Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-10-83 PZMLAi;E ELMO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, JANUARY 10, 1983 Before the meeting convened, Chairman Michels invited the Tablyn Park residents to review the remodeling plans and pictures pf the -structure of -the house proposed to be moved into Tablyn Para by Lee Annett (Item 3). Chairman Michels called the meeting to order at 7:45 p.m. Commissioners Present: Dreher, Moe, Prince, Peterson, Lyall, Nazarian, Lundquist and Gifford. Also present, Administrator Whittaker. 1. MINUTES - DECEMBER 13, 1982: M/S/P Prince/Moe to approve the minutes of December 13, 1982, Carried 8-01.1. Peterson abstained. 2. INTRODUCE NEWCEDERS: Michels informe, the Commission that Scotty Lyall, Fred Nazarian and Bill Lundquist were reappointed by the Council to serve another three year term. William Peterson was moved up to full member and fill out the term of Mike Mazzara. The Council will interview for the alternate positions in February. LEE AM ETT - MOVE HOUSE FROM SECTION 32 TO 8875 27TH ST. N. - TABLYN PARK; The Commission reviewed the Building Inspectors memo, dated January7 , 1963 and pictures he had taken of the structure. Comments: -Free Annett - plan on doing substantial remodeling - estimated cost of work „54,000. Plan to paint the stucco exterior, replace some of the windows and attach the existing non-attached garage to the home. (louse is approximately 19 years old. --Building Inspector"- memo indicated that the house is well constructed and that after remodeling he felt the house will fit into the area, -Lwe Rossow, 8628 Iron wood - asked about restrictive covenants in Tablyn Parlc Second Addition that would prohibit moving in a house, as is provided by covenants for the First Addition. --Whittaker - City does not enforce covenants - action would be up to the property owners to force the developer to enforce the covenants. Not aware of covenants for the Second Addition. --Tony Haider, 8845 27th St. N. - lives next to the proposed home site. Asked for a breakdown of the work Mr. Annett intends to do. --Lee Arnett - paint exterior stucco, recoof the house, replace some of the windows, replace entry doors, walkout the basement with sliding doors, put in a basement. The $54,000 includes interior remodeling also. Plan to sell the house once the work is complete. have contracted most of the work out. Would like to move the structure immediately, weather permitting. Plan on having everything done by May 1, 1983. Foundation and cement work is contingent on the weather. House would be moved to the site and set in the desired location ever the basement hole, The foundation would then be built up to the house. Once completed,£eel the structure would sell in excess of $100,000. --Michels - gaveled continued discussion between the neighbors to Mr, Annett concerning the acquisition of the property. --Lee Annett - indicated that the final closing is pending the completion of —JohintFYtzentergeer, 8830.27th St. Ct. N. - lives in the Sedond Addition, Homes in this addition are three years old and not constructed like 19 year old homes. Does not feel the stucco exterior will be aesthetically pleasing- moving will cause cracks in the exterior stucco that cannot be covered up to look like new. Questions a "pride in ownership" exisiting since Mr. Annett does not ,!plan to live in the house - house on Lake Jane the owner moved, remodeled, and moved in, Different situation when the house is going to be sold. 0 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, JANUARY 10, 1983 -2- 3. LEE ANNETT - Continued: --Whittaker - design of any house, new or moved in, is up to the property owner/builder, A new house could have a stucco exterior or be a story and a half. --Gifford - asked the residents the average value of' the homes in the area. --Mark J3usta, 8810 27th St. Ct. N. - his home is valued at about 8137,000 this is slightly above the average for the area. Most of the homes are cedar or aluminum sided or brick faced. --Dreher - clarified the Ordinance that there is no age limit on aellaouse moved within the limits of the City. --Lyal1 - questioned how the City oan be assured that Mr. Arnett will do everything he is proposing. --Whittaker - approval of the permit would be contingent on certain conditions along with a time limit. Should either not he met the City can initiate court action to enforce what was agreed upon by Mr. Annett. --Moe - how can pexmissioh_be given to move something on to a parcel not owned by the individual requesting the moving permit. --Whittaker - €&annot_get a building--»ermit unless he owns the lot. Question is - will this structure, once remodeled, depreciate the value of the neighborhood? Square footage is 2256 for the two floors above the basement. - -Tony Haider - two concerns based on the proposed plans - 1. the white stucco exterior does not appear to fit with the exterior of existing homes in the area. 2. the windows appear to be in bad shape - feel all the windows should be replaced. --Lee Annett - plan to repaint the entire exterior. --Prince - since the house is going to be moved from within the City limits and meets the code, approval appears inevitable - but approval should be based on certain conditions and the proposal submitted by Mr. Annett. --Mark Busta - concerned the exterior stucco will look like a patch job after the house is moved. M/S/ Prince/Lyall to recommend approval of a moving permit for Lee Annett to move a house from Section 32 to 8875 N. 27th St. with the following conditions: 1. Mr. Annett adhere to the remodeling plans submitted by him. 2. There be a six month time table for