multifamily housing market, interviews were conducted with a number of multifamily developers active along the Bottineau Corridor. The following is a list multifamily developers interviewed as part of this study. The developer backgrounds include market rate housing, affordable housing, senior housing, and student housing. • Beard Group – Bill Beard • Inland Development Partners – Kent Carlson • Common Bond – Diana Dyste, Kayla Schuchman • Aeon – Blake Hopkins • Doran Companies – Kelly Doran • Ron Clark Construction & Design – Mike Waldo, Ron Clark HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works52 It should be noted that many of these developers also have experience developing commercial properties integrated with housing (i.e., mixed-use development). A companion study that researched the commercial market conditions and development potential in each station area also summarizes feedback from these experts. The following are key findings from the interviews specific to housing: • LRT will be a catalyst for housing development, though other factors, such as the availability of neighborhood amenities (e.g., schools, parks, grocery stores, trails, etc.) and the regional economy, will play an important role in determining when and where development will most likely occur. • Regardless of the LRT, there currently is and will be a high demand for middle-market multifamily development (i.e., properties with fewer on-site amenities and not as high of unit finishes as the luxury product being built in the downtowns or more affluent suburban locations). • Affordable housing is in high demand, and sites near stations can attract favorable tax credits necessary to support development. • Land values are already beginning to increase in expectation of future development, which will increase the financial need to develop multi-story, multifamily housing on the part of developers. • Neighborhood amenities (e.g., schools, parks, grocery stores, trails, etc.) are important and help attract and support new housing development. • Regardless of the type of development, interviewees stressed the need to design appropriate pedestrian and vehicular infrastructure that encourages the use of the LRT (i.e., reimagining streets, improved sidewalks, and safer street crossings). HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works 53 COMMUNITY STAKEHOLDER INTERVIEWS AND PRESENTATION Overview Quantitative data on the supply and demand of housing does not always provide a complete picture of the real-world issues that often result from a housing gap or housing need. Therefore, qualitative research was conducted with community members and housing advocates familiar with the Bottineau Corridor to better understand the types of housing issues and needs not apparent from the quantitative research. Outreach for the qualitative research consisted of engaging representatives of a number of community- based organizations active along the Bottineau Corridor with an interest in housing issues. The engagement was in two forms: 1) one-on-one interviews with organization leadership regarding housing issues and concerns; and 2) a presentation to members of the Blue Line Coalition and the Health Equity Engagement Cohort to solicit their input regarding preliminary findings from the quantitative portion of the study. The one-on-one interviews were conducted in November and December 2017. The purpose of these meetings was to understand housing barriers, needs, and opportunities within the planned METRO Blue Line Extension (Bottineau LRT) corridor. The persons interviewed and organizations they represented are listed below. • Nelima Sitati Munene, African, Career, Education and Resources Inc., November 27, 2017 • Sebastian Rivera, La Asamblea de Derechos Civiles, December 05, 2017 • Christine Hart, Community Action Partnership of Hennepin County, December 05, 2017 • Staci Howritz, City of Lakes Community Land Trust, December 06, 2017 • Martine Smaller, Northside Residents Redevelopment Council, December 07, 2017 • Pastor Kelly Chatman, Redeemer Lutheran Church/Redeemer Center for Life, December 07, 2017 HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works54 The presentation of preliminary findings occurred on December 13, 2017 at the Brookdale Library in Brooklyn Center. Below are key themes from the one-on-one interviews and comments received in response to the presentation of findings. Detailed notes from the interviews and specific comments from the presentation attendees are in the appendices. Key Themes The following is a summary of the key discussion themes from the stakeholder interviews. The opinions presented herein are of the persons interviewed and do not necessarily represent the opinions of the report authors or report sponsor (Hennepin County). Detailed meeting notes from the stakeholder interviews are included as an appendix. Rental Housing • Most stakeholders felt that there is an abundance of rental housing within the study area, and that it tends to be in large- and mid-size apartment complexes. However, some felt that there is not an adequate supply of quality [i.e., safe and desirable condition] affordable housing. • Most stakeholders agreed that much of the rental housing is considered affordable. However, several interviewees felt strongly that much of this housing is in older buildings that is often not adequately maintained, which often leads to health concerns. Examples of property issues cited by interviewees include poor heating and cooling, improperly functioning appliances, and leaky ceilings. • Many stakeholders noted that there are very few rental units in the market with three or more bedrooms, which are needed for families. This is especially the case in the Latino and Asian communities, who often have larger households. Some stakeholders noted that it is not uncommon for a family of six to live in a small two-bedroom apartment because of the lack of larger unit types. Owner-Occupied Housing • Stakeholders reported an abundance of single family homes within the study area, many of which are considered affordable. However, demand for homeownership is high and inventory is low, which tends to put upward pressure on price and can limit affordability. HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works 55 • It was noted that there are few townhomes or other multifamily ownership options within the corridor, which tend to be more affordable because they occupy less land. • Stakeholders who focus on North Minneapolis noted that there is a lot of quality housing (e.g., bricked homes with stucco) in North Minneapolis that should be preserved. In contrast, they noted an increase in the use of poor quality materials (e.g., low grade vinyl siding) among newly built housing. • Most stakeholders expressed the need for more opportunities for homeownership and homeownership assistance strategies. While some cities have first time homeowner resources, there is still an unmet need. • Some felt that there is a need for more transitional and smaller houses (1-bedroom and smaller footprint) with less maintenance for seniors to transition from their 3 to 4-bedroom homes. Affordability • Many stakeholders made the point that even with the prevalence of naturally occurring affordable housing in the corridor, many people are still spending over 50% of their income on rent alone and are therefore “housing cost burdened.” • Several stakeholders cited current market conditions as exacerbating affordability issues. For example, it was noted that low vacancy is a barrier to accessing quality affordable housing, and, for many households, this means that if they are unable to renew their lease or are evicted without cause they have no other housing option. Concerns about Discriminatory Practices • Several stakeholders reported that some landlords engage in discriminatory practices, especially during the application/screening process. Examples cited by those interviewed include refusing to accept Section 8 housing vouchers, charging higher application fees and rents to those who lack identification, such as social security cards or car insurance, and the use of credit checks, which penalize people who lack good credit or those trying to establish credit. HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works56 • Some stakeholders also cited the lack of [or perceived lack of] tenant protection policies as contributing to an environment in which tenants are fearful of reporting legitimate issues, such as plumbing or HVAC problems, for fear that they may be evicted. Exacerbating the situation, according to those interviewed, is when markets are extremely tight with few if any available units at other properties. Under these conditions, tenants are even more fearful of potential evictions because there are so few housing options. Concerns about Gentrification/Displacement • While the stakeholders interviewed were generally supportive of the proposed LRT project, gentrification is a major concern. It is important for the LRT to serve not only new residents, but also the people who currently live in the affected areas. For example, rent control policies were suggested as a possible strategy to limit displacement among existing residents who would be unable to afford any significant rent increases due to the LRT. Connectivity and Access to Goods and Services • Many stakeholders expressed a desire for improved multimodal facilities, such as sidewalks and bicycle facilities. They also mentioned access to transit, such as buses, is limited, and access to goods and services (e.g., groceries) within walking distance is a challenge, particularly for older adults and those who do not have access to a personal vehicle. Other • Some stakeholders noted the idea of “owning” and “investing” in something can be a difficult conversation to have with some religious and cultural communities. For example, Sharia finance rules won’t allow Muslim communities to pay interest, such as the interest in a conventional mortgage which is often needed to purchase a home. • Historically, there is a lack of attractive retail sites and a disparity in neighborhood investment, particularly in North Minneapolis. It would be beneficial to have more user-friendly community retail that has a stronger sense of community investment (i.e., Whole Foods, coffee shops, cooperatives, replace the smoke shop with other retails, etc.). HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works 57 GAPS ANALYSIS Findings from the previous sections were synthesized into a Gaps Analysis focused on each station area as well as corridor-wide concerns. Although the methodology of identifying and subsequently determining the scale of a “housing gap” starts with the process of comparing supply against demand to see where gaps may exist, it doesn’t stop there. Housing need, which the gaps analysis is fundamentally trying to address, is more nuanced than that. Therefore, quantitative data was augmented with qualitative data gleaned from interviews with housing advocates and experts familiar with the housing supply and needs of the local population. Another key purpose of the gaps analysis is not to simply address existing gaps, but to draw attention to how each station area could accommodate future housing demand and thus prevent the creation of new gaps or the exacerbation of existing gaps. Therefore, the gaps analysis also takes into consideration forecasted household growth in each of the Corridor communities. Because the METRO Blue Line Extension will have an obvious impact on mobility and accessibility, it is likely to profoundly influence housing need, particularly through the pricing of housing. Therefore, the gaps analysis also factors in potential impacts on housing costs as well. A simplified methodological approach to the gaps analysis is as follows: Figure 42: Methodological Steps of the Gaps Analysis STEP 1 Evaluate station area plans for housing development potential STEP 2 Quantify Supply of Housing STEP 3 Assess Socio- Economic Factors STEP 4 Augment with Insight from Housing Advocates/Experts When thinking about a gaps analysis it is important to be reflective of two considerations which sometimes support the same housing prescriptions but in some cases can be different or complementary. 1. Housing gaps. The lack of housing types in the existing housing stock, filling gaps in the array of existing housing types. 1. Household gaps. The unmet housing needs of current residents, allowing them new options that meet identified needs. HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works58 Corridor-Wide Housing Gaps Closing a housing gap observed within a station area may not always require a station-specific prescription. For example, this can be seen in station areas where there is very little diversity in the housing supply or very little housing altogether. However, due to the station area plan, which may be more focused on non-residential uses, or a lack of developable sites, it may make more sense to consider housing prescriptions that are distributed throughout the corridor instead within a given station area. To address such considerations, the following are corridor-wide housing observations and prescriptions: • Housing age. Housing age analysis suggests the need to build new multifamily housing in many portions of the corridor because the housing stock is aging with little replacement. Generally, this is true at every station area since there has been so little new multifamily housing constructed over the last 30 years throughout the corridor. However, multifamily development is particularly limited in the 93rd Avenue, 85th Avenue, and the Golden Valley Road station areas. There are also parts of the corridor where the initial era of housing development was many decades ago, and, thus, there is a strong need for newer multifamily housing that can complement an older apartment stock. This is particularly true of the Brooklyn Boulevard and 63rd Avenue station areas in Brooklyn Park where essentially all of the apartment stock was built before 1980 as well as the Minneapolis station areas, which has an even older multifamily stock. • Housing maintenance. Maintaining the quality, condition, and marketability of the existing housing stock reduces the pressure to build new housing needed to replace obsolete or uninhabitable housing. Moreover, community input suggests that there are significant management and maintenance issues with the existing rental housing. This is true of both multifamily and single family rental housing, and it suggests: »Continued attention to oversight through rental licensing and other approaches »Support for capital investment in the existing housing stock (e.g., new roofs, windows, HVAC systems, etc.) HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works 59 »Programs to help educate and support landlords in how to manage properties with tenants of diverse needs, such as aging residents, non-English speakers, families with young children, new arrivals unaccustomed to a cold climate, etc. »Programs to help educate and support landlords new to renting and unfamiliar with the rights afforded to both owners and renters, especially in terms of maintenance responsibilities • Housing affordability. This is an area where gaps in the housing stock and gaps in household needs suggest the need for different housing types—which could be thought of as complementary as opposed to contradictory. »New market rate or even upscale rental housing are in scarce supply in many of the station areas. High quality market-rate apartments and townhomes would fill gaps in the housing stock at every station. But it may be particularly needed as an action step that can improve market perceptions in the station areas that have the most dated existing apartment stock (noted above). »Affordable housing. The station areas are appropriate locations for affordable housing because they provide access without the need of a car to jobs in a large portion of the metro area. From a housing stock perspective, new affordable housing would add diversity in the available housing stock in the more affluent parts of the corridor such as at Oak Grove and Golden Valley Road station areas. From the standpoint of meeting the needs of existing households, new affordable housing can reduce cost burdens or offer an improvement in quality and property management for existing households. From this standpoint, new affordable housing may be particularly needed in lower income areas. The median household income is lowest (around $40,000 or lower) in the 63rd Avenue, Penn Avenue, and Van White station areas, followed by the Brooklyn Boulevard, Bass Lake Road, Robbinsdale, and Plymouth Ave station areas (around $50,000). It’s $70,000 or more in the other station areas. HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works60 • Workforce housing. Used in a nontechnical sense, housing at all stations along the corridor support workers who commute to downtown, the airport, Target headquarters, and other employment destinations served by LRT. There is a particular need for housing at the employment nodes of Oak Grove Parkway, 93rd Avenue, and 85th Avenue, and at the retail hubs at Bass Lake Road and Brooklyn Boulevard. Housing for workers in these locations can be both market rate and income restricted. • Household age. Demographic trends suggest that there will be an ongoing need for a range of senior housing options throughout the corridor. The one exception is the Robbinsdale station area, which accounts for roughly one-third of all the age-restricted housing within a mile of the corridor. In all the other station areas, senior housing would fill an existing gap and any growing gaps due to an aging population. In particular, there is a strong need for housing that provides assistance, such as assisted living and memory care services. Currently, less than one-quarter of the age-restricted units in the corridor have such types of assistance. For more independent seniors, the best locations will offer other amenities, such as close proximity to walking trails and shopping. Therefore, it may be particularly appropriate at 85th Avenue, Bass Lake Road, Golden Valley Road, or Van White Boulevard station areas (if developed as a mixed use node). • Unit type. A bedroom analysis combined with comments from community stakeholders revealed a gap between the number of rental units with three or more bedrooms and the number of households with children. Most larger rental properties are dominated by one- and two-bedroom units because the traditional target market for these properties when built were young singles living alone or with a roommate or older households that have downsized from a single-family home. Households with children unable to afford homeownership, therefore, have had very limited housing options. Every station area has this housing gap because it is a need that is pervasive throughout the corridor and the region. • Medium density structures. Duplexes, triplexes, and many types of townhome product are a good way to achieve TOD densities without significantly changing the character of a station area. Furthermore, these product types can often be delivered as a more affordable option to HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works 61 traditional single-family product because they use less land yet retain some of the attributes often desired in single-family homes, such as private- entry, space for a patio or garden, and larger unit sizes (i.e., three or more bedrooms). These types of units can also be a complement to larger mixed- use developments where distances beyond ¼ or ½-mile from the station may make them more feasible. This would be especially relevant in stations such as Oak Grove Parkway and Bass Lake Road. Station Area Housing Gaps Although corridor-wide housing gaps are important to understand how wide spread gaps may be and that responses to a gap may need to be thought of more holistically, one of the purposes of this study is to provide insight at the station area level to help inform the creation of zoning codes that will support TOD and remove barriers to closing any critical housing gaps. For each station area a gaps analysis was prepared in order to identify short-term (pre-LRT) and long- term (post-LRT) housing need. Each analysis includes the following components: • Map of existing general-occupancy (i.e., non-senior or age-restricted) multifamily properties with 10 or more units. • Map of existing senior or age-restricted multifamily properties. • Summary of demographic and housing statistics presented previously in the report. For comparison purposes, Hennepin County statistics are also included as a benchmark since it is a much larger unit of geography and would represent a regional norm or average for these type of data. • A basic description of the station area vision included as part of the station area plan. • Estimate of housing demand through 2040. This estimate is based on household growth forecasts prepared by the Metropolitan Council for each city along the Corridor. Based on the station area plan, the amount of existing developable land, opportunities for redevelopment (i.e., presence of underutilized, aging, or obsolete properties), and market dynamics, a proportion the city’s forecasted household growth was assigned to the station area and considered to be its future housing demand. HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works62 For example, in the Oak Grove Parkway station area, there is a significant amount of vacant land. Moreover, given the station area plan to create a new transit oriented village, it was assumed the station area could capture 20-25% of the City of Brooklyn Park’s forecasted household growth through 2040, which translates 1,500-2,000 housing units. • List of most appropriate new housing types that would best address current gaps and future demand. • Narrative that describes the housing gap situation in each station area. The narrative provides context and understanding of the factors contributing to a housing gap (if any) and possible prescriptions for how to address current and future needs taking into consideration the unique circumstances of each station area. HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works 63 Oak Grove Parkway 2903+002904+002905+002906+002907+002908+002909+002910+002911+002912+002913+002914+002915+002916+002917+002918+002919+002920+002921+002922+002923+002924+002925+002926+002927+002928+002929+002930+002931+002932+002933+002934+002935+002936+002937+002938+002939+002940+002941+002942+002943+002944+002945+002946+002947+002948+002949+002950+002951+002952+002953+002954+002955+002956+002957+002958+002959+002960+002961+002962+002963+002964+002965+002966+002967+002968+002969+002970+002971+002972+002973+002974+002975+002976+002977+002978+002979+002980+002981+002982+002983+002984+002985+002986+002987+002988+0099+061903+001904+001905+001906+001907+001908+001909+001910+001911+001912+001913+001914+001915+001916+001917+001918+001919+001920+001921+001922+001923+001924+001925+001926+001927+001928+001929+001930+001931+001932+001933+001934+001935+001936+001937+001938+001939+001940+001941+001942+001943+001944+001945+001946+001947+001948+001949+001950+001951+001952+001953+001954+001955+001956+001957+001958+001959+001960+001961+001962+001963+001964+001965+001966+001967+001968+001969+001970+001971+001972+001973+001974+001975+001976+001977+001978+001979+001980+001981+001982+001983+001984+001985+001986+001987+001988+00130+5093RD AVENUE STATIONOAK GROVE PARKWAY STATION!( !( 93 r d 93rd 610610 ZaneWest Broadway93rd169169169169West BroadwayWest BroadwayTar get ZaneDouglasDouglasWinnetkaF F 1-Mile k 169 k 610 General Occupancy Market Affordable Subsidized <5050-100 101-200 200+ Number of Units Source: MNGEO, Hennepin County, Perkins+Will, Tangible Consulting Services 2903+002904+002905+002906+002907+002908+002909+002910+002911+002912+002913+002914+002915+002916+002917+002918+002919+002920+002921+002922+002923+002924+002925+002926+002927+002928+002929+002930+002931+002932+002933+002934+00 2935+002936+00 2937+002938+002939+002940+002941+002942+002943+002944+002945+002946+002947+002948+002949+002950+002951+002952+002953+002954+002955+002956+002957+002958+002959+002960+002961+002962+002963+002964+002965+002966+002967+002968+002969+002970+002971+002972+002973+002974+002975+002976+002977+002978+002979+002980+002981+002982+002983+002984+002985+002986+002987+002988+0099+061903+001904+001905+001906+001907+001908+001909+001910+001911+001912+001913+001914+001915+001916+001917+001918+001919+001920+001921+001922+001923+001924+001925+001926+001927+001928+001929+001930+001931+001932+001933+001934+001935+001936+00 1937+001938+001939+001940+001941+001942+001943+001944+001945+001946+001947+001948+001949+001950+001951+001952+001953+001954+001955+001956+001957+001958+001959+001960+001961+001962+001963+001964+001965+001966+001967+001968+001969+001970+001971+001972+001973+001974+001975+001976+001977+001978+001979+001980+001981+001982+001983+001984+001985+001986+001987+001988+00130+5093RD AVENUE STATIONOAK GROVE PARKWAY STATION!( !( 9 3 r d 93rd 610610 ZaneWest Broadway93rd169169169169West BroadwayWest BroadwayTar get ZaneDouglasDouglasWinnetkaF F 1-Mile k 169 k 610 Senior/ Disabled Market Affordable Subsidized <5050-100 101-200 200+ Number of Units Source: MNGEO, Hennepin County, Perkins+Will, Tangible Consulting Services 1/2-Mile STATISTIC OAK GROVE PKWY HENNEPIN COUNTY Total Population (1/2-mi radius)1,2 291 1,197,776 Toal Households (1/2-mi radius)1,2 88 490,196 Median Age1,2 37.5 36.1 Population Age 18 and Younger1,2 23%25% Population Age 65 and Older1,2 13%12% Average Household Size1,2 2.7 2.4 Persons per Bedroom1,2 --0.92 Median Household Income1,2 $71,454 $65,834 Homeownership Rate1,2 90.9%49.0% Households with Children1,2 44.7%28.0% Single-Person Households1,2 21.1%33.0% Persons of Color1,2 31.5%26.0% Households that are Housing Cost Burdened1,6,7 10.4%36.2% Total Housing Units (1/2-mi radius)1,2 42 518,332 Units in Buildings with 5+ Units1,2 4.8%29.9% Units in Buildings with 2-4 Units1,2 0.0%5.8% Townhome Units1,2 45.2%8.7% Single-Family Units1,2 50.0%55.3% Median Year Built (Multifamily Units)3,6,7 2016 1973 Median Year Built (Single-Family Units)5,6,7 2004 1958 Median Home Sales Price4 $477,874 $264,000 Average Monthly Rent - 1BR Units3,6 $1,491 $1,105 Average Monthly Rent - 2BR Units3,6 $2,012 $1,427 Average Monthly Rent - 3BR+ Units3,6 $2,288 $1,819 1 US Census, American Community Survey 2011-2015 Five-Year Estimate 2 Esri 3 CoStar 4 Minneapolis Area Association of Realtors, Multiple Listing Service 5 Hennepin County Assessor 6 Tangible Consulting Services 7 Perkins+Will Station Area Plan • New village concept with areas for mixing of uses, including residential, retail, and office. Major growth district. Housing Demand through 2040 • 1,500-2,000 units (20-25% of projected Brooklyn Park household growth through 2040) New Housing Types Needed • Market rate rental apartments • Affordable rental apartments (<30% AMI; 31-50% AMI; 51%-80% AMI) • Affordable rental townhomes (<30% AMI; 31-50% AMI; 51%-80% AMI) • Senior housing (market rate and affordable) • Mixed-income housing (properties inclusive of both market rate and affordable units) • Multi-story condominiums (multiple price points) • Owner-occupied townhomes (multiple price points) 1/2-Mile Map 1: Oak Grove Parkway - Multifamily Properties Map 2: Oak Grove Parkway – Senior Properties HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works64 Housing Gaps Analysis Being mostly vacant, the Oak Grove Parkway station area currently does not have a housing gap in the way other fully developed station areas have housing gaps. However, this is the one station area that will be able to accommodate a significant amount of new housing along the Corridor. Therefore, a range of housing product types and price points should be supported through zoning and other policies. The timing of development will be highly dependent on the introduction of new infrastructure into the station area. Given the rapid absorption of the 610 West apartments, which are located east of the station area just beyond its ½-mile radius, the market for market rate, transit-oriented development is strong and would support more near-term development. With that being said, the amount of vacant, developable land is large enough that full build out the station area will take many years even when factoring in the operation of the LRT. In order to fully leverage the opportunity of building in essence a new neighborhood, densities should be highest nearest the station. However, further from the station, densities can drop down to much lower levels. A wide variety of housing types will allow for not only a range household types but also a variety of price points, which will be extremely important. As a growing area with the potential to attract residents drawn to nearby high paying jobs, some type of inclusionary policy guaranteeing a portion of all housing development be of a certain type and affordability would likely be feasible in this station area. HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works 65 93 rd Avenue 2864+002865+002866+002867+002868+002869+002870+002871+002872+002873+002874+002875+002876+002877+002878+002879+002880+002881+002882+002883+002884+002885+002886+002887+002888+002889+002890+002891+002892+002893+002894+002895+002896+002897+002898+002899+002900+002901+002902+002903+002904+002905+002906+002907+002908+002909+002910+002911+002912+002913+002914+002915+002916+002917+002918+002919+002920+002921+002922+002923+002924+002925+002926+002927+002928+002929+002930+002931+002932+002933+002934+002935+002936+002937+002938+002939+002940+002941+002942+002943+002944+002945+002946+002947+002948+002949+002950+002951+002952+002953+002954+002955+002956+002957+002958+002959+002960+002961+002962+002963+002964+002965+002966+002967+002968+002969+002970+002971+002972+002973+002974+002975+002976+002977+002978+002979+002980+002981+002982+002983+002984+002985+002986+002987+002988+0099+061864+001865+001866+001867+001868+001869+001870+001871+001872+001873+001874+001875+001876+001877+001878+001879+001880+001881+001882+001883+001884+001885+001886+001887+001888+001889+001890+001891+001892+001893+001894+001895+001896+001897+001898+001899+001900+001901+001902+001903+001904+001905+001906+001907+001908+001909+001910+001911+001912+001913+001914+001915+001916+001917+001918+001919+001920+001921+001922+001923+001924+001925+001926+001927+001928+001929+001930+001931+001932+001933+001934+001935+001936+001937+001938+001939+001940+001941+001942+001943+001944+001945+001946+001947+001948+001949+001950+001951+001952+001953+001954+001955+001956+001957+001958+001959+001960+001961+001962+001963+001964+001965+001966+001967+001968+001969+001970+001971+001972+001973+001974+001975+001976+001977+001978+001979+001980+001981+001982+001983+001984+001985+001986+001987+001988+00130+5085TH AVENUE STATION93RD AVENUE STATIONOAK GROVE PARKWAY STATION!( !( !(WestBroadway93 r d 93rd 85th Zane610610 Dougl asDougl as93rd169 169169169West BroadwayWest BroadwayZaneZaneWest BroadwayTar getWinnetka F F 1-Mile k 169 k k 610 General Occupancy Market Affordable Subsidized <5050-100 101-200 200+ Number of Units Source: MNGEO, Hennepin County, Perkins+Will, Tangible Consulting Services 2864+002865+002866+002867+002868+002869+002870+002871+002872+002873+002874+002875+002876+002877+002878+002879+002880+002881+002882+002883+002884+002885+002886+002887+002888+002889+002890+002891+002892+002893+002894+002895+002896+002897+002898+002899+002900+002901+002902+002903+002904+002905+002906+002907+002908+002909+002910+002911+002912+002913+002914+002915+002916+002917+002918+002919+002920+002921+002922+002923+002924+002925+002926+002927+002928+002929+002930+002931+002932+002933+002934+002935+002936+002937+002938+002939+002940+002941+002942+002943+002944+002945+002946+002947+002948+002949+002950+002951+002952+002953+002954+002955+002956+002957+002958+002959+002960+002961+002962+002963+002964+002965+002966+002967+002968+002969+002970+002971+002972+002973+002974+002975+002976+002977+002978+002979+002980+002981+002982+002983+002984+002985+002986+002987+002988+0099+061864+001865+001866+001867+001868+001869+001870+001871+001872+001873+001874+001875+001876+001877+001878+001879+001880+001881+001882+001883+001884+001885+001886+001887+001888+001889+001890+001891+001892+001893+001894+001895+001896+001897+001898+001899+001900+001901+001902+001903+001904+001905+001906+001907+001908+001909+001910+001911+001912+001913+001914+001915+001916+001917+001918+001919+001920+001921+001922+001923+001924+001925+001926+001927+001928+001929+001930+001931+001932+001933+001934+001935+001936+001937+001938+001939+001940+001941+001942+001943+001944+001945+001946+001947+001948+001949+001950+001951+001952+001953+001954+001955+001956+001957+001958+001959+001960+001961+001962+001963+001964+001965+001966+001967+001968+001969+001970+001971+001972+001973+001974+001975+001976+001977+001978+001979+001980+001981+001982+001983+001984+001985+001986+001987+001988+00130+5085TH AVENUE STATION93RD AVENUE STATIONOAK GROVE PARKWAY STATION!( !( !(WestBroadway93 r d 93rd 85th Zane610610 Dougl asDougl as93rd169 169169169West BroadwayWest BroadwayZaneZaneWest BroadwayTar getWinnetka F F 1-Mile k 169 k k 610 Senior/ Disabled Market Affordable Subsidized <5050-100 101-200 200+ Number of Units Source: MNGEO, Hennepin County, Perkins+Will, Tangible Consulting Services Station Area Plan • Support current trend of new employment/business growth with emphasis on stronger multimodal connections throughout station area. Minimal residential vision. Housing Demand through 2040 • 100-200 units (1-2% of projected Brooklyn Park household growth through 2040) New Housing Types Needed • Affordable rental apartments (<30% AMI; 31-50% AMI; 51%-80% AMI) • Affordable rental townhomes (<30% AMI; 31-50% AMI; 51%-80% AMI) • Senior housing (market rate and affordable) • Owner-occupied townhomes (middle market price points) 1/2-Mile1/2-Mile Map 4: 93rd Avenue – Multifamily Properties Map 3: 93rd Avenue – Senior Properties STATISTIC 93rd AVE HENNEPIN COUNTY Total Population (1/2-mi radius)1,2 1,000 1,197,776 Toal Households (1/2-mi radius)1,2 274 490,196 Median Age1,2 33.9 36.1 Population Age 18 and Younger1,2 30%25% Population Age 65 and Older1,2 9%12% Average Household Size1,2 3.2 2.4 Persons per Bedroom1,2 0.84 0.92 Median Household Income1,2 $88,134 $65,834 Homeownership Rate1,2 91.6%49.0% Households with Children1,2 54.9%28.0% Single-Person Households1,2 14.1%33.0% Persons of Color1,2 53.8%26.0% Households that are Housing Cost Burdened1,6,7 27.5%36.2% Total Housing Units (1/2-mi radius)1,2 265 518,332 Units in Buildings with 5+ Units1,2 2.3%29.9% Units in Buildings with 2-4 Units1,2 1.1%5.8% Townhome Units1,2 13.6%8.7% Single-Family Units1,2 82.6%55.3% Median Year Built (Multifamily Units)3,6,7 --1973 Median Year Built (Single-Family Units)5,6,7 1991 1958 Median Home Sales Price4 $264,000 $264,000 Average Monthly Rent - 1BR Units3,6 --$1,105 Average Monthly Rent - 2BR Units3,6 --$1,427 Average Monthly Rent - 3BR+ Units3,6 --$1,819 1 US Census, American Community Survey 2011-2015 Five-Year Estimate 2 Esri 3 CoStar 4 Minneapolis Area Association of Realtors, Multiple Listing Service 5 Hennepin County Assessor 6 Tangible Consulting Services 7 Perkins+Will HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works66 Housing Gaps Analysis The existing housing stock within the 93rd Avenue station area is newer and mostly consists of detached, single-family homes. The median home sales price is one of the highest along the Corridor, which suggests that most of the stock is not at risk for deferred maintenance. Therefore, there are minimal gaps that can be closed through modifying the existing housing supply. Adding new housing is the most likely path to addressing any housing gaps in the station area. However, near-term opportunities for new housing development are limited. The undeveloped portions of the station area are guided for industry and are currently being rapidly developed. Nevertheless, some non-residential properties that are relatively older will experience redevelopment pressure once the LRT is established. At locations closest to existing housing or adjacent to uses complementary with housing, there would be the opportunity to introduce new housing. In the interest of broadening the limited housing choices that currently exist, any new development should consider affordable rental housing in the form of apartments or townhomes, depending on the site. Introducing more affordable housing product would provide additional choice because the cost of the existing housing in the station area is at or above the regional median. Therefore, new housing affordable to lower-income households will be especially attractive given the strong concentration of employment in this station area. Senior housing will also be a likely need in the future as there currently are few senior housing options in the vicinity today6. As residents of the existing residential neighborhoods to the south and east continue to age, there will likely be a need for senior housing at some point in the future. 