Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Housing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Nonprofit outlines 50‑unit Wright Street housing plan; EDA raises land‑holding and noise concerns
Summary
Central Minnesota Housing Partnership presented a concept for a 50‑unit low‑income housing project on part of a 26‑acre Wright Street parcel; EDA members asked the nonprofit to return with a refined proposal and discussed limiting how much of the parcel the city would hold while competitive tax credits are pursued.
At the Dec. 4 EDA meeting, Deanna (Danna) Hamish, who identified herself as executive director of Central Minnesota Housing Partnership (CHP), introduced a concept for a low‑income housing tax credit project on a portion of a 26‑acre city‑owned parcel on Wright Street.
Hamish said the concept would include approximately 50 units of one‑ to four‑bedroom family housing, surface parking and detached garages intended to buffer noise; the design shown was a three‑story family complex. "We are a private nonprofit... and we were developed by a bunch of community action agencies who were finding it difficult to find housing for their clients," Hamish said, describing CHP’s mission to develop and preserve affordable rental housing.
CHP said it intended to submit an LIHTC application in July 2026 and would learn award decisions in December 2026. The organization said the multifamily portion would likely use about four acres of the 26‑acre site and that other parts of the property might later be developed for single‑family housing or held in a community land trust. Hamish said CHP often submits two or three applications and has historic experience with projects across central Minnesota.
Commissioners and staff pressed on the request’s scope: Commissioner Johnson asked whether CHP sought conveyance of the whole 26 acres and whether the city would be left holding undeveloped land if tax credits were not awarded. City staff said the presentation was an introduction of concept and not a request for immediate conveyance; staff and CHP asked EDA for direction and a potential recommendation to council if the concept moves forward. Commissioners also raised site suitability and noise concerns because the parcel is near a data center; members suggested CHP could refine designs, perform a noise study, or ask for the EDA to carve a legal description of only the portion it needed.
The EDA did not approve conveyance at the meeting. Staff asked CHP to return with a more refined proposal in March and indicated the board could consider holding only a defined portion of the parcel rather than the entire 26 acres.
Next steps: CHP will work with city staff on a refined proposal and possible legal descriptions for a parcel carve‑out; CHP intends to prepare LIHTC applications for the July 2026 round.
