When North Minneapolis was separated and isolated by highways it was a big deal, and similarly, we need big ideas and plans to reverse that tragedy in order to address the housing needs of the current and future residents.
Below, I have listed some ideas that I thought about as long- and short-term solutions. They do not necessarily need to be taken at face value, but I hope it will spur some out-of-the-box big ideas among our elected officials.
Short-term – Homelessness
I see so many unused spaces that could be used to house our homeless population during the winter months. Examples would be the fairgrounds in St. Paul, Dunwoody area parking lots, and areas used for summer carnivals, etc. etc. On those sites, we could place SRO (single room only) modular units with or without a private bathroom, electricity for a microwave and be located near transit.
These modular units are attractive and colorful and removable, if needed, during the summer months. The areas I’m recommending already have a hard surface.
Fourplexes in Minneapolis
I am currently not a fan of the City of Minneapolis recommendation that allows for the building of fourplexes across the City, especially in areas with SFR’s. Instead, I would recommend that all fourplexes built in areas where SFR’s (Single Family Residence) already exist must be built in the following manner: a maximum of a duplex structure with a livable, finished basement and a garage that has an ADU (accessory dwelling unit) above.
This will hopefully keep in line with the SFR-look and feel of the neighborhood instead of creating a “rental” approach. I believe that homeownership should be a top priority for the City of Minneapolis and rentals being a less desirable, but necessary, option.
Paths to homeownership that the City can champion
I don’t claim to be a financial scholar, but I am of the opinion that City government has the following financial tools at their disposal to greatly jump start homeownership and provide options to reduce displacement, address the housing crisis, increase the tax base, and have many other positive outcomes.
- The City can float a bond(s) to either repay or not funding to rehab the 273 boarded-up, vacant buildings owned by the City or Hennepin County.
- After rehab, these homes would be made available to residents whose PITI (Principal Interest Taxes Insurance) would be a little less than they are currently paying for rent. This would, of course, increase homeownership and also free up the rental units these residents currently occupy.
- The City could supplement the bond with federal funds like LivCommunities, Section 108 funds, and Promise Zone benefits. These funds could be used to supplement developer costs.
The City of Minneapolis can accomplish most of the above ideas without any funds from the State; how amazing would it be if they also garnered their support and funds.
Catherine Fleming is CEO at Business Direct LLC
Dear Ms Fleming,
I am writing to you regarding your opinion article on reversing housing needs in Minnesota. I am a junior at the Blake School in Minneapolis. Recently, I have been very passionate about this issue and have been working with the Downtown Congregations to End Homelessness. I find your ideas about how to house the homelessness very insightful. I have never thought about using the fairground or other public spaces as a shelter location during the winter months. I strongly believe that Minnesotans don’t pay enough attention or know much about the affordable housing crisis. According to the H+T Affordability Index, in Minneapolis, a household making $55,000 a year, spends 44 percent of its income on housing and transportation costs — just under the 45 percent threshold — while in St. Paul, the average is 43. This is pretty staggering to think about when the average is 30% of income in the US. The ideas you raise are really important points and I think they should be addressed within the city of Minneapolis. Though there are many housing complexes being built, most are of higher end. The city needs to construct housing that doesn’t hurt the pocketbook of many lower to middle income families. Is this possible with those currently in office? What’s the best way we can create change? I would really appreciate learning more on this issue and getting your insight.
Thank you,
Madeline Wethington