Laserfiche WebLink
Mounds View Planning Commission May 2, 2007 <br />Regular Meeting Page 4 <br />________________________________________________________________________ <br /> <br /> <br />Director Ericson explained there are two options, the first being the property owner would <br />approach the City to purchase the property and alleviate all the problems of selling the home <br />through a realtor. He stated it gives the property owner an additional mechanism to sell their <br />home. He stated the City would then clear the property and market it to a builder or developer <br />who would submit a proposal to build a new home that would meet the neighborhood criteria. <br /> <br />Director Ericson stated the only time money is given and the property owner stays is if they want <br />to demolish the old home and build a new one. He explained the City would reimburse the <br />property owner for the demolition up to possibly a capped amount. He stated if it were a <br />deferred loan, the Housing Resource Center or Ramsey County would manage it and place a lean <br />on the property so some of the dollars come back to the City if the person moves before a <br />designated amount of time. He stated everybody wins in this scenario. <br /> <br />Commissioner Cramblit asked if the program would pay for a total demolition. <br /> <br />Director Ericson replied it would cover whatever it took to bring the property back to its natural <br />state. He commented that if a new home were built on the lot, that scenario is not expected. <br /> <br />Commissioner Meehlhause recommended going through each one the criteria for discussion. <br /> <br />Director Ericson stated financial status is the first criterion. He indicated the City would want to <br />make sure the property owner had the financial ability to finish the project. He recommended a <br />demolition and redevelopment agreement be put in place. <br /> <br />Commissioner Meehlhause recommended the lending source be secured before any demolition <br />dollars are authorized. <br /> <br />Commissioner Walsh-Kaczmarek stated it might be the best to cap the amount secured for the <br />new home. She commented the new home value should match the median home value and be <br />otherwise appropriate for the neighborhood. She commented the new home could perhaps be ten <br />or fifteen percent above the median home value in the neighborhood. <br /> <br />Director Ericson replied this is a good suggestion and gave examples of huge homes being built <br />that did not fit the existing neighborhood. He suggested criteria stating the new home be <br />consistent with the neighborhood. He indicated that on the other hand, the City should <br />encourage a better home if the area is significantly blighted. <br /> <br />Commissioner Gunn expressed concern that it could be somewhat detrimental in that it might <br />discourage someone from coming in to demolish the old house and build a larger home. <br />Director Ericson replied he did not think that would be the case. He commented it might prevent <br />them from building a $500,000 house; however, if they want to do it, they would do it anyway. <br /> <br />Commissioner Meehlhause stated if the City wants the community to continue to be progressive <br />and not become blighted, it must encourage new home development.