6 At the time this report was being prepared, the local media reported that a senior housing project was proposed approximately 1 mile east of the station. HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works 67 85 th Avenue 2804+002805+002806+002807+002808+002809+002810+002811+002812+002813+002814+002815+002816+002817+002818+002819+002820+002821+002822+002823+002824+002825+002826+002827+002828+002829+002830+002831+002832+002833+002834+002835+002836+002837+002838+002839+002840+002841+002842+002843+002844+002845+002846+002847+002848+002849+002850+002851+002852+002853+002854+002855+002856+002857+002858+002859+002860+002861+002862+002863+002864+002865+002866+002867+002868+002869+002870+002871+002872+002873+002874+002875+002876+002877+002878+002879+002880+002881+002882+002883+002884+002885+002886+002887+002888+002889+002890+002891+002892+002893+002894+002895+002896+002897+002898+002899+002900+002901+002902+002903+002904+002905+002906+002907+002908+002909+002910+002911+002912+002913+002914+002915+002916+002917+002918+002919+002920+002921+002922+002923+002924+002925+002926+002927+002928+001804+001805+001806+001807+001808+001809+001810+001811+001812+001813+001814+001815+001816+001817+001818+001819+001820+001821+001822+001823+001824+001825+001826+001827+001828+001829+001830+001831+001832+001833+001834+001835+001836+001837+001838+001839+001840+001841+001842+001843+001844+001845+001846+001847+001848+001849+001850+001851+001852+001853+001854+001855+001856+001857+001858+001859+001860+001861+001862+001863+001864+001865+001866+001867+001868+001869+001870+001871+001872+001873+001874+001875+001876+001877+001878+001879+001880+001881+001882+001883+001884+001885+001886+001887+001888+001889+001890+001891+001892+001893+001894+001895+001896+001897+001898+001899+001900+001901+001902+001903+001904+001905+001906+001907+001908+001909+001910+001911+001912+001913+001914+001915+001916+001917+001918+001919+001920+001921+001922+001923+001924+001925+001926+001927+001928+00BROOKLYN BOULEVARD STATION85TH AVENUE STATION93RD AVENUE STATION!( !( !( 93rd 9 3 r d West Broadway85th 85th Brooklyn BrooklynWest Broadway8 18 1 93rd 93 r d 85th 85th 85th 85th 81 Zane93rd 93rd 169169169West BroadwayZaneZaneF F 1-Mile k 169 k k General Occupancy Market Affordable Subsidized <5050-100 101-200 200+ Number of Units Source: MNGEO, Hennepin County, Perkins+Will, Tangible Consulting Services 2804+002805+002806+002807+002808+002809+002810+002811+002812+002813+002814+002815+002816+002817+002818+002819+002820+002821+002822+002823+002824+002825+002826+002827+002828+002829+002830+002831+002832+002833+002834+002835+002836+002837+002838+002839+002840+002841+002842+002843+002844+002845+002846+002847+002848+002849+002850+002851+002852+002853+002854+002855+002856+002857+002858+002859+002860+002861+002862+002863+002864+002865+002866+002867+002868+002869+002870+002871+002872+002873+002874+002875+002876+002877+002878+002879+002880+002881+002882+002883+002884+002885+002886+002887+002888+002889+002890+002891+002892+002893+002894+002895+002896+002897+002898+002899+002900+002901+002902+002903+002904+002905+002906+002907+002908+002909+002910+002911+002912+002913+002914+002915+002916+002917+002918+002919+002920+002921+002922+002923+002924+002925+002926+002927+002928+001804+001805+001806+001807+001808+001809+001810+001811+001812+001813+001814+001815+001816+001817+001818+001819+001820+001821+001822+001823+001824+001825+001826+001827+001828+001829+001830+001831+001832+001833+001834+001835+001836+001837+001838+001839+001840+001841+001842+001843+001844+001845+001846+001847+001848+001849+001850+001851+001852+001853+001854+001855+001856+001857+001858+001859+001860+001861+001862+001863+001864+001865+001866+001867+001868+001869+001870+001871+001872+001873+001874+001875+001876+001877+001878+001879+001880+001881+001882+001883+001884+001885+001886+001887+001888+001889+001890+001891+001892+001893+001894+001895+001896+001897+001898+001899+001900+001901+001902+001903+001904+001905+001906+001907+001908+001909+001910+001911+001912+001913+001914+001915+001916+001917+001918+001919+001920+001921+001922+001923+001924+001925+001926+001927+001928+00BROOKLYN BOULEVARD STATION85TH AVENUE STATION93RD AVENUE STATION!( !( !( 93rd 9 3 r d West Broadway85th85th Brooklyn BrooklynWest Broadway8 18 193rd 93rd 85th 85th 85th 85th 81Zane93rd 93rd 169169169West BroadwayZaneZaneF F Senior/ Disabled Market Affordable Subsidized <5050-100 101-200 200+ Number of Units 1-Mile k 169 k k Source: MNGEO, Hennepin County, Perkins+Will, Tangible Consulting Services Station Area Plan • Support growth and expansion of institutional uses. Select sites identified as opportunities to introduce new housing. Housing Demand through 2040 • 300-600 units (3-6% of projected Brooklyn Park household growth through 2040) Housing Types • Affordable rental apartments (<30% AMI; 31-50% AMI; 51%-80% AMI) • Affordable rental townhomes (<30% AMI; 31-50% AMI; 51%-80% AMI) • Mixed-income housing (properties inclusive of both market rate and affordable units) • Senior housing (affordable) 1/2-Mile1/2-Mile Map 6: 85th Avenue – Multifamily Properties Map 5: 85th Avenue – Senior Properties STATISTIC 85th AVE HENNEPIN COUNTY Total Population (1/2-mi radius)1,2 3,589 1,197,776 Toal Households (1/2-mi radius)1,2 1,299 490,196 Median Age1,2 35.7 36.1 Population Age 18 and Younger1,2 26%25% Population Age 65 and Older1,2 12%12% Average Household Size1,2 2.7 2.4 Persons per Bedroom1,2 0.84 0.92 Median Household Income1,2 $76,323 $65,834 Homeownership Rate1,2 85.2%49.0% Households with Children1,2 38.9%28.0% Single-Person Households1,2 27.3%33.0% Persons of Color1,2 51.0%26.0% Households that are Housing Cost Burdened1,6,7 30.3%36.2% Total Housing Units (1/2-mi radius)1,2 1,263 518,332 Units in Buildings with 5+ Units1,2 5.0%29.9% Units in Buildings with 2-4 Units1,2 4.7%5.8% Townhome Units1,2 34.5%8.7% Single-Family Units1,2 55.8%55.3% Median Year Built (Multifamily Units)3,6,7 1983 1973 Median Year Built (Single-Family Units)5,6,7 1978 1958 Median Home Sales Price4 $183,000 $264,000 Average Monthly Rent - 1BR Units3,6 $871 $1,105 Average Monthly Rent - 2BR Units3,6 $994 $1,427 Average Monthly Rent - 3BR+ Units3,6 $1,361 $1,819 1 US Census, American Community Survey 2011-2015 Five-Year Estimate 2 Esri 3 CoStar 4 Minneapolis Area Association of Realtors, Multiple Listing Service 5 Hennepin County Assessor 6 Tangible Consulting Services 7 Perkins+Will HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works68 Housing Gaps Analysis Homeownership is currently very high in the 85th Avenue station area. The median home sales price is below the County median, but this is likely due to a high percentage of owner-occupied townhomes, which tend to be smaller than detached, single-family homes and thus less expensive. There are two sites with strong development potential. One site is vacant and owned by North Hennepin Community College, which has identified the site as housing in their most recent campus plan. The other is an existing strip retail center that would front the station and is currently for –sale. The status of these prime sites increases the possibility of near-term housing development. With the North Hennepin Community College anchoring the station area, there is a clear need for rental housing that would accommodate some of their student population. Currently, there is very little rental housing in the station area. Any new rental housing targeted to students of the community college does not need to be designed for the traditional college student because community college students often work and have families. Therefore, the strongest need would be affordably-priced rental housing that could accommodate a family. The advantage of promoting a more standard housing design that does not specifically cater to a traditional student population is that it could meet the needs of non-students as well. Although townhomes are plentiful in the station area, rental townhomes are a good way to provide larger unit types to households that are unable to access homeownership. If such a development is professionally managed this would potentially mitigate some of the landlord issues that come with the renting of individually owned rental units. There is one senior housing development near the station area. Similar to the 93rd Avenue station, in all likelihood as the existing household base continues to age, providing housing that older adults can transition into can help them remain in the community and make housing available for new households that want to live in the station area. HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works 69 Brooklyn Boulevard 2746+002747+002748+002749+002750+002751+002752+002753+002754+002755+002756+002757+002758+002759+002760+002761+002762+002763+002764+002765+002766+002767+002768+002769+002770+002771+002772+002773+002774+002775+002776+002777+002778+002779+002780+002781+002782+002783+002784+002785+002786+00 2787+00 2788+00 2789+00 2790+00 2791+002792+00 2793+00 2794+00 2795+00 2796+002797+00 2798+002799+002800+002801+002802+002803+002804+002805+002806+002807+002808+002809+002810+002811+002812+002813+002814+002815+002816+002817+002818+002819+002820+002821+002822+002823+002824+002825+002826+002827+002828+002829+002830+002831+002832+002833+002834+002835+002836+002837+002838+002839+002840+002841+002842+002843+002844+002845+002846+002847+002848+002849+002850+002851+002852+002853+002854+002855+002856+002857+002858+002859+002860+002861+002862+002863+002864+002865+002866+002867+002868+002869+002870+002871+002872+002873+002874+002875+002876+003746+003747+003748+003749+003750+003751+003752+003753+003754+003755+003756+003757+003758+003759+003760+003761+003762+003763+003764+003765+003766+003767+003768+003769+003770+003771+003772+003773+003774+003775+003776+003777+003778+003779+003780+003781+003782+003783+003784+003785+001746+001747+001748+001749+001750+001751+001752+001753+001754+001755+001756+001757+001758+001759+001760+001761+001762+001763+001764+001765+001766+001767+001768+001769+001770+001771+001772+001773+001774+001775+001776+001777+001778+001779+001780+001781+001782+001783+001784+001785+001786+00 1787+00 1788+00 1789+00 1790+00 1791+00 1792+00 1793+00 1794+00 1795+00 1796+001797+00 1798+001799+001800+001801+001802+001803+001804+001805+001806+001807+001808+001809+001810+001811+001812+001813+001814+001815+001816+001817+001818+001819+001820+001821+001822+001823+001824+001825+001826+001827+001828+001829+001830+001831+001832+001833+001834+001835+001836+001837+001838+001839+001840+001841+001842+001843+001844+001845+001846+001847+001848+001849+001850+001851+001852+001853+001854+001855+001856+001857+001858+001859+001860+001861+001862+001863+001864+001865+001866+001867+001868+001869+001870+001871+001872+001873+001874+001875+001876+00BROOKLYN BOULEVARD STATION85TH AVENUE STATION!( !(West Broadway85th 85th ZaneBrooklyn BrooklynWest Broadway8181169Lakeland694694 85th 85th 85th 85th 8 1 Zane68th 8169th169West BroadwayZaneWe st BroadwayF F694 1-Mile k 169 k General Occupancy Market Affordable Subsidized <5050-100 101-200 200+ Number of Units Source: MNGEO, Hennepin County, Perkins+Will, Tangible Consulting Services 2746+002747+002748+002749+002750+002751+002752+002753+002754+002755+002756+002757+002758+002759+002760+002761+002762+002763+002764+002765+002766+002767+002768+002769+002770+002771+002772+002773+002774+002775+002776+002777+002778+002779+002780+002781+002782+002783+002784+002785+002786+00 2787+00 2788+00 2789+00 2790+00 2791+002792+00 2793+00 2794+00 2795+00 2796+002797+00 2798+002799+002800+002801+002802+002803+002804+002805+002806+002807+002808+002809+002810+002811+002812+002813+002814+002815+002816+002817+002818+002819+002820+002821+002822+002823+002824+002825+002826+002827+002828+002829+002830+002831+002832+002833+002834+002835+002836+002837+002838+002839+002840+002841+002842+002843+002844+002845+002846+002847+002848+002849+002850+002851+002852+002853+002854+002855+002856+002857+002858+002859+002860+002861+002862+002863+002864+002865+002866+002867+002868+002869+002870+002871+002872+002873+002874+002875+002876+003746+003747+003748+003749+003750+003751+003752+003753+003754+003755+003756+003757+003758+003759+003760+003761+003762+003763+003764+003765+003766+003767+003768+003769+003770+003771+003772+003773+003774+003775+003776+003777+003778+003779+003780+003781+003782+003783+003784+003785+001746+001747+001748+001749+001750+001751+001752+001753+001754+001755+001756+001757+001758+001759+001760+001761+001762+001763+001764+001765+001766+001767+001768+001769+001770+001771+001772+001773+001774+001775+001776+001777+001778+001779+001780+001781+001782+001783+001784+001785+001786+00 1787+00 1788+00 1789+00 1790+00 1791+00 1792+00 1793+00 1794+00 1795+00 1796+00 1797+00 1798+001799+001800+001801+001802+001803+001804+001805+001806+001807+001808+001809+001810+001811+001812+001813+001814+001815+001816+001817+001818+001819+001820+001821+001822+001823+001824+001825+001826+001827+001828+001829+001830+001831+001832+001833+001834+001835+001836+001837+001838+001839+001840+001841+001842+001843+001844+001845+001846+001847+001848+001849+001850+001851+001852+001853+001854+001855+001856+001857+001858+001859+001860+001861+001862+001863+001864+001865+001866+001867+001868+001869+001870+001871+001872+001873+001874+001875+001876+00BROOKLYN BOULEVARD STATION85TH AVENUE STATION!( !(West Broadway85th85th ZaneBrooklyn BrooklynWest Broadway8181169Lakeland694694 85th 85th 85th 85th 8 1 Zane68th 8169th169West BroadwayZaneWes t BroadwayF F694 1-Mile k 169 Senior/ Disabled Market Affordable Subsidized <5050-100 101-200 200+ Number of Units k Source: MNGEO, Hennepin County, Perkins+Will, Tangible Consulting Services Station Area Plan • Maintain commercial character with emphasis on stronger multimodal connections throughout station area. Minimal residential vision. Housing Demand through 2040 • 300-600 units (3-6% of projected Brooklyn Park household growth through 2040) New Housing Types Needed • Affordable rental apartments (<30% AMI; 31-50% AMI; 51%-80% AMI) • Senior housing (affordable) • Mixed-income housing (properties inclusive of both market rate and affordable units) • Affordable rental townhomes (<30% AMI; 31-50% AMI; 51%-80% AMI) • Owner-occupied townhomes (middle market price points) 1/2-Mile1/2-Mile Map 7: Brooklyn Boulevard – Multifamily Properties Map 8: Brooklyn Boulevard – Senior Properties STATISTIC BROOKLYN BLVD HENNEPIN COUNTY Total Population (1/2-mi radius)1,2 2,231 1,197,776 Toal Households (1/2-mi radius)1,2 746 490,196 Median Age1,2 31.5 36.1 Population Age 18 and Younger1,2 30%25% Population Age 65 and Older1,2 10%12% Average Household Size1,2 2.9 2.4 Persons per Bedroom1,2 0.99 0.92 Median Household Income1,2 $50,160 $65,834 Homeownership Rate1,2 62.7%49.0% Households with Children1,2 44.6%28.0% Single-Person Households1,2 17.4%33.0% Persons of Color1,2 63.5%26.0% Households that are Housing Cost Burdened1,6,7 54.3%36.2% Total Housing Units (1/2-mi radius)1,2 728 518,332 Units in Buildings with 5+ Units1,2 22.5%29.9% Units in Buildings with 2-4 Units1,2 5.5%5.8% Townhome Units1,2 9.6%8.7% Single-Family Units1,2 62.4%55.3% Median Year Built (Multifamily Units)3,6,7 1970 1973 Median Year Built (Single-Family Units)5,6,7 1970 1958 Median Home Sales Price4 $206,500 $264,000 Average Monthly Rent - 1BR Units3,6 $833 $1,105 Average Monthly Rent - 2BR Units3,6 $1,050 $1,427 Average Monthly Rent - 3BR+ Units3,6 --$1,819 1 US Census, American Community Survey 2011-2015 Five-Year Estimate 2 Esri 3 CoStar 4 Minneapolis Area Association of Realtors, Multiple Listing Service 5 Hennepin County Assessor 6 Tangible Consulting Services 7 Perkins+Will HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works70 Housing Gaps Analysis The Brooklyn Boulevard station area is dominated by auto-oriented, big-box retail. There has been substantial reinvestment to many of the retail properties in recent years. Therefore, redevelopment opportunities will be limited to a small number of older retail centers or freestanding retail buildings. Due to the lack of immediate opportunities and the challenge of introducing new multi-modal infrastructure supportive of TOD, the Brooklyn Boulevard station area is envisioned to remain a commercial district with its current character in the near-term. However, with the advent of LRT, any future redevelopment of a major commercial parcel could easily accommodate some type of multi-story housing. In such cases, a mixed-income rental project that would include both market rate and income-restricted units would help close the gap on the need for affordably-priced housing. Despite the lack of immediate development opportunities adjacent or near the station, there are potential sites approximately a ½-mile north and south of the station that would have more immediate, near-term potential. Given their distance from the station itself, these sites may likely be able to support lower-density development that is still transit supportive, such as townhomes, both affordable rentals and middle market owner-occupied product, because the land would less expensive than land adjacent or closer to the station. Most of the existing rental product in the vicinity of the station area is beyond the ½-mile radius. Therefore, it will not be as subject to rent inflation due to the LRT as other station areas. Nevertheless, renters in the Brooklyn Boulevard station area are already extremely cost burdened. Therefore, any measures to reduce this burden, such preserving affordability of units, would greatly assist the local population. The Brooklyn Boulevard station area is also an area mentioned by representatives of several community-based organizations and housing advocates as having a concentration of rental housing that is in poor condition or in need of updating. Although such units may meet the City’s maintenance codes, the livability issues of certain properties remains a concern. Therefore, additional policies that would address apartment conditions and their enforcement should be evaluated. Also, the construction of new high-quality affordable housing can not only increase the number of desirable housing units but can also serve to raise the market standard for many NOAH properties, which often results in improved maintenance and upkeep by landlords of existing properties. The median age of single-family homes in the station area is nearing 50 years. This is the point in the age of house in which routine maintenance of important systems (e.g., roof, HVAC, plumbing, windows, etc.) is critical or else a house will fall into serious disrepair quickly. Well-maintained older homes are often an important source of affordable housing and are an entry point into homeownership for many younger households. Therefore, home improvement programs and homeownership assistance are strategies to help maintain the owner-occupied housing stock. Although the population in the Brooklyn Boulevard station area tends to skew younger, the needs of the existing senior population are not being met. Many of the existing rental apartments do not have design features that assist with aging. For example, many buildings do not have elevators and units on upper floors must be accessed by walking up and down stairs. New senior housing with universal design features would address this gap. HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works 71 63rd Avenue 3554+003555+003556+003557+003558+003559+003560+003561+003562+003563+003564+003565+003566+003567+003568+003569+003570+003571+003572+003573+003574+003575+003576+003577+003578+003579+003580+003581+003582+003583+003584+003585+003586+003587+003588+003589+003590+003591+003592+003593+003594+003595+003596+003597+003598+003599+003600+003601+003602+003603+003700+001554+001555+001556+001557+001558+001559+001560+001561+001562+001563+001564+001565+001566+001567+001568+001569+001570+001571+001572+001573+001574+001575+001576+001577+001578+001579+001580+001581+001582+001583+001584+001585+001586+001587+001588+001589+001590+001591+001592+001593+001594+001595+001596+001597+001598+001599+001600+001601+001602+001603+001700+002554+002555+002556+002557+002558+002559+002560+002561+002562+002563+002564+002565+002566+002567+002568+002569+002570+002571+002572+002573+002574+002575+002576+002577+002578+002579+002580+002581+002582+002583+002584+002585+002586+002587+002588+002589+002590+002591+002592+002593+002594+002595+002596+002597+002598+002599+002600+002601+002602+002603+002700+002700+002701+002702+002703+002704+002705+002706+002707+002708+002709+002710+002711+002712+002713+002714+002715+002716+002717+002718+002719+002720+002721+002722+002723+002724+002725+002726+002727+002728+002729+002730+002731+002732+002733+002734+002735+002736+002737+002738+002739+002740+002741+002742+002743+002744+002745+002746+002747+002748+002749+002750+002751+002752+002753+002754+002755+002756+002757+002758+002759+002760+002761+002762+002763+002764+002765+002766+002767+002768+002769+002770+002771+002772+002773+002774+002775+002776+002777+002778+002779+002780+002781+002782+002783+002784+002785+002786+002787+00 3700+003701+003702+003703+003704+003705+003706+003707+003708+003709+003710+003711+003712+003713+003714+003715+003716+003717+003718+003719+003720+003721+003722+003723+003724+003725+003726+003727+003728+003729+003730+003731+003732+003733+003734+003735+003736+003737+003738+003739+003740+003741+003742+003743+003744+003745+003746+003747+003748+003749+003750+003751+003752+003753+003754+003755+003756+003757+003758+003759+003760+003761+003762+003763+003764+003765+003766+003767+003768+003769+003770+003771+003772+003773+003774+003775+003776+003777+003778+003779+003780+003781+003782+003783+003784+003785+001700+001701+001702+001703+001704+001705+001706+001707+001708+001709+001710+001711+001712+001713+001714+001715+001716+001717+001718+001719+001720+001721+001722+001723+001724+001725+001726+001727+001728+001729+001730+001731+001732+001733+001734+001735+001736+001737+001738+001739+001740+001741+001742+001743+001744+001745+001746+001747+001748+001749+001750+001751+001752+001753+001754+001755+001756+001757+001758+001759+001760+001761+001762+001763+001764+001765+001766+001767+001768+001769+001770+001771+001772+001773+001774+001775+001776+001777+001778+001779+001780+001781+001782+001783+001784+001785+001786+001787+00 BASS LAKE ROAD STATION63RD AVENUE STATION!( !( 56thWestB r o a d wa y 56thWe s t B r o a d w a yLakeland81Bass Lake 694 694 69th 8156thBass Lake BassLake 68th Bass Lake 56th BassLake 8156th WestBr oadway94 94Wes t BroadwayF F 694 1-Mile k k General Occupancy Market Affordable Subsidized <5050-100 101-200 200+ Number of Units Source: MNGEO, Hennepin County, Perkins+Will, Tangible Consulting Services 3554+003555+003556+003557+003558+003559+003560+003561+003562+003563+003564+003565+003566+003567+003568+003569+003570+003571+003572+003573+003574+003575+003576+003577+003578+003579+003580+003581+003582+003583+003584+003585+003586+003587+003588+003589+003590+003591+003592+003593+003594+003595+003596+003597+003598+003599+003600+003601+003602+003603+003700+001554+001555+001556+001557+001558+001559+001560+001561+001562+001563+001564+001565+001566+001567+001568+001569+001570+001571+001572+001573+001574+001575+001576+001577+001578+001579+001580+001581+001582+001583+001584+001585+001586+001587+001588+001589+001590+001591+001592+001593+001594+001595+001596+001597+001598+001599+001600+001601+001602+001603+001700+002554+002555+002556+002557+002558+002559+002560+002561+002562+002563+002564+002565+002566+002567+002568+002569+002570+002571+002572+002573+002574+002575+002576+002577+002578+002579+002580+002581+002582+002583+002584+002585+002586+002587+002588+002589+002590+002591+002592+002593+002594+002595+002596+002597+002598+002599+002600+002601+002602+002603+002700+002700+002701+002702+002703+002704+002705+002706+002707+002708+002709+002710+002711+002712+002713+002714+002715+002716+002717+002718+002719+002720+002721+002722+002723+002724+002725+002726+002727+002728+002729+002730+002731+002732+002733+002734+002735+002736+002737+002738+002739+002740+002741+002742+002743+002744+002745+002746+002747+002748+002749+002750+002751+002752+002753+002754+002755+002756+002757+002758+002759+002760+002761+002762+002763+002764+002765+002766+002767+002768+002769+002770+002771+002772+002773+002774+002775+002776+002777+002778+002779+002780+002781+002782+002783+002784+002785+002786+002787+003700+003701+003702+003703+003704+003705+003706+003707+003708+003709+003710+003711+003712+003713+003714+003715+003716+003717+003718+003719+003720+003721+003722+003723+003724+003725+003726+003727+003728+003729+003730+003731+003732+003733+003734+003735+003736+003737+003738+003739+003740+003741+003742+003743+003744+003745+003746+003747+003748+003749+003750+003751+003752+003753+003754+003755+003756+003757+003758+003759+003760+003761+003762+003763+003764+003765+003766+003767+003768+003769+003770+003771+003772+003773+003774+003775+003776+003777+003778+003779+003780+003781+003782+003783+003784+003785+001700+001701+001702+001703+001704+001705+001706+001707+001708+001709+001710+001711+001712+001713+001714+001715+001716+001717+001718+001719+001720+001721+001722+001723+001724+001725+001726+001727+001728+001729+001730+001731+001732+001733+001734+001735+001736+001737+001738+001739+001740+001741+001742+001743+001744+001745+001746+001747+001748+001749+001750+001751+001752+001753+001754+001755+001756+001757+001758+001759+001760+001761+001762+001763+001764+001765+001766+001767+001768+001769+001770+001771+001772+001773+001774+001775+001776+001777+001778+001779+001780+001781+001782+001783+001784+001785+001786+001787+00BASS LAKE ROAD STATION63RD AVENUE STATION!( !( 56thWestBr o a d wa y 56thWe s t B r o a d w a yLakeland81Bass Lake 694 694 69th 8156thBass Lake BassLake 68th Bass Lake 56th BassLake 8156th WestBr oadway94 94Wes t BroadwayF F 694 1-Mile k k Senior/ Disabled Market Affordable Subsidized <5050-100 101-200 200+ Number of Units Source: MNGEO, Hennepin County, Perkins+Will, Tangible Consulting Services Station Area Plan • Allow residential uses to transition to TOD in select areas. Housing Demand through 2040 • 300-600 units (3-6% of projected Brooklyn Park household growth through 2040) New Housing Types Needed • Affordable rental apartments (<30% AMI; 31-50% AMI; 51%-80% AMI) • Mixed-income housing (properties inclusive of both market rate and affordable units) • Owner-occupied townhomes (middle market price points) • Affordable rental townhomes (<30% AMI; 31-50% AMI; 51%-80% AMI) 1/2-Mile1/2-Mile Map 9: 63rd Avenue – Multifamily Properties Map 10: 63rd Avenue – Senior Properties STATISTIC 63rd AVE HENNEPIN COUNTY Total Population (1/2-mi radius)1,2 4,649 1,197,776 Toal Households (1/2-mi radius)1,2 1,848 490,196 Median Age1,2 32 36.1 Population Age 18 and Younger1,2 28%25% Population Age 65 and Older1,2 13%12% Average Household Size1,2 2.5 2.4 Persons per Bedroom1,2 1.20 0.92 Median Household Income1,2 $41,101 $65,834 Homeownership Rate1,2 32.1%49.0% Households with Children1,2 40.0%28.0% Single-Person Households1,2 27.2%33.0% Persons of Color1,2 59.3%26.0% Households that are Housing Cost Burdened1,6,7 52.4%36.2% Total Housing Units (1/2-mi radius)1,2 2,058 518,332 Units in Buildings with 5+ Units1,2 63.9%29.9% Units in Buildings with 2-4 Units1,2 1.0%5.8% Townhome Units1,2 4.4%8.7% Single-Family Units1,2 30.8%55.3% Median Year Built (Multifamily Units)3,6,7 1971 1973 Median Year Built (Single-Family Units)5,6,7 1955 1958 Median Home Sales Price4 $178,800 $264,000 Average Monthly Rent - 1BR Units3,6 $851 $1,105 Average Monthly Rent - 2BR Units3,6 $986 $1,427 Average Monthly Rent - 3BR+ Units3,6 $1,397 $1,819 1 US Census, American Community Survey 2011-2015 Five-Year Estimate 2 Esri 3 CoStar 4 Minneapolis Area Association of Realtors, Multiple Listing Service 5 Hennepin County Assessor 6 Tangible Consulting Services 7 Perkins+Will HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works72 Housing Gaps Analysis The 63rd Avenue station area mostly consists of residential uses with a mix of rental apartments, single- family homes, and senior housing. With the exception of one identified site, most of the station area is expected to take many years to transition from its current low-density character to a higher-density, TOD character. Therefore, the opportunities to address any existing housing gaps have more to with physical preservation and/or enhancement of existing properties than with new construction. The 63rd Avenue station has one of the highest concentrations of rental housing along the Corridor. Most of it was built between 40 and 60 years ago and, if not suffering from deferred maintenance, is at risk to do so. The vast majority of the rental housing is market rate, but well below the County average and thus would be considered naturally occurring affordable housing (NOAH). Given this condition, the station area is at risk of losing substantial amounts of affordable housing due to: 1) future redevelopment of properties in poor condition; or 2) rising rents caused by market demand or the impact of the LRT. Therefore, physical preservation strategies should be considered to help maintain the existing rental stock, and financial preservation programs should be considered to help maintain affordability of the existing rental stock. Where newer housing could be developed in coming years, higher-quality product that would be available to households at a mix of income levels would help close the gap on the need for better conditioned homes. Allowing increased density at sites closest to the station is one possible strategy that could help with introducing more affordably-priced, higher quality units. In areas further from the station, townhome product may be appropriate, both owned and rented. Rental townhomes would help with the lack of rented three-bedroom units in the station area. Townhomes would also help provide a transition between areas of single-family homes and higher- density sites closer to the station. Although the 63rd Avenue station already has a fair amount of senior housing, single-level townhomes would meet the needs of many seniors who are still independent, but want to remain in the community. One possible housing strategy that would be appropriate in this station area would be to allow in-fill development on larger lots with existing homes. This would increase density of the station area without significantly changing the character of the area as well. In-fill development could happen on a fine grain level. Therefore, market forces could dictate a large portion of this type of development. However, because of the small-scale of such developments, they could also be attractive to wide range of programs that fund affordable housing development. HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works 73 Bass Lake Road 1421+001422+001423+001424+00 1425+001426+001427+001428+001429+001430+00 1431+001432+001433+001434+001435+001500+002421+002422+002423+002424+002425+002426+002427+002428+002429+002430+002431+002432+002433+00 2434+002435+002500+003421+003422+003423+003424+003425+003426+003427+003428+003429+003430+003431+003432+003433+00 3434+003435+003436+003500+003500+003501+003502+003503+003504+003505+003506+003507+003508+00 3509+003510+003511+003512+00 3513+003514+003515+003516+003517+003518+003519+003520+00 3521+003522+00 3523+003524+003525+003526+003527+003528+003529+003530+00 3531+003532+003533+003534+003535+003536+003537+003538+00 3539+003540+00 3541+003542+003543+003544+003545+003546+003547+003548+00 3549+003550+00 3551+003552+003553+003554+003555+003556+00 3557+003558+00 3559+003560+003561+003562+003563+003564+003565+003566+00 3567+003568+00 3569+003570+003571+003572+003573+003574+003575+003576+00 3577+003578+003579+003580+003581+003582+003583+003584+00 3585+003586+00 3587+003588+003589+003590+003591+003592+003593+003594+00 3595+003596+003597+003598+003599+003600+003601+003602+003603+003700+001500+001501+001502+001503+001504+001505+00 1506+001507+001508+001509+001510+001511+001512+001513+001514+001515+001516+001517+001518+001519+001520+001521+001522+001523+001524+001525+001526+001527+001528+001529+001530+001531+001532+001533+001534+001535+001536+001537+001538+001539+001540+001541+001542+001543+001544+001545+001546+001547+001548+001549+001550+001551+001552+001553+001554+001555+001556+001557+001558+001559+001560+001561+001562+001563+001564+001565+001566+001567+001568+001569+001570+001571+001572+001573+001574+001575+001576+001577+001578+001579+001580+001581+001582+001583+001584+001585+001586+001587+001588+001589+001590+001591+001592+001593+001594+001595+001596+001597+001598+001599+001600+001601+001602+001603+001700+002500+002501+002502+002503+00 2504+002505+002506+002507+002508+002509+002510+002511+002512+002513+002514+002515+002516+002517+002518+002519+002520+002521+002522+002523+002524+002525+002526+002527+002528+002529+002530+002531+002532+002533+002534+002535+002536+002537+002538+002539+002540+002541+002542+002543+002544+002545+002546+002547+002548+002549+002550+002551+002552+002553+002554+002555+002556+002557+002558+002559+002560+002561+002562+002563+002564+002565+002566+002567+002568+002569+002570+002571+002572+002573+002574+002575+002576+002577+002578+002579+002580+002581+002582+002583+002584+002585+002586+002587+002588+002589+002590+002591+002592+002593+002594+002595+002596+002597+002598+002599+002600+002601+002602+002603+002700+002700+002701+002702+00 2703+002704+00 2705+002706+002707+002708+002709+002710+002711+002712+002713+002714+002715+002716+002717+002718+002719+002720+003700+003701+003702+003703+003704+003705+003706+00 3707+003708+003709+003710+003711+003712+003713+003714+00 3715+003716+00 3717+003718+003719+003720+001700+001701+001702+001703+001704+001705+001706+001707+001708+001709+001710+001711+001712+001713+001714+001715+001716+001717+001718+001719+001720+00BASS LAKE ROAD STATION63RD AVENUE STATION !( !( 8 1 56th 8 1 WinnetkaWe st B r o a d w a y 56th W e st B ro a d w a y Bass Lake Bass Lake BassLake 56th Bass Lake 56th56th 1 00 58th Orchard1 0 0Douglas F F 1-Mile k 100 General Occupancy Market Affordable Subsidized <5050-100 101-200 200+ Number of Units Source: MNGEO, Hennepin County, Perkins+Will, Tangible Consulting Services 1421+001422+001423+001424+001425+001426+001427+001428+001429+001430+00 1431+001432+001433+001434+001435+001500+002421+002422+002423+002424+002425+002426+002427+002428+002429+002430+002431+002432+002433+002434+002435+002500+003421+003422+003423+003424+003425+003426+00 3427+003428+003429+003430+003431+003432+003433+003434+003435+003436+003500+003500+00 3501+003502+003503+003504+003505+003506+003507+003508+003509+003510+003511+003512+003513+003514+003515+003516+003517+00 3518+003519+003520+003521+003522+003523+003524+003525+003526+003527+003528+003529+003530+003531+003532+003533+003534+003535+003536+003537+003538+003539+003540+003541+003542+003543+003544+003545+003546+003547+003548+00 3549+003550+003551+003552+003553+003554+003555+003556+003557+003558+003559+003560+003561+00 3562+003563+003564+003565+003566+003567+003568+00 3569+003570+003571+003572+003573+003574+003575+003576+003577+003578+003579+00 3580+003581+003582+003583+003584+003585+003586+003587+003588+003589+003590+003591+003592+00 3593+003594+003595+003596+003597+003598+003599+00 3600+003601+003602+003603+003700+00 1500+001501+001502+001503+001504+00 1505+001506+001507+001508+001509+001510+001511+001512+001513+001514+00 1515+001516+001517+001518+001519+001520+001521+00 1522+001523+001524+001525+001526+001527+001528+001529+001530+001531+001532+001533+001534+00 1535+001536+001537+001538+001539+001540+001541+001542+001543+001544+001545+00 1546+001547+001548+001549+001550+001551+001552+00 1553+001554+001555+001556+001557+001558+001559+001560+001561+001562+001563+001564+001565+001566+00 1567+001568+001569+001570+001571+001572+001573+00 1574+001575+001576+001577+001578+001579+001580+001581+001582+001583+001584+00 1585+001586+001587+001588+001589+001590+001591+001592+001593+001594+001595+001596+001597+00 1598+001599+001600+001601+001602+001603+001700+002500+002501+002502+002503+002504+002505+002506+002507+00 2508+002509+002510+002511+002512+002513+002514+002515+00 2516+002517+002518+002519+002520+002521+002522+00 2523+002524+002525+002526+002527+002528+002529+002530+002531+002532+002533+00 2534+002535+002536+002537+002538+002539+002540+002541+002542+002543+002544+002545+002546+00 2547+002548+002549+002550+002551+002552+002553+002554+00 2555+002556+002557+002558+002559+002560+002561+00 2562+002563+002564+002565+002566+002567+002568+002569+002570+002571+002572+00 2573+002574+00 2575+002576+002577+002578+002579+002580+002581+002582+002583+002584+002585+00 2586+002587+002588+002589+002590+002591+002592+00 2593+002594+002595+002596+002597+002598+00 2599+002600+002601+002602+002603+002700+002700+002701+002702+002703+002704+002705+002706+002707+002708+002709+002710+002711+002712+002713+002714+002715+002716+002717+002718+002719+002720+003700+003701+003702+003703+003704+003705+003706+003707+003708+003709+003710+003711+00 3712+003713+003714+003715+003716+003717+003718+003719+003720+00 1700+001701+001702+001703+001704+001705+001706+001707+001708+001709+001710+001711+001712+001713+001714+001715+001716+001717+001718+001719+001720+00BASS LAKE ROAD STATION63RD AVENUE STATION !( !