Interesting story in today's Strib business section regarding what is probably the single largest for-profit affordable housing project in the city pipeline ( http://www.startribune.com/stories/535/2209073.html ). Arguably one of the hottest topics in local and state government discussion these days, everyone is hollering about the need for more affordable housing. Advocates line up demanding more public money to subsidize more affordable housing. Then as each prospective project takes shape, local neighbors come out in opposition-- almost without fail! NIMBYism at it's finest, right here in Mpls.
Today's article describes this 221-unit apartment complex- Stone Arch Apartments, and how Paul Zerby, the new CM from the 2nd Ward, is beginning his effort to halt production of 91 affordable units out of 221 units at the apartment complex. He is being pushed hard by the Marcy Holmes Neighborhood Association. The rationale?... the area, they claim... is not suitable for housing, due to industrial neighbor Metal-Matic's truck activity and a rail spur that, as I understand, has been essentially unused for three years. Metal-Matic has sued the city to reverse the zoning approvals, and is posturing that a loss of labor truck jobs is eminent. Seems that when the proposal was originally made for high-end ownership several years ago, the area was very appropriate for housing for Marcy Holmes. If memory serves, during planning commission hearings the neighborhood felt the site was appropriate if there was ownership, but not affordable rental. The Planning Commission thought their objections disingenuous. So did the city council, which supported the project. Ahh yes, just another case of NIMBYism... as we recently experienced at 54th and Lyndale fiasco last summer, 50th and France only recently and other locations throughout the city. Do we have a crisis in affordable housing or not? Just what is city policy? How can a few neighborhood opponents to affordable housing and one newly elected, ill-informed Council Member undo months of approvals and city, county and state commitments? Well, it seems they are taking advantage of inaction by affordable housing advocates-- where are the affordable housing advocates now? What of the day care center operation immediately across the street from Metal-Matic... is that too inappropriate, given all that dangerous truck traffic? Will Zerby and neighborhood opponents also move to take down the threatened housing that already exists across the street from Metal-Matic? Not likely. In today's paper, Zerby claims the neighborhood has launched a "master plan" effort to plan for this area. He forgot to mention they initiated the plan AFTER Stone Arch was proposed and applications filed. Is there any doubt the plan will conclude the area isn't suited to such projects? And, what of efforts up and down the riverfront to clean up properties, establish green space and make the riverfront more available to area residents? This project was approved for rezoning in October. It was affirmed by the City Council by a wide majority. The project's redevelopment plan was approved in December, on a 13-0 vote. Tax credit housing bonds were allocated by the County in January. An environmental grant for pollution cleanup and landscaping, applied for by the city, was granted by the state. I've even heard that Zerby tried to reject the grant and send the money back to the state as a means of killing the project. Is this what we can look forward to with our new leadership at City Hall? Is this the way the City intends to do business? Today's article said the city subsidy amounted to $35,000 per affordable unit-- compare that with the numbers recently summarized on this list a couple of weeks ago with NRP-subsidized projects coming in at five times the unit price (in local subsidy dollars). The city approves the project, the developer acquires the property, and now the city is trying to reverse it's earlier decision-- sounds like another big lawsuit to me. And, according to the article, the MCDA is sitting on the fence with regard to the project. How can they be fence-sitting when the City Council has already approved it? I'm no housing expert, but as a taxpayer and city resident, this situation seems a bit screwy to me. If developers have to constantly re-defend affordable housing projects even after Council approval, they won't do them-- simple as that. Costs will increase and the public will pay. Does this city and its leadership really believe in and support affordable housing development, or just campaign lip service? The election is over-- time to walk the talk!! A public hearing is scheduled for this coming Monday, April 8, 2002, at 1:30pm in the Community Development Committee, which has been fully supportive of the project to date. I hope supporters of affordable housing will show up in force and demonstrate that there is indeed a need, and it's time to quit talking and start building! See you there! Michael Hohmann Linden Hills _______________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A Civil City Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