completion. This to include the foundation being built, the house being set onto the foundation, site grading and landscaping. Discussion: --Tony Haider - recommended that the Commission view the house. Opposes the entire proposal and hopes the Planning Commission will find justification to deny the request. - -Mark Busta - fears that the house will be brought up to minimum State standards and sold. What recourse do the property owners have if this house lowers the property values around it. - -Whittaker - a new house could also lower surrounding values - there is the same chance with either type of structure. --Lyall - feels the cost of the land provides a"self-policing situation - not economically feasible to do a slip -shod job and recover an investarent. Motion carried 8-0-1 Michels abstained. CITY OF LAKE ELMO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, JANUARY 10, 1983 —3- 4; CLARENCE ENRIGHT — 'TIRE RECYCLING PLANT FOR SECTION 32: Mr. Enright introduced Wolfgang Kutreib, engineer and designer of the tire recycling (pyrolatori unit. Mr. Kutreib explained how the unit melts tires thereby creating a. #3#4 grade-fuk:,'t oil. The only residue remaining is carbon chunks,and steel,_ --The methane gas that is produced is reserved and used to reheat the chamber. Mr. Kutreib gave a slide present- ation showing the unit and how the tires are recycled and the by-product extracted. There is only one unit of this type presently. in operation ., it-is_located:in Pennsylvania. This presentation was strickly informational with the idea that uhit could be.developed in conjunction with the Waste/Energy Plant. Mr, Enright owns the property adjacent to the proposed energy plant site. Because of the time element, Mr. Enright and Mr. Kutreib briefly answered questions from the audience. Since this was an introductory presentation specifics of the use, by-products, and product use will be-:r, addressed in detail.pending progress of the energy plant and a proposal to locate a,tire recycling plant in Lake Elmo. The Commission was generally receptive to the recycling idea. 5. UP -DATE ON SECTION 32 PROPERTY OWNERS MEETING: Whittaker informed the Commission that the property owners will be meeting January 26. The Commission and the Council will receive a meeting notice - anyone interested in attending is welcome.and encouraged to attend.- Sketch plans will be available, some commitments for engineering and other work should be ready. The purpose of the meeting is to get the Council and Planning Commission involved with the property owners,working and thinking along the same lines and getting a reaction from the group on what is and what is not feasible. The meeting is scheduled for Wednesday evening, January 26, at 7 p.m. in the Council Chambers. re MANFACTURED HOUSING: A. Mike Ahrens/Stephen Taylor - concerns about proposed changes in the Code relating to MH Parks. Mr. Taylor prefaced his concern-b.-and proposed changes-withthe statement that all their remarks were based on comparisons between the new State Law, League of Minnesota Cities Model and the City's Ordinance. --Stephen Taylor - Mike Ahrens: - All reference to Mobile Homes should be changed to Manfactured Homes. -Section 302.030 H. - recommend the definition of Occupant should state "Any individual residing therein." -Section 302.050 D. - take exception to the City Ordinance addition that the Park should be responsible for designing a shelter for residents desiring such a shelter. Cimarron position is that if a resident wants such a shelter, the design be the responsibility of the resident with the design being approved by the Park and the City, Reqommend deleting the words"standard" and "from the Park"; and replace "from the Park" with -"by the resident" and add "ana that:Park Other" after "approved by the City" in the last sentence. Cimarron feels that the differences in the homes and the lots makes it too difficult to do the designing. LAKE ELMO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, JANUARY 10, 1983 -4- 6. MANFACTURED HOUSING: A. Stephen T'az'lo'r M'i'ke' Ahrens - Continued- - Section' 302.08'0` E. - Current 10 mph speed is in conformance with the State Law. City has the option to raise to the 20 mph suggested; but, Cimarron has had an excellent safety record with the 10 mph,and feel secure with the 10 mph limit. PZC had no concern with the 10 mph speed. Whittaker noted that the deputies have a difficult time enforcing a 10 mph speed limit. Ahrens noted that their record to date is excellent and that there is not an overwhelming need to increase the speed limit. - Section 302.080'G. - recommended adding "exterior" to the last sentence so it reads "shall be no closer than 5 feet from the exterior lot line". 302.080 J. - recommend adding " for all new homes" to the end Of the sentence. After discussing voltage capacity for existing homes in the Commission determined that existing residences need not be required to have 100 amp service and agreed to the Cimarron recommendation - 110 volt minimum may be"misphrased as 110 v is minimum for any type of use.No problem as long as the electrical service meets State Code. - 302.080 K, - staking of each lot not required by the new State law or the League Model - do not feel it should be required by the City. --Whittaker - this is required by the present Ordinance, --Lyall - as residents are_permitted to,erect fences, confirmed by Mr. Taylor, then there should be some distinguishing markers to allow the homeowner to put it up properly or a survey would have to be run, Otherwise couldencroachon onet.anbthers - rental property. --Taylor - involved in four mobile home parks - know that in none of them are them four corner stakes on each lot. Checked with Cimarron and Beaver Lake Estates, found out that three to four times a year residents question where their lot lines are. When the question comes up the resident manager goes out and identifies the lot lines. Putting_this requirement in would require ,a, expenditure, $50,000 or $100 per. lot, This would apply to either an existing park or a new park. Will add to the cost of the operation when it isn't needed, will ultimately be passed on to the homeowner and impede accomplishing low cost housing. - -Lyall - at some point, when developing a new area or park, someone has to put something in the ground to define the lot areas. Why not put in a metal stake rather than a wooden stake. Some way or another have to determine what the homeowner will get. --Ahrens - Cimarron has a map with dimensions of each lot, a clear definition of front to the street, and fences and/or walks across the back. This enables the manager to identify boundaries. - -Lundquist - with the map, stakes could be put in place without a survey. --Whittaker - intent of this requirement are: 1. have lot setback requirements that have to be measured from something. 2. have to be assured that the number of lots are clearly laid out on the land,.so that additional homes could not be moved in. 3. clearly define rights to property. Even in lease situation have to define the property the leasee is entitled to, LAKE ELMO PLANNING COMMISSION - JANUARY 10, 1983 -5- 6. 'MANFACTUREP HOUSING: AI `Stephen' Tay1or•'-•Mike'.Ahrens\.Continued- Whittaker - this was in the old Ordinance - not a big problem since the landlord owns all the property - thought Cimarron was laid out as is proposed, since it was laid out under the old Ordinance. --Lyall --is the concern that Cimarron will have to go back and survey and stake the entire park - if so, do not believe this is what is being asked. --Taylor - concerned about building a new park or putting on an addition that a survey and iron stakes, identifying four lot corners, will be required - may not want to go to this expense. May want to go down the street and set wooden stakes with iron stakes in the back of the lots. --Lyall - real cost lies in surveying the new area - cost of staking material is insignificant - big money is in the engineering. No not feel that reinforcing rod(will create an exorbitant cost and once placed can be found when needed. Lundquist. - if have a map this could be done at little expense - since the landlord owns all the property the line can be set arbitraily, The Commission noted the concerns --Mike Ahrens 3Q2.080 N.- dead storage/overload parking - in current City Code but not found in the State law or the League of Cities Model Ordinance. Believe this should be left as an option for the park owners to provide. City does not require this for homes outside a park. --Whittaker - this is a requirement because residents out - a park have more property and can store boats, RV"s, etc. well within setback lines away from the street - also have space for garages. --Ahrens - rental_lease agreement recognizes this - some storage is permitted on -site. - --Whittaker - not saying this has to be provided at no cost saying there has to be a place for dead storage. --Ahrens - not sure a place has to be provided, even at a cost. Cimarron had dead storage area - had difficulties with security and found it was not worthwhile for resident use. --Moe - was the area located where it could be easily watched or patroled. --Ahrens - on the property, up by the water tower. Area was fenced and lighted - not by a high traffic area - provided this for a small fee --had theft and vandalism problems - over 500 homes in the community, 10-15 boats, campers trailers stored in the area. Reason the area was removed was when several young people climbed the fence, vandalized many of the units stored, and burned several of the camping trailers. --Taylor - find this area is not greatly utilized in the other parks he is involved in. Think this type of storage should be amenitiy and provided at the option of the park. Lots are not much different than a smaller lot in town. Park provides off-street parking for two vehicles and do not object to residents storing a light camper or boat trailer behind their homes - would object to a large motor home, which would not be acceptable in town either. LAKE ELMO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING - JANUARY 10, 1983 -6- 6. 'MANFACTURED HOUSING A, Stephen T'aylbr)-Mike\ threns - Continued Whittaker - overload parking - is more important because of the lot sizes,.- very little street frontage in front of each home. Typical home in Lake Elmo has 125' of frontage. --Taylor - new Ordinance requires 60' frontage - can get three extra .cars plus two in the driveway per lot. At Cimarron overload parking not a problem. Stephen Taylor- --302.080 Q. - understand that the State Building Code requires that a mobile home should be on a foundation that is approved by the State Building Code - option that it be tied down. If tied down, should be according to Code. Cimarron favors tie downs, but because of the way the homes are secured to the foundations in Cimarron, tie down can be a problem, --Whittaker - City feels Cimarron presently complies with this requirement. --Taylor - recommended adding "or to be approved by the Building Inspector" after Building Code at the end of the sentence. Commission did not object. --Taylor - could not find a definition for the word permanent - suggested deleting "permanent" in front of foundation so it would read "All dwellings shall be placed on a foundation...". --Whittaker - this comes from the County Model Ordinance - will check with the County on what they mean by permanent. --Taylor - consider their foundations permanent - would object to permanent meaning poured frost footings - very expensive. Cimarron believes that homes should be placed on foundations in compliance with the State Building Code. --Mike Ahrens 302.100 - Child Free Areas - State law prohibits discriminating against children with some exception. Can set aside an area up to 1/3 of the area for a child free or adult only area. State law gives the owners the right to develop this type of area, but do not feel this should be a requirement of park owners. This should be optional. Whittaker noted this concern and will check with the old Ordinance. 302.110 - question the mechanics of this section. Item A. - no problem Item B. - name and address of the owner of the vehicle by which the trailer is towed. These homes are not towed. Item C. - No license of each home. No licenses have been required since 1975. Suggest the last half of Item B. and all of Item C.and D. be deleted. A building moving permit is required for all structures that are moved in or out - this covers Item D. Only Item A. and first half of Item B. are applicable. --Lyall - questioned the length of time a mobile home can remain on a site before it is required to be placed on a foundation. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, JANUARY 10, 1983 -7- 6. MANFACTURED HOUSING: Audience Comments: --Christine Moe, 61 Cimarron- did not address what an on -site manager is and what will be, done about it. -10 mph limit - not sure 20 mph is too high - 10 mph is fine. don't make theulimit so ironclad that it cannot be renegotiated if 20 mph would be a more reasonable limit. -Staking - would like to know where the lot lines are - as would other residents. -Tie downs - like the idea of an ordinance about tie downs Leaves it open to the homeowner to decide if they want additional protection. -dead storage - space was promised- part of what was offered when moved in. Residents in Cimarron who have lived there since the park opened - this was part of their lot rent - this has fallen by the wayside and not maintained. Do not think this is right, and object to this being no longer a part of the Ordinance. This was part of their contract and part of the City Ordinance,.at the beginning. -Whittaker - contract between the homeowner and the landlord on the cost of storage is between these two bodies City has no say. -Christine Moe - would like to see the storage available - need to work on better policing. --Charles Clausen, 63 Cimarron - ways to use residents in the park to police the area could use rent reductions to cover the cost. This is no longer part of the contract. Mr. Clausen had the following comments -representing the HOA: -1. Thinks the park has some responsibility inproviding some type of shelter design. Residents should not bear all of the cost. If the park wants to approve the plans they should have some designs available as to what they consider acceptable. Current emergency plan includes using Oakland Jr, High - this is inadequate and unsafe for the number of people. Also the system of gaining entrance to the school is poorly handled. Many times have to wait for someone to come to open the door. --Gifford - questioned how an emergency is handled when the school is in session. --Whittaker - key is critical issue - problems with the current plan should be discussed and worked out. -2. Lot Lines - lines do need to be defined for the individual lots. Rent is determined by the number of square feet - larger lots pay more rent. Residents have been told they cannot put up fences. Lines need to be established so that the homeowner know what he is paying for. --Lyall - this is something that has to be worked out with the management. Ordinance is more for new parks. --Whittaker - do not require residents in town to stake out their lots in old plats. --Stephen Taylor - three to four times a year management is asked to stake a lot - do respond - will put in stakes for whoever asks. --3.Dead Storage - Originally paid rent for this. Would like to see this stay in the Ordinance. If this is not provided would like some compensation in the form of rent reduction. --4. Tie downs. - feel present tie down system is adequate. Not opposed to individual wanting to improve their protection with additional tie downs, PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, JANUARY 10, 1983 -8- 6. 'MANFACTURED SOUSING: --Charles Clausen Continued 5. Manager on Duty - Position of the HOA is that they still want someone on duty more hours a day. --Whittaker - talked to Capt. Green - wants to know if the dispatchers are interfering with forwarding emergency lifter hours calls from Cimarron , the Sheriff -Department policy is to relay this type of call. Department wants to know about any problems. --Charles Clausen - still do not feel that this type of service should be used by the landlord at the expense of the taxpayer. This is the responsiblity of the management - someone should be available on the premises. --Stephen Taylor - regarding dead storage - storage was previously available for a price. Nothing has been taken away that was not being paid for seperately and in addition to the rent. --Don Moe - Not arguing price - what was taken away is what was a convenience at a price. 6. D. MFH Association Slide Show - Whittaker will put this on the January 24 agenda. Due to the lateness of the hour, the Commission tabled all other Agenda Items to the January 24, 1983 meeting. ADJOURNMENT: M/S/P Lyall/Michels to adjourn at 10:45 p.m.