( 8 1 56th 8 1 WinnetkaWe st B r o a d w a y 56th W est B ro a d w a y Bass Lake Bass Lake BassLake 56th Bass Lake 56th56th 1 0 058th Orchard1 0 0Douglas F F 1-Mile k 100 Senior/ Disabled Market Affordable Subsidized <5050-100 101-200 200+ Number of Units Source: MNGEO, Hennepin County, Perkins+Will, Tangible Consulting Services Station Area Plan • Establish Becker Park as a town square surrounded by TOD; strengthen connections between station and Crystal Shopping Center Housing Demand through 2040 • 400-600 units (80-100% of projected Crystal household growth through 2040) New Housing Types Needed • Mixed-income housing (properties inclusive of both market rate and affordable units) • Affordable rental apartments (<30% AMI; 31-50% AMI; 51%-80% AMI) • Affordable rental townhomes (<30% AMI; 31-50% AMI; 51%-80% AMI) • Senior housing (market rate and affordable) • Multi-story condominiums and cooperatives (multiple price points) 1/2-Mile1/2-Mile Map 11: Bass Lake Road – Multifamily Properties Map 12: Bass Lake Road –Senior Properties STATISTIC BASS LAKE RD HENNEPIN COUNTY Total Population (1/2-mi radius)1,2 2,364 1,197,776 Toal Households (1/2-mi radius)1,2 948 490,196 Median Age1,2 38.2 36.1 Population Age 18 and Younger1,2 22%25% Population Age 65 and Older1,2 13%12% Average Household Size1,2 2.3 2.4 Persons per Bedroom1,2 1.21 0.92 Median Household Income1,2 $51,914 $65,834 Homeownership Rate1,2 57.2%49.0% Households with Children1,2 28.6%28.0% Single-Person Households1,2 38.8%33.0% Persons of Color1,2 39.1%26.0% Households that are Housing Cost Burdened1,6,7 49.3%36.2% Total Housing Units (1/2-mi radius)1,2 951 518,332 Units in Buildings with 5+ Units1,2 39.9%29.9% Units in Buildings with 2-4 Units1,2 4.2%5.8% Townhome Units1,2 0.7%8.7% Single-Family Units1,2 55.1%55.3% Median Year Built (Multifamily Units)3,6,7 1983 1973 Median Year Built (Single-Family Units)5,6,7 1949 1958 Median Home Sales Price4 $180,500 $264,000 Average Monthly Rent - 1BR Units3,6 $700 $1,105 Average Monthly Rent - 2BR Units3,6 $811 $1,427 Average Monthly Rent - 3BR+ Units3,6 --$1,819 1 US Census, American Community Survey 2011-2015 Five-Year Estimate 2 Esri 3 CoStar 4 Minneapolis Area Association of Realtors, Multiple Listing Service 5 Hennepin County Assessor 6 Tangible Consulting Services 7 Perkins+Will HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works74 Housing Gaps Analysis A great deal of new investment beyond the LRT is planned for the Bass Lake Road station area; Becker Park will be reconstructed and Bass Lake Road will receive a new streetscape. These investments have the potential to significantly change the perception of the station area. Currently, many of the households living in the station area pay an exorbitant share of their income for housing. If these investments do change the perception of the station area, existing residents that are cost burdened are at an even higher risk of being displaced because of potential rising housing costs. Therefore, policies should be considered that would help existing residents remain in the community once the LRT is operational. Such approaches can include preserving the condition and affordability of properties that are older yet well-maintained, mixing market rate and income-restricted units in any new development, and encouraging a wide range in product types. Also, the station area has a very high rate of persons per bedroom, which suggest a housing market that is out of equilibrium, both in terms of housing cost burden and availability of larger rental unit styles (e.g., 3+ bedroom units), and therefore is not meeting the needs of the local population. With several potential redevelopment areas within a few blocks of the station, the Bass Lake Road station area could accommodate most of Crystal’s projected household growth through 2040. In order to truly leverage all this investment and accommodate the Met Council’s forecasted household growth, this would require primarily multifamily housing. This should include a range of product type and styles. In addition to traditional market rate rental housing, the station area could help close some of the housing gaps by also including senior housing and affordable rental and owner-occupied multifamily housing. One example of affordable owner-occupied multifamily housing that has been very successful in the Twin Cities is the limited-equity cooperative. In the region, these types of properties are often age- restricted and targeted to seniors because banks are otherwise reluctant to prepare mortgages for these types of properties. The buildings look and operate very much a like a multifamily condominium property. However, instead of owning title to an individual unit, the owner owns shares in the cooperative that owns the building. An individual’s shares entitle them to live in a particular unit. In a limited-equity model, the share prices increase on an annual set rate and not according to market pricing. This “limits” the equity needed to buy into the cooperative making it more affordable. In return, the residents do not expect as much return on the value of their shares when they go to sell. HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works 75 Robbinsdale ROBBINSDALE STATION 1328+001329+001330+001331+001332+001333+001334+001335+001336+00 1337+001338+00 1339+001340+00 1341+001342+00 1343+001344+00 1345+001346+001347+001348+001349+00 1350+00 1351+001352+001353+001354+001355+001356+001357+00 1358+001359+001360+001361+001362+001363+001364+001365+001366+001367+001368+001369+001370+001371+001372+001373+001374+001375+001376+00 1377+001378+00 1379+001380+001381+001382+001383+001384+001385+001386+001387+001388+001389+00 1390+001391+00 1392+001393+001394+001395+001396+001397+001398+001399+001400+001401+001402+001403+001404+00 1405+001406+001407+001408+001409+001410+001411+001412+001413+001414+001415+00 1416+001417+001418+001419+001420+001421+001422+001423+001424+001425+001426+001427+001428+00 1429+001430+001431+001432+001433+001434+001435+001500+002328+00 2329+002330+002331+00 2332+002333+002334+002335+00 2336+002337+00 2338+002339+00 2340+002341+00 2342+002343+00 2344+002345+002346+002347+002348+002349+002350+002351+002352+002353+002354+002355+002356+002357+002358+00 2359+002360+002361+002362+002363+002364+002365+002366+002367+002368+002369+002370+002371+002372+002373+002374+002375+002376+002377+002378+002379+002380+002381+002382+002383+002384+00 2385+002386+002387+002388+002389+002390+002391+002392+00 2393+002394+002395+002396+002397+002398+002399+002400+002401+002402+002403+002404+002405+002406+002407+002408+002409+002410+002411+002412+002413+002414+002415+002416+002417+002418+002419+002420+002421+002422+002423+00 2424+002425+002426+002427+002428+002429+002430+002431+002432+002433+002434+002435+002500+003328+003329+003330+003331+003332+003333+003334+003335+003336+003337+003338+003339+003340+003341+003342+003343+003344+003345+00 3346+003347+003348+003349+003350+00 3351+003352+003353+003354+003355+003356+003357+00 3358+003359+003360+003361+003362+003363+003364+003365+00 3366+003367+00 3368+003369+003370+003371+003372+003373+003374+003375+003376+003377+003378+00 3379+003380+00 3381+003382+003383+003384+003385+003386+003387+003388+003389+003390+003391+003392+003393+003394+003395+003396+003397+003398+003399+003400+003401+003402+003403+003404+003405+003406+003407+003408+003409+003410+003411+003412+003413+003414+003415+003416+003417+003418+003419+003420+003421+003422+00 3423+003424+00 3425+003426+003427+003428+003429+003430+003431+003432+003433+003434+003435+003436+003500+003500+003501+00 3502+003503+003504+003505+003506+003507+003508+003509+003510+003511+003512+003513+003514+003515+003516+003517+003518+00 3519+003520+003521+003522+003523+003524+003525+003526+003527+003528+003529+003530+003531+001500+001501+001502+001503+001504+001505+001506+001507+001508+001509+001510+00 1511+001512+001513+001514+001515+00 1516+001517+001518+001519+001520+001521+001522+00 1523+001524+001525+001526+001527+001528+001529+001530+001531+002500+002501+002502+002503+002504+002505+002506+002507+002508+002509+002510+002511+002512+002513+002514+002515+002516+002517+002518+002519+002520+002521+002522+002523+00 2524+002525+002526+002527+002528+00 2529+002530+002531+00!( 42nd Os s e o 42nd We s t Br o a d wa y L a k e 100100Brookl yn45th818146th DouglasF F 1-Mile k 100 100General Occupancy Market Affordable Subsidized <5050-100 101-200 200+ Number of Units Source: MNGEO, Hennepin County, Perkins+Will, Tangible Consulting Services ROBBINSDALE STATION 1327+001328+001329+001330+001331+001332+001333+001334+001335+001336+001337+001338+00 1339+001340+00 1341+001342+00 1343+001344+00 1345+001346+001347+001348+001349+001350+00 1351+001352+001353+001354+001355+001356+001357+00 1358+001359+001360+001361+00 1362+001363+001364+001365+001366+001367+001368+001369+001370+001371+00 1372+001373+001374+001375+001376+001377+001378+001379+001380+001381+00 1382+001383+001384+001385+001386+001387+001388+001389+001390+001391+001392+001393+00 1394+001395+001396+001397+001398+001399+001400+001401+001402+001403+00 1404+001405+001406+001407+001408+001409+001410+00 1411+001412+001413+001414+001415+001416+001417+001418+001419+001420+001421+001422+001423+001424+001425+001426+001427+001428+001429+001430+001431+001432+001433+001434+001435+001500+002327+002328+002329+002330+002331+00 2332+002333+002334+002335+002336+002337+00 2338+002339+00 2340+002341+00 2342+002343+00 2344+002345+002346+002347+002348+002349+002350+002351+002352+002353+002354+002355+002356+002357+002358+00 2359+002360+002361+002362+002363+002364+002365+00 2366+002367+002368+002369+002370+002371+002372+002373+002374+002375+002376+002377+00 2378+002379+002380+002381+002382+002383+002384+002385+002386+002387+00 2388+002389+002390+002391+002392+002393+002394+002395+002396+002397+002398+002399+002400+002401+002402+002403+002404+002405+002406+002407+002408+002409+002410+002411+002412+002413+002414+002415+002416+00 2417+002418+002419+002420+002421+002422+002423+002424+002425+002426+00 2427+002428+002429+002430+002431+002432+002433+002434+002435+002500+003327+003328+003329+003330+003331+003332+003333+003334+003335+003336+003337+003338+003339+003340+003341+003342+003343+003344+003345+003346+003347+003348+003349+003350+003351+003352+003353+003354+003355+003356+003357+00 3358+003359+003360+003361+00 3362+003363+00 3364+003365+003366+003367+003368+003369+003370+003371+003372+003373+00 3374+003375+003376+003377+003378+003379+003380+003381+003382+003383+00 3384+003385+003386+003387+003388+003389+003390+003391+003392+003393+00 3394+003395+003396+003397+003398+003399+003400+003401+003402+003403+003404+003405+00 3406+003407+003408+003409+003410+003411+003412+003413+003414+003415+003416+003417+003418+003419+003420+003421+003422+003423+003424+003425+00 3426+003427+003428+003429+003430+003431+003432+003433+003434+003435+00 3436+003500+003500+003501+003502+003503+003504+003505+003506+003507+003508+00 3509+003510+003511+003512+003513+003514+003515+00 3516+003517+003518+003519+003520+003521+003522+003523+003524+003525+003526+003527+003528+00 3529+003530+001500+001501+001502+001503+00 1504+001505+001506+001507+001508+001509+00 1510+001511+001512+00 1513+001514+001515+001516+001517+001518+001519+001520+001521+001522+001523+001524+001525+00 1526+001527+001528+001529+001530+001531+002500+002501+002502+002503+002504+002505+002506+002507+002508+002509+002510+002511+002512+002513+00 2514+002515+002516+002517+002518+002519+002520+002521+002522+002523+002524+002525+002526+002527+002528+002529+002530+002531+00!( 42nd 42nd Os s e oWe s t B r o a d wa y L a k e 100100Brookl yn45th 8 1814 6 t h DouglasF F 1-Mile k 100 100Senior/ Disabled Market Affordable Subsidized <5050-100 101-200 200+ Number of Units Source: MNGEO, Hennepin County, Perkins+Will, Tangible Consulting Services Station Area Plan • Preserve/protect West Broadway as a main street; promote TOD around the periphery of the downtown. Housing Demand through 2040 • 600-800 units (80-100% of projected Robbinsdale household growth through 2040) New Housing Types Needed • Market rate rental apartments • Mixed-income housing (properties inclusive of both market rate and affordable units) • Owner-occupied townhomes (multiple price points) • Multi-story condominiums (multiple price points) 1/2-Mile 1/2-Mile Map 14: Robbinsdale – Multifamily Properties Map 13: Robbinsdale –Senior Properties STATISTIC 42nd AVE HENNEPIN COUNTY Total Population (1/2-mi radius)1,2 4,181 1,197,776 Toal Households (1/2-mi radius)1,2 1,953 490,196 Median Age1,2 38.9 36.1 Population Age 18 and Younger1,2 21%25% Population Age 65 and Older1,2 16%12% Average Household Size1,2 1.9 2.4 Persons per Bedroom1,2 1.00 0.92 Median Household Income1,2 $48,121 $65,834 Homeownership Rate1,2 54.3%49.0% Households with Children1,2 19.0%28.0% Single-Person Households1,2 44.3%33.0% Persons of Color1,2 30.5%26.0% Households that are Housing Cost Burdened1,6,7 32.3%36.2% Total Housing Units (1/2-mi radius)1,2 1,879 518,332 Units in Buildings with 5+ Units1,2 41.3%29.9% Units in Buildings with 2-4 Units1,2 2.4%5.8% Townhome Units1,2 11.3%8.7% Single-Family Units1,2 44.8%55.3% Median Year Built (Multifamily Units)3,6,7 1980 1973 Median Year Built (Single-Family Units)5,6,7 1949 1958 Median Home Sales Price4 $201,000 $264,000 Average Monthly Rent - 1BR Units3,6 $670 $1,105 Average Monthly Rent - 2BR Units3,6 $1,104 $1,427 Average Monthly Rent - 3BR+ Units3,6 $1,665 $1,819 1 US Census, American Community Survey 2011-2015 Five-Year Estimate 2 Esri 3 CoStar 4 Minneapolis Area Association of Realtors, Multiple Listing Service 5 Hennepin County Assessor 6 Tangible Consulting Services 7 Perkins+Will HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works76 Housing Gaps Analysis The Robbinsdale station area has the greatest mixing of uses of any station area along the Corridor. In recent decades there has been substantial multifamily development both in the core and around the periphery of what is considered downtown Robbinsdale. However, almost all of this development has been senior housing. Therefore, like many other station areas along the Corridor, there is a distinct absence of newer, market rate, general occupancy apartments. This is likely to change in the near future, though. Unlike most of the other stations areas, there are currently two proposals for large, market rate apartments just south of the station area that would be at higher densities not typically found in Robbinsdale. This is a clear example of the current strength of the broader housing market, but it also demonstrates that the mixed-use environment in the station area is a factor in attracting residents to the area. Once the LRT is operational, any such momentum will only increase. Market rate rental apartments will satisfy most of the future housing gaps in the Robbinsdale station area. Given the existing pedestrian scale of the station area, demand for this product will only accelerate. Therefore, consideration should be given to promoting mixed-income developments. In many cases, this product type is most successful in areas where growth will be strongest. With the pressure to develop market rate apartments, an important gap that may need to be addressed would be units for families or other larger household types. Therefore, consideration should be given to where certain types of townhome product can complement traditional apartment development. Townhomes use less land than typical detached, single-family homes. However, much of the single- family housing stock in Robbinsdale, especially near the station, is older, smaller, and located on very small lots. Thus, it is challenging to modify these existing homes to accommodate larger homes. Townhome product located on strategic parcels can provide larger home sizes and help control for costs by using less land. HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works 77 Golden Valley Road 3000+003001+003002+003003+003004+003005+003006+003007+003008+003009+003010+003011+003012+001053+001054+001055+001056+001057+001058+001059+001060+001061+001062+001063+001064+001065+001066+001067+001068+001069+001070+001071+001072+001073+001074+001075+001076+001077+001078+001079+001080+001081+001082+001083+001084+001085+001086+001087+001088+001089+001090+001091+001092+001093+001094+001095+001096+001097+001098+001099+001100+001101+001102+001103+001104+001105+001106+001107+001108+001109+001131+832053+002054+002055+002056+002057+002058+002059+002060+002061+002062+002063+002064+002065+002066+002067+002068+002069+002070+002071+002072+002073+002074+002075+002076+002077+002078+002079+002080+002081+002082+002083+002084+002085+002086+002087+002088+002089+002090+002091+002092+002093+002094+002095+002096+002097+002098+002099+002100+002101+002102+002103+002104+002105+002106+002107+002108+002109+001201+001202+001203+001204+001205+001206+001207+001208+001209+001210+001211+001212+001213+001214+001215+001216+001217+001218+001219+001220+001221+001222+001223+001224+001225+001226+001227+001228+001229+001230+001231+001232+001233+001234+001235+001237+001238+001239+001240+001241+001242+001243+001244+001245+001246+001247+001248+001249+001250+001251+001252+001253+001254+001255+001256+001257+001258+001259+001260+001261+001262+001263+001264+001265+001266+001267+001268+001269+001270+001271+001272+001273+001274+001275+003201+003202+003203+003204+003205+003206+003207+003208+003209+003210+003211+003212+003213+003214+003215+003216+003217+003218+003219+003220+003221+003222+003223+003224+003225+003226+003227+003228+003229+003230+003231+003232+003233+003234+003235+003236+003237+003238+003239+003240+003241+003242+003243+003244+003245+003246+003247+003248+003249+003250+003251+003252+003253+003254+003255+003256+003257+003258+003259+003260+003261+003262+003263+003264+003265+003266+003267+003268+003269+003270+003271+003272+003273+003274+003275+002200+002201+002202+002203+002204+002205+002206+002207+002208+002209+002210+002211+002212+002213+002214+002215+002216+002217+002218+002219+002220+002221+002222+002223+002224+002225+002226+002227+002228+002229+002230+002231+002232+002233+002234+002235+002236+002237+002238+002239+002240+002241+002242+002243+002244+002245+002246+002247+002248+002249+002250+002251+002252+002253+002254+002255+002256+002257+002258+002259+002260+002261+002262+002263+002264+002265+002266+002267+002268+002269+002270+002271+002272+002273+002274+002275+001301+001302+001303+001304+001305+001306+001307+001308+001309+001310+001311+001312+001313+001314+001315+001316+001317+001318+001319+001320+001321+001322+001323+001324+001325+001326+001327+001328+001329+001330+001331+001332+001333+001334+001335+001336+001337+001338+001339+001340+001341+001342+002301+002302+002303+002304+002305+002306+002307+002308+002309+002310+002311+002312+002313+002314+002315+002316+002317+002318+002319+002320+002321+002322+002323+002324+002325+002326+002327+002328+002329+002330+002331+002332+002333+002334+002335+002336+002337+002338+002339+002340+002341+002342+003301+003302+003303+003304+003305+003306+003307+003308+003309+003310+003311+003312+003313+003314+003315+003316+003317+003318+003319+003320+003321+003322+003323+003324+003325+003326+003327+003328+003329+003330+003331+003332+003333+003334+003335+003336+003337+003338+003339+003340+003341+003342+00PLYMOUTH AVENUE/THEODORE WIRTH PARK STATIONGOLDEN VALLEY ROAD STATION!( !( !(PennGolden Valley Olson M em ori a l Olson Memorial Lowry We st B r o a d w a y We s t Br o a d wa yTheodoreWirthLowry D ul u t h Duluth Duluth XerxesTheodoreWirthWest Broadway F F 1-Mile k k k55 General Occupancy Market Affordable Subsidized <5050-100 101-200 200+ Number of Units Source: MNGEO, Hennepin County, Perkins+Will, Tangible Consulting Services 3000+003001+003002+003003+003004+003005+003006+003007+003008+003009+003010+003011+003012+001053+001054+001055+001056+001057+001058+001059+001060+001061+001062+001063+001064+001065+001066+001067+001068+001069+001070+001071+001072+001073+001074+001075+001076+001077+001078+001079+001080+001081+001082+001083+001084+001085+001086+001087+001088+001089+001090+001091+001092+001093+001094+001095+001096+001097+001098+001099+001100+001101+001102+001103+001104+001105+001106+001107+001108+001109+001131+832053+002054+002055+002056+002057+002058+002059+002060+002061+002062+002063+002064+002065+002066+002067+002068+002069+002070+002071+002072+002073+002074+002075+002076+002077+002078+002079+002080+002081+002082+002083+002084+002085+002086+002087+002088+002089+002090+002091+002092+002093+002094+002095+002096+002097+002098+002099+002100+002101+002102+002103+002104+002105+002106+002107+002108+002109+001201+001202+001203+001204+001205+001206+001207+001208+001209+001210+001211+001212+001213+001214+001215+001216+001217+001218+001219+001220+001221+001222+001223+001224+001225+001226+001227+001228+001229+001230+001231+001232+001233+001234+001235+001237+001238+001239+001240+001241+001242+001243+001244+001245+001246+001247+001248+001249+001250+001251+001252+001253+001254+001255+001256+001257+001258+001259+001260+001261+001262+001263+001264+001265+001266+001267+001268+001269+001270+001271+001272+001273+001274+001275+003201+003202+003203+003204+003205+003206+003207+003208+003209+003210+003211+003212+003213+003214+003215+003216+003217+003218+003219+003220+003221+003222+003223+003224+003225+003226+003227+003228+003229+003230+003231+003232+003233+003234+003235+003236+003237+003238+003239+003240+003241+003242+003243+003244+003245+003246+003247+003248+003249+003250+003251+003252+003253+003254+003255+003256+003257+003258+003259+003260+003261+003262+003263+003264+003265+003266+003267+003268+003269+003270+003271+003272+003273+003274+003275+002200+002201+002202+002203+002204+002205+002206+002207+002208+002209+002210+002211+002212+002213+002214+002215+002216+002217+002218+002219+002220+002221+002222+002223+002224+002225+002226+002227+002228+002229+002230+002231+002232+002233+002234+002235+002236+002237+002238+002239+002240+002241+002242+002243+002244+002245+002246+002247+002248+002249+002250+002251+002252+002253+002254+002255+002256+002257+002258+002259+002260+002261+002262+002263+002264+002265+002266+002267+002268+002269+002270+002271+002272+002273+002274+002275+001301+001302+001303+001304+001305+001306+001307+001308+001309+001310+001311+001312+001313+001314+001315+001316+001317+001318+001319+001320+001321+001322+001323+001324+001325+001326+001327+001328+001329+001330+001331+001332+001333+001334+001335+001336+001337+001338+001339+001340+001341+001342+002301+002302+002303+002304+002305+002306+002307+002308+002309+002310+002311+002312+002313+002314+002315+002316+002317+002318+002319+002320+002321+002322+002323+002324+002325+002326+002327+002328+002329+002330+002331+002332+002333+002334+002335+002336+002337+002338+002339+002340+002341+002342+003301+003302+003303+003304+003305+003306+003307+003308+003309+003310+003311+003312+003313+003314+003315+003316+003317+003318+003319+003320+003321+003322+003323+003324+003325+003326+003327+003328+003329+003330+003331+003332+003333+003334+003335+003336+003337+003338+003339+003340+003341+003342+00PLYMOUTH AVENUE/THEODORE WIRTH PARK STATIONGOLDEN VALLEY ROAD STATION!( !( !(PennGolden Valley Olson M em ori al Olson Memorial Lowry We st B r o a d w a y We s t B r o a d wa yTheodoreWirthLowry D ul u th Duluth D uluth XerxesTheodoreWirthWestBroadway F F 1-Mile k k k55 Senior/ Disabled Market Affordable Subsidized <5050-100 101-200 200+ Number of Units Source: MNGEO, Hennepin County, Perkins+Will, Tangible Consulting Services Station Area Plan • Maintain residential character and feel of station area. Some potential long-term residential opportunities on currently institutional lands. Housing Demand through 2040 • 100-200 units (10-20% of projected Golden Valley household growth through 2040) New Housing Types Needed • Senior housing (market rate and affordable) • Affordable rental apartments (<30% AMI; 31-50% AMI; 51%-80% AMI) 1/2-Mile 1/2-Mile Map 15: Golden Valley Road – Multifamily Properties Map 16: Golden Valley Road – Senior Properties STATISTIC GOLDEN VALLEY RD HENNEPIN COUNTY Total Population (1/2-mi radius)1,2 2,778 1,197,776 Toal Households (1/2-mi radius)1,2 1,090 490,196 Median Age1,2 39.7 36.1 Population Age 18 and Younger1,2 23%25% Population Age 65 and Older1,2 14%12% Average Household Size1,2 2.5 2.4 Persons per Bedroom1,2 0.82 0.92 Median Household Income1,2 $75,360 $65,834 Homeownership Rate1,2 80.6%49.0% Households with Children1,2 28.2%28.0% Single-Person Households1,2 26.4%33.0% Persons of Color1,2 46.9%26.0% Households that are Housing Cost Burdened1,6,7 39.4%36.2% Total Housing Units (1/2-mi radius)1,2 1,152 518,332 Units in Buildings with 5+ Units1,2 6.8%29.9% Units in Buildings with 2-4 Units1,2 2.4%5.8% Townhome Units1,2 2.2%8.7% Single-Family Units1,2 88.5%55.3% Median Year Built (Multifamily Units)3,6,7 1940 1973 Median Year Built (Single-Family Units)5,6,7 1941 1958 Median Home Sales Price4 $241,875 $264,000 Average Monthly Rent - 1BR Units3,6 $791 $1,105 Average Monthly Rent - 2BR Units3,6 $996 $1,427 Average Monthly Rent - 3BR+ Units3,6 $998 $1,819 1 US Census, American Community Survey 2011-2015 Five-Year Estimate 2 Esri 3 CoStar 4 Minneapolis Area Association of Realtors, Multiple Listing Service 5 Hennepin County Assessor 6 Tangible Consulting Services 7 Perkins+Will HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works78 Housing Gaps Analysis The Golden Valley Road station area consists mainly of park land (Theodore Wirth Park) or detached, single-family homes. The only exceptions are a few institutional uses (e.g., church, fire station, and care center) in scattered locations. Because single-family housing is such a dominant use in the station area, multifamily housing should be added to diversify housing choice and provide more affordable options. The challenge to increasing housing choice through development is that there are so few readily available redevelopment opportunities in the station area. As determined through the station area planning process, the Church of St. Margaret Mary controls a site that is large enough to accommodate substantial new development either on land that is vacant or underutilized (i.e., surface parking) or through redevelopment of existing structures. However, if the church does not see a need to sell their land for development or redevelopment then the timing of any new housing of a significant scale in the station area would be uncertain. Due to station area population that is significantly older than the Corridor or County average, there is an obvious gap and need for senior housing. A multifamily senior housing development on a sufficiently large site would provide greater housing choices to local residents and potentially open up some of the existing single-family housing stock to younger households. The persons per bedroom in the station area is well below the Hennepin County rate, which indicates that there is a lot of excess housing not being utilized in the form of empty bedrooms. This is likely the result of an aging population staying in their homes as children grow up and leave the household. In addition, the small amount of rental housing that does exist in the station area is very affordable with average rents being well the County average. This is likely because the rental housing stock is concentrated in the Minneapolis portion of the station area where the age of the stock is significantly older and likely liking in amenities and other features. New rental apartments at a variety of price points would introduce additional housing choice in the station area currently not available. HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works 79 Plymouth Avenue 3000+003001+003002+003003+003004+003005+003006+003007+003008+003009+003010+003011+003012+001040+001041+001042+001043+001044+001045+001046+001047+001048+001049+001050+001051+001052+001053+001054+001055+001056+001057+001058+001059+001060+001061+001062+001063+001064+001065+001066+001067+001068+001069+001070+001071+001072+001073+001074+001075+001076+001077+001078+001079+001080+001081+001082+001083+001084+001085+001086+001087+001088+001089+001090+001091+001092+001093+001094+001095+001096+001097+001098+001099+001100+001101+001102+001103+001104+001105+001106+001107+001108+001109+001131+832040+002041+002042+002043+002044+002045+002046+002047+002048+002049+002050+002051+002052+002053+002054+002055+002056+002057+002058+002059+002060+002061+002062+002063+002064+002065+002066+002067+002068+002069+002070+002071+002072+002073+002074+002075+002076+002077+002078+002079+002080+002081+002082+002083+002084+002085+002086+002087+002088+002089+002090+002091+002092+002093+002094+002095+002096+002097+002098+002099+002100+002101+002102+002103+002104+002105+002106+002107+002108+002109+001201+001202+001203+001204+001205+001206+001207+001208+001209+001210+001211+001212+001213+001214+001215+001216+001217+001218+001219+001220+001221+001222+001223+001224+001225+001226+001227+001228+001229+001230+001231+001232+001233+001234+001235+001237+001238+001239+001240+001241+001242+001243+001244+001245+001246+001247+001248+001249+001250+001251+001252+001253+001254+001255+001256+001257+001258+001259+001260+001261+001262+001263+001264+001265+001266+001267+001268+001269+001270+001271+001272+001273+001274+001275+003201+003202+003203+003204+003205+003206+003207+003208+003209+003210+003211+003212+003213+003214+003215+003216+003217+003218+003219+003220+003221+003222+003223+003224+003225+003226+003227+003228+003229+003230+003231+003232+003233+003234+003235+003236+003237+003238+003239+003240+003241+003242+003243+003244+003245+003246+003247+003248+003249+003250+003251+003252+003253+003254+003255+003256+003257+003258+003259+003260+003261+003262+003263+003264+003265+003266+003267+003268+003269+003270+003271+003272+003273+003274+003275+002200+002201+002202+002203+002204+002205+002206+002207+002208+002209+002210+002211+002212+002213+002214+002215+002216+002217+002218+002219+002220+002221+002222+002223+002224+002225+002226+002227+002228+002229+002230+002231+002232+002233+002234+002235+002236+002237+002238+002239+002240+002241+002242+002243+002244+002245+002246+002247+002248+002249+002250+002251+002252+002253+002254+002255+002256+002257+002258+002259+002260+002261+002262+002263+002264+002265+002266+002267+002268+002269+002270+002271+002272+002273+002274+002275+001301+001302+001303+001304+001305+001306+001307+001308+001309+001310+002301+002302+002303+002304+002305+002306+002307+002308+002309+002310+003301+003302+003303+003304+003305+003306+003307+003308+003309+003310+00PLYMOUTH AVENUE/THEODORE WIRTH PARK STATIONGOLDEN VALLEY ROAD STATION!( !( !(!( Glenwood Olso n Memorial Ol so n M em orial PennW est Broad w ay GirardGolden Valley Glenwood XerxesTheodoreWirthWestBroadway F F 55 1-Mile k k kGeneral Occupancy Market Affordable Subsidized <5050-100 101-200 200+ Number of Units Source: MNGEO, Hennepin County, Perkins+Will, Tangible Consulting Services 3000+003001+003002+003003+003004+003005+003006+003007+003008+003009+003010+003011+003012+001040+001041+001042+001043+001044+001045+001046+001047+001048+001049+001050+001051+001052+001053+001054+001055+001056+001057+001058+001059+001060+001061+001062+001063+001064+001065+001066+001067+001068+001069+001070+001071+001072+001073+001074+001075+001076+001077+001078+001079+001080+001081+001082+001083+001084+001085+001086+001087+001088+001089+001090+001091+001092+001093+001094+001095+001096+001097+001098+001099+001100+001101+001102+001103+001104+001105+001106+001107+001108+001109+001131+832040+002041+002042+002043+002044+002045+002046+002047+002048+002049+002050+002051+002052+002053+002054+002055+002056+002057+002058+002059+002060+002061+002062+002063+002064+002065+002066+002067+002068+002069+002070+002071+002072+002073+002074+002075+002076+002077+002078+002079+002080+002081+002082+002083+002084+002085+002086+002087+002088+002089+002090+002091+002092+002093+002094+002095+002096+002097+002098+002099+002100+002101+002102+002103+002104+002105+002106+002107+002108+002109+001201+001202+001203+001204+001205+001206+001207+001208+001209+001210+001211+001212+001213+001214+001215+001216+001217+001218+001219+001220+001221+001222+001223+001224+001225+001226+001227+001228+001229+001230+001231+001232+001233+001234+001235+001237+001238+001239+001240+001241+001242+001243+001244+001245+001246+001247+001248+001249+001250+001251+001252+001253+001254+001255+001256+001257+001258+001259+001260+001261+001262+001263+001264+001265+001266+001267+001268+001269+001270+001271+001272+001273+001274+001275+003201+003202+003203+003204+003205+003206+003207+003208+003209+003210+003211+003212+003213+003214+003215+003216+003217+003218+003219+003220+003221+003222+003223+003224+003225+003226+003227+003228+003229+003230+003231+003232+003233+003234+003235+003236+003237+003238+003239+003240+003241+003242+003243+003244+003245+003246+003247+003248+003249+003250+003251+003252+003253+003254+003255+003256+003257+003258+003259+003260+003261+003262+003263+003264+003265+003266+003267+003268+003269+003270+003271+003272+003273+003274+003275+002200+002201+002202+002203+002204+002205+002206+002207+002208+002209+002210+002211+002212+002213+002214+002215+002216+002217+002218+002219+002220+002221+002222+002223+002224+002225+002226+002227+002228+002229+002230+002231+002232+002233+002234+002235+002236+002237+002238+002239+002240+002241+002242+002243+002244+002245+002246+002247+002248+002249+002250+002251+002252+002253+002254+002255+002256+002257+002258+002259+002260+002261+002262+002263+002264+002265+002266+002267+002268+002269+002270+002271+002272+002273+002274+002275+001301+001302+001303+001304+001305+001306+001307+001308+001309+001310+002301+002302+002303+002304+002305+002306+002307+002308+002309+002310+003301+003302+003303+003304+003305+003306+003307+003308+003309+003310+00PLYMOUTH AVENUE/THEODORE WIRTH PARK STATIONGOLDEN VALLEY ROAD STATION!( !( !(!( Glenwood Olson Memorial Olson M em orial PennW est Broad w ay GirardGolden Valley Glenwood XerxesTheodoreWirthWestBroadway F F 1-Mile k k k55Senior/ Disabled Market Affordable Subsidized <5050-100 101-200 200+ Number of Units Source: MNGEO, Hennepin County, Perkins+Will, Tangible Consulting Services Station Area Plan • Maintain current residential character. Minimal redevelopment opportunities. Potential to infill on numerous vacant lots throughout station area. Housing Demand through 2040 • <100 units New Housing Types Needed Small-scale infill development on small urban lots, such as: • Accessory dwelling units (ADUs) • Townhomes • Small multifamily properties (<5 units) Map 17: Plymouth Avenue – Multifamily Properties Map 18: Plymouth Avenue – Senior Properties STATISTIC PLYMOUTH AVE HENNEPIN COUNTY Total Population (1/2-mi radius)1,2 3,921 1,197,776 Toal Households (1/2-mi radius)1,2 1,264 490,196 Median Age1,2 33.3 36.1 Population Age 18 and Younger1,2 28%25% Population Age 65 and Older1,2 12%12% Average Household Size1,2 2.9 2.4 Persons per Bedroom1,2 0.92 0.92 Median Household Income1,2 $53,189 $65,834 Homeownership Rate1,2 66.5%49.0% Households with Children1,2 37.4%28.0% Single-Person Households1,2 23.6%33.0% Persons of Color1,2 75.3%26.0% Households that are Housing Cost Burdened1,6,7 46.4%36.2% Total Housing Units (1/2-mi radius)1,2 1,352 518,332 Units in Buildings with 5+ Units1,2 7.4%29.9% Units in Buildings with 2-4 Units1,2 5.0%5.8% Townhome Units1,2 2.5%8.7% Single-Family Units1,2 84.9%55.3% Median Year Built (Multifamily Units)3,6,7 1949 1973 Median Year Built (Single-Family Units)5,6,7 1938 1958 Median Home Sales Price4 $173,000 $264,000 Average Monthly Rent - 1BR Units3,6 $658 $1,105 Average Monthly Rent - 2BR Units3,6 $777 $1,427 Average Monthly Rent - 3BR+ Units3,6 $998 $1,819 1 US Census, American Community Survey 2011-2015 Five-Year Estimate 2 Esri 3 CoStar 4 Minneapolis Area Association of Realtors, Multiple Listing Service 5 Hennepin County Assessor 6 Tangible Consulting Services 7 Perkins+Will 1/2-Mile 1/2-Mile HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works80 Housing Gaps Analysis Due its proximity to Theodore Wirth Park and its prevalence of detached, single-family homes, the Plymouth Avenue station area is not envisioned to change significantly through redevelopment in the coming years. Therefore, addressing its housing gaps will not be achieved through significant, large- scale development. Instead, infill on small sites consisting mostly of vacant single-family lots will be the primary method of addressing housing gaps. In recent years, portions of the station area have seen a fair amount of infill development on vacant lots due to a tornado that severely damaged many homes in this area. Based on interviews with community stakeholders, one of the concerns that emerged out of this rush to rebuild was the quality of the newly built housing stock. The stock of single-family homes in the station area is generally priced below the County median. Therefore, to help prevent further erosion of market pricing in this area, it would be important to have policies in place that ensure a higher standard in the quality of the construction. Although new, large-scale development is not likely in this station area, one possibility that would help create new housing is to promote accessory dwelling units, which are already allowed under Minneapolis’s zoning code. Many of the blocks in the station area have alleys, which are ideal for accommodating accessory dwelling units. These units could either support extended families living together or be rented to boarders, which would help homeowners stay in their homes by providing a source of income to help cover housing costs. HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works 81 Penn Avenue 3000+003001+003002+003003+003004+003005+003006+003007+003008+003009+003010+003011+003012+001012+001013+001014+001015+001016+001017+001018+001019+001020+001021+001022+001023+001024+001025+001026+001027+001028+001029+001030+001031+001032+001033+001034+001035+001036+001037+001038+001039+001040+001041+001042+001043+001044+001045+001046+001047+001048+001049+001050+001051+001052+001053+001054+001055+001056+001057+001058+001059+001060+001061+001062+001063+001064+001065+001066+001067+001068+001069+001070+001071+001072+001073+001074+001075+001076+001077+001078+001079+001080+001081+001082+001083+001084+001085+001086+001087+001088+001089+001090+001091+001092+001093+001094+001095+001096+001097+001098+001099+001100+001101+001102+001103+001104+001105+001106+001107+001108+001109+001131+832012+002013+002014+002015+002016+002017+002018+002019+002020+002021+002022+002023+002024+002025+002026+002027+002028+002029+002030+002031+002032+002033+002034+002035+002036+002037+002038+002039+002040+002041+002042+002043+002044+002045+002046+002047+002048+002049+002050+002051+002052+002053+002054+002055+002056+002057+002058+002059+002060+002061+002062+002063+002064+002065+002066+002067+002068+002069+002070+002071+002072+002073+002074+002075+002076+002077+002078+002079+002080+002081+002082+002083+002084+002085+002086+002087+002088+002089+002090+002091+002092+002093+002094+002095+002096+002097+002098+002099+002100+002101+002102+002103+002104+002105+002106+002107+002108+002109+001201+001202+001203+001204+001205+001206+001207+001208+001209+001210+001211+001212+001213+001214+001215+001216+001217+001218+001219+001220+001221+001222+001223+001224+001225+001226+001227+001228+001229+001230+001231+001232+001233+001234+001235+001237+001238+001239+001240+001241+001242+001243+001244+001245+001246+001247+001248+001249+001250+001251+001252+001253+001254+001255+001256+003201+003202+003203+003204+003205+003206+003207+003208+003209+003210+003211+003212+003213+003214+003215+003216+003217+003218+003219+003220+003221+003222+003223+003224+003225+003226+003227+003228+003229+003230+003231+003232+003233+003234+003235+003236+003237+003238+003239+003240+003241+003242+003243+003244+003245+003246+003247+003248+003249+003250+003251+003252+003253+003254+003255+003256+002200+002201+002202+002203+002204+002205+002206+002207+002208+002209+002210+002211+002212+002213+002214+002215+002216+002217+002218+002219+002220+002221+002222+002223+002224+002225+002226+002227+002228+002229+002230+002231+002232+002233+002234+002235+002236+002237+002238+002239+002240+002241+002242+002243+002244+002245+002246+002247+002248+002249+002250+002251+002252+002253+002254+002255+002256+00PLYMOUTH AVENUE/THEODORE WIRTH PARK STATIONGOLDEN VALLEY ROAD STATION!