Agenda - Council - 04/14/2015 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

= Review 2040 local comprehensive plan updates and subsequent amendments to verify that each community is guiding an adequate supply of land to accommodate their share of the region's need for low- and moderate -income housing, i.e., the Allocation of Affordable Housing Need. Part III: Council Policies and Roles, page 81: As mentioned previously, the Need and the Goal are frequently confused. Where the Need is a proxy for demand for new additional affordable housing that should be addressed in local comprehensive plans, the Goal is a mechanism for participants of the Livable Communities Act to show their commitment and effort to produce affordable and life -cycle housing. With their Goal expressing a desire to expand housing choices, the LCA -participating communities are aided and rewarded by access to the LCA funding discussed on page 84. The two measures are products of different legislation with different purposes and requirements. One of the desired outcomes of this Housing Policy Plan is to improve the understanding of the roles of these measures in the regional housing conversation. Part III: Council Policies and Roles, pages 82-3: Emerging from this Housing Policy Plan will be is a new set of scoring criteria the Council will creatc use to develop local Scores annually. This methodology replaces the Guidelines for Housing Performance developed in 2002 and updated in 2012. Jurisdictions vary widely in their fiscal, technical, level of developer interest. The Housing Performance Scores should recognize these differences. For achicving a high Housing Pcrformancc Scorc. Additionally, thc Housing Pcrformancc Scores can ccrvc meas of addressing local housing needs given available -resources. Framework for developing new Housing Performa. Ge-gsares The goals of the revisions to the Housing Performance Scores are to: • Better recognize local variations in their fiscal, technical, and human resource capacity, existing built environments, cost and availability of land, and existing level of developer interest. • Provide all cities and townships a real possibility of achieving high Housing Performance Scores if they are active in providing affordable housing or related services. • Make the scoring process more transparent. • Minimize the administrative burden on cities by leveraging information from sources such as applications to the Consolidated Request for Proposals and county housing investments. The table on the following page compares the 2002 (revised in 2012) and 2015 methodologies for the Housing Performance Scores. The Council expects that these refinements to the Scores will lead to both a better ability to evaluate local performance on expanding affordable housing and also a greater opportunity to help cities connect tools, ideas, and resources with development opportunities, potential partners, and a larger pool of funding and technical options. • Use the following broad categories for the Scores: Tools available at the local level Tools or resources used in the last fivc ton years Number of affordable housing units or affordablc housing opportunitics cr tcd in thc last five ten years Existing stock of affordable housing Local participation in state, regional, or county housing progras, whether as an administrator, lender, funding allocator, pass through entity, or funding applicant Page - 6 1 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL