02-05-2007 WS - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Item No: 1C Meeting Date: Feb 5, 2007 Type of Business: Worksession Administrator Review : ____ City of Mounds View Staff Report To: Honorable Mayor and City Council and Members of the Planning Commission From: James Ericson, Community Development Director Item Title/Subject: Review Administrative Subdivision Request Concerning Red Oak Estates Townhome Project Introduction: Last December, Marty Harstad contacted me regarding the possibility of separating the existing six townhome owners from the rest of the association. The request, according to Mr. Harstad, was made by the existing six townhome owners who anticipate pressure from the new association to bring their building exteriors into compliance with the design standards and appearances of the new buildings. The existing owners foresee this possibility as a financial burden they are not presently able to bear and may feel as though the new association board could effectively vote them out of the development via excessive renovation assessments. To guard against this from happening, the six townhome owners wish to be removed from the Red Oak Estates Association, or conversely, that the remaining 66 lots be placed into a new association apart from their own. The attorney representing Mr. Harstad has articulated this request in writing, dated January 23, 2007. Staff asked Kennedy & Graven to review this request and to prepare an opinion taking into consideration the City’s Subdivision Code and potential ramifications from the 2004 ruling on the development. City Attorney Scott Riggs has responded that there is no basis for an administrative subdivision approval, and that if the new association were to be carved from the old, the development would likely need to be replatted or a variance be requested to bypass the platting requirement. Discussion: Setting aside for the moment any procedural issues associated with such a change, staff feels the request is not without merit and there would not appear to be any obvious reasons to prohibit such a split from occurring, except that approving the split could potentially delay a timely renovation of the existing building’s exterior. If the 66 remaining lots were split from the original six, it would seem likely that the new association bylaws would be prepared under current townhome association laws and requirements rather than a model from the 1970s. From a procedural standpoint, it appears that a division of the association would necessitate creation of a new lot line which would in turn necessitate a replatting of the property. All of the property owners would need to sign the application for the subdivision if such action were being considered. Based on Mr. Riggs response, there are no provisions in the Subdivision Code (Title 1200) which would allow for an administrative subdivision approval.