FOR UPDATE ONLY: Receive Update on Housing Assistance Policy Progress

The purpose of this report is to update the Planning Commission on the status of the progress on the Housing Assistance Policy work by the Planning Commission ad-hoc sub-committee. No formal action or feedback is being requested, other than to receive input and comments from Commissioners.

In 2013, the City Council directed Staff to form an ad-hoc sub-committee of the Planning Commission for formulate a Housing Assistance Policy. This sub-committee has met three times over the course of the past several months. The purpose of the policy is to establish a framework in which to review requests for financial assistance (or other form of assistance) for housing projects. These requests could include, but are not limited to City financing options, third-party financing options, and grant opportunities available to the City. Given the number of requests the City has been receiving related to housing projects and the forecasted housing growth of the community, the City Council felt that a policy was necessary in order to ensure an equitable and fiscally responsible application to housing assistance.

The sub-committee has reviewed the following:

1. Current Housing Plan, Goals, and Implementation Strategies
2. Current housing and population demographics (Census data)
3. Current housing and population forecasts (2030 Comprehensive Plan)
4. Current employment demographics
5. Current employment forecasts

The sub-committee also has completed the following deliverables:

1. Framework of Policy
2. Interim Policy Statement
3. Housing Product Priority List

Framework

The sub-committee agreed to a framework of the policy as follows:

1. Housing Product Priorities
2. Minimum Thresholds
3. Scoring Matrix

Housing Product Priorities
The first effort of the sub-committee was to establish housing product priorities. It is important to note that this priority list is an evolving document that would need to be reviewed and updated on a regular basis and was based on current demographic data (see attachment to this case). With every housing development that is completed, the assumptions that went into formulating this list change, and the list needs to be amended. When the City accomplishes a single housing goal, the priority likely shifts, at least in part, to a different priority.

It should further be noted that the list includes priorities of housing types that City assistance should be focused. This is not a list that would indicate how to guide our future land use map or a reflection as to the number of units per housing type forecasted. The focus was on those housing types that met the City's housing goals, but presented the highest need for assistance to achieve a particular goal. For example, the sub-committee did not rank general, market-rate single-family high on the priority list, as standard market conditions appear to be sufficient to make this style successful. The sub-committee focused on those developments, which could include single-family, that brought other aspects such is high degree of architecture, a high amount of amenities, etc. The Priority List is as follows:

1. Senior Independent
2. Affordable/Workforce
3. Redevelopment
4. Energy Efficient
5. Rehabilitation of Existing
6. Amenity Rental
7. 3+ Unit Rental
8. Accessory Dwelling Unit
9. Executive Single-Family
10. Senior Skilled Nursing
11. Assisted Living/Memory Care
12. Condominium
13. Single-Family Detached
14. Single-Family Attached

Minimum Thresholds

The sub-committee agreed to utilize the existing Housing Goals and Implementation Strategies of the Comprehensive Plan as Minimum Thresholds. It is recommended that each development requesting housing assistance identify at least one existing goal/implementation strategy as Step #1. A development requesting assistance would need to be able to prove successful achievement of an implementation strategy in order to move to the formal review.

Scoring Matrix

The sub-committee has agreed that a scoring process should be part of the policy that would follow the minimum thresholds. A draft scoring matrix has been prepared. The scoring matrix is divided between affordable (aimed at units prices below 80% or area medium income) and market rate (units priced above 80% AMI).  A Metropolitan Council ownership and rent affordability limits for 2013 is attached to provide example rents and ownership prices that would fall within certain affordability thresholds.  
The scoring matrix then provides points based on each individual project and what the project includes. Points can be awarded for additional affordability levels, construction of senior housing, and provision of specialized senior housing, inclusion of development amenities, amount of private financing, redevelopment, architectural standards, development standards and energy efficiency. 

Once the scoring matrix was developed staff requested professional peer review which we received from Karen Skepper of Anoka County and Barb Dacy with Washington County whom provided good feedback and encouraged us to ensure that the scorning process was easy to use and provided the most points for the City’s highest priority. The sub-committee met on September 16th and reviewed the drafts, offered input and recommended that an update be provided to the Planning Commission.  

Staff requests review and discussion by the Planning Commission at their meeting on October 3^rd.

Review, discussion and offer feedback to staff.

No action is being requested at this time.