Loading...
11-10-08 PC Minutes Regular Meeting of the Golden Valley Planning COrljlmission I November 10, 2008 A regular meeting of the Planning Commission was held at the Golden Valley City Hall, Council Chambers, 7800 Golden Valley Road, Golden Valley, Minnesota, on Monday, November 10, 2008. Chair Keysser called the meeting to order at 7:30 pm. Those present were Planning Commissioners Cera, Eck, Keysser, Kluchka, McCarty,. Schmidgall and Waldhauser. Also present was Director of Planning and Development Mark Grimes, City Planner Joe Hogeboom and Administrative Assistant Lisa Wittman. 1. Approval of Minutes October 13, 2008 Regular Planning Commission Meeting Eck referred to paragraph eight on page four and noted that the word "know" should be changed to the word "now". MOVED by Eck, seconded by Waldhauser and motion carried unanimously to approve the October 13 minutes with the above noted correction. 2. Informal Public Hearing - Property Rezoning - 3335 Scott Avenue North - Z005-02 Applicant: Charmaine Wahlstrom Schodde Address: 3335 Scott Avenue North Purpose: To consider rezoning the property from Single Family Zoning District (R-1) to Moderate Density Residential Zoning District (R-2) Grimes explained that the applicant is requesting to rezone her property from Single Family Residential (R-1) to Moderate Density Residential (R-2). He noted that the area is primarily zoned R-1 and added that the applicant recently purchased the house which had gone into foreclosure. Grimes explained that from the time the house was built in 1958 until 1998 the house was used as a two family home. After that time the house was converted to a single family home so it lost its legally non-conforming status. He explained that when the house was built the zoning code allowed duplexes as a permitted use in the R-1 zoning district. Approximately 30 years ago the zoning code was amended to allow only single family homes in the R-1 zoning district causing all existing duplexes to become legally non-conforming. Grimes referred to the recent history of the property and explained that in September there was work being done in the house without a building permit and a stop work order Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission November 10,2008 Page 2 was issued. He stated that the City did issue a building permit to allow some work to be done in the basement due to severe water damage which would have to be done whether the house is a one or two family home. Grimes referred to a survey of the property and noted that it meets all of the requirements of the R-2 zoning district and it is designated low density on the General Land Use Plan map and a two family home would be considered low density. He stated that the zoning code doesn't have specific issues to consider when a rezoning is requested but that some of the issues he considered are that the Comprehensive Plan is designated properly for a two family home (Low Density Residential is less than 5 units per acre), the house was legally built in 1958 before the zoning code was amended to only allow single family homes, the house looks like a duplex with two front doors, etc. and there are several other duplexes in the area. He questioned if maybe a larger area should be considered for rezoning rather than just this one property. He added that if the City Council chooses not to rezone this property nothing is really being taken away from the applicant because the house can still be used as a single family home. He explained that he did not make a recommendation in his staff report because he can see both sides of this issue and how this request could be considered "spot zoning". Keysser questioned a specific duplex in the area that had been brought before the Planning Commission in the past. He asked if the existing non-conforming duplexes in the area are "grandfathered in". Grimes said he thought the house Keysser was referring to is a residential facility serving six or fewer people which is a permitted use in the R-1 zoning district. Eck asked how the City knows when an existing duplex is converted into a single family home. Grimes stated that the City can tell by looking at utility bills and/or building permit information. Eck referred to Grimes' staff report regarding Grimes informing a realtor that this house could not be sold as a duplex. Grimes stated that he was informed by a neighbor that this house was being marketed as a two family home in 2007. He wrote a letter to the real estate agent informing him that this house could not be sold as a duplex without rezoning the property first. He added that sometime after he spoke with this realtor that the house went into foreclosure so he does not know how the house was marketed to the applicant. Eck asked if there is anything specific that needs to be done to a house to make it be considered a single family home versus a two family home. Grimes explained that once the wall was removed between the two sides of the house it was considered to be a single family h9me. Charmaine Schodde, Applicant, stated that the MLS listing of the house when she bought it said the property could be converted into a duplex. She said she spoke with someone at the City before she bought the house and was informed of the procedure Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission November 10, 2008 Page 3 required to rezone it from R-1 to R-2 and that is what she is in the process of doing. She said she was led to believe that rezoning this property would not be a problem. She stated that the house was built as a duplex. It looks like a duplex. It has two front doors, two kitchens, two gas meters, two furnaces and separate utilities and that is why she would like to have the property rezoned. She added that the property has a very large lot and there are several other duplexes in the area. She added that this is a very stable, family oriented area not a rental community. She explained that whoever lived in the house before she bought went through the foreclosure process. The heat was shut off but the water was left on causing the pipes to burst and water to bust out the windows causing extensive water damage. She stated that her plan is to live in one side of the house and have her daughter live in the other side of the house. Keysser asked if the MLS listing stated that the property would have to be rezoned. Schodde said no. Eck referred to Ms. Schodde saying that she called the City and discussed the procedure to rezone the property. He asked Schodde if she understood that the property would need to be rezoned. Schodde said yes. She said the house looked like a duplex and she believed it would not be a problem to rezone the property to R-2. Keysser stated that the applicant's daughter and family can live in the house with the applicant without having to rezone the property. Schodde explained that she lost her job and that her daughter living with her will be a temporary situation and she would eventually like to rent out half of the house in order to make the home more affordable. Keysser opened the public hearing. Lee Johnston, 3336 Scott Avenue North, said she has spent quite a bit of time in the house and it is her understanding that the house was totally renovated into a single family home approximately five years ago. She stated that the second kitchen was totally removed and converted to a bedroom and that the second stairway was removed as well. She stated that as far as she can tell the applicant has put a second stairway back in. She said she is mildly opposed to this property being rezoned to R-2 because it has been a drug house in the past and it is has been a single family home for several years now. Craig Hess, 3320 Scott Avenue North, said he is an architect and understands city codes. He referred to Subdivision 11.90 of the Golden Valley city code regarding non- conforming uses and stated that it is very clear that a non.