MONDAY, MARCH 21, 2011, 3:00 P.M.





  I.  Roll Call


PRESENT:   Bob Burgess, Dick Darger, Rick Loose, Sharon Mortensen and Steve Rapanos


ABSENT:    None


STAFF:        Cheri King, Community Development Specialist; and Keith Baker, Planning Director


OTHERS:    Carol Locker (League of Women Voters), and Trudy Laufer (Manager of Cleveland Manor


II.  Public Comments




III. CDBG Funding Proposals for the 2011-2012 Fiscal Year


      At their meeting on March 16, 2011, members of the Housing Commission asked staff to have Trudy Laufer, Manager of Cleveland Manor, come and present her proposal for the ramp to join Cleveland Manor I and II, and to provide handicap access to all floors of Cleveland Manor.


      Trudy reported that she had to spend $5,000 for an architect to design a plan for the ramp.  There are 200 residents at Cleveland Manor.  In the summer of 2010, the elevator for Cleveland Manor II was out of service for 3-1/2 weeks.  The cylinder was worn out and a new cylinder had to be specially made to repair this elevator.  Cleveland Manor I and Cleveland Manor II each only have one elevator.  Residents with disabilities were not able to use the stairs without help.  Also, residents with disabilities on the first floor were not able to access the laundry facilities on the second floor without significant assistance. 


      Another option researched by Cleveland Manor staff was the feasibility of getting one elevator that would stop at all six levels, and that would service both sides of Cleveland Manor.  Trudy stated that to do the preparatory work for this elevator would cost $400,000 and the elevator would cost approximately $90,000 additional.  This is when they started thinking about a ramp.  Cleveland Manor staff thinks the proposed ramp would be the best and least costly option.  This would serve them well into the future.


      Originally the projected cost of the ramp was $239,000.  Management feels that staff can handle the project without a general contractor.  Also, if they used concrete for the ramp, it would cost an additional $30,000.  They chose to use a synthetic wood product instead. 


      Cleveland Manor has submitted a funding request to the Midland Area Community Foundation for $25,000.  She was told that they do not typically award grants that large, but it has not been ruled out yet.  Trudy also wrote a letter to HUD.  They are requesting funding from HUD but they do not know if they will receive it or not.  This project will have to be done using the Davis Bacon prevailing wage rates.  This will add to the cost of the project.


      Mr. Darger asked about the condition of the current elevators.  Trudy stated that the elevator in Cleveland Manor I is older than that in Cleveland Manor II, but Cleveland Manor I has not had the cylinder replaced yet.  There is also the cost of annual maintenance.  They will probably have to replace the cylinder in Cleveland Manor I eventually.  Replacing the cylinder that went bad last summer cost them $60,000.  Mobility issues are much more severe today than several years ago.


      At Cleveland Manor, the average age of their residents is 75 years.  Eight of their units are designated for people with disabilities who are not required to be senior citizens.  They have three units each on the second and third floors and two units on the first floor for people with disabilities. 


      Sharon Mortensen stated that this project would fit with what the Housing Commission has done for Cleveland Manor in recent years. 


      Motion by Burgess, seconded by Rapanos, to approved staff’s proposed budget with the three changes, including reducing the proposed allocation to Cleveland Manor by $25,000 to $174,525, funding Legal Services of Eastern Michigan by $5,000 to do additional paired testing in the coming fiscal year, and adding the remaining $20,000 to Property Acquisition and Maintenance, with the understanding that this will be reserved for an Analysis of Impediments Study in the coming years.   The Housing Commission wants quarterly reports from Legal Services of Eastern Michigan and a comparison of the differences found in their 2009 activities versus what they will be discovering in their 2011-2012 testing activities.


VI.  Adjournment


The meeting was adjourned at 3:52 p.m.


Respectfully submitted,

Cheri King