HomeMy WebLinkAboutJun 7, 1976OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS
SPECIAL MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS
JUNE 7, 1976
The Meeting was called to order at 8:38 by Council President Heintz.
Roll Call: Logacz, Heintz, Hentges---present Norberg, Nawrocki---
absent
Council President Heintz noted that Mayor Nawrocki would join the
meeting shortly.
Motion by Hentges, Seconded by Logacz to name Karen DeBruin Secretary
for the meeting. Roll Call: All Ayes
STATEMENT OF PURPOSE OF MEETING
Council President Heintz noted that the purpose of this meeting
is to handle the items of business on the agenda, including the
presentation of the Rehabilitation Program.
PRESENTATION OF REHABILITATION PROGRAM
Mr. Dean Otterson, HRA Director, stated that he would like the
Council to consider elements of a program that the City has been
interested in for many years: Rehabilitation of the present housing
stock. He noted that this program is designed primarily to be a
flexible approach to preserving the existing housing stock of
Columbia Heights, which is a valuable resource.
Mr. Otterson noted that a high percent of dwellings in Columbia
Heights are single family units. He also explained that this
program is modelled after similar programs which have been successful.
At this time, Mr. Otterson introduced Mr. Bob Bentzen of the Housing
Authority to explain more about the proposed program.
Mr. Bentzen stated that the main target area would be from
Van Buren Street from 39th Avenue to 40th Avenue. He noted that
this area is a primary area because of its visual appearance and the
possibilities for home rehabilitation there.
Mr. Bentzen then explained the goals of the program as being:
1. To make loan funds available to low and moderate income
homeowners for the purpose of improving the quality of their
existing residential properties.
2. To maximize the participation of local public and private entities
in program administration and delivery of home improvement funds.
--241- June 7, 1976
To encourage improvement of deteriorated and substandard
housing in areas to make it more habitable and less hazardous
to health and safety.
To encourage the stabil ization and upgrading of existing
neighborhoods having moderately priced housing.
He also explained the requirements for eligibility:
]. Applicants must be individual fee owners or contract-for-deed
purchases of the property which wi]] be improved.
Applicants for Home Improvement Program loans must be persons
or families (including non-related individual adults) who
are residents of Hinnesota and have an annual "adjusted
gross income" of not over $19,000.
3. Applicant must be a reasonable credit risk, with reasonable
ability to pay the loan obligation.
Properties must be at least fifteen (15) years of age, or in
need of repair to correct damage resulting from a natural
disaster or to correct items that are hazardous to health
and safety.
5. Properties must not be in violation of applicable zoning
ordinances or other land use guides.
o
Eligible properties shall be used primarily for residential
purposes and shall contain no more than six separate dwelling
units. Mobile homes and tral]ers are not eligible.
HRA funds shall be used to finance only new improvements to
existing structures, and shall not be used for refinancing
any existing mortgage or debt.
Improvements shall be completed within nine (9) months from the
date the Note for the loan is signed and funds are disbursed.
Council President Heintz noted that under No. 6 of the general eligibility
requirements, the number of separate dwellings should be changed, in his
opinion, from six to two. He went on to say that he didn't see why
apartment owners should get rehabi]itation help when their apartments
are commercial and income properties and improvements can be written off
on their income tax forms.
Councilman Logacz noted that Mr. Otterson was tr'!ing to present the
extreme cases by including the six dwelling unit in the eligibility
listing. He also noted that he thought the single family dwellings should
be looked at first in terms of rehabilitation,
June 7, 1976 -2~2-
Councilman Hentges stated that he could not see the reason why the
area from 39th Avenue to 40th Avenue on Van Buren Street was chosen
as the "target area~II
Mr. Otterson replied that there were several reasons for this. He
noted that it would be best to begin in a small area when beginning
a program such as this one. He also noted that this area of the
City would not be undergoing any public improvements.
Mr. Otterson suggested call ing the area a "demonstration areaI' if the
title "target area" was not suitable.
Mr. Otterson further noted that this was an area he would ~eel
comfortable working in to begin this project.
Council President He.i, ntz stated that he was concerned over the fact
that private home owners would not be aware of this program, and
people owning multiple dwellings would be taking advantage of it.
Mr. Otterson noted that he thought there was a need for this type
of program in multiple dwelling structures.
Mr. Otterson explained that local lending institutions would be
handling the monies involved in the project. He also noted that the
HRA had applied for a title to loan money in case no local lender
was interested.
Mr. Bentzen explained the eligible improvements, priority in selection,and
presented the loan summary.
ELIGIBLE IMPROVEMENTS
Residential properties may be improved to increase compliance
with state, county or municipal health, housing, building, fire
prevention and housing maintenance codes or other public standards
applicable to housing.
