Richfield

Type of Community (Metropolitan Council Designation):
Developed
1995 Population:
35,237
2005 Population:
33,667
2020 Forecast Population:
41,300
Progress Towards LUPA & LCA Affordable Housing Goals*, 2011-2020

New Units Produced (2011)

21

LUPA Goal

765

LCA Goal

497

% Progress Towards LCA Goal

4.2%
Source: Metropolitan Council.

*Although new affordable housing goals under LUPA (Comp Plan) and LCA (Livable Communities eligibility) cover the same time period for the same kind of units, the Met Council established generally different goals for cities. For most cities, the LCA goal is set at 65% of the LUPA goal. Some larger cities or those with access to more resource have LCA goals closer to or equal to LUPA goals. Unlike pre-2010 goals, the 2011-2020 goals do not create separate sub-goals for rental and ownership housing units. More information.
Progress Toward LCA Affordable Housing Goals Through 2010
 
Owner
Rental
Total

New Units Produced

262
43
305

2010 LCA Goals

757
0
757

% Progress Towards 2010 Goals

34.6%
n/a
40.3%
Source: Metropolitan Council.

Metropolitan Council Housing Performance Score
Out of 100 (100 = highest)

2012: 70
2011: 73

2010 Housing Performance Scores (PDF - 45 KB)
All Metro Communities

2009 Housing Performance Scores (PDF - 27 KB)
All Metro Communities

2008 Housing Performance Scores (PDF - 138 KB)
All Metro Communities

Housing Affordability in 2000
Affordable Units Available
Owner
Rental
Total

Units affordable at 50% or less of Regional Family Median Income

918
2,723
3,641

Total Housing Units

10,109
4,889
14,998

% Affordable

9.1%
55.7%
24.3%
Low Income Households In Need
Owner
Rental
Total

Households at 50% or less of Regional Median Family Income with Housing Problems

728
1,639
2,367

Total Households at 50% or less of Regional Family Median Income

1,535
2,082
3,617

% with Problems

47.4%
78.7%
65.4%
Source: United States Department of Housing and Urban Development, Consolidated Plan/CHAS, 2000.

Note: The median family income for the Twin Cities was $65,800 in 2000 (or $32,900 at 50% of median).

Housing affordability numbers are adjusted by family size. Housing affordability matches the number of persons in a family to units with different numbers of bedrooms (e.g. a 4-person family is matched to 2 bedroom units). Income limits to affordable housing costs are also adjusted higher for larger families (greater than 4 people) and lower for smaller families (less than 4 people).

Housing problems are defined as household cost burden greater than 30% of income and/or overcrowding (more than 1 person per room) and/or without complete kitchen and plumbing facilities.

An interview was conducted with an official from Richfield’s planning or community development department in Spring of 2006, shortly after the Metropolitan Council's calculations for affordable housing need numbers were made public. A summary of key issues addressed in the interview is below:

According to the Met Council's recent report on "Determining Affordable Housing Need in the Twin Cites," Richfield's affordable housing need number is 765 units for 2010-2020. Our source felt that these goals were high and not feasible. Our source identified the following problems and obstacles to meeting these goals: lack of funding and lack of available land. The new affordable housing goals do not make a distinction between affordable rental and affordable for-sale housing, and our source felt that this would hurt Richfield's ability to produce affordable housing. Our source felt that the new goals are higher than Richfield's LCA goals. Richfield is not sure if it will use the need number established in the Met Council's report as the affordable housing target in its comprehensive plan update.

Actions

Richfield does not keep a database tracking the supply of low- and moderate-income housing. It has used the following programs to develop and facilitate the development of affordable housing: TIF, PUD, mortgage revenue bonds, and set-asides for affordable housing. We also asked our source about Richfield's use of some specific policies and programs. The results are summarized below:

Tools

Have Used?
Effectiveness
Will Use

PUD with smaller lots or density bonus

Often
Very Effective
 

Density bonuses

No
 
 

Expedited zoning & approval for low-mod

No
 
 

Adjusted fees for low-mod housing

No
 
 

Allow accessory apartments

No
 
 

Set asides for low-moderate housing (i.e., inclusionary zoning)

Often
Very Effective
 

Low Income Housing Tax Credits

No
 
 

Incentives for new construction technologies

No
 
 

Manufactured homes

No
 
 

Tax Increment Financing (TIF)

Often
Very Effective
 

Mortgage Revenue bonds

Often
Very Effective
 

Richfield has solicited proposals from the local HRA or other developers for building low- and moderate-income housing. It has not acted as a proposer or developer of low- and moderate-income housing. Our source indicated that Richfield has transit-oriented development opportunities, but that they will not make a difference in its ability to produce more affordable housing. Our source felt that with additional funding, Richfield could accomplish its affordable housing goals.

Obstacles and Challenges

Our source did not feel that any aspects of city zoning ordinances or processes discourage or prevent adding to the supply of low-and moderate income housing. We also asked our source about some specific local practices and if they limit the development of low- and moderate-income housing. The results are summarized below:

Challenge Name

Assessment

Restricted amount of land zoned for multi-family housing

Does Not Limit Low-Moderate Housing

Local requirements for building materials

Does Not Limit Low-Moderate Housing

Subdivision regulations requiring high quality materials or wide street paving

Does Not Limit Low-Moderate Housing

Local limits on the use of manufactured housing (e.g., mobile homes)

Does Not Limit Low-Moderate Housing

Building codes hat require updated code enforcement with any rehabilitation

Does Not Limit Low-Moderate Housing

Prohibition on accessory apartment units

Does Not Limit Low-Moderate Housing

Data is not available on the amount of undeveloped land in Richfield that is zoned residential and allows ten or more units per acre Our source felt that in order to meet its affordable housing goals, Richfield needs funding, especially from employers, and subsidies from cities with lots of green space.

Bookmark and Share
Survey Summary Page
Learn more about the Survey and the cities involved.
What is the difference between current and future metro area affordable housing goals?
Explanation of the differences between the current affordable housing goals for cities (for 1995-2010) based on the Livable Communities Act, and the goals for the coming decade of 2011-2020.
PDF - 10 KB
Met Council LCA Progress Report
Source for City Snapshot information related to LCA Affordable Housing Goals.
PDF - 1.7 MB
HUD/CHAS Dataset
For a detailed analysis by HUD of housing needs in this community, follow this link. Then, select Minnesota and Submit. You then have the choice of viewing data for "all households" or for various racial/ethnic groups. Make the selection and Submit. Select either "County" or "Census Place" and Submit.
City Data
More information is available at Dataplace.org.
City Website
Visit the city's website to identify the key city staff and how to contact them.

Housing Justice Center Hubert H. Humphrey Institute of Public Affairs Institute on Race & Poverty The McKnight Foundation
 Click for Sponsor Websites