Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-02-2007 PROCEEDINGS OF THE MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA Regular Meeting May 2, 2007 Mounds View City Hall 2401 Highway 10, Mounds View, MN 55112 1. Call to Order Chair Stevenson called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. May 2, 2007. 2. Roll Call Members Present: Chair Stevenson, Commissioners Cramblit, Gunn, Lang, Meehlhause, Miller, and Walsh-Kaczmarek Absent and Excused: None Also Present: Community Development Director Ericson and Planning Associate Heller 3. Approve Minutes A. April 4, 2007 MOTION/SECOND: Commissioner Gunn/Commissioner Walsh-Kaczmarek to approve the April 4, 2007 meeting minutes of the regular Planning Commission meeting as slightly amended. Ayes – 7 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 4. Citizens Requests and Comments on Items Not on the Agenda None 5. Planning Cases None Mounds View Planning Commission May 2, 2007 Regular Meeting Page 2 ________________________________________________________________________ 6. Other Planning Activity A. Review Housing Replacement Program Guidelines and Criteria Community Development Director Ericson reported the Housing Replacement Program Guidelines and Criteria were last reviewed in 2004. He stated it was set into motion about 1995 in response to blighted property. Director Ericson explained there are two parts of the program, the first being the acquisition and demolition of the property, after which the property is then offered to a developer. He stated the second component is to provide only demolition assistance. He indicated the second option was meant to encourage residents to stay in the community, either by demolishing their own house or one on another lot. Director Ericson reported a resident recently applied for and was approved for the demolition assistance option through the EDA, however, there really is no criteria for this program and the EDA thought there should be. He stated the acquisition portion of the program does contain some criteria. He commented the City Council asked the Planning Commission to look at potential criteria to implement and to make recommendations back to the Council. Director Ericson stated the Housing Replacement Program is a voluntary program. He commented on the rumors and miscommunications that the City created a list to acquire certain properties. He explained the list of properties was created at the direction of the Office of the State Auditor. He explained the City could acquire property only if it was specifically listed in the TIF plan. He explained the City looked at which parcels would qualify under the blight guidelines. He stressed the City is not attempting to force anyone out of his or her home. Director Ericson recommended the guidelines associated with the demolition assistance component of the program could include the financial status of the applicant based on need, ownership and residency requirements for a specific number of years, a neighborhood analysis of the property, a maximum award, and a deferred loan program. Director Ericson stated City Council would consider the possibility of a deferred loan program. He asked how the Commission felt if money was provided to demolish the old property, the owner then builds a new home, sells it, and moved out of the community. He commented the City Council would like the Planning Commission’s thoughts on criteria. Director Ericson suggested setting a maximum dollar amount and reviewing it every two years or so. He commented creating a deferred loan program to discourage blight and help property owners stay in the community made sense. Director Ericson stated the purpose of the Housing Replacement Program is to reduce the social costs of blight, improve residential neighborhoods, and increase the tax base. He explained the objectives of the program are to replace deteriorated lower value housing with higher valued housing, eliminate blight, and increase the availability of quality housing for families. Mounds View Planning Commission May 2, 2007 Regular Meeting Page 3 ________________________________________________________________________ Commissioner Walsh-Kaczmarek asked how many houses were on the list. Director Ericson replied there are about 218 parcels. Commissioner Walsh-Kaczmarek asked how many property owners have approached the City. Director Ericson replied Staff is rarely approached and has not been approached since the list was put in place in 2004. He commented the City sent mailers to the property owners to inform them of their options. He explained the list only provides the property owner with another potential buyer. He mentioned that before the list was developed, the City could not obtain the property because of the opinion of the Office of the State Auditor. Commissioner Walsh-Kaczmarek asked what the intent of the State Auditor was. Director Ericson replied the list was made because of the interpretation of TIF laws in that any acquired property must be listed in the TIF Plan. He commented the Office of the State Auditor prepared a finding of non-compliance to the City because properties previously acquired were not listed in the TIF Plan. He explained the list was created to satisfy the Office