( !( !(!( Glenwood 3 9 4394 O ls o n MemorialOlson Memorial PennWestBroadway PennWest Broadway GirardGolden Valley East LyndaleDunwoody Dunwoody LakesideXerxes949494EastLyndal eF F 1-Mile k55 k k k 94 394 General Occupancy Market Affordable Subsidized <5050-100 101-200 200+ Number of Units Source: MNGEO, Hennepin County, Perkins+Will, Tangible Consulting Services 3000+003001+003002+003003+003004+003005+003006+003007+003008+003009+003010+003011+003012+001012+001013+001014+001015+001016+001017+001018+001019+001020+001021+001022+001023+001024+001025+001026+001027+001028+001029+001030+001031+001032+001033+001034+001035+001036+001037+001038+001039+001040+001041+001042+001043+001044+001045+001046+001047+001048+001049+001050+001051+001052+001053+001054+001055+001056+001057+001058+001059+001060+001061+001062+001063+001064+001065+001066+001067+001068+001069+001070+001071+001072+001073+001074+001075+001076+001077+001078+001079+001080+001081+001082+001083+001084+001085+001086+001087+001088+001089+001090+001091+001092+001093+001094+001095+001096+001097+001098+001099+001100+001101+001102+001103+001104+001105+001106+001107+001108+001109+001131+832012+002013+002014+002015+002016+002017+002018+002019+002020+002021+002022+002023+002024+002025+002026+002027+002028+002029+002030+002031+002032+002033+002034+002035+002036+002037+002038+002039+002040+002041+002042+002043+002044+002045+002046+002047+002048+002049+002050+002051+002052+002053+002054+002055+002056+002057+002058+002059+002060+002061+002062+002063+002064+002065+002066+002067+002068+002069+002070+002071+002072+002073+002074+002075+002076+002077+002078+002079+002080+002081+002082+002083+002084+002085+002086+002087+002088+002089+002090+002091+002092+002093+002094+002095+002096+002097+002098+002099+002100+002101+002102+002103+002104+002105+002106+002107+002108+002109+001201+001202+001203+001204+001205+001206+001207+001208+001209+001210+001211+001212+001213+001214+001215+001216+001217+001218+001219+001220+001221+001222+001223+001224+001225+001226+001227+001228+001229+001230+001231+001232+001233+001234+001235+001237+001238+001239+001240+001241+001242+001243+001244+001245+001246+001247+001248+001249+001250+001251+001252+001253+001254+001255+001256+003201+003202+003203+003204+003205+003206+003207+003208+003209+003210+003211+003212+003213+003214+003215+003216+003217+003218+003219+003220+003221+003222+003223+003224+003225+003226+003227+003228+003229+003230+003231+003232+003233+003234+003235+003236+003237+003238+003239+003240+003241+003242+003243+003244+003245+003246+003247+003248+003249+003250+003251+003252+003253+003254+003255+003256+002200+002201+002202+002203+002204+002205+002206+002207+002208+002209+002210+002211+002212+002213+002214+002215+002216+002217+002218+002219+002220+002221+002222+002223+002224+002225+002226+002227+002228+002229+002230+002231+002232+002233+002234+002235+002236+002237+002238+002239+002240+002241+002242+002243+002244+002245+002246+002247+002248+002249+002250+002251+002252+002253+002254+002255+002256+00PLYMOUTH AVENUE/THEODORE WIRTH PARK STATIONGOLDEN VALLEY ROAD STATION!( !( !(!( Glenwood 3 9 4394 Olso n MemorialOlson Memorial PennWestBroadway PennWest Broadway GirardGolden Valley East LyndaleDunwoody Dunwoody LakesideXerxes949494EastLyndal eF F 1-Mile k55 k k k 94 394 Senior/ Disabled Market Affordable Subsidized <5050-100 101-200 200+ Number of Units Source: MNGEO, Hennepin County, Perkins+Will, Tangible Consulting Services Station Area Plan • Primarily maintain residential character of existing neighborhoods. Intersection of Penn and Highway 55 is envisioned to have higher density (up to 5 stories) in order to anchor the station and provide a mixture of commercial and higher density residential. Housing Demand through 2040 • 200-400 units New Housing Types Needed • Mixed-income housing (properties inclusive of both market rate and affordable units) • Affordable rental apartments (<30% AMI; 31-50% AMI; 51%-80% AMI) • Affordable rental townhomes (<30% AMI; 31-50% AMI; 51%-80% AMI) • Senior housing (market rate and affordable) 1/2-Mile 1/2-Mile Map 19: Penn Avenue – Multifamily Properties Map 20: Penn Avenue – Senior Properties STATISTIC PENN AVE HENNEPIN COUNTY Total Population (1/2-mi radius)1,2 6,246 1,197,776 Toal Households (1/2-mi radius)1,2 1,986 490,196 Median Age1,2 29 36.1 Population Age 18 and Younger 1,2 31%25% Population Age 65 and Older1,2 9%12% Average Household Size1,2 2.7 2.4 Persons per Bedroom1,2 1.12 0.92 Median Household Income1,2 $32,276 $65,834 Homeownership Rate1,2 39.6%49.0% Households with Children1,2 40.5%28.0% Single-Person Households1,2 28.8%33.0% Persons of Color1,2 80.7%26.0% Households that are Housing Cost Burdened1,6,7 54.4%36.2% Total Housing Units (1/2-mi radius)1,2 2,290 518,332 Units in Buildings with 5+ Units1,2 17.5%29.9% Units in Buildings with 2-4 Units1,2 26.2%5.8% Townhome Units1,2 7.5%8.7% Single-Family Units1,2 48.6%55.3% Median Year Built (Multifamily Units)3,6,7 1937 1973 Median Year Built (Single-Family Units)5,6,7 1933 1958 Median Home Sales Price4 $186,300 $264,000 Average Monthly Rent - 1BR Units3,6 $807 $1,105 Average Monthly Rent - 2BR Units3,6 $946 $1,427 Average Monthly Rent - 3BR+ Units3,6 --$1,819 1 US Census, American Community Survey 2011-2015 Five-Year Estimate 2 Esri 3 CoStar 4 Minneapolis Area Association of Realtors, Multiple Listing Service 5 Hennepin County Assessor 6 Tangible Consulting Services 7 Perkins+Will HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works82 Housing Gaps Analysis The Penn Avenue station area has the highest population and number of households of any station area along the Bottineau Corridor. This is attributable to the overwhelmingly residential character of the station area and its mix of all types of housing from single-family homes to small multifamily properties to large multifamily properties. Housing cost burden is significant in the station area despite lower overall costs for housing. Due to the station area’s proximity to downtown and Theodore Wirth Park, the area is highly susceptible displacement of existing households due to rapidly rising prices for housing. Based on interviews with community stakeholders, there already is strong evidence of rising prices and concerns over displacement. Therefore, any new housing development should be seen as an opportunity to help retain existing residents. Mixed-income rental apartments is an obvious strategy. Per the station area plan, these could be located closest to the station. Other strategies could include helping existing households that rent their housing to access homeownership before pricing becomes too unobtainable. Given the rich diversity of housing options already in place, promoting accessory dwelling units may be a low impact path to maintaining affordability and helping existing residents remain in the community (also see discussion under Plymouth Avenue station area). Other possibilities to be explored may be co-housing arrangements. These are not common in the United States, but have been proven to help housing affordability issues in areas of rapid price increases in Europe. The Penn Avenue station area has a lot of older housing stock, which can often be difficult for older residents to safely age-in-place. New senior housing options, or at least properties developed with principles of Universal Design, which allow persons of varying physical abilities to live safely and comfortably, should be considered for the station area. HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works 83 Van White Boulevard 3000+003001+003002+003003+003004+003005+001005+291006+001007+001008+001009+001010+001011+001012+001013+001014+001015+001016+001017+001018+001019+001020+001021+001022+001023+001024+001025+001026+001027+001028+001029+001030+001031+001032+001033+001034+001035+001036+001037+001038+001039+001040+001041+001042+001043+001044+001045+001046+001047+001048+001049+001050+001051+001052+001053+001054+001055+001056+001057+001058+001059+001060+001061+001062+001063+001064+001065+001066+001067+001068+001069+001070+001071+001072+001073+001074+001075+001076+001077+001078+001079+001080+001081+001082+001083+001084+001085+001086+001087+001088+001089+001090+001091+001092+001093+001094+001095+001096+001097+001098+001099+001100+001101+001102+001103+002000+002001+002002+002003+002004+002005+002006+002007+002008+002009+002010+002011+002012+002013+002014+002015+002016+002017+002018+002019+002020+002021+002022+002023+002024+002025+002026+002027+002028+002029+002030+002031+002032+002033+002034+002035+002036+002037+002038+002039+002040+002041+002042+002043+002044+002045+002046+002047+002048+002049+002050+002051+002052+002053+002054+002055+002056+002057+002058+002059+002060+002061+002062+002063+002064+002065+002066+002067+002068+002069+002070+002071+002072+002073+002074+002075+002076+002077+002078+002079+002080+002081+002082+002083+002084+002085+002086+002087+002088+002089+002090+002091+002092+002093+002094+002095+002096+002097+002098+002099+002100+002101+002102+002103+00!( !(!( Glenwood GlenwoodPenn 947th West Broadway 7th 3 9 4 394 R i v e r Olson Memorial Olson Mem orial West Broadway Glenwood W estBroadway PennGirardGolden Valley East LyndaleDunwoody Dunwoody NicolletLakeside2 n d 2ndBroadway W a shin gto n 94WashingtonEastLyndal eF F 1-Mile Source: MNGEO, Hennepin County, Perkins+Will, Tangible Consulting Services 94 394 55 k General Occupancy Market Affordable Subsidized <5050-100 101-200 200+ Number of Units k 3000+003001+003002+003003+003004+003005+001005+291006+001007+001008+001009+001010+001011+001012+001013+001014+001015+001016+001017+001018+001019+001020+001021+001022+001023+001024+001025+001026+001027+001028+001029+001030+001031+001032+001033+001034+001035+001036+001037+001038+001039+001040+001041+001042+001043+001044+001045+001046+001047+001048+001049+001050+001051+001052+001053+001054+001055+001056+001057+001058+001059+001060+001061+001062+001063+001064+001065+001066+001067+001068+001069+001070+001071+001072+001073+001074+001075+001076+001077+001078+001079+001080+001081+001082+001083+001084+001085+001086+001087+001088+001089+001090+001091+001092+001093+001094+001095+001096+001097+001098+001099+001100+001101+001102+001103+002000+002001+002002+002003+002004+002005+002006+002007+002008+002009+002010+002011+002012+002013+002014+002015+002016+002017+002018+002019+002020+002021+002022+002023+002024+002025+002026+002027+002028+002029+002030+002031+002032+002033+002034+002035+002036+002037+002038+002039+002040+002041+002042+002043+002044+002045+002046+002047+002048+002049+002050+002051+002052+002053+002054+002055+002056+002057+002058+002059+002060+002061+002062+002063+002064+002065+002066+002067+002068+002069+002070+002071+002072+002073+002074+002075+002076+002077+002078+002079+002080+002081+002082+002083+002084+002085+002086+002087+002088+002089+002090+002091+002092+002093+002094+002095+002096+002097+002098+002099+002100+002101+002102+002103+00!( !(!( Glenwood GlenwoodPenn 947th West Broadway 7th 3 9 4 394 R i v e r Olson Memorial Olson Memorial West Broadway Glenwood W estBroadway PennGirardGolden Valley East LyndaleDunwoody Dunwoody NicolletLakeside2 n d 2ndBroadway W as hin gto n 94WashingtonEastLyndaleF F 1-Mile k 94 394 55 Source: MNGEO, Hennepin County, Perkins+Will, Tangible Consulting Services k Senior/ Disabled Market Affordable Subsidized <5050-100 101-200 200+ Number of Units Station Area Plan • Intensify land uses within 1-3 blocks of the station. Strong vision for TOD in this area with 5+ story buildings. Primary land uses would be residential with some commercial at the street level. Housing Demand through 2040 • >500 units Housing Types • Mixed-income housing (properties inclusive of both market rate and affordable units) • Owner-occupied townhomes (multiple price points) • Multi-story condominiums (multiple price points) Map 21: Van White Boulevard – Multifamily Properties Map 22: Van White Boulevard Senior Properties STATISTIC VAN WHITE BLVD HENNEPIN COUNTY Total Population (1/2-mi radius)1,2 4,899 1,197,776 Toal Households (1/2-mi radius)1,2 1,828 490,196 Median Age1,2 26.7 36.1 Population Age 18 and Younger1,2 36%25% Population Age 65 and Older1,2 8%12% Average Household Size1,2 2.6 2.4 Persons per Bedroom1,2 1.14 0.92 Median Household Income1,2 $20,186 $65,834 Homeownership Rate1,2 18.2%49.0% Households with Children1,2 47.4%28.0% Single-Person Households1,2 34.5%33.0% Persons of Color1,2 84.1%26.0% Households that are Housing Cost Burdened1,6,7 56.7%36.2% Total Housing Units (1/2-mi radius)1,2 1,857 518,332 Units in Buildings with 5+ Units1,2 63.5%29.9% Units in Buildings with 2-4 Units1,2 11.3%5.8% Townhome Units1,2 10.1%8.7% Single-Family Units1,2 15.1%55.3% Median Year Built (Multifamily Units)3,6,7 1978 1973 Median Year Built (Single-Family Units)5,6,7 1937 1958 Median Home Sales Price4 $260,000 $264,000 Average Monthly Rent - 1BR Units3,6 $794 $1,105 Average Monthly Rent - 2BR Units3,6 $977 $1,427 Average Monthly Rent - 3BR+ Units3,6 --$1,819 1 US Census, American Community Survey 2011-2015 Five-Year Estimate 2 Esri 3 CoStar 4 Minneapolis Area Association of Realtors, Multiple Listing Service 5 Hennepin County Assessor 6 Tangible Consulting Services 7 Perkins+Will 1/2-Mile 1/2-Mile HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works84 Housing Gaps Analysis The Van White station area has the largest concentration of income-restricted housing along the Corridor. Therefore, it is somewhat well positioned to preserve critical affordable housing when inevitable price increases begin the happen. The station area is too close to downtown Minneapolis to not be impacted by gentrification. Although most of the income-restricted housing is preserved through the next 20 years, it will still be important to maintain these funding sources or find other strategies for preserving affordable housing. The station area plan envisions a significant amount of new, higher density housing. Making sure new development has a mixture of income requirements will be an important strategy for ensuring the station area will retain current residents. Owner-occupied housing is limited in the station area. Therefore, by encouraging certain types of owner-occupied product this will help diversify the housing stock and provide opportunities for some households to access ownership who currently are not able to do so. Smaller unit types often found in townhomes and multifamily condominiums can often be source of more affordably priced owner-occupied housing. At the station area’s periphery there have been examples of new multifamily condominium development in recent years. Thus, it is likely that when the LRT becomes operational the demand for this type of housing may increase. HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works 85 APPENDICES Community Stakeholder Interview Notes African Career, Education and Resources Inc. (ACER) Attending: Nelima Sitati Munene (ACER Inc.), Dan Edgerton (Zan), Faith Xiong (Zan) 1. What communities do you work with in the Bottineau Corridor? Identifying specific populations, geographies and station areas, if possible. Organization and Background »African Career, Education, and Resource Inc. (ACER) is a grassroots organization. The mission of the organization is to create equitable communities by addressing health, education, housing, and community inequality. »Geographies and Population »ACER serves communities in the northwest suburbs (Brooklyn Center, Brooklyn Park, New Hope, Robbinsdale, and Crystal), and the communities ACER works with are primarily African-American and immigrant communities. »Immigrant communities includes both West African and East African (i.e., Somali, Uganda, Kenya, etc.). ACER also partner and work with other communities including the Latino community and Southeast Asian communities. Organization Projects/Programs »Some of the projects ACER are working on focus around housing justice, immigration, transportation equity, and health equity. HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works86 2. What type of housing is abundant in the community you represent? What type of housing is most needed in the community you represent? This is intended to be very open ended. “Type” of housing, could mean any styles or arrangement. For example: rental vs. owned; townhomes vs single-family vs multi-story; large homes vs small homes; old homes vs new homes; homes affordable to low-income households; homes designed for children; homes designed for older adults or persons with disabilities; etc. »There is a lot of apartment housing and single-family rental. Most of the housing units tend to be old rentals and are “unhealthy housing.” Statistically there are a lot of affordable housing units, but they are really not affordable to the populations served by ACER. People are spending over 50% of their income on rent alone for both apartment and single- family housing and are therefore “housing cost burdened.” »Rental units are often small, 1-2 bedroom units. Eden Park and Park Haven are the two largest apartment rentals in the area. There are a few 3-bedroom apartments located at Park Haven. The rental units tend to be small for the families ACER serves. »It is not uncommon for a 1-bedroom unit to house a family of four people, a 2-bedroom unit can house six people, and a 3-bedroom unit can house larger families, however, there are very few 3-bedroom or larger units (mostly at Park Haven). »We need healthier housing, more affordable housing and more opportunities for homeownership/homeownership strategies. For example, the City of Brooklyn Park is among the cities with the highest level of homeownership in the metro, but also has the second highest racial disparity in homeownership. »Healthier housing means better-maintained housing. For example, the existing housing doesn’t have adequate lighting (indoor or outdoor), often has roof leakage, and there is not enough security at Park Haven and Eden Park Apartments. The doors to the apartment complexes are not secure, and sometimes there are people who don’t live in the apartments loitering inside the apartment complexes. There is also a lack of management. »Many apartments are old and dirty with bad refrigerators/other appliances that can cause food poisoning. The playgrounds are not well kept, which is an unhealthy environment for kids. HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works 87 3. What barriers does the community you represent have in accessing housing? For example cost; discrimination; physical accessibility; other barriers. »Available and adequate housing in the community does not exist. There are also discriminatory practices in housing, such as landlords refusing to accept Section 8 housing vouchers. The application screening is also discriminatory. People with immigrant status can’t get housing or will have to pay more if they don’t have a social security card. »Another barrier is having large families in small housing units, as the kind of housing needed (i.e., 3+ bedroom units) in these neighborhoods is not available. 4. Are there design issues with the type of housing available? Are there design features that are desired by the community you represent? For example, not enough bedrooms; bad layout/ format; not designed to accommodate children; not designed to accommodate people with disabilities; other design issues. »See answers to questions #1, #2 and # 3. 5. What are the desirable neighborhood features in the communities you represent? Are there neighborhood location issues with the housing available? For example, too far from transit; too much crime; too far from essential goods and services; not in a walkable neighborhood; etc. »Park Haven Apartment is not a senior apartment, but there are a lot of seniors/elderly African population that live there. Access to transit, such as buses, is limited, and while it is within walking distance of a grocery store (i.e., Cub is approximately one-half mile), it is difficult for seniors carry more than two bags of grocery for that distance. »Another barrier is the application process for affordable housing. There are a lot of people that lack credit and some places require a credit check. Currently there are no policy strategies to address issue of displacement and gentrification. »Data is outdated, and existing trend analysis alone is not enough to address the issue of displacement and gentrification as well as racially HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works88 concentrated areas of poverty. We need analyses to forecast the supply of housing (and affordable housing, considering the gentrification likely to occur) into the future. »At the policy level, no one is talking about gentrification and affordable housing, and there is no action being taken to address the question: “Why are they poor”. We need to get to the root cause of the issue. We need to consider a private and public partnership strategy. »City policies and practices are also a barrier. For example, there is a monthly landlord crime and safety meeting. At these meetings they will look at a 911 call catalog, and if there are a lot of calls at a given complex, they assume it is a high crime area. But they never really look at the root cause. At Park Haven, there are a lot of seniors, and the high volume of 911 calls could be for medical purposes rather than a crime prevention concern. »There are intentional restrictions and discriminatory practices, such as parking restrictions to restrict certain types of people from accessing housing. 6. Other issues »Displacement and gentrification are a concern. There are currently no policies in place to prevent displacement. For example, ACER lost a senior housing complex in New Hope and seniors are being displaced. In Brooklyn Park, ACER almost lost a senior housing complex, but because of community action Aeon got involved and purchased the complex. Across the metro, we are losing 100 units every week, and this may not include some of the smaller buildings which are often not counted. »No analysis has been done to look at displacement and dealing with affordable housing. »The Hennepin County preliminary study (affordable housing study) assumes that people are choosing to rent rather than buy houses. This is a false assumption; people just can’t afford to buy houses. HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works 89 La Asamblea de Derechos Civiles Attending: Sebastián Rivera (La Asamblea) Dan Edgerton (Zan), Faith Xiong (Zan) 1. What communities do you work with in the Bottineau Corridor? Identifying specific populations, geographies and station areas, if possible. Organization and Background »La Asamblea de Derechos Civiles is a faith-based organization that started 19 years ago with its core work focusing on social justice ministry and immigration issues. The organization was first established in Minneapolis. Today La Asamblea has several congregations located in Minneapolis, Brooklyn Park and St. Cloud. Geographies and Population »La Asamblea primarily serves undocumented populations: Latino, African, and Southeast Asian immigrants. Most of their work is focused on immigrant families living in apartments and mobile homes. Organization Projects/Programs »La Asamblea projects and programs seek to identify social justice for immigrant families. »La Asamblea and ACER are partner organizations working on housing and economic development efforts in both the Latino and East African communities – emphasizing that both Latino and East African communities are experiencing similar issues. »In Brooklyn Park and Brooklyn Center, La Asamblea’s core work focuses on ensuring that immigrant communities thrive while still living in the shadow. With this focus, the organization provides services in housing and economic development, education on civil rights and immigrant rights, and education on landlord-tenant rights. »Some of the areas most impacted by inequality and injustice are the Grove Apartments, Park Haven Apartments, and Autumn Ridge Apartments. HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works90 Grove Apartments have a large population of Latino, Liberian, Somali, Vietnamese and Hmong population. This apartment complex has been targeted by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) many times, and a lot of breadwinners have been taken. Park Haven Apartments have a huge senior African community. Autumn Ridge Apartments was the first building to be focused on when the Blue Line LRT was being studied and planned. There are 970+ units, and many of these units were infested with bedbugs, rats and mice. The apartments primarily house African and African-American families who are on Section 8 vouchers. La Asamblea’s role was to ensure the city provided code enforcement, which the city is currently working on. La Asamblea notices that as the Blue Line LRT is coming in, rent is also going up. »The organization also work towards minimizing the gap between the community and the cities. To do this, the organization educates the community about available resources and create various opportunities for cities to connect with the community. One example of this work is the creation of the Civil Rights Blue Print put together for the City of Brooklyn Center and Brooklyn Park by La Asamblea and ACER. In the process of designing the Civil Rights Blue Print, the organizations were able to engage the community, and connect community members with elected officials. »The blue print was created to help cities create policies that reflect the communities they serve. Under this blue print, La Asamblea and other organizations are working to get buy-ins from the cities for the following policies: • Just Clause Eviction • Section 8 Protection • Inclusionary Housing • Right of First Refusal Clause HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works 91 2. What type of housing is abundant in the community you represent? What type of housing is most needed in the community you represent? This is intended to be very open ended. “Type” of housing, could mean any styles or arrangement. For example: rental vs. owned; townhomes vs single-family vs multi-story; large homes vs small homes; old homes vs new homes; homes affordable to low-income households; homes designed for children; homes designed for older adults or persons with disabilities; etc. »South of Brooklyn Park, there are more single-family homes and some duplexes. After the 2008 housing crash, bigger homes were transformed into duplexes and multi-family housing. »There is an abundance of older housing stock (mid-70s and mid-80s). These homes are affordable, but are in bad conditions – emphasizing that conditions are inhumane. »South of Crystal and Brooklyn Park, there are a few 15-20-unit housing renting out units at $1000-$1200/month. These are harder to find, but are easier to get into because of the high turnover rate. »Compared to Robbinsdale and Crystal, Brooklyn Park has larger apartment complexes. »La Asamblea emphasizes the need for more multi-family housing with more than 2-bedrooms. A 2-bedroom unit does not suffice for the communities they serve, particularly Latino and Southeast Asian communities, who often have larger households. »While some cities have first time homeowner resources, there is a great need here for homeownership resources and opportunities. »Park Haven has a few 3-bedroom units, all located on the top floor. Most of these larger units often house families with younger children, which is inconvenient for seniors. »Bigger housing tends to be more expensive, especially in Crystal, Robbinsdale, New Hope, and anywhere along the Blue Line LRT. There is not a chance for affordable housing along the Blue Line LRT. »There are some affordable starter homes in Robbinsdale. HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works92 3. What barriers does the community you represent have in accessing housing? For example cost; discrimination; physical accessibility; other barriers. »Parking ordinances are a barrier. While the shift in parking time makes it easier for snow plowing, it gets difficult when residents’ vehicles are being towed. »The assumption that everyone has a car is a false assumption. »Lack of sidewalk connections make it difficult for seniors to walk in the middle of winter. There is also a lack of sidewalk connection from the neighborhood area to the busy intersection. »The Blue Line LRT corridor’s busy intersection discourages people from walking. »There are no bike lanes. »Gentrification is a barrier to accessing housing. There is a huge influx of immigrant and people of color (Hmong, Vietnamese, Liberian, etc.), and there is an old mentality of keeping the suburb the way it should be. However, this new form of gentrification is problematic because it pushes more people into the suburbs without any resources. »Discriminatory practices are also barriers to accessing housing. Undocumented immigrants usually pay $75 to $100 more in fees and rent than any other tenants. Landlords are now asking for car insurance to get a parking space, which targets undocumented immigrants. Often the extra money, advocated with the help of La Asamblea, is used to pay for towing fees and not rental fees. »Accessing information and resources on the city websites is difficult for Spanish, Somali and Hmong speakers. It would be beneficial for cities to send yearly and/or quarterly newsletters about available resources provided at the city. HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works 93 »Identifying landlords is very difficult. When an apartment management company changes, La Asamblea goes door-to-door letting people know about what to expect from new management; frequently screening criteria changes. 4. Are there design issues with the type of housing available? Are there design features that are desired by the community you represent? For example, not enough bedrooms; bad layout/ format; not designed to accommodate children; not designed to accommodate people with disabilities; other design issues. »See question #2 5. What are the desirable neighborhood features in the communities you represent? Are there neighborhood location issues with the housing available? For example, too far from transit; too much crime; too far from essential goods and services; not in a walkable neighborhood; etc. »See question #3 6. Other issues »There is an apparent disconnect between the cities and the county. »Hennepin County housing inventory is very helpful, and the organization would like the cities to also know about this document. The document is beneficial for the cities because it talks about housing cost burden, who is impacted, and what are the housing needs in the county and cities. »Homelessness is rising in the suburbs. La Asamblea want the cities and county to work together to prevent the increase of homelessness (i.e., loitering in the LRT) when the Blue Line LRT comes in. HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works94 Community Action Partnership of Hennepin County Attending: Christine Hart (CAP-HC) Dan Edgerton (Zan), Faith Xiong (Zan) 1. What communities do you work with in the Bottineau Corridor? Identifying specific populations, geographies and station areas, if possible. Organization and Background »Community Action Partnership of Hennepin County (CAP-HC) is a service provider organization, and is the only CAP organization that services all of Hennepin County. A few of the programs established by the organization focus on homeownership, economic stability, and housing stability. Geographies and Population »CAP-HC serves all communities along the Blue Line LRT. The organization primarily works with low-income families at 125%-200% of the federal poverty guideline. Organization Projects/Programs »CAP-HC provide energy assistantship, financial services (i.e., financial literacy workshops, financial and employment counseling, etc.), and housing stabilization services. The housing stabilization program provides case management services for someone transitioning from shelter to affordable housing. »CAP-HC would like to increase and preserve affordable housing in Brooklyn Park. HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works 95 2. What type of housing is abundant in the community you represent? What type of housing is most needed in the community you represent? This is intended to be very open ended. “Type” of housing, could mean any styles or arrangement. For example: rental vs. owned; townhomes vs single-family vs multi-story; large homes vs small homes; old homes vs new homes; homes affordable to low-income households; homes designed for children; homes designed for older adults or persons with disabilities; etc. »There is an abundance of affordable old housing stock in Robbinsdale, Crystal and New Hope. »There is less than a 2% vacancy rate for affordable housing ($1,200 or less) in the county, which is a challenge because people will move out of the county to find affordable housing elsewhere. The vacancy rate is nearing 0%, and if people are terminated from their current rental, they basically have nowhere to go. »In the current market, there are a lot of families in rental units/housing because people can’t afford to own a home. There is also a lack of 3 or more-bedroom rentals. Frequently there are six people living in 1-2-bedroom unit housing, which gets tenants in trouble and creates an ongoing problem for tenants. Three or more-bedroom housing is needed across Hennepin County. »Senior housing is also needed. The rent for the New Hope senior apartment complex that was sold has gone up by $200. In Golden Valley, there is a community housing team comprised of 3-4 seniors. These seniors are looking to move out of homeownership because they can no longer maintain their home; but they also face a challenge with finding affordable rental housing in the neighborhood. There is a shortage of affordable senior housing for rent. 3. What barriers does the community you represent have in accessing housing? For example cost; discrimination; physical accessibility; other barriers. »Low vacancy rates and discriminatory practices are barriers to accessible housing. People with housing subsidies (i.e., Section 8 vouchers) experience discrimination by landlords. Many landlords do not want to work with people with housing subsidies because they don’t want to take the extra step to fill out additional paperwork. In some cases, people with HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works96 housing subsidies are being discriminated by property managers because of their race. »Rent increases are also a challenge. For example, rent used to be $800/ month, now rents are going up to $1,400/month. This barrier is not only a hurdle for accessible housing, but also impacts people’s employment and where children are going to school. 