Improvements may also be made for the purpose of making housing
more desirable to live in, or to increase the market value of the
housing, or to make the home more habitable. These improvements
may take the form of permanent general improvements; however,
to insure that loans will be used for basic and necessary items
and not for luxury items, the definition of permanent general im-
provements is as follows:
Permanent general improvements shall include additions,renovations,
alterations, or repairs upon real property or in connection
with existing structures which substantially protect or improve
the basic livability or utility of the property. Improvements
shall not include materials, fixtures, or landscapes of a type
of quality which exceeds that customarily used in the locality
for properties of the same general type as the property to be
improved.
June 7, ]976
All work or construction completed with Home Improvement Program
funds must be in compliance with applicable building and housing codes
and standards, however, no application for improvements to owner-
oo:upied housing shall be denied solely because the improvements
will not place such housing in full compliance with all such codes
and standards.
4. Improvements such as insulation and storm windows, which will conserve
usage of fuel and energy, are strongly encouraged.
o
HRA funds may be used for bringing individual sewage disposal systems
(excluding septics) into comp] iance with local, state, and federal
environment and sanitary standards.
6. HRA funds shall not be used for the financing or payment of
assessments for ~public improvements.
7. Ail construction or work performed under contract shall be in
compliance with a HRA warranty on workmanship and materials.
o
In all cases, loans and improvements must be eligible under HUD/FHA
Title I requirements as described or referred to in HUD Handbook
Title ! Property Improvement~Loan Operating Handbook; and/or FHA Regulations,
FHA 2000 Property Improvement Loan Insurance, Title 24, Chapter
Subchapter B, Part 20], Subpart A, Code of Federal Regulations.
PRIORITY IN SELECTION OF APPLICANTS
Priority will be given to applicants whose living conditions are hazardous
to the health, safety, public welfare, or may be considered as emergencies.
LOAN SUMMARY
The maximum principal loan amounts exclusive of financing charges are:
A. $5,000 for properties with one dwelling unit.
B. $5,000 per dwelling unit for properties with six individual
dwelling units,
2. Loans need not be secured except for principal amounts over $1,000.
3. The maximum terms of the loan shall be twelve (12) years.
4. There shall be no prepayment penalties, and loans may general ly be
assumed upon the sale of the pr(;perty if a mortgage lien is in effect.
The simple annual rate of interest to be charged on the loan shall be
either 4, 6, 8~, depending upon the property owners adjusted gross
income.
June 7,1976 -244-
At the time of application, conventional financing for the
proposed improvements must not otherwise be available from
private lenders upon equivalent terms and conditions.
All loans must be "direct loans" as defined by FHA Title I
regulations. Loans involving "dealers" are ineligible.
The minimum monthly payment on a loan shall be $10.00. For the
principal amount desired, if a 12-year maturity (term) results
in a monthly payment of less than $10.00, then the term shall be
decreased to yield a monthly payment of not less than $10.00.
9. Before the Note (Loan) is signed, the applicant shall also
complete and sign a certificate stating:
A. The type and extent of proposed improvements.
B. That the improvements to be financed by the loan shall
be completed within nine months.
C. That each contractor shall specify work to be done by
him and shall sign a warranty on workmanship and materials.
D. That HRA or an authorized representative shall have the right
to inspect the property any time after nine months upon
giving due notice to the occupants. Failure to use loan
funds for home improvements is a federal criminal offense
punishable by a fine up to $5,000 and/or imprisonment up
to two years.
Councilman Hentges stated that this was a good program that the average
working man in Columbia Heights could benefit from.
Mayor Nawrocki entered the meeting at 9:!5 p.m.
Motion by Hentges, seconded by Heintz to authorize the Housing and
Redevelopment Authority to enter into this program. Roll Call: All Ayes.
Mr. Otterson assured the Council that, as Director of the Housing Authority,
emphasis would be placed on single family units.
Mayor Nawrocki noted that he has been trying to implement a program
of this nature for some time and that he was extremely happy to see the
City a step closer.
RESOLUTION #76-32 ON HOME IMPROVEMENT GRANTS
AUTHORIZING THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY TO SUBMIT A
GRANT APPLICATION TO THE MINNESOTA HOUSING FINANCE AGENCY.
WHEREAS, The City Council of the city of Columbia Heights has long
recognized that the supply of existing housing units in the community
represent a valuable resource that should be preserved, and
-24~- June 7, 1976
WHEREAS, The City Council further recognizes the need to provide a
program to assist low income homeowners in maintaining their dwelling
units and other incentives to arrest decline in the community's
neighborhoods, and
WHEREAS, the Housing and Redevelopment Authority, organized pursuant
to MSS 462.411, in partnership with the City Council, has developed
a housing rehabilitation loan and grant program designed to preserve
the community's housing stock, and
WHEREAS, The H.R.A. has requested authorization of the City Council to
submit a grant application to the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency for
funds under their Home Improvement Grant Program, and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Minnesota Housing Finance Agency requirements,
approval of the grant application is necessary before a sponsoring
agency can submit an application.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by thc City Council of the City
of Columbia Heights that the Housing and Redevelopment Authority
be authorized to submit an application for home improvement grants to
the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency.
BE ~IT FURTHER RESOLVED that if successful, the Housing and Redevelopment
Authority be required to provide the City Council with quarterly
reports demonstrating how these grant funds were used in the community.