of the State Auditor. Chair Stevenson asked if any of the homes fell into a non-R-1 designation in the Comprehensive Plan. Director Erickson replied he believed there were some. Chair Stevenson stated these properties should receive different attention than R-1 homes scattered across the City. He commented the Comprehensive Plan deemed one area be changed from an R-1. He suggested perhaps Class A and Class B criteria be outlined to distinguish between them. Director Ericson stated he thought that was a good idea because property owners realize they are in a development area and have been fully apprised of what would eventually take place. He indicated the priority in an area designated as not single family be re-designated. He stated it is time to make the distinction. Commissioner Meehlhause asked if this becomes a criteria. Director Ericson replied it is less of a criterion than a priority point with priority given to existing Mounds View property owners than to individuals from outside community. He stated a point system could be used to rank the properties and a checklist could also be developed. Commissioner Walsh-Kaczmarek recommended giving higher points to residents who have been in the community for a specific length of time. She suggested that perhaps ten percent of the loan could be forgiven per year for every year they remain in their home. Mounds View Planning Commission May 2, 2007 Regular Meeting Page 4 ________________________________________________________________________ Commissioner Miller asked if the loan was for the demolition. Director Ericson explained there are two options, the first being the property owner would approach the City to purchase the property and alleviate all the problems of selling the home through a realtor. He stated it gives the property owner an additional mechanism to sell their home. He stated the City would then clear the property and market it to a builder or developer who would submit a proposal to build a new home that would meet the neighborhood criteria. Director Ericson stated the only time money is given and the property owner stays is if they want to demolish the old home and build a new one. He explained the City would reimburse the property owner for the demolition up to possibly a capped amount. He stated if it were a deferred loan, the Housing Resource Center or Ramsey County would manage it and place a lean on the property so some of the dollars come back to the City if the person moves before a designated amount of time. He stated everybody wins in this scenario. Commissioner Cramblit asked if the program would pay for a total demolition. Director Ericson replied it would cover whatever it took to bring the property back to its natural state. He commented that if a new home were built on the lot, that scenario is not expected. Commissioner Meehlhause recommended going through each of the criteria for discussion. Director Ericson stated financial status is the first criterion. He indicated the City would want to make sure the property owner had the financial ability to finish the project. He recommended a demolition and redevelopment agreement be put in place. Commissioner Meehlhause recommended the lending source be secured before any demolition dollars are authorized. Commissioner Walsh-Kaczmarek stated it might be the best to cap the amount secured for the new home. She commented the new home value should match the median home value and be otherwise appropriate for the neighborhood. She commented the new home could perhaps be ten or fifteen percent above the median home value in the neighborhood. Director Ericson replied this is a good suggestion and gave examples of huge homes being built that did not fit the existing neighborhood. He suggested criteria stating the new home be consistent with the neighborhood. He indicated that on the other hand, the City should encourage a better home if the area is significantly blighted. Commissioner Gunn expressed concern that it could be somewhat detrimental in that it might discourage someone from coming in to demolish the old house and build a larger home. Director Ericson replied he did not think that would be the case. He commented it might prevent them from building a $500,000 house; however, if they want to do it, they would do it anyway. Mounds View Planning Commission May 2, 2007 Regular Meeting Page 5 ________________________________________________________________________ Commissioner Meehlhause stated if the City wants the community to continue to be progressive and not become blighted, it must encourage new home development. Commissioner Gunn stated that perhaps this would motivate others in the neighborhood to do the same. Commissioner Director Ericson gave an example of where that scenario has occurred. Commissioner Cramblit commented construction costs continually increase, so there might not be a way to control the cost of the home built. Director Ericson indicated there is probably a way to ensure the house would be similar and not out of character with the neighborhood. He stated he would review case studies or scenarios to see what this might look like. Commissioner Walsh-Kaczmarek summarized that financing be secured for rebuilding, and the character of the neighborhood