4. Are there design issues with the type of housing available? Are there design features that are desired by the community you represent? For example, not enough bedrooms; bad layout/ format; not designed to accommodate children; not designed to accommodate people with disabilities; other design issues. »While there are many issues with layout and design, at the end of the day these issues do not matter. As long as people have housing, they are satisfied with whatever housing layout they have. Layout and design are not a priority for many people. »There is no tenant protection. Tenants would prefer to not complain because of the fear of having nowhere to go if they get terminated for complaining about small things like plumbing. »There are four policies CAP-HC is pushing for city buy-in: • Just cost eviction or non-renewal -Landlords cannot terminate tenants unless there is a just cause. • Section 8 ordinances -Whether or not rent is being paid through housing subsidies, landlords cannot discriminate potential tenants by how their rent is being paid. -Right of First Refusal If the owner/landlord sells the property, they need to give 90-day notice to tenants. This allows the city or other agencies to get involved with rehab or making the property more affordable for the tenants. HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works 97 • Inclusionary Housing -Requires any new development to contribute a percentage of the total units as permanently affordable housing. -Brooklyn Park and Golden Valley both have inclusionary housing ordinances, and the organization is working to get other cities on board. 5. What are the desirable neighborhood features in the communities you represent? Are there neighborhood location issues with the housing available? For example, too far from transit; too much crime; too far from essential goods and services; not in a walkable neighborhood; etc. »Walkability – having more sidewalks in neighborhood area. »Transit – always an issue in the suburbs. Seniors rely on Metro Mobility to get around, but this service is not enough. »Cities should prioritize community-building opportunities. In most cities, community building is not a priority for funding. CAP-HC emphasized that it is in the city’s best interest to prioritize community connection opportunities. While cities are aware of this need, there have been no action to build capacity in moving forward with community building in the neighborhood. 6 . Other issues »There is a disconnect between the county and the cities; they are not working together. The county and cities don’t really have a clear understanding of what the other is doing. »CAP-HC would like to have county take a stronger leadership role to help guide cities with planning for equity. HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works98 City of Lakes Community Land Trust Attending: Staci Howritz (CLCLT), Dan Edgerton (Zan), and Faith Xiong (Zan) 1. What communities do you work with in the Bottineau Corridor? Identifying specific populations, geographies and station areas, if possible. Organization and Background »City of Lakes Community Land Trust is a business that focuses on homeownership opportunities in Minneapolis. The organization’s mission is to “create community ownership that preserves affordability and inclusivity.” »CLCLT began in 2002 as a non-profit organization. This year is CLCLT’s second business year. They are projected to have 38 home closings in the following year. On average, CLCLT,on average, closes 25-30 houses per year, earning about $2-4 million in capital. »CLCLT is marketed through homebuyer education courses, partnerships and lender referrals, and by word of mouth by current homeowners. Geographies and Population »CLCLT serves populations with 80% or less of the median average income. Most of the people they serve have an average median income of 5% or lower. »53% of CLCLT homeowners are communities of color (African- American, East African, Somali, Hmong, and Latino), and 54% of CLCLT homeowners are single. »CLCLT only serves the City of Minneapolis Organization Projects/Programs »CLCLT’s primary role is to invest in land and make it affordable for potential homeowners to own a home on the land. While CLCLT owns the land, the homeowner takes title of the home. Any changes to the net worth of the home are shared between homeowner and CLCLT. HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works 99 »CLCLT currently has 250 homes, ranging from single-family homes to duplexes, condos, and townhomes. The organization also has 50 resales. While the organization mostly focuses on homeownership, they also have rental properties near their business. 2. What type of housing is abundant in the community you represent? What type of housing is most needed in the community you represent? This is intended to be very open ended. “Type” of housing, could mean any styles or arrangement. For example: rental vs. owned; townhomes vs single-family vs multi-story; large homes vs small homes; old homes vs new homes; homes affordable to low-income households; homes designed for children; homes designed for older adults or persons with disabilities; etc. »CLCLT needs a range of housing, however their main concern is not about the type of housing they need, but about who gets to live in Minneapolis. »Minneapolis used to be against duplexes, but there is also a need for density. CLCLT emphasizes that when thinking about filling up empty city lots in Minneapolis, it is also important to think strategically about the need for density. »There is a decent stock of single-family and multi-family housing, and it is important for the city and county to create different housing options along LRT. 3. What barriers does the community you represent have in accessing housing? For example cost; discrimination; physical accessibility; other barriers. »Credit is the biggest barrier for homeownership. »There are a lot of rental properties in Minneapolis, but not enough homes for people to own in Minneapolis. The demand for homeownership is high, but home inventory is low. »There is still a traditional mindset that, in order to own a home, one must have $20,000-$30,000 for closing costs. CLCLT is modeling homeownership, but it is still difficult. HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works100 »Cultural religious policy is also a barrier to homeownership. The idea of “owning” and “investing” in something is a difficult conversation to have with religious and cultural communities. For example, Sharia finance won’t allow Muslim communities to pay interest, but a conventional mortgage with interest is recommended for owning a home. »Land ownership has always been a barrier towards homeownership for many of the cultural and religious communities CLCLT work with. However, homeownership is possible within these communities when people accept changes (i.e., Little Earth community). 4. Are there design issues with the type of housing available? Are there design features that are desired by the community you represent? For example, not enough bedrooms; bad layout/ format; not designed to accommodate children; not designed to accommodate people with disabilities; other design issues. »There is a need for larger family homes with 4 to 6-bedrooms. »There is also a need for accessible and visible homes, particularly for seniors and people with disabilities. »CLCLT is interested in more transitional and smaller houses (1-bedroom and smaller footprint) with less maintenance for seniors to transition from their 3 to 4-bedroom homes. »CLCLT is also interested in mixed-generational homes and mixed-income homes in Minneapolis. HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works 101 5. What are the desirable neighborhood features in the communities you represent? Are there neighborhood location issues with the housing available? For example, too far from transit; too much crime; too far from essential goods and services; not in a walkable neighborhood; etc. »North Minneapolis is a great place, but it also has a very bad reputation for crime. »97% of the people who live in Minneapolis live within a six-block radius to transit. While there is certainly transit accessibility, there is no accessibility to amenities (i.e., banks, grocery stores, coffee shop, restaurant options, etc.) where people live. »It is important to be mindful of creating an economic center where people can live, work, and play. 6. Other issues »CLCLT encourages the Blue Line LRT study to think creatively in the future about landownership and community ownership opportunities. HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works102 Northside Residents Redevelopment Council (NRRC) Attending: Martine Smaller (NRRC), Gale (NRRC), Dan Edgerton (Zan), and Faith Xiong (Zan) 1. What communities do you work with in the Bottineau Corridor? Identifying specific populations, geographies and station areas, if possible. Organization and Background »Northside Residents Redevelopment Council is non-profit neighborhood organization that serves both the Willard-Hay and Near North neighborhoods in North Minneapolis. Their role as a neighborhood organization is to empower residents to make changes in their community. Geographies and Population »NRRC serves a range of communities. The residents they serve are African-American, Hmong, Latino, and European American with a wide range of income. Organization Projects/Programs »Some of the programs and services NRRC provides include block grants, first time homebuyer loans, and reviewing/making recommendations on development proposals. 1. What type of housing is abundant in the community you represent? What type of housing is most needed in the community you represent? This is intended to be very open ended. “Type” of housing, could mean any styles or arrangement. For example: rental vs. owned; townhomes vs single-family vs multi-story; large homes vs small homes; old homes vs new homes; homes affordable to low-income households; homes designed for children; homes designed for older adults or persons with disabilities; etc. »There is a lot of quality housing (bricked homes) that should be preserved and respected, and there is also an increase in housing built using poor quality materials. The quality that housing developers are putting up does not fit the characteristic and aesthetic of the community. These poor- quality homes frequently, after a short period of ownership, are turned HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works 103 into rental properties. When developers are putting resources in an old narrative (social service neighborhood), the community is losing income and the tax base that contributes to the wealth of our neighborhood. There is a need for more relevant details. »The definition of affordable housing is a challenge. While there is an abundance of extremely low-income housing, there is a lack of affordable housing for younger, talented people. Without any affordable housing stock, the community is losing young talented people who are choosing to live elsewhere in the city. 2. What barriers does the community you represent have in accessing housing? For example cost; discrimination; physical accessibility; other barriers. »There are a lot of owner-occupied homes and there are also several rentals that are owned by slum lords. There is a lack of quality rentals in the neighborhood. »There are a lot of entities financially dependent on the old narrative (a community needing of social services resources), and it is not helping the community. »Data is also feeding the old narrative, so there is a need to collect new data and more relevant details to support the neighborhood’s new narrative. »The disconnect within Hennepin County and the disconnect between the county and the city makes it difficult for NRRC to align its neighborhood small area plan with them. »NRRC’s role is to gather data from residents and to share it with the city and the county. In the future, NRRC wants to work more with the city and the county in this aspect. HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works104 3. Are there design issues with the type of housing available? Are there design features that are desired by the community you represent? For example, not enough bedrooms; bad layout/ format; not designed to accommodate children; not designed to accommodate people with disabilities; other design issues. »Most of the homes in the neighborhood are stucco and brick homes. New sidings do not fit in, and we would like to see strategies for preserving the character of neighborhood. If you look down Plymouth Avenue, there is a mix of housing/building types which is not cohesive. 4. What are the desirable neighborhood features in the communities you represent? Are there neighborhood location issues with the housing available? For example, too far from transit; too much crime; too far from essential goods and services; not in a walkable neighborhood; etc. »The organization expressed that zoning is the biggest problem. The current zoning codes have not been changed since the protest and burning of the small businesses along the corridor. Plymouth Avenue and Penn Avenue used to be commercial corridors, similar to 50th and France in South Minneapolis. However, when the city rezoned the neighborhood into residential zoning, it deprived the community of the opportunity to grow economically. There is a need for a more proactive approach to zoning and more commercial zoning in the neighborhood. »Zoning is also designed specifically for vehicles and not pedestrians, which is hindering people from getting to know each other. »Crime is not an issue, but the organization is concerned about the potential of crime when there is an increase in pedestrian traffic outside of walkshed. »Many essential goods are too far for people to walk to. NRRC want more pedestrian--friendly and walkable neighborhoods. »NRRC expressed that the Blue Line LRT was planned without seniors in mind. The organization would like to have more special bus services to serve senior citizens to get to the Blue Line LRT. HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works 105 Redeemer Lutheran Church/Redeemer Center for Life Attending: Pastor Kelly Chatman (Redeemer), Dan Edgerton (Zan), and Faith Xiong (Zan) 1. What communities do you work with in the Bottineau Corridor? Identifying specific populations, geographies and station areas, if possible. Organization and Background »Redeemer Lutheran Church/Redeemer Center for Life is a church and non-profit organization in the Harrison Neighborhood. There are over 4,000 people in the community, in which 39% are African American and 60% rentals in the Harrison neighborhood. Geographies and Population »Harrison Neighborhood is considered near-north due to its proximity to Downtown Minneapolis. 2. What type of housing is abundant in the community you represent? What type of housing is most needed in the community you represent? This is intended to be very open ended. “Type” of housing, could mean any styles or arrangement. For example: rental vs. owned; townhomes vs single-family vs multi-story; large homes vs small homes; old homes vs new homes; homes affordable to low-income households; homes designed for children; homes designed for older adults or persons with disabilities; etc. »The neighborhood is primarily industrial and single-family residential. A few of these single-family homes are Pride for Project Living (PPL) housing projects. There is also an abundance of single-family rentals, some apartment complexes, and vacant lots in the neighborhood. »There are more investors than there are foreclosures in the community. HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works106 »There is an early sign of gentrification that is changing the neighborhood because there is a limited amount of affordable housing, which is pressuring people to move out. There is an increase of younger people in the community today. »As development is coming in, rents will most likely increase. Rent control is needed when LRT comes in. 3. What barriers does the community you represent have in accessing housing? For example cost; discrimination; physical accessibility; other barriers. »The Neighborhood Association wants to advocate more for homeowners and become a homeowner association. »Historically, there is a lack of attractive retail sites and a disparity in neighborhood investment. It would be beneficial to have more user- friendly community retail that has a stronger sense of community investment (i.e., Whole Foods, coffee shops, cooperatives, replace the smoke shop with other retails, etc.). The people in this neighborhood deserve amenities present in other neighborhoods too. »As gentrification comes in, it is likely that the impound lot and industrial sites will turn into retail locations. While adding more commercial sites is a positive thing, there is the risk of further gentrification. 4. Are there design issues with the type of housing available? Are there design features that are desired by the community you represent? For example, not enough bedrooms; bad layout/ format; not designed to accommodate children; not designed to accommodate people with disabilities; other design issues. »There is a need to create healthy design to improve community health. The organization wants to see height limitations, as designs from the city do not fit the characteristic of the community. The organization doesn’t want a “downtown/Grand Canyon” feel, but urges planning and design to maintain the “small town” feel. HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works 107 5. What are the desirable neighborhood features in the communities you represent? Are there neighborhood location issues with the housing available? For example, too far from transit; too much crime; too far from essential goods and services; not in a walkable neighborhood; etc. »There is a need to expand mobility options (bike lanes, sidewalks, buses, etc.) to improve connectivity to amenities and facilities in the neighborhood. It is inaccessible for Minneapolis residents to get to Theodore Wirth Park, an urban park used for skiing and golfing. • Theodore Wirth Park facility also needs to program and promote their facility as a part of the neighborhood. Today, Edina residents are using the park more than local residents. • Harrison Neighborhood is a food desert. Access to healthy food is limited. 6. Other issues »Try to encourage more homeownership and longer-term leases. HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works108 Comments Received in Response to Presentation of Draft Findings to members of the Blue Line Coalition and Health Equity Engagement Cohort (December 13, 2017 – Brookdale Library) Attendee #1: • The number of new affordable units (as listed by the Met Council) seems small compared to the number of total new units • Van White will be a busy station. Students coming and going, start of the corridor • Like how universal design is being addressed • Long term affordability »This needs to be addressed--especially the fact that some developments are halfway thru their affordability period and will be close to finished by opening day »NOAH--be clear on “relative” affordability. Be aware of the pushback by city officials….”We have NOAH, why do we need more”. Many NOAH units are substandard. • Potentially creating homelessness because not producing housing stock that folks are looking for or need Attendee #2: • Much of the naturally-occurring affordable housing in the corridor is uninhabitable or significantly aged. Poor housing stock is bad for residents, obviously, but it also increases the risk that these buildings will be targets for redevelopment. I’d like the report to emphasize that NOAH is unlikely to remain naturally affordable as the corridor becomes a more attractive real estate market. The report should encourage cities to be proactive about preserving affordability either by adding new units or adding rent protections (and renovations) to current NOAH properties. Cities cannot rely on their current NOAH stock to continue meeting the affordability needs of their residents. HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works 109 • Along this theme, a lot of the current rental housing of all types is aging and likely in need of capital investment. The increased costs of these improvements often push property owners to raise their rents. I’d like to see the report discuss this phenomenon and include recommendations about how cities can help landlords maintain quality housing stock while preserving affordability. • Given the age of the corridor’s housing stock, I would also like to see the report discuss whether any current affordable housing properties that were built under Section 42 or similar programs are nearing the end of their affordability term commitment. Again, this represents another threat to affordable housing in the corridor as property owners seek to take advantage of the rising rental market and/or can’t afford capital investments in their properties without raising rents. • The corridor’s housing density is currently well under the recommended levels of density for TOD. I’d like to see the report emphasize that permitting higher-density development is one way to make affordable housing and commercial space more financially feasible. • Concerns were raised about the shortage of 3+ bedroom units in the corridor, and I worry that pushback about developing larger units could be a smokescreen for discrimination against immigrant families who tend to be larger. The report should encourage cities to prioritize housing units of all sizes in both the ownership and rental markets. • The report should discuss the current status of owner-occupied multifamily housing stock within the corridor and include recommendations for affordable homeownership as an important strategy. Density, homeownership, and affordability do not need to be mutually exclusive goals. HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works110 Attendee #3: My apologies for being unable to attend this session but I’m confident that my fellow BLC members were a great representation. My comments are listed below and as indicated represent a context outside of being in attendance and outside of receiving or providing direct input from the presenters. a. I would have welcomed better identification of the areas being addressed at the beginning of the report b. My understanding of a Gap Analysis involves the “comparison of actual performance with potential or desired performance” and ways to bridge the “Gap”. c. I was unable to match the “Purpose of a Gap Analysis” with many of the Takeaways. The first sentence can be said about most major cities but would have preferred to see Takeaways specific to the Blue Line corridor and its specific needs. In addition, other than “upgrading current limited stock” there was no need identified for new development in the “under 3 bdrm market.” d. Without a Glossary, I’m unclear on the definition of an “owner-occupied MF unit” or where are the “Hennepin County and Twin Cities MSA areas might be located. e. I would like to see the source document indicating that affordable housing is available as stated in your document. f. In that same vein, I disagree and have seen reports that dispute the premise in this report that most housing along the corridor is owned and not rental, especially when the same report touts the large population of people of color along this same corridor. g. I am in disagreement with Page 16’s premise that the median income of people on Golden Valley Rd. is $80,000 and I would also challenge the amount attributed to Plymouth Ave too. h. Page 36 graph-2017 Household Size does not include “Oak Grove Parkway” or “Corridor 1-mile” (whatever that is) data. i. Page 41 does not reference any cost-burdened renters in Oak Grove Parkway or at 93rd Ave, is that correct? j. Page 46 Development Trends do not reference a specific area or areas. k. Page 51 I would suggest an increase in the Community Experts going forward. this group(s) do not mention government policies around density and zoning that impact housing. They failed to mention high construction costs, bias against those with criminal backgrounds and those with unlawful detainers. They did not mention red-lining by banks and lenders and many other factors impacting construction and rehab of affordable housing. l. Page 53, I’m unclear on who may have been asked a question and what was the question they were attempting to answer. m. There is no reference to gentrification and its related displacement of community members. n. There appears to be no Equity or Racial Disparity lens applied to any of the captured data and potential Takeaways. o. On the “Why Do A Gap Analysis” page, four items (or conclusions) are referenced but none of the Takeaway’s offer alternatives or solutions to any of these items. HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works 111 DATA TABLES Housing Units by Units in Structure SF Homes Attached (THs) 2-4 Unit Bldgs 5-19 Unit Bldgs 20+ Unit Bldgs Other All Housing Units Oak Grove Pkwy 21 19 0 2 0 0 42 93rd Ave 219 36 3 0 6 0 265 85th Ave 705 436 59 17 46 0 1,263 Brooklyn Blvd 454 70 40 62 102 0 728 63rd Ave 633 90 21 421 894 0 2,058 Bass Lake Rd 524 7 40 126 253 0 951 Robbinsdale 841 212 46 178 598 4 1,879 Golden Valley Rd 1,020 25 28 72 6 0 1,152 Plymouth Ave 1,148 34 68 77 23 3 1,352 Penn Ave 1,113 172 601 184 217 2 2,290 Van White Blvd 281 188 209 423 757 0 1,857 Corridor - 1/2 Mile 11,703 1,585 1,199 1,936 3,392 12 19,827 Corridor - 1 Mile 24,071 3,229 2,234 3,141 9,792 47 42,515 Brooklyn Park 16,410 4,001 544 1,151 4,623 29 26,758 Crystal 7,113 159 236 495 1,345 0 9,348 Robbinsdale 4,066 414 150 503 1,014 14 6,161 Golden Valley 6,289 643 123 677 1,145 28 8,905 Minneapolis 75,287 6,533 22,052 19,183 44,989 341 168,385 Hennepin County 271,200 42,701 28,395 38,148 108,263 1,489 490,196 Twin Cities MSA 826,141 143,539 58,862 81,791 202,845 21,217 1,334,395 Source: US Census, ACS 2011-2015 Estimate HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works112 Rental Housing by Type and Year Built (1-mile Buffer) Oak Grove Pkwy Single Family Town- homes Duplex/ Triplex Apt, 4-9 Units Apts 10+ Units Total Before 1940 1 1 1940 to 1959 0 1960 to 1979 0 1980 to 1999 0 2000 and Later 2 279 281 Total 3 0 0 0 279 282 93rd Ave Single Family Town- homes Duplex/ Triplex Apt, 4-9 Units Apts 10+ Units Total Before 1940 0 1940 to 1959 0 1960 to 1979 1 1 1980 to 1999 22 22 2000 and Later 1 1 Total 24 0 0 0 0 24 85th Ave Single Family Town- homes Duplex/ Triplex Apt, 4-9 Units Apts 10+ Units Total Before 1940 2 2 1940 to 1959 0 1960 to 1979 38 42 80 1980 to 1999 23 93 116 2000 and Later 3 16 19 Total 66 109 42 0 0 217 Brooklyn Blvd Single Family Town- homes Duplex/ Triplex Apt, 4-9 Units Apts 10+ Units Total Before 1940 0 1940 to 1959 2 2 1960 to 1979 31 46 14 268 359 1980 to 1999 25 2 27 2000 and Later 1 1 Total 59 0 48 14 268 389 63rd Ave Single Family Town- homes Duplex/ Triplex Apt, 4-9 Units Apts 10+ Units Total Before 1940 0 1940 to 1959 56 28 27 111 1960 to 1979 9 19 56 1,445 1,529 1980 to 1999 3 7 73 83 2000 and Later 1 7 122 130 Total 69 28 46 70 1,640 1,853 Bass Lake Rd Single Family Town- homes Duplex/ Triplex Apt, 4-9 Units Apts 10+ Units Total Before 1940 1 2 3 1940 to 1959 60 4 14 78 1960 to 1979 4 28 111 143 1980 to 1999 4 241 245 2000 and Later 0 Total 69 0 6 42 352 469 HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works 113 Robbinsdale Single Family Town- homes Duplex/ Triplex Apt, 4-9 Units Apts 10+ Units Total Before 1940 41 30 71 1940 to 1959 38 71 55 164 1960 to 1979 8 11 20 14 185 238 1980 to 1999 11 4 331 346 2000 and Later 2 20 7 36 65 Total 100 31 125 21 607 884 Golden Valley Rd Single Family Town- homes Duplex/ Triplex Apt, 4-9 Units Apts 10+ Units Total Before 1940 77 13 16 24 130 1940 to 1959 48 6 35 89 1960 to 1979 6 3 13 22 1980 to 1999 10 10 2000 and Later 4 4 Total 145 0 22 51 37 255 Plymouth Ave Single Family Town- homes Duplex/ Triplex Apt, 4-9 Units Apts 10+ Units Total Before 1940 220 2 62 21 12 317 1940 to 1959 29 6 21 35 91 1960 to 1979 7 5 7 72 91 1980 to 1999 7 7 2000 and Later 7 7 14 Total 270 15 88 63 84 520 Penn Ave Single Family Town- homes Duplex/ Triplex Apt, 4-9 Units Apts 10+ Units Total Before 1940 237 371 213 88 909 1940 to 1959 39 6 52 14 111 1960 to 1979 43 5 49 63 243 403 1980 to 1999 33 12 11 7 63 2000 and Later 14 7 11 14 46 Total 366 30 494 311 331 1,532 Van White Blvd Single Family Town- homes Duplex/ Triplex Apt, 4-9 Units Apts 10+ Units Total Before 1940 28 19 83 90 12 232 1940 to 1959 2 2 1960 to 1979 15 8 28 703 754 1980 to 1999 7 6 7 14 88 122 2000 and Later 10 25 8 84 588 715 Total 60 50 108 216 1,391 1,825 Corridor Single Family Town- homes Duplex/ Triplex Apt, 4-9 Units Apts 10+ Units Total Before 1940 1,531 290 1,132 666 147 3,766 1940 to 1959 1,054 23 362 174 172 1,785 1960 to 1979 444 449 534 757 5,152 7,336 1980 to 1999 289 271 52 123 834 1,569 2000 and Later 153 390 19 273 1,641 2,476 Total 3,471 1,423 2,099 1,993 7,946 16,932 HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works114 Housing Cost-Burdened Status of Households (2015) Owner Households Renter Households Owner Households Renter Households Cost- Burdened Not Cost- Burdened Cost- Burdened Not Cost- Burdened Cost- Burdened Not Cost- Burdened Cost- Burdened Not Cost- Burdened Oak Grove Pkwy 7 28 0 32 10.4%41.8%0.0%47.8% 93rd Ave 74 163 0 32 27.5%60.6%0.0%11.9% 85th Ave 294 788 116 153 21.8%58.3%8.6%11.3% Brooklyn Blvd 104 332 656 308 7.4%23.7%46.9%22.0% 63rd Ave 203 415 1,422 1,063 6.5%13.4%45.8%34.3% Bass Lake Rd 150 321 604 455 9.8%21.0%39.5%29.7% Robbinsdale 901 3,393 1,195 999 13.9%52.3%18.4%15.4% Golden Valley Rd 173 651 573 496 9.1%34.4%30.3%26.2% Plymouth Ave 201 587 708 461 10.3%30.0%36.2%23.6% Penn Ave 250 506 1,870 1,274 6.4%13.0%47.9%32.7% Van White Blvd 95 234 1,875 1,271 2.7%6.7%54.0%36.6% Brooklyn Park 4,195 10,248 4,477 3,239 18.9%46.2%20.2%14.6% Crystal 1,374 3,309 1,514 1,171 18.6%44.9%20.5%15.9% Golden Valley 1,121 3,506 924 997 15.4%45.2%20.4%19.0% Robbinsdale 786 2,306 1,041 967 17.1%53.5%14.1%15.2% Hennepin County 60,081 163,163 84,579 91,932 15.0%40.8%21.2%23.0% Twin Cities MSA 180,536 504,729 186,397 198,387 16.9%47.2%17.4%18.5% Sources: U.S. Census Bureau; Esri; Tangible Consulting Services; Perkins+Will HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works 115 Age Distribution 2015 (Numeric) 1/2 Mile Radius 0-18 19-24 25 to 34 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65-74 75-84 85+Total Median Oak Grove Pkwy 67 17 49 43 37 40 24 12 2 291 37.5 93rd Ave 298 69 152 156 140 102 49 26 8 1,000 33.9 85th Ave 931 240 585 505 446 427 266 142 47 3,589 35.7 Brooklyn Blvd 672 211 346 256 253 268 169 47 9 2,231 31.5 63rd Ave 1,298 493 755 599 453 402 291 197 161 4,649 32.0 Bass Lake Rd 531 191 345 345 332 300 180 82 58 2,364 38.2 Robbinsdale 871 330 618 635 530 518 337 181 161 4,181 38.9 Golden Valley Rd 637 226 333 398 383 403 258 97 43 2,778 39.7 Plymouth Ave 1,093 400 554 490 438 458 312 128 48 3,921 33.3 Penn Ave 1,929 775 951 775 702 594 345 128 47 6,246 29.0 Van White 1,755 521 932 581 382 340 259 93 36 4,899 26.7 Corridor (1/2-mile)12,556 4,157 7,647 6,286 6,107 4,716 2,377 1,627 821 46,294 34.9 1 Mile Radius 0-18 19-24 25 to 34 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65-74 75-84 85+Total Median Oak Grove Pkwy 417 111 291 258 226 225 130 63 9 1,730 36.6 93rd Ave 1,521 384 911 821 773 641 354 243 105 5,753 35.7 85th Ave 2,930 861 1,706 1,460 1,343 1,266 782 354 126 10,828 34.5 Brooklyn Blvd 2,787 894 1,610 1,252 1,134 1,189 758 259 68 9,951 33.0 63rd Ave 3,979 1,516 2,433 1,983 1,638 1,439 996 559 329 14,872 32.9 Bass Lake Rd 2,427 858 1,602 1,627 1,511 1,421 880 434 255 11,015 38.6 Robbinsdale 3,267 1,121 2,251 2,210 1,985 1,954 1,244 665 489 15,186 39.1 Golden Valley Rd 4,139 1,600 2,027 1,960 1,758 1,702 1,032 419 166 14,803 33.1 Plymouth Ave 4,361 1,770 2,148 1,821 1,669 1,558 946 390 152 14,815 30.5 Penn Ave 5,732 2,062 2,919 2,335 1,969 1,780 1,133 408 147 18,485 29.6 Van White 5,218 2,494 4,724 2,859 2,360 2,037 1,115 387 127 21,321 30.5 Corridor 25,330 9,055 16,900 13,377 13,210 10,019 4,821 3,306 1,688 97,706 34.7 Cities & Region 0 to 19 20 to 24 25 to 34 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65-74 75-84 85+Total Median Golden Valley 4,382 730 2,671 2,149 3,130 3,526 2,251 1,126 875 20,845 46.5 Robbinsdale 3,001 800 2,615 2,015 2,015 1,600 941 646 379 14,046 36.8 Crystal 5,471 746 3,662 3,459 3,233 2,916 1,513 1,084 497 22,584 38.9 Brooklyn Park 24,006 5,317 12,355 10,244 10,947 8,445 4,466 1,959 627 78,351 32.8 Hennepin County 297,048 79,053 203,622 158,106 166,491 148,524 79,053 43,120 22,758 1,197,776 36.1 Twin Cities MSA 930,415 217,904 508,442 460,019 508,442 425,431 224,821 121,058 58,799 3,458,790 36.6 Source: U.S. Census Bureau, ACS 2011-2015 Estimate; Esri; Tangible Consulting Services HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works116 Age Distribution 2015 (Percentage) 1/2 Mile Radius 0 to 19 20 to 24 25 to 34 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65-74 75-84 85+Total Oak Grove Pkwy 23%6%17%15%13%14%8%4%1%100% 93rd Ave 30%7%15%16%14%10%5%3%1%100% 85th Ave 26%7%16%14%12%12%7%4%1%100% Brooklyn Blvd 30%9%16%11%11%12%8%2%0%100% 63rd Ave 28%11%16%13%10%9%6%4%3%100% Bass Lake Rd 22%8%15%15%14%13%8%3%2%100% Robbinsdale 21%8%15%15%13%12%8%4%4%100% Golden Valley Rd 23%8%12%14%14%15%9%3%2%100% Plymouth Ave 28%10%14%12%11%12%8%3%1%100% Penn Ave 31%12%15%12%11%10%6%2%1%100% Van White 36%11%19%12%8%7%5%2%1%100% 1 Mile Radius 0 to 19 20 to 24 25 to 34 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65-74 75-84 85+Total Oak Grove Pkwy 24%6%17%15%13%13%8%4%1%100% 93rd Ave 26%7%16%14%13%11%6%4%2%100% 85th Ave 27%8%16%13%12%12%7%3%1%100% Brooklyn Blvd 28%9%16%13%11%12%8%3%1%100% 63rd Ave 27%10%16%13%11%10%7%4%2%100% Bass Lake Rd 22%8%15%15%14%13%8%4%2%100% Robbinsdale 22%7%15%15%13%13%8%4%3%100% Golden Valley Rd 28%11%14%13%12%11%7%3%1%100% Plymouth Ave 29%12%14%12%11%11%6%3%1%100% Penn Ave 31%11%16%13%11%10%6%2%1%100% Van White 24%12%22%13%11%10%5%2%1%100% Corridor Cities & Region 0 to 19 20 to 24 25 to 34 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65-74 75-84 85+Total Golden Valley 21%4%13%10%15%17%11%5%4%100% Robbinsdale 21%6%19%14%14%11%7%5%3%100% Crystal 24%3%16%15%14%13%7%5%2%100% Brooklyn Park 31%7%16%13%14%11%6%3%1%100% Hennepin County 25%7%17%13%14%12%7%4%2%100% Twin Cities MSA 27%6%15%13%15%12%7%4%2%100% Source: U.S. Census Bureau, ACS 2011-2015 Estimate; Esri; Tangible Consulting Services HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works 117 Median Age (2000-2022) 1/2 Mile Radius 2000 2010 2017 2022 Oak Grove Pkwy 39.0 36.4 37.5 38.2 93rd Ave 29.6 32.8 33.9 35.7 85th Ave 35.3 34.6 35.7 36.7 Brooklyn Blvd 31.9 30.2 31.5 32.1 63rd Ave 30.4 30.6 32.0 32.6 Bass Lake Rd 35.7 37.0 38.2 39.0 Robbinsdale 38.2 36.7 38.9 40.4 Golden Valley Rd 34.9 37.8 39.7 41.2 Plymouth Ave 29.5 31.3 33.3 34.8 Penn Ave 24.9 28.1 29.0 29.4 Van White 21.8 25.5 26.7 27.3 Golden Valley 42.7 45.7 47.4 47.9 Robbinsdale 37.6 36.9 38.7 39.9 Crystal 36.9 38.0 39.5 40.3 Brooklyn Park 32.0 32.6 33.6 34.6 Hennepin County 34.9 35.9 37.3 38.1 Sources: U.S. Census Bureau; Esri; Tangible Consulting Services HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works118 Household Size 2015 1/2-Mile Radius Oak Grove Pkwy 3.3 93rd Ave 3.7 85th Ave 2.8 Brooklyn Blvd 3.0 63rd Ave 2.5 Bass Lake Rd 2.5 Robbinsdale 2.1 Golden Valley Rd 2.5 Plymouth Ave 3.1 Penn Ave 3.1 Van White 2.7 Corridor (1/2-mile)2.5 Corridor (1-mile)2.6 1- Mile Radius Oak Grove Pkwy 2.8 93rd Ave 2.8 85th Ave 2.9 Brooklyn Blvd 2.8 63rd Ave 2.6 Bass Lake Rd 2.4 Robbinsdale 2.3 Golden Valley Rd 2.7 Plymouth Ave 2.8 Penn Ave 2.7 Van White 2.2 Corridor 2.4 Cities & Region Brooklyn Park 2.9 Crystal 2.4 Robbinsdale 2.3 Golden Valley 2.3 Hennepin County 2.3 Twin Cities MSA 2.5 Source: U.S. Census Bureau 2015 5-year ACS, Esri, Tangible Consulting Services HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works 119 Household Type (2015) Household Type Married Couple w/ Children Married Couple w/o Children Other Family w/ Children Other Family w/o Children Non- family (2+ persons) Living Alone Half Mile Radius Oak Grove Pkwy 13 9 4 3 1 8 93rd Ave 91 62 61 17 7 39 85th Ave 354 335 114 36 36 329 Brooklyn Blvd 151 165 167 83 23 124 63rd Ave 362 400 428 132 115 538 Bass Lake Rd 174 157 89 57 86 357 Robbinsdale 154 325 185 120 209 790 Golden Valley Rd 174 342 133 64 89 288 Plymouth Ave 190 260 271 74 148 291 Penn Ave 264 254 594 180 214 610 Van White 176 124 658 76 118 607 Corridor (1/2-Mile)3,329 3,920 3,417 1,247 1,488 5,486 One Mile Radius Oak Grove Pkwy 138 96 55 29 7 77 93rd Ave 564 480 251 99 42 456 85th Ave 984 872 611 157 128 827 Brooklyn Blvd 660 706 679 214 125 865 63rd Ave 1,175 1,025 1,148 417 297 1,664 Bass Lake Rd 938 889 504 257 372 1,352 Robbinsdale 1,021 1,501 769 494 622 2,056 Golden Valley Rd 887 978 959 361 424 1,276 Plymouth Ave 739 813 1,174 374 414 1,261 Penn Ave 858 887 1,716 433 613 1,851 Van White 729 1,133 1,628 387 841 3,706 Corridor 7,010 8,058 6,619 2,507 3,060 12,797 Cities & Region Brooklyn Park 6,543 6,694 4,436 1,776 1,107 6,202 Crystal 1,735 2,085 1,058 707 737 3,026 Robbinsdale 1,033 1,416 715 371 610 2,016 Golden Valley 1,578 2,844 707 542 514 2,720 Hennepin County 94,700 120,473 44,999 23,774 45,563 160,687 Twin Cities MSA 305,630 367,720 127,855 64,344 98,744 370,102 Source: U.S. Census Bureau, ACS 2011-2015 Estimate; Esri; Tangible Consulting Services HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works120 Households by Number of Bedrooms Owner- Occupied Total No Bedroom 1 Bedroom 2 Bedrooms 3 Bedrooms 4 Bedrooms 5+ Bedrooms Total Bedrooms