-conforming use can exist and continue as long as it is used in the same non-conforming way. He said it is also clear how the non-conforming status is lost. He said there has been no hardship shown in order to change the zoning on this property and if this property is rezoned it would be considered "spot" zoning which is typically not the preferred method of zoning. Charles Christianson, 3376 Scott Avenue North, said he can confirm the history of the house which was spoken about by Lee Johnston. He said he is concerned about Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission November 10, 2008 Page 4 property values and rental units in the neighborhood. He said he is also concerned about the applicant purchasing the house in a manner that wasn't really valid. Waldhauser noted that the Planning Commission also received a letter from Kevin Boedigheimer, homeowner at 5240 33rd Avenue North. Keysser summarized the letter received and stated that Mr. Boedigheimer strongly opposes this rezoning request because he is concerned about the property values and setting a precedent. McCarty referred to the people who have stated that the home has been converted to a single family home and questioned how they are able to verify this. Johnston said she is friends with the previous owner and her children went to this house for daycare so she has been in the house many times. Keysser asked Johnston if she saw that the kitchen and stairs had been removed. Johnston said yes. Christianson said he also had his children in daycare at this house and he has only seen one kitchen but he has not seen every room in the house. Schodde stated that there was a kitchen downstairs with full size appliances and cabinets that had already been pulled out. Keysser asked Grimes how many unrelated people are allowed to live in a single family home. Grimes stated that up to five unrelated people can rent a single family home. Schodde said it seems like the neighbor's concerns are regarding the type of people living in the area and not if the property is a duplex. She said she could have the property be a rental property but it looks like a duplex not like a single family home. Keysser reiterated to the applicant that she has other options if this property is not rezoned. Schodde said she will have to think about what she is going to do with the property because she bought it thinking it would not be a problem to rezone it. She referred to the concerns about property values and stated that she has put a lot of time and money into fixing up this property. McCarty questioned the legal issues regarding "spot" zoning. Grimes said he would talk to the City Attorney about "spot" zoning but he is not sure if that would be an argument in this case or not because a two family home would still be considered low density. Kluchka asked about crime in the neighborhood. Grimes said he did not do any research regarding crime and that nothing has been mentioned to him regarding crime in the area. Kluchka asked if crime is ever a consideration in zoning issues. Grimes said crime is not usually a consideration in zoning issues. Eck said notwithstanding that this was obviously built as a two family home and looks like a two family home he would not be in favor of rezoning this property to R-2 because it would be "spot" zoning. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission November 10, 2008 Page 5 Keysser stated that if the City does rezone the property and the house is torn down in the future a new two family home could be built. He noted that the whole block is single family homes and that the other duplexes in the area are around the corner. Cera stated that the General Land Use plan has the area designated for single family (R-1) residential which means that is what is planned for the area. Waldhauser said this is a very nice, quiet single family neighborhood and she thinks the best use of the area is single family residential. She added however that a duplex can fit in a single family neighborhood especially if the owner lives on one side and is cognizant of who is living next door. Kluchka said he is also not in favor of this rezoning but he questioned how the City can encourage higher density and more affordable housing. He suggested maybe allowing different types of housing in the R-1 zoning district with a Conditional Use Permit. Grimes stated that the zoning code would have to be amended to allow two family homes as a conditional use in the R-1 zoning district. Waldhauser stated that the Planning Commission has seen requests where people with larger homes want to divide them into apartment for parents, etc. and hopefully they will come up with a way to address these types of issues in Golden Valley. Schmidgall said he feels for the applicant if the property was misrepresented to her by the real estate agent but he is not inclined to support this request because work was done in the house without obtaining a building permit first and he is not comfortable with "spot" zoning so he would like to keep the property zoned as it is. McCarty said he is also not in support of this request. Keysser agreed and reiterated that the applicant does have other options for sharing the burden of homeownership. Grimes suggested that if the Planning Commission recommends denial of this request that they list findings. Keysser suggested the following findings: 1) Scott Avenue is clearly a single family street, 2) the house has already been converted back to a single family home, 3) the Planning Commission is uncomfortable with "spot" zoning and 4) the applicant has other options available to make it more affordable. Waldhauser said she thinks finding number four should be removed. The Commissioners agreed. MOVED by Keysser, seconded by Waldhauser and motion carried unanimously to recommend denial of the applicant's request to rezone the property at 3335 Scott Avenue North from Single Family Zoning District (R-1) to Moderate Density Residential Zoning District (R-2) ---Short Recess--- Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission November 10,2008 Page 6 3. Reports on Meetings of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority, City Council, Board of Zoning Appeals and other Meetings Waldhauser discussed a recent MnAPA conference she attended. 4. Other Business Kluchka asked for an update on whether a PUD has to correspond with the underlying zoning. Grimes said he was still looking into it. 5. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 8:35 pm