be guaranteed. Director Ericson asked the Planning Commission if they agreed that, at a minimum, to determine that the individual has the financial ability to finish project. The Planning Commission reached consensus on this criteria. Commissioner Lang raised a different viewpoint. He stated that if the objective is to eliminate blight, why not let the rich get richer by eliminating the City’s blight. Director Ericson replied that regardless of where the money goes, and if the end result is to build a new home, encourage redevelopment, and increase the tax base, the goal is achieved regardless. Commissioner Walsh-Kaczmarek commented that why should the Mounds View property tax owners be using their tax dollars to benefit those that could afford it themselves; better they purchase one of the other 200 blighted properties. She stated need is a very applicable and appropriate criteria. Director Ericson commented this might be an opportunity to use a ranking or point system and provide scenarios in which this could work. Commissioner Meehlhause asked if a distinction should be made between a resident with blighted property and someone taking advantage of a situation. He stated he agrees with increasing the tax base. Commissioner Walsh-Kaczmarek commented Mounds View taxes recently increased because of the school levy. She stated the City needs to be cognizant of the burden on the residents. She indicated she would not object to a rich person building if they did not use TIF money. Mounds View Planning Commission May 2, 2007 Regular Meeting Page 6 ________________________________________________________________________ Director Ericson directed the Commission to a discussion on the residency requirement. He asked if the Planning Commission wanted to exclude non-residents or require a resident live in the community for a specific amount of time Commissioner Gunn stated she preferred the individual be required to stay in the home for a specific number of years after the fact rather than the resident or non-resident criteria. She stated that if an elderly resident needed to go into assisted housing, it gives them the opportunity to sell the property. Commissioner Walsh-Kaczmarek agreed the residency requirement after the fact should be included. She recommended five years would be a reasonable length of time. Chair Stevenson asked if the City could legally require someone to remain on the property for a specific length of time. A discussion on the length of time ensued. Director Ericson summarized that he heard the Commission preferred not limiting the program to Mounds View residents; however, the resident would have preference. The Planning Commission reached consensus on tying the demolition grant to a forgivable deferred loan. Director Ericson stated a neighborhood analysis could be tied into a ranking or pointing schedule. Commissioner Walsh-Kaczmarek asked if the statement “should be equally…” would be hard to evaluate because of the micro neighborhoods throughout Mounds View. She recommended the degree of blight and whether it is a danger to a neighborhood should have a higher priority. Commissioner Lang asked if the list should be tied to it. Director Ericson recommended no; however, he could give points to properties on the list. Commissioner Walsh-Kaczmarek asked if the program would apply to a home destroyed by a severe storm or tornado. Director Ericson replied Federal or State programs would probably be available to help these property owners or a community rebuild. Director Ericson asked the Commission to discuss the maximum award. Commissioner Gunn asked what the average demolition cost would be. Director Ericson replied it generally costs between $8,000 and $10,000. He stated in cases where hazardous waste, such as asbestos, is involved the price could increase. He indicated Staff would talk to various demolition contractors to arrive at an average cost. Mounds View Planning Commission May 2, 2007 Regular Meeting Page 7 ________________________________________________________________________ A discussion on asbestos ensued. Commissioner Cramblit recommended a dollar amount per square foot or a percentage increase each year. Director Ericson replied he would rather not measure square footage or adjust for inflation because the price could vary based on the age and/or condition of the home to be demolished. A discussion on demolition issues and costs ensued. Director Ericson indicated consensus was reached that a deferred demolition loan program be added. Director Ericson referred the Planning Commission to page six, section two, Planning for Demolition of the Housing Replacement Guidelines. He stated he is drafting a report for City Council on housing programs in the community. He stated he would ask the City Council if it would want to flip-flop the options. He commented that perhaps demolition should be the priority. He reported there are 55 properties for sale in Mounds View today, 53 of which exceed $150,000. He asked if the City would receive the most bang for the buck by purchasing the property from the property owner. He stated that if all things were equal, buying the property or funding the demolition, the City could spend much less money to achieve the same end. He asked