04-10-2014 Planning Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 10, 2014 Murphy asked if the City informed the real estate agent of the loss of legal non - conforming status of this property. The Planner indicated that when people called about the status of this property, they were informed about the loss of the duplex use. He noted, however, that the City does not track properties for sale and the realtors have the listings. The City answers the questions that are brought forward, but does not actively review whether properties for sale in Little Canada are properly marketed. Fischer asked about the County's indication that this is a two - family residence. The Planner noted that the County only tracks properties from a property tax perspective. Zoning is under the City's authority. Maleitzke asked if the real estate company should have looked into this issue and listed the property as a single - family home. Barraclough replied that technically they should have. Barraclough noted that he is a realtor and it was his understanding that Minnesota was a "buyer beware state ", and it is up to the purchaser to do their due diligence. Barraclough indicated that a bank likely has 100's of listings for foreclosed properties, and purchase agreements will be for properties in "as is" condition so that the banks are protecting themselves. Barraclough reported that he lives in this area and has driven by this property for years. The property has been an eyesore for a long period of time. Barraclough stated that in his opinion, the rezoning of the property to R -2 would be spot zoning. Barraclough stated that he did not think the buyers did their due diligence, and indicated that he was not in favor of the rezoning. Barraclough agreed that the property has been vacant for more than three years. Fischer noted the application packet references some existing duplexes in the R -1 zone in the City. The City Planner indicated that the applicant is trying to show similar land uses nearby. The Planner pointed out that in the case of the Ruth Street properties, that area is zoned R -2. The other properties are legally non- conforming under the one -in -ten provision. The Planner stated that the area around 29 Demont Avenue is predominantly single- family. Duray noted that it appears there is a lot of remodeling that is necessary on this home, and asked why not utilize the house as a single - family home. Lee replied that if the property is rezoned to R -2, the Vang's will not have to build an interior staircase connecting the two units which would be required to conform to single - family standards. Duray asked if the Vang's would rent the structure or resell it. Lee indicated that they would like to maintain the duplex use. Lee indicated that when the Vang's found out about the loss of the legal non- conforming status, they tried to sell the property, but had no interest in it. Lee indicated that if the Rezoning is not -4