11-26-1984 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

GENERAL CO"7CERNS 1. COMMUNITY INDEX The AM11 has major concerns relative to the Council's intent to introduce the Community Index concept into the housing and grant review process conducted by the Metropolitan Council. The eiiectiveness of any tool used �o prom .e and produce more affordable housing within communities in the metropolitan area depends a great deal on its creditability and acceptance by local officials. Hared on an extensive review of the written material describing the Community Index and discussions with the Council's Housing Staff, the AMM believes this concept is premature. To a large Extent, the index is based on a "snap shot in time" of the existing housing already built in t',is area. Since the housing already in place will provide the bulk of the housing stock for at least the next ten (10) years, communities might be unfairly penalized because of this. The existing housing is largely a reflection of ttie market place and has little to do with the "good" or "bad" intentions of local officials and they should not be judged or held accountable for conditions over which they have little or no control. Also, the exact same houses in different areas might differ greatly in market value because of the influence of the market place and other i.ntan,-ibiles. The AMM also questions the wisdom or fairness of judging every community by the same standards since much of the housing type, style and cost is a reflection of the market and has little to do with planning. It almost appears that the intent of this index is to make each and every ci`y a microcosm of the region as whole and the AMM does nest believe this is necessary, advantage, or even good public policy. The AMM does believe that the information (data) ddsctd' �d in the Community Index is useful planning information for city officials and should be useful for internal planning purposes on a city by city basis. However, the index should not be used as a "control technique" by the Metropolitan Council at this time becau---e of its deficiencies and the many unanswered questions. Recommendations: If the M-,tropolitan Council decides tc proceed with the "Comm�inity Index" concept, for a period of time (perhaps two or thrE ears) it should be used only as a bilateral plannirq top'. -en the Metropolitan council and the to^aI commun. ies. is, when the Council eviews a local housing project or proposal, the comments :t maker based I the "Index