My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
3/1/1994
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1990's
>
1994
>
3/1/1994
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 12:04:23 PM
Creation date
6/16/2015 1:48:35 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
03/01/1994
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
54
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
RGGK 91 Fb,; X75 <br />restrictions to conform with State requirements. He gave examples <br />of the criteria: At least 75 percent of the funds expended through <br />this program must be for new construction, and at least 65 percent <br />of that must be home ownership, not rental property. At least 30 <br />percent of the beneficiaries must be in the very low income <br />category and at least 30 percent in the low income category. Of <br />the total program, at least 60 percent of the recipients must be in <br />the very low or low income category. This program is intended to <br />help not only people in need of housing assistance but also the <br />construction industry as much as possible. It is recognized that <br />communities are strengthened when homeowners have pride in the <br />community because they keep their homes and lawns in better <br />condition, they care about their neighborhood, they participate in <br />the community, and the overall community is enhanced. <br />Commissioner Bird asked if it is possible for home buyers to <br />qualify for a loan as reimbursement for funds already expended, for <br />example, if they made their down payment for the house and lot and <br />are in the process of construction but they are short on funds for <br />furnishings and other things. <br />Director Keating responded that it would be possible if they <br />have not closed on their loan, but it would not be possible to <br />recapture the down payment after closing on the loan. However, <br />they would be eligible for a grant or a loan for impact fees for <br />utilities which would be a new expenditure. <br />Director Keating pointed out that Indian River County has a <br />head start on affordable housing requirements because we have set <br />up the Professional Services Advisory Committee to study the <br />County's land development regulations and we have eliminated <br />needless or overly burdensome regulations. The housing incentive <br />plan addresses the issue of impact fees by providing loans and <br />grants for impact fees. <br />Commissioner Eggert clarified that County property would be <br />considered surplus only if it is not usable for anything else, such <br />as a park, and if no County department has a use for the property. <br />Director Keating agreed that the recommendation in the housing <br />incentive plan would not preclude any property from being used for <br />an appropriate County purpose. <br />Commissioner Adams asked, and Director Keating clarified that <br />the $250,000 that we get from the State is funded by the additional <br />penny documentary stamp tax, half of which is designated for the <br />Preservation 2000 fund and half for affordable housing matters. <br />Commissioner Bird noted that staff is tracking the County's <br />progress in complying with the housing elements of our <br />Comprehensive Plan, and asked how we are doing in that regard. <br />28 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.