Oak Grove N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 93rd Ave 649 0 10 170 161 254 54 2,130 85th Ave 2,407 12 29 576 626 1,008 156 7,914 Brooklyn Blvd 3,183 12 119 641 1,108 1,118 185 10,171 63rd Ave 2,552 0 112 495 1,352 486 107 7,658 Bass Lake Rd 2,334 0 24 418 1,417 397 78 7,105 Robbinsdale 2,609 14 122 502 1,457 427 87 7,671 Golden Valley Rd 3,357 0 35 533 1,771 831 187 10,710 Plymouth Ave 2,048 0 14 277 1,087 501 169 6,712 Penn Ave 2,502 0 50 602 1,155 519 176 7,710 Van White 1,871 7 105 385 743 438 193 5,867 Brooklyn Park 18,743 12 267 3,446 6,963 6,278 1,777 62,412 Crystal 6,594 0 107 1,134 3,794 1,345 214 20,250 Robbinsdale 4,083 14 105 791 2,312 732 129 12,236 Golden Valley 6,851 0 127 915 3,179 2,070 560 22,686 Hennepin County 307,395 595 12,504 67,039 118,634 81,659 26,964 969,928 Twin Cities MSA 932,769 1,449 23,571 185,911 371,780 268,897 81,161 3,009,807 Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Tangible Consulting Services HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works 121 Households by Number of Bedrooms – Renter-Occupied 2015 Renter- Occupied Total No Bedroom 1 Bedroom 2 Bedrooms 3 Bedrooms 4 Bedrooms 5+ Bedrooms Total Bedrooms Oak Grove N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 93rd Ave 45 0 0 32 13 0 0 103 85th Ave 528 0 97 187 135 84 25 1,342 Brooklyn Blvd 964 0 293 306 216 124 25 2,179 63rd Ave 2,124 79 652 1,042 263 81 7 3,964 Bass Lake Rd 576 6 71 191 217 91 0 1,474 Robbinsdale 1,805 50 739 747 213 30 26 3,177 Golden Valley Rd 1,320 14 104 481 491 215 15 3,491 Plymouth Ave 1,194 39 233 426 305 176 15 2,821 Penn Ave 3,343 198 801 1,109 758 359 118 7,541 Van White 3,295 220 957 1,143 598 266 111 6,898 Brooklyn Park 8,015 250 2,749 3,116 1,063 597 240 16,056 Crystal 2,754 75 932 939 643 159 6 5,481 Robbinsdale 2,078 50 739 914 323 26 26 3,825 Golden Valley 2,054 42 698 821 391 85 17 3,983 Hennepin County 182,801 12,192 72,588 64,026 23,385 7,690 2,920 328,931 Twin Cities MSA 401,626 21,118 140,480 152,216 61,485 19,819 6,508 763,603 Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Tangible Consulting Services HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works122 Households by Number of Bedrooms – All Occupied Households 2015 Total-Occupied Total No Bedroom 1 Bedroom 2 Bedrooms 3 Bedrooms 4 Bedrooms 5+ Bedrooms Total Bedrooms Oak Grove N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 93rd Ave 694 0 10 202 174 254 54 2,233 85th Ave 2,935 12 126 763 761 1,092 181 9,256 Brooklyn Blvd 4,147 12 412 947 1,324 1,242 210 12,350 63rd Ave 4,676 79 764 1,537 1,615 567 114 11,623 Bass Lake Rd 2,910 6 95 609 1,634 488 78 8,579 Robbinsdale 4,414 64 861 1,249 1,670 457 113 10,849 Golden Valley Rd 4,677 14 139 1,014 2,262 1,046 202 14,201 Plymouth Ave 3,242 39 247 703 1,392 677 184 9,533 Penn Ave 5,845 198 851 1,711 1,913 878 294 15,251 Van White 5,166 227 1,062 1,528 1,341 704 304 12,765 Brooklyn Park 26,758 262 3,016 6,562 8,026 6,875 2,017 78,468 Crystal 9,348 75 1,039 2,073 4,437 1,504 220 25,731 Robbinsdale 6,161 64 844 1,705 2,635 758 155 16,061 Golden Valley 8,905 42 825 1,736 3,570 2,155 577 26,669 Hennepin County 490,196 12,787 85,092 131,065 142,019 89,349 29,884 1,298,859 Twin Cities MSA 1,334,395 22,567 164,051 338,127 433,265 288,716 87,669 3,773,410 Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Tangible Consulting Services HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works 123 Year Householder Moved Into Dwelling Unit (2015) 1/2 Mile Radius Moved in 2010 or later Moved in 2000 to 2009 Moved in 1990 to 1999 Moved in 1980 to 1989 Moved in 1979 and Earlier Oak Grove Pkwy 113 195 47 22 26 93rd Ave 534 846 365 88 59 85th Ave 1,028 1,446 628 249 227 Brooklyn Blvd 960 1,256 532 216 285 63rd Ave 2,371 1,675 755 349 576 Bass Lake Rd 1,310 1,365 617 385 634 Robbinsdale 2,027 2,227 1,007 437 764 Golden Valley Rd 1,874 1,427 653 339 591 Plymouth Ave 2,189 1,165 557 307 557 Penn Ave 2,855 2,030 583 290 599 Van White Blvd 4,319 2,733 500 268 604 Corridor (1/2-mile)14,819 13,304 5,255 2,602 4,071 Brooklyn Park 8,816 9,739 4,702 1,928 1,573 Crystal 2,693 2,803 1,513 954 1,385 Golden Valley 1,956 3,175 1,655 932 1,187 Minneapolis 74,762 52,112 20,714 10,650 10,147 Robbinsdale 2,027 2,251 939 358 586 Hennepin County 172,848 161,342 79,003 39,882 37,121 Twin Cities MSA 417,614 472,598 230,987 110,528 102,668 Sources: US Census, ACS 2011-2015 Estimate; Esri HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works124 Number of Vehicles Available to Households All Occupied Housing Units None 1 2 3 or More Oak Grove Pkwy 1 111 212 70 93rd Ave 59 546 869 325 85th Ave 115 1,055 1,711 486 Brooklyn Blvd 338 1,055 1,261 366 63rd Ave 610 2,391 1,900 613 Bass Lake Rd 344 1,716 1,606 502 Robbinsdale 762 2,345 2,369 786 Golden Valley Rd 649 1,668 1,941 470 Plymouth Ave 895 1,733 1,540 426 Penn Ave 1,472 2,463 1,814 408 Van White Blvd 2,316 3,857 1,789 321 Corridor (1-mile)5,345 15,505 13,930 3,962 Brooklyn Park 2,156 7,734 10,541 6,327 Crystal 747 3,403 3,836 1,362 Robbinsdale 727 2,196 2,367 871 Golden Valley 497 3,162 4,012 1,234 Minneapolis 30,549 70,851 52,200 14,785 Hennepin County 50,479 176,114 189,982 73,621 Twin Cities MSA 100,220 411,746 549,084 273,345 Source: Esri, Tangible Consulting Services HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works 125 Race, Ethnicity, and Hispanic Origin (2015) 1/2 Mile Radius White African Amer. Amer. Indian Asian Pacific Islander Other Race Two or More Races Total Hispanic* Oak Grove Pkwy 198 44 1 33 1 4 8 289 7 93rd Ave 462 174 2 321 0 14 26 999 28 85th Ave 1,760 707 7 883 7 68 158 3,591 133 Brooklyn Blvd 814 818 18 421 0 49 107 2,229 143 63rd Ave 1,891 1,654 19 325 0 544 214 4,647 823 Bass Lake Rd 1,440 487 14 142 0 168 111 2,365 270 Robbinsdale 2,907 820 13 172 0 92 176 4,183 234 Golden Valley Rd 1,475 878 14 197 0 58 156 2,778 142 Plymouth Ave 968 2,137 43 416 0 125 227 3,921 227 Penn Ave 1,206 3,255 87 1,081 0 250 362 6,248 481 Van White 779 3,047 39 558 0 240 230 4,899 554 Corridor 24,951 15,304 354 5,505 0 2,020 2,374 50,508 3,889 1 Mile Radius Oak Grove Pkwy 1,114 273 5 263 5 24 43 1,730 40 93rd Ave 3,118 874 17 1,484 0 92 167 5,753 184 85th Ave 5,188 2,513 43 2,339 11 271 455 10,831 520 Brooklyn Blvd 4,109 3,254 60 1,711 10 338 468 9,950 687 63rd Ave 7,019 4,520 74 1,234 0 1,368 654 14,870 2,141 Bass Lake Rd 7,467 1,817 77 617 0 485 562 11,014 859 Robbinsdale 11,330 2,111 76 623 15 349 699 15,188 835 Golden Valley Rd 5,477 6,173 148 1,688 15 444 859 14,804 933 Plymouth Ave 3,601 7,557 193 2,045 15 489 919 14,817 978 Penn Ave 4,455 9,668 222 2,440 18 702 980 18,486 1,405 Van White 7,291 9,295 277 2,622 21 682 1,109 21,319 1,684 Corridor 55,610 30,489 859 11,272 107 3,972 5,046 107,356 7,944 Cities & Region Golden Valley 17,352 1,787 132 860 0 126 609 20,866 529 Robbinsdale 11,353 1,992 58 218 0 180 488 14,289 507 Crystal 18,429 2,337 161 804 0 312 564 22,607 1,858 Brooklyn Park 40,851 20,998 246 11,986 57 1,617 2,440 78,195 5,133 Hennepin County 889,634 145,718 8,273 81,406 475 30,305 41,965 1,197,776 81,719 Twin Cities MSA 2,790,735 262,209 20,834 211,862 1,192 64,386 107,572 3,458,790 192,461 * Persons of Hispanic origin can be of any race Sources: U.S. Census Bureau 2015 5-year ACS, Esri, Tangible Consulting Services HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works126 Household Income 2015 1/2 Mile Radius <$15,000 $15,000 - $24,999 $25,000 - $34,999 $35,000 - $49,999 $50,000 -$74,999 $75,000 - $99,999 $100,000 - $149,999 $150,000 - $199,999 $200,000+Total Median Oak Grove Pkwy 4 4 10 8 20 13 18 5 6 88 $71,454 93rd Ave 6 13 18 20 49 52 79 26 12 275 $88,134 85th Ave 52 66 97 153 270 172 227 161 102 1,300 $76,323 Brooklyn Blvd 93 119 44 116 108 130 79 41 16 746 $50,160 63rd Ave 183 316 255 342 401 156 140 39 16 1,848 $41,101 Bass Lake Rd 97 131 111 103 256 118 101 10 21 948 $51,914 Robbinsdale 218 321 160 307 407 181 230 96 34 1,954 $48,121 Golden Valley Rd 69 97 77 116 185 108 235 115 90 1,092 $75,360 Plymouth Ave 159 139 118 175 225 143 172 71 61 1,263 $53,189 Penn Ave 451 352 243 330 300 142 116 36 15 1,985 $32,276 Van White 703 338 242 237 153 66 53 15 21 1,828 $20,186 Corridor (1/2-mile)2,298 2,380 1,881 2,716 3,813 2,218 2,570 843 550 19,269 $51,570 Corridor (1-mile)4,351 4,520 4,114 5,547 7,922 5,045 6,140 2,137 1,768 41,544 $55,170 1 Mile Radius <$15,000 $15,000 - $24,999 $25,000 - $34,999 $35,000 - $49,999 $50,000 - $74,999 $75,000 - $99,999 $100,000 - $149,999 $150,000 - $199,999 $200,000+Total Median Oak Grove Pkwy 23 26 64 56 135 100 138 37 40 619 $76,002 93rd Ave 78 115 161 233 374 293 437 197 116 2,004 $77,670 85th Ave 171 226 341 462 762 570 691 328 170 3,721 $70,407 Brooklyn Blvd 334 366 365 493 688 504 443 152 75 3,420 $53,887 63rd Ave 568 853 757 958 1,162 594 521 145 79 5,637 $43,841 Bass Lake Rd 359 445 473 543 1,077 669 655 156 124 4,501 $57,408 Robbinsdale 489 761 555 950 1,488 822 1,079 330 137 6,611 $56,833 Golden Valley Rd 512 562 521 643 872 562 776 261 202 4,911 $54,553 Plymouth Ave 752 701 502 696 775 429 536 216 167 4,774 $43,146 Penn Ave 1,413 942 762 926 893 493 458 239 193 6,319 $35,492 Van White 1,744 1,099 866 1,056 1,154 819 1,080 451 655 8,924 $44,753 Corridor 4,351 4,520 4,114 5,547 7,922 5,045 6,140 2,137 1,768 41,544 $55,170 Cities & Region <$15,000 $15,000 - $24,999 $25,000 - $34,999 $35,000 - $49,999 $50,000 - $74,999 $75,000 - $99,999 $100,000 - $149,999 $150,000 - $199,999 $200,000+Total Median Brooklyn Park 2,049 2,323 2,483 4,128 4,511 4,212 4,586 1,490 976 26,758 $62,974 Crystal 710 882 965 1,311 2,266 1,275 1,435 371 133 9,348 $59,188 Robbinsdale 795 530 463 935 1,066 911 1,098 262 101 6,161 $57,357 Golden Valley 546 697 585 717 1,631 1,031 1,813 797 1,088 8,905 $81,534 Hennepin County 49,098 41,037 40,528 58,734 83,304 63,792 78,453 34,052 41,198 490,196 $65,834 Twin Cities MSA 111,789 104,137 105,671 158,769 242,392 191,985 234,382 95,089 90,181 1,334,395 $68,778 Source: U.S. Census Bureau 2015 5-year ACS, Esri, Tangible Consulting Services HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works 127 Household Income by Age of Householder 2015 (1-mile Radius) Age: Under 25 <$15,000 $15,000 - $24,999 $25,000 - $34,999 $35,000 - $49,999 $50,000 - $74,999 $75,000 - $99,999 $100,000 - $149,999 $150,000 - $199,999 $200,000+Total Oak Grove Pkwy 1 2 1 2 3 2 1 0 0 12 93rd Ave 2 5 6 7 8 6 5 1 1 41 85th Ave 7 12 15 17 21 12 8 3 1 96 Brooklyn Blvd 32 30 22 23 26 15 5 2 1 156 63rd Ave 68 93 62 67 53 17 9 4 1 374 Bass Lake Rd 15 18 20 15 25 10 4 5 0 112 Robbinsdale 19 30 20 34 38 15 8 3 0 167 Golden Valley Rd 35 42 27 26 31 12 6 2 0 181 Plymouth Ave 50 51 28 33 31 12 6 4 0 215 Penn Ave 126 77 43 51 36 14 7 2 0 356 Van White 217 129 112 117 83 49 48 20 18 793 Corridor 403 359 286 312 296 137 96 40 22 1,951 Age: 25-44 <$15,000 $15,000 - $24,999 $25,000 - $34,999 $35,000 - $49,999 $50,000 - $74,999 $75,000 - $99,999 $100,000 - $149,999 $150,000 - $199,999 $200,000+Total Oak Grove Pkwy 2 3 9 9 27 21 31 11 12 125 93rd Ave 10 12 26 40 70 68 107 62 30 425 85th Ave 21 24 48 76 147 127 162 100 47 752 Brooklyn Blvd 48 43 49 79 134 101 104 46 22 626 63rd Ave 78 92 102 149 212 120 112 42 25 932 Bass Lake Rd 54 53 65 90 227 146 151 47 41 874 Robbinsdale 56 85 76 152 277 165 240 96 39 1,186 Golden Valley Rd 80 72 80 110 171 111 175 78 54 931 Plymouth Ave 134 98 81 125 148 82 116 63 46 893 Penn Ave 207 119 115 165 172 95 102 81 60 1,116 Van White 231 129 113 168 197 128 176 95 144 1,381 Corridor 1395 1,394 1,588 2,096 3,245 2,231 2,860 906 738 16,453 Age: 45-64 <$15,000 $15,000 - $24,999 $25,000 - $34,999 $35,000 - $49,999 $50,000 - $74,999 $75,000 - $99,999 $100,000 - $149,999 $150,000 - $199,999 $200,000+Total Oak Grove Pkwy 8 8 22 20 54 39 58 17 20 246 93rd Ave 30 31 57 79 145 121 187 94 55 799 85th Ave 63 64 113 155 300 241 302 162 86 1,486 Brooklyn Blvd 127 105 113 165 272 203 198 78 39 1,300 63rd Ave 174 195 197 284 395 221 209 67 44 1,786 Bass Lake Rd 133 125 142 180 432 269 289 77 70 1,717 Robbinsdale 156 213 165 309 555 320 469 161 65 2,413 Golden Valley Rd 194 167 166 222 331 225 339 140 111 1,895 Plymouth Ave 299 216 156 244 287 164 230 112 91 1,799 Penn Ave 462 259 222 312 327 184 192 131 113 2,202 Van White 561 291 213 309 366 231 316 150 255 2,692 Corridor 1460 1225 1,177 1,759 2,899 1,901 2,514 998 850 14,783 HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works128 Age: 65+<$15,000 $15,000 - $24,999 $25,000 - $34,999 $35,000 - $49,999 $50,000 - $74,999 $75,000 - $99,999 $100,000 - $149,999 $150,000 - $199,999 $200,000+Total Oak Grove Pkwy 9 8 20 13 26 14 15 3 3 111 93rd Ave 28 50 47 71 77 40 36 15 13 377 85th Ave 53 91 101 134 135 77 72 22 16 701 Brooklyn Blvd 72 124 100 120 103 62 45 9 3 638 63rd Ave 144 246 201 222 233 97 63 20 2 1,228 Bass Lake Rd 114 190 162 189 217 118 74 14 11 1,089 Robbinsdale 213 341 186 293 311 154 127 29 15 1,669 Golden Valley Rd 121 177 128 152 169 91 98 37 37 1,010 Plymouth Ave 152 211 112 139 143 68 72 30 26 953 Penn Ave 264 270 133 151 135 70 50 20 16 1,109 Van White 312 289 105 116 103 61 64 19 33 1,102 Corridor 1094 1,542 1,062 1,380 1,483 776 668 193 159 8,357 Sources: U.S. Census Bureau 2015 5-year ACS; Esri; Tangible Consulting Services HOUSING GAPS ANALYSIS - 6.28.2018 Bottineau Community Works 129 Household Income by Age of Householder 2015 Age: Under 25 <$15,000 $15,000 - $24,999 $25,000 - $34,999 $35,000 - $49,999 $50,000 - $74,999 $75,000 - $99,999 $100,000 - $149,999 $150,000 - $199,999 $200,000+Total Golden Valley 546 697 585 717 1,631 1,031 1,813 797 1,088 8,905 Robbinsdale 795 530 463 935 1,066 911 1,098 262 101 6,161 Crystal 710 882 965 1,311 2,266 1,275 1,435 371 133 9,348 Brooklyn Park 2,049 2,323 2,483 4,128 4,511 4,212 4,586 1,490 976 26,758 Hennepin County 49,098 41,037 40,528 58,734 83,304 63,792 78,453 34,052 41,198 490,196 Twin Cities MSA 111,789 104,137 105,671 158,769 242,392 191,985 234,382 95,089 90,181 1,334,395 Age: 25-44 <$15,000 $15,000 - $24,999 $25,000 - $34,999 $35,000 - $49,999 $50,000 - $74,999 $75,000 - $99,999 $100,000 - $149,999 $150,000 - $199,999 $200,000+Total Golden Valley 546 697 585 717 1,631 1,031 1,813 797 1,088 8,905 Robbinsdale 795 530 463 935 1,066 911 1,098 262 101 6,161 Crystal 710 882 965 1,311 2,266 1,275 1,435 371 133 9,348 Brooklyn Park 2,049 2,323 2,483 4,128 4,511 4,212 4,586 1,490 976 26,758 Hennepin County 49,098 41,037 40,528 58,734 83,304 63,792 78,453 34,052 41,198 490,196 Twin Cities MSA 111,789 104,137 105,671 158,769 242,392 191,985 234,382 95,089 90,181 1,334,395 Age: 45-64 <$15,000 $15,000 - $24,999 $25,000 - $34,999 $35,000 - $49,999 $50,000 - $74,999 $75,000 - $99,999 $100,000 - $149,999 $150,000 - $199,999 $200,000+Total Golden Valley 546 697 585 717 1,631 1,031 1,813 797 1,088 8,905 Robbinsdale 795 530 463 935 1,066 911 1,098 262 101 6,161 Crystal 710 882 965 1,311 2,266 1,275 1,435 371 133 9,348 Brooklyn Park 2,049 2,323 2,483 4,128 4,511 4,212 4,586 1,490 976 26,758 Hennepin County 49,098 41,037 40,528 58,734 83,304 63,792 78,453 34,052 41,198 490,196 Twin Cities MSA 111,789 104,137 105,671 158,769 242,392 191,985 234,382 95,089 90,181 1,334,395 Age: 65+<$15,000 $15,000 - $24,999 $25,000 - $34,999 $35,000 - $49,999 $50,000 - $74,999 $75,000 - $99,999 $100,000 - $149,999 $150,000 - $199,999 $200,000+Total Golden Valley 546 697 585 717 1,631 1,031 1,813 797 1,088 8,905 Robbinsdale 795 530 463 935 1,066 911 1,098 262 101 6,161 Crystal 710 882 965 1,311 2,266 1,275 1,435 371 133 9,348 Brooklyn Park 2,049 2,323 2,483 4,128 4,511 4,212 4,586 1,490 976 26,758 Hennepin County 49,098 41,037 40,528 58,734 83,304 63,792 78,453 34,052 41,198 490,196 Twin Cities MSA 111,789 104,137 105,671 158,769 242,392 191,985 234,382 95,089 90,181 1,334,395 Sources: U.S. Census Bureau 2015 5-year ACS; Esri; Tangible Consulting Services DRAFT CHAPTER 4: Housing & Neighborhood Comprehensive Plan 2040 HOUSING & NEIGHBORHOOD - DRAFT 03-21-2019 HOUSING & NEIGHBORHOOD - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 4-1 INTRODUCTION This Chapter evaluates Brooklyn Center’s existing housing stock and plans for future housing needs based on household projections, population projections, and identified needs communicated through this planning process. As required in the City’s 2015 System Statement prepared by the Metropolitan Council, understanding and planning for the City’s housing stock is a critical part of the 2040 Comprehensive Plan (Plan). The City’s planned land use includes three residential categories and residential components of new mixed-use designations which together account for approximately half of the City’s land use area. Residential land use will continue to be the largest land use in the community. A diverse housing stock that offers neighborhood stability combined with access to open space, goods and services is essential to a healthy, sustainable, and resilient community. It protects the community’s tax base against market fluctuations; it builds community pride and engagement of existing residents; it helps the community’s economic competitiveness by assisting Brooklyn Center businesses with employee attraction and retention; it provides options for existing residents to remain in the community should their life circumstances (e.g., aging-in-place) change; and it offers future residents access to amenities and levels of service that support a stable and supportive housing and neighborhood environment. The first part of this Chapter focuses on the existing housing stock. It summarizes important information regarding the overall number of housing units, the type of units, their affordability, and the profile of their residents. These sections are a summary of more detailed socio-economic data which is attached to this Plan as an Appendix and serves as a supporting resource to this Chapter. Understanding the existing housing stock is key to determining what types of housing products may be demanded over the next 10-20 years and where they should be located. In conjunction to the statistical or inventory information collected, this Chapter includes a summary of community, stakeholder and policy-maker feedback related to housing and neighborhoods heard throughout this planning process. Additionally, this Chapter addresses the projected housing needs during the planning period and presents some neighborhood and housing aspirations as identified by the City’s residents and policy-makers. The final section of this Chapter links projected housing need to practical implementation tools to help the City achieve its housing goals and identified strategies. The list contained in this Chapter is not exhaustive but provides a starting place from which the City can continue to expand and consider opportunities to meet current and future resident needs. HOUSING & NEIGHBORHOOD - DRAFT 03-21-2019 HOUSING & NEIGHBORHOOD - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 4-34-2 ASSESSMENT OF EXISTING HOUSING SUPPLY Overview of Brooklyn Center’s Residential Neighborhoods The City of Brooklyn Center’s residential neighborhoods are diverse and include a variety of housing types from single-family neighborhoods to large-scale apartment complexes. Although the City originally incorporated as a village in 1911, it wasn’t until the Post-World War II era that the City began to develop on a large scale in which entire blocks and neighborhoods were constructed with tract housing, suburban streets, and neighborhood parks. Like much of the region’s first ring suburbs, Brooklyn Center took on the role of a typical bedroom community where residents could get to their jobs in the downtown, stop for groceries at the retail center, and go home and park their cars in their garages for the evening. This pattern of development can be seen throughout the region, but Brooklyn Center had one significant difference for many decades – the regional mall known as Brookdale. The prominence of the mall and its surrounding commercial district played a major role in how neighborhoods were built and developed, which influenced neighborhood patterns and housing types. Even though the mall is now gone, it continues to have lasting effects on the existing housing types and neighborhoods and will influence future housing as described in subsequent sections of this Chapter. For example, in the decades that the mall and regional retail center was operational much of Brooklyn Center’s multi-family and apartment development was concentrated near the mall and its surrounding commercial district and provided a transition to the surrounding single-family neighborhoods. Therefore, even though the mall no longer exists, the apartments developed around the periphery of its retail area in the 1960s continue to be in high demand and provide a critical source of housing for many households. 2040 Housing & Neighborhood Goals »Promote a diverse housing stock that provides safe, stable, and accessible housing options to all of Brooklyn Center’s residents. »Recognize and identify ways to match Brooklyn Center’s housing with the City’s changing demographics. »Explore opportunities to improve the City’s housing policies and ordinances to make them more responsive to current and future residents. »Maintain the existing housing stock in primarily single-family neighborhoods through proper ordinances, incentive programs and enforcement. »Explore opportunities to incorporate new affordable housing into redevelopment areas that promote safe, secure and economically diverse neighborhoods. * Supporting Strategies found in Chapter 2: Vision, Goals and Strategies HOUSING & NEIGHBORHOOD - DRAFT 03-21-2019 HOUSING & NEIGHBORHOOD - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 4-54-4 While related to housing age, the size or square footage of single-family homes also plays a significant role in the demographics of a community. Changes to family structure, technology, and other factors alter housing preferences over time, which can lead to functional obsolescence of homes and result in reduced home values because they no longer meet current buyers’ expectations. Brooklyn Center’s single-family housing stock is fairly homogeneous and the overwhelming majority of homes in every neighborhood are less than 1,500 square feet – and in many areas less than 1,000 square feet. This is a relatively modest single-family housing size, and, therefore, the single-family housing stock lacks diversity, which results in lack of choice for current and prospective residents. At the same time, these homes offer an option for small families, single and two-person households, and first time homebuyers. Because the majority of the City’s single-family housing stock is relatively small, older, and of a homogeneous type as compared to newer larger homes or neighborhoods with more housing variety, housing prices in Brooklyn Center tend to be affordable. Also, given the similar age, size and styles of many of the homes, housing in the community has a fairly consistent price-per- square foot. Affordability in the existing housing stock can be a positive attribute that has the potential to provide long-term stability to residents and neighborhoods. However, as shown in the Background Report residents of Brooklyn Center also tend to have lower median household incomes, which can mean residents may struggle to pay for large-scale capital investments in their homes such as replacing windows or a roof. Additionally, within the region some communities with similar single-family stock to Brooklyn Center have experienced pressure for tear-downs and major remodeling, and that market trend has yet to reach the City. While that trend may eventually impact the community, at the present time the change and growth impacting the single-family neighborhoods is mostly related to the evolving demographics within the community. This change presents different considerations and challenges because it is not necessarily physical growth or changes to homes and neighborhoods. Instead the community is challenged with how to manage larger numbers of people living within a household such as growing numbers of multi- generational households. The following sections identify and inventory the existing housing stock in the community including single-family, attached and apartment uses. Each of these housing types serve a different role in the community, but each type is an important part of the City’s neighborhoods. A summary of the City’s existing residential types and neighborhoods are as follows: Single-Family Residential Single-family residential neighborhoods are the dominant land use within the City and single- family detached homes comprise nearly 63 percent of the City’s housing stock. The City’s single-family detached neighborhoods were developed surrounding higher density and higher intensity land uses that included the former regional retail center and the major freeway corridors of I-94 and Highway 100. Most of the single-family neighborhoods are developed on a grid system with traditional ‘urban’ size lots. Exceptions of some larger lots are interspersed within the traditional block pattern and along the Mississippi River where a pocket of residents have views and/or frontage of the river corridor. The 1950s were the peak decade for housing construction in the City; a period in which owner- occupied housing predominated. While other housing types began to emerge post 1950s, the demand for single-family detached housing continued through 1980 as the remaining land in the community developed. Given the period in which the majority of Brooklyn Center’s housing stock was built, nearly the entire single-family detached housing stock is more than 40 years old. This is a major concern because at 40 years of age exterior components of a building including siding, windows, and roofs often need to be replaced to protect its structural integrity. Because the City became mostly built-out by the late 1970s, nearly all of the City’s housing stock falls into this category, which means the City must be cognizant of potential issues and proactively monitor the situation to ensure neighborhoods are sustainable into the future. HOUSING & NEIGHBORHOOD - DRAFT 03-21-2019 HOUSING & NEIGHBORHOOD - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 4-74-6 Multi-family Residential Nearly one third (29 percent) of the City’s housing units are in multi-family residential buildings located throughout the community. Nearly all of these buildings were constructed in the 1960s and 1970s, and are primarily located on major roadways or corridors, and surrounding the former regional retail areas. This means these buildings are nearly 50 years old or older. Just as noted within the single-family neighborhoods, the potential for deterioration and need for significant investment in these aging buildings can pose a threat to the quality of the City’s housing stock if the buildings are not properly maintained, managed and updated. There has been some maintenance and management of the multi-family housing stock, and a few complexes have even incorporated modest upgrades to the interiors. In fact, the City has started one large-scale rehabilitation of a building that would bring higher-market rate rental options to the community once completed. However, this is one project and despite these improvements the City’s multi-family housing stock continues to be one of the most affordable in the region with some of the lowest rental rates in the metropolitan area. Many of the multi-family areas are near major corridors and are adjacent to high intensity uses that do not necessarily support or serve the residential use with the current development and land use patterns. As a result, many of the multi-family areas do not feel like an incorporated part of the City’s neighborhoods. As discussed in subsequent sections of this Chapter, the City is planning for redevelopment in or adjacent to many of the existing multi- family areas that will hopefully reinvigorate and reconnect the existing multi-family uses into a larger neighborhood context. Existing Single-family Neighborhood Perspectives Described in this Planning Process Throughout this planning process policy-makers and residents alike expressed the desire to maintain the affordability of the existing single-family neighborhoods but acknowledged the current challenges of helping residents maintain their structures, blocks and neighborhoods in the face of compounding maintenance due to the age of the City’s neighborhoods. In addition to the physical condition of the structures, residents and policy-makers also acknowledged that as the City’s population and demographics become increasingly more diverse new residents are changing how existing homes are being occupied and, therefore, it would be valuable for the City to evaluate it’s ordinances and policies to ensure they align with the needs of residents. The demographic considerations are identified in subsequent sections of this Chapter, but it is worth noting that the demographic changes can have a significant impact the character of existing single-family residential neighborhoods. Most recognized this as a positive change, but also acknowledged and stated that the City must figure out how to pro-actively address some of these changes to protect the existing neighborhood fabric. For example, multi-generational households are becoming increasingly more prevalent within the City’s single-family neighborhoods which can impact how rooms within a home are used, how many cars may be present at the home, and how outdoor spaces and yards may be used. Closely related to the demographic changes in the community is the City’s aspiration to promote and maintain neighborhood stability. This objective emerged repeatedly throughout this planning process as residents and policy-makers expressed the desire to identify strategies to help promote and encourage sustainability, resiliency and accessibility within the single-family neighborhoods. In part this objective is the result of several years of turnover within the single- family neighborhoods as long-term residents begin to age and move onto other housing options, new residents and families are moving into the neighborhoods. This life-cycle of housing is common, but the City wants to find ways to ensure new residents want to stay in their homes, their neighborhoods, and the community long-term and invest in making the City a better place for generations to come. HOUSING & NEIGHBORHOOD - DRAFT 03-21-2019 HOUSING & NEIGHBORHOOD - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 4-94-8 Housing Stock Statistics The following existing housing stock characteristics support the previous neighborhood descriptions through more detail. This information, coupled with the previous description, provides a valuable baseline from which the City can evaluate and plan for the future of its housing stock. Total Housing Units According to data from the Metropolitan Council and the City of Brooklyn Center, there are 11,603 housing units in Brooklyn Center as of 2017. As a fully developed community, new residential development in Brooklyn Center has been limited since the late 1980s. According to the Metropolitan Council, around 100 new housing units have been built since 2000 and these homes were primarily small infill locations or small redevelopment opportunities. Housing Tenure (Owned and Rented Units) Nearly 40 percent of the community’s residents rent, and the majority of those renters live in apartment buildings which are integrated throughout the community. The Background Report in the Appendix includes maps illustrating the location of rental housing and demographics of renters. Given that a significant portion of the City’s population lives in apartments, the age of such structures becomes critically important to the overall health of the housing supply. The majority of the apartments were constructed prior to 1979 with the bulk of the units being constructed between 1966 and 1969. This means that the majority of the apartments is more than 50 years old, and that structural deficiencies and major capital improvements may be required in the relatively near term in order for the structures to remain marketable. Multifamily Neighborhood Perspectives Described in this Planning Process Throughout this planning process the City’s residents were vocal about the existing multi-family options available in the community and the lack of diversity within the multi-family housing stock. Without a full inventory of all available multi-family units it is difficult to confirm some of the anecdotal comments heard throughout the process, but nevertheless it is important to consider since residents’ testimony provides valuable insight into the existing housing stock. Several residents indicated that there are few options available for larger multi-family units with at least three (3) bedrooms, making it difficult to find stable living options for families with more than two (2) children. Residents also communicated a desire to have housing options that were closer to supportive retail, commercial and services so that they could walk, bike or easily use transit to meet their needs. Despite these challenges, the City’s parks, trails and open spaces were viewed as an integral and important part of their quality of life. Similarly, to the single-family neighborhoods, the community’s aspiration to create a stable, accessible, and economically diverse multi-family housing stock was established as a short and long-term priority. Though not discussed at length during this planning process, it is widely known and understood that resident turnover, including evictions, is a serious problem that is most concentrated within the multi-family neighborhoods of the City. While this Chapter does not attempt to fully evaluate the causes for turnover and eviction in these neighborhoods, it does acknowledge it as a significant challenge and issue which shapes the character of these areas of the community. Turnover, including evictions, changes how residents feel about the community whether the City is directly involved or not. It has lasting affects on how safe people feel within a community, how invested in an area they want to become and how willing they are to contribute and reinvest in the City. For these reasons, it is imperative that the City tackle these issues and create a more stable, and integrated living environment so all residents feel a part of a neighborhood, and the larger community. 11,603 Brooklyn Center housing units as of February 2017 - Sources: Metropolitan Council 40% of community residents are renters - Sources: Metropolitan Council; US Census; SHC HOUSING & NEIGHBORHOOD - DRAFT 03-21-2019 HOUSING & NEIGHBORHOOD - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 4-114-10 Approximately 86 percent of Brooklyn Center’s housing stock (over 10,000 units) is more than 40 years old. This is an overwhelming portion of the City’s housing, and it is therefore important to track the condition of these older homes as they are at-risk of deferred maintenance. This can rapidly result in critical structural problems. At the same time, well-maintained older housing can be an important source of entry-level housing because of its relative affordability when compared to newer construction. Table 4-1. Year Built Housing Type Related to housing tenure is housing type. Due to Brooklyn Center’s peak time of housing development in the 1950s, the housing type is predominantly single-family detached homes. As of 2017, there are 8,270 units (71 percent) of single-family housing (attached and detached) and 3,333 (29 percent) classified as multi-family housing. The type of housing structure can influence not only affordability but also overall livability. Having a range of housing structures can provide residents of a community options that best meet their needs as they shift from one life stage to another. For example, retirees often desire multi-family housing not only for the ease of maintenance, but also for security reasons. Multifamily residences are less susceptible to home maintenance issues or burglary concerns because of on-site management. For those with health concerns, multi-family residences often have neighbors that can also provide oversight should an acute health problem occur. The majority (63 percent) of Brooklyn Center’s housing stock consists of detached single-family homes. This is above the proportion found in Hennepin County (55 percent) or throughout the metropolitan area (59 percent). Nevertheless, the City’s housing stock is diversified, with many multi-family units in large structures, as well as a significant number of single-family attached units. More detailed data are included in the Background Report in the Appendix. Year Built The age of the housing stock is an important characteristic of the community particularly as it relates to potential structural obsolescence and other limiting factors which correlate to housing values. As described earlier, much of Brooklyn Center’s single-family housing stock was developed post-World War II between 1950 and 1963 and many of the homes in this age range were dominated by rambler architectural styles. As shown on Map 15, entire neighborhoods were all constructed in a relatively short period of time which strongly defines a neighborhood pattern. As shown, most of Brooklyn Center was developed on a fairly regular grid pattern and does not reflect a ‘suburban’ development pattern. This is positive from the perspective that transportation and transit connections should be easier to improve, where necessary, because of the relatively dense population of the neighborhoods. However, aging neighborhoods can present a challenge as major systems (i.e. roof, siding, windows, HVAC, etc.) reach the end of their useful life. This can be particularly difficult if residents are unable to reinvest and maintain their properties, which leads to deferred maintenance and the potential for more significant problems that would become widespread across entire neighborhoods. 