Agenda - Council - 09/23/1980 - Special

Home

III · COMPARISON OF CUR-T~ENT CRITERIA AND PROPOSED REVISIONS PREgEkrr CRITERIA - DELETE PROPOSED REVISION ExPLA,qATIOY FOR THE CHA~E POI NTS WAB LE I to 10 EXISTING HOUSING Low-Income Municipalities ranked accord- ing to percent of total hous- ing in price range affordable by low-income persons. (Units renting for $119 or less, or valued at $12,500 or less, , 1970 CensuS- The percent of unitS that are substandard is subtracted and the percent of mobile hom~s is added to adve at a total percentage.) 1 to 10 Moderete-I ncome Municipalities r~nked accord- lng to percent of total hous- ing in price range affordable by moderate-income persons. (UnitS renting for $199 a~ less, or valued at $19,999 or less, 1970 CensuS-) points HOUSING AFFORDABILITy AND DIVERSIFICATION Allowable 1 to 5 Low- and Moderate-Income Homeownershi? Unit~. - Municipalities are ranked according to the percentage of their total homesteaded housing units-in 1980 which are affordable to low- and m~derate-income persons based upon 1980 market value data compiled by the county. 1 tO 5 Low- and Moderate-Income Rental Units - Municipalities are ranked according ~'o the percentage of their total rental housing in a price range affordable to low- and moderate- income persons based upon the most current available census data. The percentage of substandard rental units is subtracted to arrive at a total percentage. (For example - units renting for $149 or less, 1970 cenSuS.) ~ allow ~z of more cu~z~t ~ on low- and Th~ proposed c~J~9~-~ ..... .._ ~- ~he absence of ~, ~v~. ~980 av~Sle. The approp~ ~9~0 r~