if the program guidelines should focus on the demolition as it is the faster return on investment. Commissioner Gunn agreed it would give residents the opportunity to stay in Mounds View rather than selling and moving out of the community. Commissioner Walsh-Kaczmarek stated a cleaned lot rather than a blighted home would make the property more attractive for resale. The Planning Commission reached consensus to put the focus on demolition assistance. Commissioner Miller asked if a variance would ever be required to redevelop a property and if so, what type of variance would it be. Director Ericson explained the City would work it out so someone would not buy a lot and then have to go through the variance process. Commissioner Walsh-Kaczmarek asked if there is a restriction on heavy trucks coming into a neighborhood in the spring. She asked if this would have a detrimental effect on the timing of demolition. Planning Associate Heller stated the truck drivers could apply for a road restriction permit during these times. Mounds View Planning Commission May 2, 2007 Regular Meeting Page 8 ________________________________________________________________________ Director Ericson stated Mounds View follows MNDot’s guidelines and restrictions regarding road restrictions. He mentioned the Housing Replacement Program would be on the agenda for the next Council Worksession. B. Discuss Expanding the Allowed Food/Restaurant Uses in a B-2 Zoning District Planning Associate Heller reported Kraus Anderson, Management Company of Silver View Plaza, came before the Planning Commission in November 2005 to request a rezoning of the property from a B-2, Limited Business, to a B-3, Highway Business. She explained the same request was also made in 1988 not long after the center opened. She reported that due to the lack of parking on the site and the layout of the building, and traffic flow, they were denied both times. Planning Associate Heller reported several business have asked about opening a business in Silver View Plaza and were told they could not because of the zoning. She stated that in comparison, the zoning across the street is B-4 and it is almost fully occupied. She indicated Staff thought the Planning Commission might consider expanding allowed restaurant uses in a B-2 zoning district. She stated other communities allow more in the B-2 than did Mounds View. She pointed out the B-2 zoning areas on the zoning map. Planning Associate Heller reported Silver View Plaza is over 50 percent vacant with more tenants planning to leave. Chair Stevenson stated that as much as restaurants were wanted in Mounds View, they require adequate parking. Planning Associate Heller replied parking has always been the issue at Silver View Plaza. She listed the square footage of miscellaneous businesses, restaurants, and fast food establishments in Mounds View. Discussion on Silver View Plaza and parking issues ensued. Director Ericson commented there is no way the site would support a restaurant over 2000 square feet. He cautioned that once the door is open to expanding the allowable food/restaurant uses in a B-2 Zoning District, other problems could arise. Chair Stevenson stated every business in Silver View Plaza would have to be a conditional use in order to not cause parking problems. Commissioner Walsh-Kaczmarek recommended making suggestions as to what type of food businesses could fit into Silver View Plaza. Mounds View Planning Commission May 2, 2007 Regular Meeting Page 9 ________________________________________________________________________ Director Ericson stated Kraus Anderson asked Staff to bring this to the Planning Commission to see if it were open to a restaurant in a B-2 district. He commented it is fine with Staff if the Planning Commission is not open to it. He explained Staff did not want to create a situation where there is not enough parking to serve the tenants in the Silver View Plaza. A discussion on possible food options in Silver View Plaza ensued. Commissioner Gunn stated the property owner should be marketing to businesses that could go into Silver View Plaza. A discussion on why tenants are moving out of Silver View Plaza ensued. Commissioner Lang asked if the owner had anything in mind to fill the vacancies that would not create a parking problem. Director Ericson replied they did not. He commented the owners are looking at potential uses currently not allowed in a B-2. Commissioner Miller stated she did not see how Silver View Plaza could be opened up to restaurants because of the limited parking available. A discussion on other options for Silver View Plaza ensued. Planning Associate Heller reported the Silver View Plaza site plan indicates there are up to 16 different tenant spaces and 172 parking spaces. 7. Next Planning Commission Meetings: A. May 16, 2007 B. June 6, 2007 8. Adjournment to Agenda Session There being no further business before the Planning Commission, Chair Stevenson adjourned the meeting at 8:26 p.m. (The meeting immediately adjourned to the Agenda Session) Mounds View Planning Commission Regular Meeting Respectfully submitted, Jim Ericson Community Development Director Transcribed by: Dianna Wise TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc. May 2, 2007 Page 10