71% of housing units are single-family - Sources: Metropolitan Council; US Census; SHC 86% of housing stock is more than 40 years old - Sources: US Census; SHC HOUSING & NEIGHBORHOOD - DRAFT 03-21-2019 HOUSING & NEIGHBORHOOD - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 4-134-12 Map 4-1. Estimated Market Value of Owner-Occupied Housing Housing Affordability The Metropolitan Council considers housing affordable when low-income households are spending no more than 30 percent of their income on housing costs. Households are considered low-income if their income is at or below 80 percent of the metropolitan area’s median income (AMI). The housing stock in Brooklyn Center is affordable relative to other communities in the Twin Cities region. According to the Metropolitan Council, 93 percent of the housing units in 2017 in Brooklyn Center were considered affordable. Moreover, only a small portion (5 percent) of this housing is publicly subsidized. Therefore, most housing is privately-owned and pricing is set by the market. According to the Minneapolis Area Association of Realtors, there were 480 home sales in Brooklyn Center in 2017 with a median sales price of $186,125. This was roughly 25 percent lower than the Metro Area median sales price of $247,900. For rental housing, according to CoStar, a national provider of real estate data, the average monthly rent for a market rate apartment in Brooklyn Center in 2017 was $981 compared to the Metro Area average of $1,190.Brooklyn Center Broo klyn Park Columbia Heights Crystal Fridley Robbinsdale Minneapolis - Owner-Occupied Housing by Estimated Market Value 1/5/2018 .1 in = 0.55 miles Brooklyn Center County Boundaries City and Township Boundaries Streets Lakes and Rivers Owner-Occupied Housing Estimated Market Value, 2016 $243,500 or Less $243,501 to $350,000 $350,001 to $450,000 Over $450,000 Source: MetroGIS Regional Parcel Dataset, 2016 estimated market values for taxes payable in 2017. Note: Estimated Market Value includes only homesteaded units with a building on the parcel. $186,125 2017 median home sale price in Brooklyn Center $247,900 2017 median home sale price in the Metro Area - Source: Minneapolis Area Association of Realtors, HOUSING & NEIGHBORHOOD - DRAFT 03-21-2019 HOUSING & NEIGHBORHOOD - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 4-154-14 The high rate of affordability is largely due to the prevalence of smaller and older homes in the single-family neighborhoods, and the age and level of improvements within the multi-family rental neighborhoods. Such small sized properties are typically less expensive because they have significantly less living space than newer homes (average construction square footage has increased each decade since the 1950s). Age and level of update and improvements within the apartment stock, coupled with the average number of bedrooms in the rental units is impacting the relative affordability of the multi-family units. The condition in both the single-family and multi-family housing stock is what is known as Naturally Occurring Affordable Housing (NOAH), because the physical characteristics of the properties are what makes them affordable rather than the affordability being established through a legally binding contract. Although there is a high rate of affordability for existing units, the Metropolitan Council identifies a need for additional affordable units in any new housing construction added to the community through 2040. This condition would most likely be achieved by a legally binding contract, or some other financing mechanism as new affordable housing product would be difficult to achieve without some assistance given construction and land costs. Of the 2,258 projected new housing units, the Metropolitan Council establishes a need of 238 units to be affordable to households at or below 80 percent AMI to satisfy the regional share of affordable housing. Although nearly all of Brooklyn Center’s housing stock essentially fits within the criteria as naturally occurring affordable housing, there are some observable trends that would suggest the price of housing in Brooklyn Center could rise in the coming years. Most recently in 2018 the City’s for-sale housing median home sales price surpassed the pre-bust pricing. While the median remains below the regional median, it does indicate growing demand and increased pricing. Significant areas of redevelopment identified on the Future Land Use Plan, including the former regional mall (Brookdale) location, present opportunities for higher-market rates for new housing added. These opportunities have the potential to create a more economically diverse housing stock within the City, which is relatively homogeneous at the time this Plan is written. Given these opportunities, it is important to continue to monitor the City’s NOAH stock, and to evaluate and establish policies to incorporate legally binding and protected affordable housing as redevelopment occurs. This is a careful balancing act that requires concerted and direct monitoring, study, and evaluation in order to ensure an economically diverse, sustainable and resilient housing stock for the long-term success of the community. Table 4-2. Existing Housing Assessment Total Housing Units1 11,608 Affordability2 Units affordable to households with income at or below 30% of AMI Units affordable to households with income 31% to 50% of AMI Units affordable to households with income 51% to 80% of AMI 460 4,451 6,029 Tenure3 Ownership Units Rental Units 6,911 4,697 Type1 Single-family Units Multifamily Units Manufactured Homes Other Housing Units 8,275 3,333 0 0 Publicly Subsidized Units4 All publicly subsidized units Publicly subsidized senior units Publicly subsidized units for people with disabilities Publicly subsidized units: all others 553 22 0 531 Housing Cost Burdened Households5 Income at or below 30% of AMI Income 31% to 50% of AMI Income 51% to 80% AMI 1,691 1,406 895 1 Metropolitan Council, 2016 housing sock estimate. Single-family units include single-family detached homes and townhomes. Multifamily units include units in duplex, triplex, and quadplex buildings as well as those in buildings with five or more units. 2 Metropolitan Council staff estimates for 2016 based on 2016 and 2017 MetroGIS Regional Parcel Datasets (ownership units), 2010-2014 Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy data from HUD (rental units and household income), and the Council’s 2016 Manufactured Housing Parks Survey (manufactured homes). Counts from these datasets were adjusted to better match the Council’s estimates of housing units and households in 2016 as well as more current tenure, affordability, and income data from eh American Community Survey, home value data from the Federal Housing Finance Agency, and rents from HousingLink’s Twin Cities Rental Revue data. 3 US Census Bureau, 2012-2016 American Community Survey five-year estimates; counts adjusted to better match the Council’s 2016 housing stock estimates. 4 Source: HousingLink Streams data (covers projects whose financing closed by December 2016) 5 Housing cost burden refers to households whose housing costs are at least 30% of their income. Source: US Department of Housing and Urban Development, 2010- 2014 Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) data, with counts adjusted to better match Metropolitan Council 2016 household estimates. HOUSING & NEIGHBORHOOD - DRAFT 03-21-2019 HOUSING & NEIGHBORHOOD - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 4-174-16 Cost Burdened Households Cost burden is the proportion of household income spent toward housing and utilities. When lower income households spend more than 30 percent of their income toward housing and utilities this burden is considered excessive because it begins to limit the money available for other essentials such as food, clothing, transportation, and healthcare. According to data from the Metropolitan Council, 4,114 (35 percent) Brooklyn Center households at or below 80 percent average median income (AMI) are considered cost-burdened which means they spend more than 30 percent of household income on housing costs. This percentage is well above the metro area rate of 23 percent. Half of these Brooklyn Center households are lower income households who earn at or less than 30 percent AMI. The high incidence of cost burdened households is correlated with younger wage earners, lower-wage jobs, and a high proportion of older households, many of which are in retirement and no longer working. FUTURE HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES Projected Housing Need As referenced in Chapter 3: Land Use & Redevelopment and the following Table 4-4, the Metropolitan Council’s 2015 System Statement forecasts that Brooklyn Center will add approximately 4,169 new residents and 2,258 new households through 2040 and identifies the following affordable housing allocation to be accommodated between 2020 and 2030. Table 4-3. Affordable Housing Need Allocation At or below 30% AMI 103 31 to 50% AMI 0 51 to 80% AMI 135 Total Units 238 Source: 2015 System Statement - Metropolitan Council Housing Challenges inform Housing Needs The Metropolitan Council’s System Statement identifies approximately 10% of the planned housing units for some level of affordability as identified in Table 4-3. As described in other chapters of this Plan, for the first time since the post-World War II housing boom the City is expected to add a significant number of new households. These new households have the opportunity to provide a more diverse housing stock, and add to the options of available for existing and new residents in the community. Redevelopment can reinvigorate and revive KEY DEMOGRAPHICS Age Profile of the Population The age profile of a community has important ramifications on demand for housing, goods and services, and social cohesion. Tables and figures illustrating the City’s age distribution are presented in the Background Report in the Appendix. Unlike the broader region, in which the population continues to age rapidly, Brooklyn Center’s population grew younger between 2000 and 2010, and has stayed relatively stable since 2010. This is largely due to a significant increase in people age 25 to 34, many of which are starting families and having children. Increases in the number of young families place demands on schools, housing affordability, and the types of retail goods and services needed. The median age of residents in Brooklyn Center in 2016 was 32.8, which is consistent with the 2010 median age of 32.6. This is younger than 2000 when the median ages was 35.3. With such a young population, it is expected housing units may turn over more frequently. But, as of 2016, more than 60 percent all households have been living in their homes for more than five (5) years. More data about geographic mobility of households is found in the Background Report in the Appendix. Household & Family Type Changing family and household structures can also have a profound effect on housing and other community needs. For example, decreasing household size has a direct impact on the amount of housing a household needs. As mentioned, the presence of children not only impacts local schools and parks, but also the types of retailers that can be supported and the nature of housing demanded. Since 2010, the number of households with children in both single-parent and married couple households has been growing significantly. Meanwhile, the trend among households without children, especially married couples (i.e., empty-nesters) has been on the decline. The percentage of households with children is approaching 40 percent, which is well above the rate in the County and the metro area. 32.8 Median age of Brooklyn Center residents - Sources: US Census, SHC HOUSING & NEIGHBORHOOD - DRAFT 03-21-2019 HOUSING & NEIGHBORHOOD - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 4-194-18 • The City has discussed developing a more formal housing action plan to better understand the needs of its residents. The plan would work to better understand cost-burdened households, eviction rates and policies, home-ownership racial disparities, and gaps in the housing stock. • Continuing to revise, enhance and modify its policies and ordinance to respond to residents needs. This includes monitoring best-practices in the region, being agile and open to changes and enhancements. As an example of this type of ordinance or policy response the City recently adopted a Tenant Protection Ordinance that is aimed and protecting the City’s residents ability to maintain stable, safe housing. The City’s projected housing needs are complex, and are likely to become more complicated as redevelopment occurs. However, the City intends to continue to prioritize discussion and action around creating safe and stable housing throughout the City. The following sections specifically address the new housing expected to be develop in this planning period. The new and redevelopment areas should be considered collectively with the City’s existing neighborhoods to ensure an incorporated, integrated approach to the City’s neighborhoods is achieved to create a dynamic community for generations to come. areas of the community with vibrant, experience-rich areas that will benefit everyone in the community. The City is excited for redevelopment to create a dynamic central hub of activity in the community, but also acknowledges that it must be balanced with strong assessment, planning and appropriate protection of its existing housing stock to ensure neighborhood sustainability and stability in all areas of the community. New housing stock brings the possibility of adverse impacts to existing single-family and multi-family properties if proactive steps are not taken to protect existing naturally occurring affordable housing (NOAH), single-family neighborhoods, and multi-family properties. The City’s policy makers throughout this process discussed and acknowledged that bringing new market-rate, amenity rich housing products could have deleterious affects specifically on existing naturally occurring affordable housing if a plan to protect affordability is not implemented. This is a huge concern as resident stability through access to safe and healthy housing is one of the City’s adopted strategic priorities. If proper tools are not in place there are no protections to keep rents reasonable for residents and to maintain reasonably priced for-sale housing as redevelopment takes holds. One of the positive aspects of the City’s identified redevelopment areas is that the land proposed for redevelopment does not contain existing housing. In a fully-development community this is unusual for a large redevelopment area, and is positive because no residents will be displaced as a result of the City’s redevelopment aspirations. However, even though residents will not be displaced directly, indirectly, redevelopment could increase the desirability of activities such as flipping single-family homes and converting NOAH multi-family properties for higher-rents. To address some of these concerns an extensive list of high-level tools have been outlined in Table 4-5 of this Chapter. The City recognizes that this chapter is only the start of an ongoing conversation, and it is the City’s policy-makers intent to continue to be proactive, and to collaborate with non-profits and advocate for a broader regional approach to housing affordability. In addition to the tools identified in Table 4-5, the City is also continuing conversations about: • Viability of a non-discrimination ordinance related to Section 8 acceptance. Adjacent Cities, including Minneapolis, have attempted to include ordinances in their tool-kit addressing this issue. While the issue is currently in court, Brooklyn Center will continue to monitor the process and may consider adoption of a similar ordinance depending on its outcome. HOUSING & NEIGHBORHOOD - DRAFT 03-21-2019 HOUSING & NEIGHBORHOOD - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 4-214-20 Future Residential Uses in Planned [Re] Development Opportunity Areas Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) is a new land use and redevelopment concept in the City that focuses on existing and planned transit as a major amenity and catalyst for redevelopment. While previous planning efforts have acknowledged the presence of transit in the community, none have embraced it as an opportunity for redevelopment. As this portion of the City redevelops, the location of future transit enhancements has the potential to attract significant new housing development. Therefore, this is where guided densities are the highest. This is purposeful because the area has exceptional visibility and access from Highway 100 and I-94, and will be served by two transit stops (one being a transit hub) for the C-Line Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) and the potential future D-Line BRT. The C-Line BRT is planned to open in 2019 and will mimic the operations of LRT (light rail transit), offering frequent transit service that will connect residents to the larger region. To best support the C-Line, and future D-Line, the City has planned to reinvigorate and re-imagine this central area of the community as a more livable, walkable, and connected neighborhood within the City. In addition, the potential for desirable views of Downtown Minneapolis could result in pressure to build taller structures in this area. Any development of this area should also be seen as an opportunity to support commercial users, improve multi-modal service and access, and allow safe, pleasant, and walkable connections to transit, parks, and other community destinations. As this area evolves, the desirability of this area as an amenity-rich livable area is likely to improve. As change occurs, the housing within the area is likely to be at market rates adding to a more economically diverse housing stock than is currently available in the community. This would add more housing choices in Brooklyn Center, and it could also support a mix of both market rate and affordable units; provided proper policies are developed to ensure legally binding affordable housing is incorporated into development plans. Communities oftentimes explore policies such as inclusionary zoning as redevelopment accelerates which may become an appropriate consideration in the future, but is likely not to be the best approach given current market conditions. However, in the future if significant increases in the market occur it may warrant further discussion in the City. Regardless of the policy tool (whether regulatory or incentive based) selected, consideration will need to be given to working with any future developer in a possible partnership with the City to help deliver affordable units as part of redevelopment. As described within the Chapter 9: Implementation, the City will continue to explore proper methodology and policies to ensure an economically diverse housing stock is created as housing continues to evolve in the community. New Housing Opportunities in this Planning Period Recognizing that the land use plan for Brooklyn Center identifies several key areas that are envisioned for new development or redevelopment, this will result in an opportunity to accommodate more housing and increase the City’s number of households. Based on guided residential densities in the development opportunity areas, the City can accommodate the Metropolitan Council’s forecasted households as well as meet the allocated affordable units as shown in Table 4-3 above. As indicated in the Land Use Chapter, depending on how the market responds to these redevelopment areas the City could accommodate anywhere between 2,658 and 3,836 new households by 2040 (Chapter 3: Table 3-5, repeated in the following Table 4-4). Table 4-4. Future Land Use Densities and Projected Acres, Households & Population Future Land Use Density (DU/A)2020 Acres (Res)b HH Popc 2030 Acres (Res)b HH Popc Transit Orient Development 31.01-130 DU/A 9 279 619 26 814 1,807 Neighborhood Mixed-Use 15.01-31 DU/A 13 195 433 19 285 632 Commercial Mixed Use 10.01 – 25 DU/A 8 80 178 15 150 333 High Density Residential 15.01-31 DU/A 212 3,180 7,060 212 3,180 7,060 TOTAL ----3,734 8,290 --4,429 9,832 Source: Metropolitan Council, Thrive 2040 Brooklyn Center 2015 System Statement, SHC. a Acreages assume that some recently redeveloped areas within these land use designations will not experience redevelopment until post-2040 and therefore households are not calculated. Please refer to Map 3-3 that identifies areas planned for change within this planning period. b Note, there are existing households in each of the designations today that would be re-guided for potential redevelopment in the future. This accounts for existing households and those that my potentially develop over the next two years. c Calculation multiplies households by 2.22 persons per household (According to the 2016 ACS (Census), for multi- family units (5+ units in structure) There are three large districts identified in the City with guided land use that allows for significant potential of new development and redevelopment through 2040. These areas have the potential to greatly expand Brooklyn Center’s current housing numbers and choices. Moreover, each opportunity area has the potential to not only provide new forms and types of housing but to catalyze or rejuvenate investment into the City resulting in stronger linkages between neighborhoods and districts that are currently isolated from one another. The following section discusses these areas further. HOUSING & NEIGHBORHOOD - DRAFT 03-21-2019 HOUSING & NEIGHBORHOOD - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 4-234-22 Commercial Mixed-Use Areas The Commercial Mixed-Use areas generally surround the TOD area and are contemplated for large- scale redevelopment but are equally as focused on supporting business and office users. These areas are generally within one mile of the transit station that serves as a major hub for regional and local transit services, and therefore new housing will still have opportunities to capitalize on this as an amenity. Slightly less dense than the TOD district, these areas may provide exceptional opportunities to introduce multi-family uses such as town homes, row homes, and small lot single-family uses that could cater to larger families and incorporate more units with three or more bedrooms. As indicated in previous sections of this Chapter, the City’s residents expressed a desire to have access to more rental units with more bedrooms and larger square footages. While a detailed market study would likely be needed to confirm the demand for these uses, if we can take the anecdotal information as true, this area has the potential to support those types of uses. As with the TOD district, affordability is likely to become a consideration in any redevelopment within these areas because new construction naturally costs more and as the area redevelops interest and demand is likely to escalate costs. It is therefore important, just as with the redevelopment of the TOD district, that the City evaluate and explore ways to incorporate a range of affordable and market rate opportunities in new developments. Neighborhood Mixed-Use Areas The Neighborhood Mixed-Use is a new land use designation that responds to resident and policy-makers desire to incorporate retail and services into the neighborhood fabric. One of the ways the City can accomplish that objective is to create ‘nodes’ of mixed-uses that include residential uses, but protect key corners for small retailers, shops, or restaurants that create a more vibrant streetscape. The City acknowledges that these areas are less likely to redevelop with any regularity. Therefore, the number of new housing units expected to come on-line in these areas is a little less tangible than in areas with large contiguous redevelopment acres. However, the nodes have the opportunity to provide yet another housing style and type, as these areas are not envisioned for large high-rises or extensive master plans. Instead, these areas are contemplated to have smaller footprints with living units above a small store front or restaurant for example. HOUSING RESOURCES, STRATEGIES & TOOLS Table 4-5 outlines a variety of resources, strategies, and tools to implement Brooklyn Center’s identified housing needs and stated housing goals. There is a wealth of resources available to assist communities in meeting their goals. The following table should be considered a starting point. As the City’s housing needs evolve or become clearer, this set of tools should expand with options. Table 4-5. Housing Resources, Strategies & Tools Housing Goal Tool/ Resource/ Strategy Description Affordability Target Promote a diverse stock that provides opportunities for all income levels Housing Demand Market Study Conduct a market study and gaps analysis to track housing demand. This study and report could double as a marketing and promotional piece about housing opportunities. <30% AMI 51-80% AMI HRA/CDA/ EDA Work with the County HRA and City EDA to protect and enhance existing NOAH in the City. Use Market Studies to help identify opportunities to meet housing needs in the City and evaluate ways to partner with the County and other program providers. <30% AMI 30-50% AMI 51-80% Site Assembly Consider strategies for assembling sites in high-density or mixed-use districts that would increase appeal to developers. <30% AMI 51-80% AMI CDBG Work with Hennepin County to use CDBG funds to help low-and moderate-income homeowners with rehabilitation assistance. CDBG funds will also be explored for use to support redevelopment efforts that meet the City’s goals towards a diverse housing stock (units and market/ affordable diversity). <30% AMI 51-80% AMI Tax Abatement Consider tax abatement for large rental project proposals that provide unit and income-mix within a single project. The City is particularly interested in projects with market diversity and units of different size to cater to a larger market (singles, families, multi-generational, etc). <30% AMI 51-80% AMI HOME and Affordable Housing Incentive Fund Consider application, and utilization, of HOME and Affordable Housing Incentive fund grants to support a diverse housing stock. The City will prioritize projects that include a unit size and income mix that meets the needs of single-person and families in the City. <30% AMI 30-50% AMI Housing Bonds The City would consider issuing Housing Bonds for projects that include units for large families, particularly in projects with a mix of unit sizes and incomes. However, it should be noted that there are limitations to the city bonding authority and other programs may be more suitable <30% AMI 51-80% AMI Brownfield Clean-up In potential redevelopment areas, explore EPA and MN DEED grant programs that provide funding and assistance with planning, assessment, and site clean-up. <30% AMI 30-50% AMI 51-80% 4D for NOAH Properties The City will continue use of 4D classification for the purpose of protecting its Naturally Occurring Affordable Housing (NOAH) uses throughout the City. <30% AMI 30-50% AMI Pooled TIF Funds Explore the use of TIF housing funds to create a revolving loan program to support the rehabilitation of existing single- family and multi-family NOAH properties. <30% AMI 30-50% AMI 51-80% HOUSING & NEIGHBORHOOD - DRAFT 03-21-2019 HOUSING & NEIGHBORHOOD - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 4-254-24 Housing Goal Tool/ Resource/ Strategy Description Affordability Target Identify ways to match housing stock with changing demographic Housing Coordinator Position The City would create a position that would serve as a liaison to existing landlords to help them respond to shifting demographics through training and access to city resources. The position could also serve as a resource for tenants to connect to support services in the event of eviction notices, discriminatory practices, and other issues related to housing access. The position would include coordinating housing programs, including home ownership programs, resident financial literacy programs, with the intent to convert Brooklyn Center renters to successful home owners. <30% AMI 30-50% AMI 51-80% Referrals Review and update reference procedures and training for applicable staff including a plan to maintain our ability to refer residents to any applicable housing programs outside the scope of local services. <30% AMI 30-50% AMI 51-80% Preserve LIHTC properties The City will monitor expiring LIHTC properties and work to find solutions to protect and preserve these affordable units to meet the needs and demands of the City’s residents. The City will approach owners with expiring properties to discuss the possibility of 4d program tax breaks <30% AMI 30-50% AMI Explore opportunities to improve City housing policies and ordinance to make more responsive Expedited Application Process Streamline the pre-application process in order to minimize unnecessary delay for projects that address our stated housing needs, prior to a formal application submittal <30% AMI 30-50% AMI 51-80% Fair Housing Policy The City will work to incorporate a Fair Housing policy into its ordinances and policies. <30% AMI 30-50% AMI 51-80% Existing ordinances The City will continue to operate its Rental Licensing Program, and will periodically review and make enhancements to support the City’s residents. <30% AMI 30-50% AMI 51-80% Update the City’s Zoning to support new land uses The City’s future land use plan provides opportunities to include high density residential uses in the areas identified for redevelopment. The City will update its zoning ordinance, including prepare new zoning districts, to support the housing needs identified in this Housing chapter. <30% AMI 51-80% Maintain existing housing stock in single-family neighborhoods through proper ordinances, incentives and enforcement Foreclosure Prevention In established neighborhoods, a rash of foreclosures, especially in close proximity to one another, can have a deleterious effect on the surrounding neighborhood. Be aware of foreclosures and be able to direct homeowners at-risk of foreclosure to resources that can help prevent foreclosures. http://www.hocmn.org/ <30% AMI 30-50% AMI 51-80% Low or No Cost Home Loans Providing low-or no-cost loans to help homeowners repair heating, plumbing, or electrical systems helps preserve existing housing. For example, Minnesota Housing’s Rehabilitation Loan and Emergency Loan programs make zero percent, deferred loans that are forgivable if the borrower lives in the home for 30 years. Minnesota Housing’s Community Fix Up Program offers lower-cost home improvement loans, often with discounted interest rates, remodeling advising, or home energy services, through a trained lender network. <30% AMI 30-50% AMI 51-80% Home Ownership Program Work with residents to provide education and programs to make home ownership possible, particularly converting existing renters to home owners through supporting down- payment assistance programs. 30-50% AMI 51-80% Code Enforcement The City will continue to operate a robust code enforcement program that includes both complaint-based enforcement and proactive sweeps. <30% AMI 30-50% AMI 51-80% Vacant Building Program The City will continue to operate its Vacant Building Program that tracks and monitors vacant properties in the City to ensure adequate upkeep and maintenance. <30% AMI 30-50% AMI 51-80% Explore opportunities to incorporate new affordable housing into redevelopment areas Inclusionary Housing Ordinance If the market strengthens in redevelopment areas to the extent that policies would not deter investment, the City could consider an inclusionary housing ordinance to ensure that affordable housing is a component of any new housing development. Since current market conditions in the City are well below those of adjacent communities, an inclusionary policy may deter short-term investment. The City may want to explore this policy in the future if the market rents rise to levels of at least 80% AMI. <30% AMI 30-50% AMI 51-80% Livable Communities (LCA and LCA LCDA-TOD) Consider supporting/sponsoring an application to LCDA programs for multi-family rental proposals in areas guided for high density residential and targeted to households of all income levels. <30% AMI 30-50% AMI 51-80% Tax Increment Financing (TIF) To help meet the need for low-income housing, the City will establish a TIF district in an area guided for TOD and mixed uses. <30% AMI 30-50% AMI 51-80% HOUSING & NEIGHBORHOOD - DRAFT 03-21-2019 HOUSING & NEIGHBORHOOD - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 4-274-26 DRAFT Chapter 9: Implementation Comprehensive Plan 2040 IMPLEMENTATION - DRAFT 10-2-2018 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 2 IMPLEMENTATION - DRAFT 10-2-2018 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 1 INTRODUCTION This chapter is a critical part of the Comprehensive Plan Update process providing a roadmap for the City of next steps and implementation strategies to help bring this Plan to reality. The implementation strategies contained in subsequent sections of this Plan are specific to the chapters, goals and strategies, and feedback heard throughout this planning process. Throughout this planning process consistent themes and messaging emerged that became the foundation for plan development, including the implementation strategies found in this chapter. At key milestones in this process the City solicited targeted feedback from residents, stakeholders, commission members and the City Council in an effort to establish Brooklyn Center’s top priorities for the next 10–20 years. The following top priorities, including those characteristics of the community that are important to maintain, emerged from the planning process (unordered): • Our location is exceptional but a consistent brand for the community has yet to be recognizable in the region since Brookdale closed. We have an opportunity to reimagine and redevelop this area—we have to design and implement a plan that is innovative, forward thinking and creative. • Brooklyn Center’s population is diverse and will be into the future. The City should embrace its diversity and use it as a differentiator that makes the City a desirable, exciting and vibrant place to live, work, and recreate. • Creating an economically competitive, accessible and stable business climate is important to developing a stable, vibrant and sustainable community long-term. • Brooklyn Center’s accessible regional location in conjunction with the available redevelopment areas in the center city provide an opportunity to create a dynamic and vibrant sub-regional job center that provides employment opportunities to the City’s residents and the larger region. • Our youth is our future and we need to focus on their needs today, and in the future. We should partner with schools, work-programs, public and private post- secondary institutions to ensure kids have opportunities to work and live in the City as they become adults. • The City’s housing stock is aging and lacks economic diversity. We need to find ways to integrate a range of housing types, sizes, affordability, and market rate into redevelopment to expand the choices available to new and existing residents. IMPLEMENTATION - DRAFT 10-2-2018 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 2 • We need to establish clear standards and regulations for areas designated or identified for redevelopment. It is important to consider massing, setbacks, relationship with existing homes, open spaces, trails, and natural resources. • We should capitalize on the transit improvements, particularly the C-Line, that could be an amenity to any new development in the center city if designed and planned for appropriately. • The City should establish and enhance key relationships with partner agencies such as Metropolitan Council, DEED, MnDNR, Three Rivers Park District and Hennepin County to create a more integrated region that provides improved connections within the City and to the region. • Safety of transit users was repeatedly mentioned particularly for users that would like to use the main transit station in the community. Community members identified concerns such as loitering, lighting, accessibility, and lack of consistency with routes as concerns. This transit ‘hub’ will likely become busier as the C-Line opens, and it is important for the City to partner with Metro Transit to plan for this station to ensure residents feel comfortable and safe at the station. Based on these guiding priorities and principles the following implementation strategies were derived. Most chapters’ implementation strategies can be found in the following sections with the exception of some the Housing Implementation Strategies that are partially included within the individual chapter for consistency with the Metropolitan Council’s checklist. The following implementation strategies are meant to identify a set of high-level steps and considerations that will help guide the City to achieve the goals and objectives of this Plan. The strategies are not all encompassing, but instead are meant to serve as a guide and roadmap to describe the methods, steps and types of questions the City will tackle throughout this planning period. Just as this list may not include every strategy, Brooklyn Center may not complete every strategy on this list based on market dynamics or other external factors. But generally the City will use the following strategies as a guide to work towards implementing the Vision and Goals that this Plan has established for the City as it continues to evolve and change into 2040. IMPLEMENTATION - DRAFT 10-2-2018 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 3 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN The Capital Improvement Program is a flexible plan based upon long-range physical planning and financial projections, which schedules the major public improvements that may be incurred by the City over the next five years. Flexibility of the Capital Improvement Plan is established through annual review, and revision if necessary. The annual review assures that the program will become a continuing part of the budgetary process and that it will be consistent with changing demands as well as changing patterns in cost and financial resources. Funds are appropriated only for the first year of the program, which is then included in the annual budget. The Capital Improvement Plan serves as a tool for implementing certain aspects of the City’s comprehensive plan; therefore, the program describes the overall objectives of City development, the relationship between projects with respect to timing and need, and the City’s fiscal capabilities. The full Capital Improvement Plan is available at Brooklyn Center City Hall and on the City’s website. It is also included as an appendix to the Comprehensive Plan. Specific implementation strategies for water, sewer and transportation infrastructure are also described in those chapters. CHAPTER 3: LAND USE & REDEVELOPMENT The following list of Implementation Strategies is provided as a guide to implement the goals and strategies identified in Chapter 2 of this Comprehensive Plan Update. Land Use 1. The City will complete a full update of its zoning ordinance to support the modified land use designations identified on the Future Land Use Plan. a. The update at a minimum will include a full review of all residential, commercial, and industrial zoning classifications that consider the following: i. Setbacks ii. Parking iii. Height Restrictions iv. Coverage v. Performance Standards vi. Permitted/Un-permitted Uses vii. Conditional Uses viii. Accessory Structures/Uses ix. Fencing/Screening IMPLEMENTATION - DRAFT 10-2-2018 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 4 b. To support the individual zoning district update process, a full review of the City Code as it may pertain to the administration of the Zoning Code will be completed. This process may result in changes and updates or may find that the existing ordinances are adequate. At a minimum, the review will consider the following: i. Sign Standards ii. Public Nuisances iii. Special Use Permit (SUP) will be brought into Compliance with Minnesota State Statute requirements for Conditional Use Permits iv. Variance process and language will be updated and revised to reflect ‘Practical Difficulties’ if not already completed. v. Platting ordinance will be reviewed for platting process compliance and proper reference to revised zoning ordinance. vi. PUD process and procedures will be reviewed for consistency with the City’s stated goals and objectives, particularly as it relates to redevelopment areas identified within this Plan. vii. Addition of a Shoreland Ordinance to comply with MRCCA requirements. c. The process to prepare the zoning ordinance update will be led by the City’s staff, with support and assistance from a Consultant and input and direction from the City Council. i. The City may establish a community engagement plan for the Zoning Code update process. This may include a sub-committee or task force to provide feedback and input on key issues throughout the update process to ensure a broad spectrum of perspectives is represented and addressed within the process. 