Passed this 7th day of June, 1976
Offered by: Logacz
Seconded by: Hentges
Roll! Call: All Ayes
PRESENTATION OF DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT
Mr. Otterson explained that the City has been through a long process of
studies with Real Estate Research on the subject of downtown development
and now have an interested developer, Kraus Anderson.
Mr. Otterson noted that there is a need for something to be done in the
Columbia Heights downtown area, but help was needed to decide exactly
what: should be done. He went on to say that he came before the Council
tonight to ask their endorsement of the concept of development as it
stands so far.
It was explained that the Council would not be committed to any course of
action. Mr. Otterson noted that he only wished the Council to voice
their opinions, ideas, and concerns.
Mr. Otterson presented the four initial concepts of development. He also
spoke on what would be included in each of these four concepts.
June 7, 1976 -246-
Mayor Nawrocki noted that it is difficult to give even a preliminary
decision without a feel for the numbers, and Mr. Otterson noted that
this was true, but numbers were difficult to give when one is working
in stages as preliminary as this.
There was much general discussion on such things as expected costs of
the project.
At this time, Mr. Otterson asked for the general consensus of the
Council on one of the four plans which were presented. He again
emphasized that this would in no way commit the Council, but only
give Kraus Anderson some idea which direction to pursue.
The Council agreed that the Plan No. 4 should be pursued further.
Mayor Nawrocki stated that, even if the fine points don't look
quite so encouraging; a lot of work, time, and effort has gone into
the project as presented thus far. He noted that he very much
appreciated this.
RECESS AT 10:42 p.m.
RECONVENE AT ll:03 p.m.
REQUEST TO CALL FOR BIDS ON TREE PLANTING SEPARATE FROM CONSTRUCTION
BID ON JEFFERSON STREET 40th to 45th AVENUE
George Brown, City Engineer, was present at the meeting and explained
to the Council that it was his feeling that a more acceptable tree
planting program could be accomplished if the bid for trees was let
separately from the construction bid.
Mayor Nawrocki informed Mr. Brown that it was his perogative whether
he wanted to let the bids together or separately.
REQUEST FOR AUTHORIZATION TO MOVE CUL-DE-SAC
It was explained that the cul-de-sac which was presently platted for
42½ Avenue would allow for more efficient lot development if it was
moved approximately fifty feet east. It was discovered that the
cul-de-sac as initially laid out does not give good access for the
easterly lots on 42½ Avenue.
Motion by Logacz, seconded by Hentges to acquire the necessary easements
needed to move the cul-de-sac on 42½ Avenue. Roll Call: All Ayes
PETITION FOR CANCELLATION OF A FORFEITURE CERTIFICATE FOR CANCELLATION
OF A FORFEITURE AND
APPLICATION FOR ABATEMENT OF TAXES ON CERTIFICATE #31245
Attorney Douglas Peterson explained that this action is to cancel the
forfeiture filed against Anoka Registrar of Title Certificate #31245,
which relates to the forfeiture which was filed against the Glover
property at Sullivan Lake. The second action is approval of the
application for the abatement of taxes of the same property.
._2L7.- June 7, 1976
Motion by Hentges, seconded by Heintz to authorize the Mayor and
City Manager to sign the petition for cancellation of a forfeiture
certificate for cancellation of a forfeiture and the application
for .abatement of taxes on certificate #3]245. Roll Call: All Ayes
CONSIDERATION OF CASE SETTLEMENT
Attorneys Peterson and Kalina explained that this case sett]ement related
to the po]icmen pension case which was scheduled for June 14. A letter
was given to a]l the Councilmen outlining the basic proposal for this
settlement.
It was noted that the active and retired officers and their attorneys
have agreed to this settlement. It was further noted that if the
Council approved this settlement plan, there should be no more litigation
involving the City and its active and retired police officers.
Attorney Kalina noted that the provisions of this settlement, if approved,
wou]d become enacted as part of a bi]] to the legislature supported by
the !retired officers, active officers, and the City.
Attorney Ka]ina read and explained each of the points of the settlement.
Councilman Heintz suggested that John Schedler, City Clerk-Treasurer,
be appointed to invest the funds of the Po]ice Relief Association.
There was much discussion on this idea.
Mayor Nawrocki suggested that the final settlement be written with
words suggesting provisions for the best return on investments.
Counci]man Heintz asked Attorney Kalina if he recommended approval
of this settlement.
Attorney Kalina replied that his recommendation is in favor of this
settllement.
Motion by Logacz, seconded by Hentges to concur in settlement as proposed
by the City Attorney. Roi] Cai]: All Ayes
Mayor- Nawrocki noted that with federal and state fund available, the
police department would be hiring a Community Service Officer for
the summer months. It was further noted that this individual has
had three years of police science training.
Motion by Heintz, seconded by Logacz to adjourn the special, meeting at
1:08 a.m. Roll Call: All Ayes ~~~1
Bruce G. Nawrocki, Mayor
Secretary