2. The City will continue to support and explore incorporating policies within ordinance updates that address community resiliency and long-term sustainability. a. As ordinances are updated, the City will explore opportunities to encourage through incentives or regulations energy efficiency in redevelopment and site design. b. Addressing resiliency with respect to the City infrastructure and PTOS systems can be cost-effective when incorporated into initial site design requirements. The City will explore opportunities to address and incorporate such site design standards into its ordinances, particularly within new zoning districts. IMPLEMENTATION - DRAFT 10-2-2018 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 5 Redevelopment 1. The City will create zoning districts to support the new land use designations identified on the Future Land Use Plan. a. At a minimum seven new zoning districts will be developed for consistency with the Transit Oriented Development (TOD), Neighborhood Mixed-Use (N-MU), Commercial Mixed-Use (C-MU), and Business Mixed Use (B-MU) land use designations. b. The process to prepare the new zoning districts will be led by Staff and a Consultant with direction from the City Council and City Commissions. The process should be initiated immediately upon adoption of this Comprehensive Plan and should be completed within nine (9) months of its adoption. Each zoning district will address, at a minimum: i. Massing and architectural design ii. Setbacks iii. Height restrictions iv. Site design/landscape standards v. Permitted, conditionally permitted and not permitted uses vi. Accessory structures/uses vii. Transition of uses viii. Mix of uses ix. PUD process or other incentive process x. Establishment of how mixed-use will be applied (i.e. through a master plan approach, parcel-by-parcel basis, etc.) 2. The City will develop a process and methodology for tracking the mixed-use and redevelopment projects to achieve the mix of uses as contemplated within this Comprehensive Plan. The ordinances should be developed with graphic representations of the standards to be more user friendly. The process may include exploration of ghost-platting, development of a database/tracking spreadsheet, and the development of ‘cheat-sheet’ or development reference guides for developers and land owners that describe the mix of uses contemplated and the process to ensure compliance with the ordinance and this Plan. 3. The City will establish guidelines and procedures for the sale of EDA-owned property. This may include creating marketing materials and promoting revised ordinances that highlight the ease of developing in the community. 4. The City will continue to evaluate opportunities for additional land acquisition particularly within proximity to land holdings in the center city that may offer larger redevelopment opportunities. IMPLEMENTATION - DRAFT 10-2-2018 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 6 5. The City will participate as an active partner in any redevelopment effort that includes City financial participation including as the land owner, or TIF, tax abatement, grant partner, etc. 6. What has historically been known as the “Opportunity Site” is re-guided in this Plan to allow for mixed-use development of the site. At the time of this Plan the City is working with a developer on a master plan for the redevelopment that will add a significant number of new households to the community. Understanding that this redevelopment effort is in-progress, the new zoning districts that are created to support the land use designation must be prepared for consistency with the anticipated development. In an effort to minimize duplication of the process, the City will create a minimum of one supporting zoning district that is consistent with the known redevelopment plans. The zoning district will address, at a minimum, the following: a. A minimum percentage of a project that must contain commercial, office or retail uses that support and are consistent with any developed housing. b. The ordinance development process should consider how to incorporate a range of housing types, including considering incentives and/or standards that encourage the construction of new affordable housing c. The ordinance will incorporate architectural and landscape design standards that support the goals and strategies contained within Chapter 2 of this Plan. d. The ordinance will incorporate incentives, and where applicable standards, that are focus on sustainable site improvements and resilient infrastructure improvements such as: transit, trail and sidewalk connections, pervious pavers and other innovate landscape products, localized surface water management and other low impact development techniques. e. The ordinance will require development that incorporates best practices for creating transit oriented places, including density minimums, parking maximums, pedestrian-oriented design, and accommodates a mix of uses. IMPLEMENTATION - DRAFT 10-2-2018 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 7 CHAPTER 4: HOUSING The Implementation Strategies that support the Metropolitan Council’s checklist to achieve the City’s Housing goals and objectives can be found in Chapter 4 of this Plan. The following implementation strategies support those contained within Chapter 4. 1. As part of the zoning ordinance update process the City will evaluate the rules and regulations to ensure that they allow existing and future residents to improve their homes in ways that add value and are desirable, and allow for infill housing that offers a range of housing types and products. a. Residential zoning districts should be written to allow for a mix of housing types, with various setbacks and massing standards to allow for diversity within an individual development. b. Ordinances should be written to define ‘family’ consistently with current demographics. This may require additional study to fully understand the greatest needs anticipated in the community over the next planning period. c. Setback requirements should reflect existing conditions and allow reasonable expansions and additions to homes. 2. The City will evaluate the housing stock for consistency with current and projected demographics. This includes understanding appropriate mix of bedrooms, unit types, etc., that match the changing needs of the City’s residents. The following examples may require additional study: a. Unit mix, such as studios, 1-bedrooms, 2-bedrooms, 3 and 3+ Bedrooms b. Private entry rental opportunities such as town homes, row homes, etc., versus standard multi-family apartments and condominium development. 3. The City will continue to operate its Rental Licensing Program, which has proven to be highly effective in maintaining the City’s rental housing stock. 4. The City will continue to operate a robust code enforcement program that incorporates both complaint-based enforcement and proactive sweeps. The City will continue to engage residents and business owners to ensure code compliance and to provide information in a way that is understandable and clear. 5. The City will continue to operate its Vacant Building Program, which tracts and monitors vacant properties in the City, as well as ensuring adequate upkeep and maintenance. IMPLEMENTATION - DRAFT 10-2-2018 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 8 6. The City will explore programs and policies that promote home ownership in the City. 7. The City will explore programs and policies that provide assistance with single-family housing rehabilitation and maintenance, including low and no-cost loans and grants, project consultation, and other resources. This may include partnerships with outside agencies as well as programs administered by the City. 8. The City will explore polices and ordinances, including incentives and standards, that encourage the construction of new affordable housing. 9. The City will explore partnerships that provide sources of financing and incentives to preserve existing multi-family housing, particularly ways to preserve naturally occurring affordable housing that maintains its affordability. 10. The City will explore programs and policies that encourage landlords to invest in their rental properties. 11. The City will consider creating a housing coordinator position to build relationships with existing landlords and tenants, administer programs, seek funding opportunities, and promote the City’s housing goals. 12. The City will consider adopting policies that promote further the goal of providing safe, secure, and stable housing for renters. This may include adopting ordinances and/or policies that protect the rights of renters. 13. The City will consider inclusionary housing policies that ensure that affordable housing is a component of new housing development when the market strengthens to the extent that it would not deter investment. a. For example, if market rents rise to levels that are affordable to those making 80% AMI then the City would consider adopting an inclusionary housing policy. 14. The City will consider adopting a public subsidy policy that gives greater consideration to projects that forward the City’s housing goals. This includes the option of TIF Housing Set-Aside funds or new TIF Districts that support mixed- income and affordable housing. The City will support grant applications to outside agencies to benefit projects that forward the City’s housing goals. IMPLEMENTATION - DRAFT 10-2-2018 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 9 CHAPTER 5: COMMUNITY IMAGE, BUSINESS STABILITY & ECONOMIC COMPETITIVENESS The following list of Implementation Strategies is provided as a guide to implement the goals and strategies identified in Chapter 2 of this Comprehensive Plan Update. 1. The City will work to create strategies and supporting resources to incorporate affordable commercial, retail and office space into new redevelopment areas. 2. The City will actively pursue a branding and marketing strategy that leverages the community’s diversity as a key asset from which new businesses can be developed. 3. To promote and support local businesses the City will explore the development of a local procurement policy. 4. The City will form a task force or steering committee to study local entrepreneurial needs, gaps and opportunities of residents. Study and research will focus on: a. Identification of barriers to growing or starting a business in the City. b. Review of existing ordinances and policies to ensure they support small, start-up and pop-up businesses. c. Understand what opportunities exist locally and regionally, and what strategies the City might employ to further support local entrepreneurs. 5. The City will explore the feasibility of a commercial land trust model that promotes perpetually affordable commercial space. 6. The City will review its existing business and industrial zoning district designations and revise and update, as necessary, language and policies to ensure regulations support and incentivize: a. Local businesses to stay and grown in the City b. New businesses to locate in the community c. A mix of land uses that reflect current market needs and desires 7. The City will explore opportunities to enhance partnerships with local secondary and post-secondary education institutions that support school-work opportunities, skills and job training, and matching local companies with young talent. 8. The City will partner with DEED and Hennepin County to offer entrepreneurial resource and support programs such as WomenVenture and Open to Business. IMPLEMENTATION - DRAFT 10-2-2018 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 10 9. The City will create a Business Retention & Expansion Program to work directly with the businesses within the community to ensure that their needs are being met. 10. The City will amend its Business Subsidy Policy to prioritize the creation of livable and high wage jobs. 11. The City will create and fund a revolving loan/grant program to assist property and business owners with expansions, interior buildouts, equipment purchasing, and exterior enhancements. 12. The City will explore other economic development programs, including with outside agencies, which would incentivize business expansion and attraction. 13. The City will explore job training and career pathways programs and policies that would benefit residents. 14. The City will explore options to connect the local workforce to employers. 15. The City will continue to support partnerships that promote workforce readiness and removing barriers for existing residents to access education and workforce training, such as the Brooklynk partnership with Brooklyn Park. 16. The City will explore partnerships and programs that promote financial literacy and wealth creation amongst residents. 17. The City will continue to explore ways to reduce racial disparities that exist as they relate the economic stability of its residents, including access to livable wage jobs, home ownership opportunities, financial literacy and wealth creation, and job pathways training. IMPLEMENTATION - DRAFT 10-2-2018 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 11 CHAPTER 6: PARKS, TRAILS AND OPEN SPACE (PTOS) The following list of Implementation Strategies is provided as a guide to implement the goals and strategies identified in Chapter 6 of this Comprehensive Plan Update. 1. The City will continue to prioritize the completion of the PTOS system within redevelopment areas and will work with developers to identify appropriate and reasonable opportunities to enhance and improve access to the system by all residents. 2. Redevelopment projects will be required to provide trail connections that align with the surrounding local and regional trail system that are existing or planned within this Plan. 3. Redevelopment projects will be required to plan for parks and open spaces consistent with this Plan, and the City will work with developers to identify and prioritize improvements to the PTOS system. 4. The City will continue to maintain and manage the existing parks, trails and open space plan consistent with past and current practices. Current management includes: a. Annual CIP budgeting and planning to support current park, trail, and open space function. b. Continue to support the City’s Community Activities, Recreation and Services (CARS) division through appropriate capital investments. c. Periodic survey of residents and stakeholders to understand appropriate and needed parks, trails, and open space programming within the system. d. Prepare and plan for system improvements that respond to the needs of the community. This includes improvements such as park system component conversions including transitioning baseball fields to multi-purpose fields (example) 5. Brooklyn Center will continue to support opportunities for community gatherings at each of its parks, including, but not limited to the summer markets, pavilion rentals, Brooklyn Center’s movie in the parks, and Central Park events that unite the community. 6. The City will continue to complete the sidewalk and trail network consistent with previous planning efforts. This plan acknowledges that trails and sidewalks are a critical component of the Park and Recreation system but are equally as important to the transportation system. IMPLEMENTATION - DRAFT 10-2-2018 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 12 CHAPTER 7: TRANSPORTATION The following list of Implementation Strategies is provided as a guide to implement the goals and strategies identified in Chapter 2 of this Comprehensive Plan Update. 1. The City’s accessibility to the region, and within the region, is an important differentiator and asset to the community. The City will continue to prioritize roadways as an important part of the transportation network. 2. The City will continue to partner with Hennepin County and MnDOT on planned road reconstruction projects to ensure safety and accessibility of the road system within the City are prioritized. 3. Any roadway reconstruction or improvement will consider the incorporation of a stormwater assessment, and any plans should incorporate and implement the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency’s Best Management Practices to improve stormwater quality, recharge local aquifers, and reuse and conserve stormwater where possible. 4. The City will continue to budget for regular maintenance of roadways approximately every five to eight years and include such plan within the City’s Capital Improvement Program. 5. Brooklyn Center will plan for completing the Regional Bicycle Transportation Network (RBTN) that is currently planned within the City to connect to other regional and sub- regional job centers. As redevelopment and reconstruction of roadways occurs RBTN segments or gaps will be constructed to help complete the system. 6. Many of the City’s residents use Transit, and many more could if service were improved in the City. Currently the City is divided into Transit Market II and Transit Market II, which provides varying levels of services. The following summary of considerations is provided: a. The City will work with Metro Transit over this planning period to evaluate the appropriate Transit Market areas for the City per the Metropolitan Council. i. The mapping completed for this Plan demonstrates that some of the residents that may benefit most from frequent and reliable transit may be underserved. ii. The City is developed with a similar urban grid pattern for the majority of its neighborhoods without much distinction. Therefore, it seems inaccurate to identify some areas as more typical “suburban” development. b. The City’s Future Land Use Plan has identified the ‘central spine’ for possible redevelopment in this planning period. The redevelopment pattern contemplated embraces the Transit Station and uses it as an organizing feature. IMPLEMENTATION - DRAFT 10-2-2018 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 13 CHAPTER 8: INFRASTRUCTURE (UTILITIES) The following list of Implementation Strategies is provided as a guide to implement the goals and strategies identified in Chapter 2 of this Comprehensive Plan Update. 1. The City will continue to plan for water and sewer infrastructure improvements to occur concurrently with any planned roadway improvements and reconstruction projects. 2. The City prepared a full sanitary sewer plan and supportive modeling in conjunction with this Plan update. As redevelopment occurs, the sewer plan will be used to guide proper infrastructure improvements including sizing and capacity recommendations, timing and consideration for future phases of redevelopment. 3. The City prepared an update to its water plan and supportive modeling in conjunction with this Plan update. As redevelopment occurs the water plan will be used to guide proper/necessary infrastructure improvements. a. The water supply permit from the DNR will be updated once this Plan and Future Land Use Plan are adopted to reflect projected housing and employment forecasts contained in this Plan. 4. The LSWMP identifies several capital and administrative projects that are incorporated into this implementation plan by reference. The City will properly manage and schedule such improvements to be included within its CIP for on-going planning and action. 5. The City will continue to work with its regional partners, including the Metropolitan Council, on sewer and water infrastructure planning and development so that regional coordination is maintained throughout this planning period. 6. Consideration for how to incorporate sustainable and resilient infrastructure through new development will be addressed at the specific site redevelopment level. This will first be accomplished through the ordinance review, creation and update process and described within previous sections; and will then be implemented through site and redevelopment plan sets and engineering. a. The City’s Public Works Department and its staff will work collaboratively with the Community Development department to identify potential ordinance revisions that would support the development of an integrated green network that not only supports the PTOS system but the City’s infrastructure. IMPLEMENTATION - DRAFT 10-2-2018 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 14 APPENDIX: MISSISSIPPI RIVER CRITICAL CORRIDOR AREA PLAN The following list of Implementation Strategies is provided as a guide to implement the MRCCA Plan contained within Appendix B of this Plan. 1. The City will develop ordinances to support the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MnDNR) requirements to regulate property contained within the MRCCA overlay designations. a. At a minimum the City will develop a shoreland ordinance for properties that abut the Mississippi River and will structure the ordinance to comply with MnDNR requirements. b. The City will work collaboratively with the MnDNR to establish appropriate setback and height standards based on specific parcel locations and potential redevelopment. i. The City may seek flexibility from the MnDNR’s standard requirements, particularly on sites identified for redevelopment. The City will work with the MnDNR to identify appropriate standards. c. The City will engage residents during the ordinance development to provide education about the MRCCA standard requirements and ordinance development process. i. The public engagement process will also solicit feedback regarding specific standards development include appropriate setbacks, height, coverage requirements, etc. Fair Housing Policy 1. Purpose and Vision Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act establishes federal policy for providing fair housing throughout the United States. The intent of Title VIII is to assure equal housing opportunities for all citizens. Furthermore, the City of Bloomington, as a recipient of federal community development funds under Title I of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, is obligated to certify that it will affirmatively further fair housing. The City of Bloomington strives to advance its commitment to inclusion and equity by developing this Fair Housing Policy to further the goal of creating a vibrant, safe, and healthy community where all residents will thrive. 2. Policy Statement It is the policy and commitment of the City of Bloomington to ensure that fair and equal housing opportunities are available to all persons in all housing opportunities and development activities funded by the City regardless of race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, marital status, status with regard to public assistance, creed, familial status, national origin, or disability. This is done through external policies to provide meaningful access to all constituents as well as fair housing information and referral services; and through internal practices and procedures that promote fair housing and support the City’s equity and inclusion goals. City of Bloomington, Minnesota Fair Housing Policy 2 3. External Practices a. Intake and Referral The City of Bloomington has designated the Staff Liaison to the Human Rights Commission as the responsible authority for the intake and referral of all fair housing complaints. At a minimum the Staff Liaison will be trained in state and federal fair housing laws, the complaint process for filing discrimination complaints, and the state and federal agencies that handle complaints. The date, time, and nature of the fair housing complaint and the referrals and information given will be fully documented. The Human Rights Commission will advise the City Council on City programs and policies affecting fair housing and raise issues and concerns where appropriate. b. Meaningful Access i. Online Information. The City of Bloomington will continue to display information about fair housing prominently on its website. The website will continue to include links to various fair housing resources, including the Department of Housing and Urban Development, Minnesota Department of Human Rights, Mid-Minnesota Legal Aid, and others as well as links to state and federal fair housing complaint forms. In addition, the City will post the following documents on its website: 1. Reasonable Accommodation Policy; 2. Limited English Proficiency (LEP) Policy; 3. Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Policy regarding access to City services; and 4. The State of Minnesota’s Olmstead Plan. ii. In-Person Information. The City of Bloomington will provide in-person fair housing information including: 1. A list of fair housing enforcement agencies; 2. Frequently asked questions regarding fair housing law; and 3. Fair housing complaint forms for enforcement agencies City of Bloomington, Minnesota Fair Housing Policy 3 c. Languages. The City of Bloomington is committed to providing information in the native language of its residents. The City of Bloomington will provide information in languages other than English as described in its LEP Policy. 4. Internal Practices The City of Bloomington commits to the following steps to promote awareness and competency regarding fair housing issues in all of its government functions. a. Staff and Officials Training. The City will continue to train its staff and officials on fair housing considerations. b. Housing Analysis. The City will review its housing periodically to examine the affordability of both rental and owner-occupied housing to inform future City actions. c. Code Analysis. The City will review its municipal code periodically, with specific focus on ordinances related to zoning, building, and occupancy standards, to identify any potential for disparate impact or treatment. d. Project Planning and Analysis. City planning functions and development review will consider housing issues, including whether potential projects may perpetuate segregation or lead to displacement of protected classes. e. Community Engagement. The City will seek input from underrepresented populations in the community. Conversations regarding fair housing, development, zoning, and land use changes may be facilitated by the City. f. Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing. As a recipient of federal funds, the City agrees to participate in the Regional Analysis of Impediments, as organized by the regional Fair Housing Implementation Council (FHIC), an ad hoc coalition of Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) entitlement jurisdictions and City of Bloomington, Minnesota Fair Housing Policy 4 others working together to affirmatively further fair housing. The City will review the recommendations from the analysis for potential integration into City planning documents, including the Consolidated Plan, the Comprehensive Plan, and other related documents. Adopted by the City Council on August 6, 2018 MEMOR ANDUM - C OUNCIL WOR K SESSION DAT E:2/24/2020 TO :C ity C ouncil F R O M:C urt Boganey, C ity Manager T HR O UG H:N/A BY:Meg Beekman, C ommunity Development Director S UBJ EC T:O pportunity S ite Update (30 minutes ) Background: In ac cordance with the proposed timeline, a draft plan has been prepared for the O pportunity S ite, inc orporating community input from the firs t phase of engagement as well as ongoing conversations and input from the Working C ommittee. T he Working C ommittee has not reviewed this draft, but will do so at their next meeting. T he purpos e of this update and disc ussion is to provide the C ity C ouncil with an opportunity to review the direction of the mas ter plan draft and to provide any feedbac k and comments ahead of the next phase of c ommunity engagement work. Attached to the memo is an exec utive s ummary of the draft master plan. A full c opy of the draft mas ter plan is being c ompiled and will be emailed out to the C ity C ouncil ahead of the meeting. At the work s es s ion s taff and the c onsultant team will go over highlights from the draft master plan and disc uss any c hanges from the pas t version. C ity C ouncil will have an opportunity to provide feedbac k on the work that has been done to date and direction on next s teps for the roll out of the draft plan for c ommunity engagement. T he draft master plan c ontains s ignificantly more content than previous vers ions of the plan. It breaks the plan into five c ategories or chapters; Vis ion; P ublic R ealm; Ac cess and C onnectivity; Buildings and Development; and Implementation. S ome elements are identified as placeholders since additional technic al analysis and community input are needed in order to unders tand greater detail. F or example, the implementation s ection identifies targets , or goals , for the development. T hese inc lude among others , affordable housing targets which are des cribed as a range of overall affordability for the entire development. T he implementation sec tion identifies a path for developing a more detailed housing implementation plan, which will require more community input, a hous ing study, as well as a financial feas ibility analys is to determine the final target perc entage and s pecific affordability bands (ie; 30% AMI, 50% AMI, and 60% AMI). T he final vers ion of the mas ter plan will contain the final target numbers , while this draft version contains plac eholders and language whic h des cribes how the final targets will be identified. Internally, s taff and the c onsultant team debated if more tec hnical and feas ibility analysis s hould be completed before a draft mas ter plan was made public. In the end it was dec ided that it was better to move forward with creating a draft plan with the information that was available in order to allow more c ommunity input into the process and to s hape the feasibility work, rather than to wait until the plan was more fully formed to gather community input. T he next steps will be to pres ent the draft mas ter plan to the Working C ommittee for feedback and review. T his input will assist with c ompleting the c ommunity engagement products , s uc h as the Meeting-in-a-Box tool, pos ters, and other handouts whic h are being prepared. T he C ity has entered into contrac ts to as s is t with this next phase of engagement with AC ER , Jude Nnadi, and the O rganization for Liberians in Minnes ota (O LM), and is negotiating a sec ond contrac t for engagement with the Brooklyn Bridge Alliance. T he focus of thes e contrac ts is to assist with reac hing historically underrepresented and difficult to reach groups in the c ommunity, s uc h as renters, youth, immigrant c ommunities, Wes t Afric an communities , and Afric an Americ an communities . S taff is also reaching out to organizations to assist with engaging Lao/Hmong c ommunities as well as Latinx communities . In addition, once the engagement tools are completed, community facilitators will be enrolled to conduc t community conversations throughout the c ommunity on the topic of the draft plan and to solic it dis cus s ions and collec t s urvey information on behalf of the city. With the draft plan, Ehlers will begin work on a high level financial analys is whic h will look at the financ ial feas ibility of the plan, along with identifying any funding gaps . S taff has as ked them to provide high level analys is that will include reviewing the impac t of including a certain percentage of mixed inc ome housing as part of the development as well to see the affec t that may have on the feas ibility. A traffic study and stormwater analysis will also begin to identify any issues or impacts associated with the plan related to these items. T he input from the community engagement, along with the technical analysis work will be used to revise and shape the plan to ensure that it minimizes impacts and maximizes benefits to the community, infrastructure, and environment. Policy Issues: Is the C ity C ouncil comfortable with the direction the draft master plan is heading? Are there areas or elements of the draft master plan whic h the C ity C ouncil has concerns about, or would like to see altered? Is the C ity C ouncil comfortable with staff proc eeding with the roll out of the draft mas ter plan for community engagement and input? S trategic Priorities and Values: Targeted R edevelopment AT TAC HME N T S: Desc ription Upload Date Type Executive S ummary 1/8/2020 Exec utive S ummary MEMOR ANDUM - C OUNCIL WOR K SESSION DAT E:2/24/2020 TO :C ity C ouncil F R O M:C urt Boganey, C ity Manager T HR O UG H:Dr. R eggie Edwards , Deputy C ity Manager BY:Barb S uciu, C ity C lerk S UBJ EC T:P ending Items Recommendation: Metro T ransit Bus H ub - (upcomi ng C C presentati on) C ommemoration of 400 years of S lavery Ac tivities -3/9 Livable Wages -3/9 Us e of EDA O wned P roperty -3/9 F ood Trucks - 3/9 O ptions for Use of Adjacent S pace to Liquor S tore - 3/9 Dis cus s ion of Mayor/C ity C ounc il roles & res ponsibilities (C ommonS ense Inc.) Background: S trategic Priorities and Values: O perational Exc ellenc e