Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07/15/2002BOOk 1. Call to Order MAPLEWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION Monday, July 15, 2002, 7:00 PM City Hall Council Chambers 1830 County Road B East 2. Roll Call 3. Approval of Agenda 4. Approval of Minutes a. July 1,2002 5. Public Heating None 6. New Business a. Concept Plan Review - MWF Properties Apartment Proposal (2000 County Road D) 7. Unfinished Business a. Manufactured Home Park Closing Ordinance Amendment 8. Visitor Presentations 9. Commission Presentations a. July 8 Council Meeting: Ms. Junek b. July 22 Council Meeting: Mr. Tdppler c. August 12 Council Meeting: Mr. Mueller 10. Staff Presentations 11. adjoumment WELCOME TO THIS MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION This outline has been prepared to help you understand the public meeting process. The review of an item usually takes the following form: The chairperson of the meeting will announce the item to be reviewed and ask for the staff report on the subject. Staff presents their report on the matter. The Commission will then ask City staff questions about the proposal. The chairperson will then ask the audience if there is anyone present who wishes to comment on the proposal. This is the time for the public to make comments or ask questions about the proposal. Please step up to the podium, speak clearly, first giving your name and address and then your comments. After everyone in the audience wishing to speak has given his or her comments, the chairperson will close the public discussion portion of the meeting. The Commission will then discuss the proposal. No further public comments are allowed. The Commission will then make its recommendation or decision. All decisions by the Planning Commission are recommendations to the City Council. The City Council makes the final decision. jw/pc\pcagd Revised: 01/95 DRAFT MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION 1830 COUNTY ROAD B EAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA MONDAY, JULY 1, 2002 I. CALLTO ORDER Chairperson Fischer called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. I1. ROLL CALL CommissIoner Mary Dierich Present Commissioner Lorraine Fischer Present Commissioner Matt Ledvina Absent Commissioner Jackie Monahan-Junek Present Commissioner Paul Mueller Absent Commissioner Gary Pearson Present Commissioner William Rossbach ' Present Commissioner Dale Trippler Present III. IV. Staff Present: Ken Roberts, Associate Planner Chris Cavett., Assistant City Engineer Lisa Kroll, Recording Secretary APPROVAL OF AGENDA Commissioner Pearson requested an addition under number seven Unfinished Business. This addition to the agenda was to discuss the letter from APAC that the planning commission members received prior to the meeting. Commissioner Pearson moved to approve the agenda with the amended change. Commissioner Rossbach seconded. Ayes - All The motion passed. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Approval of the planning commission minutes for June 17, 2002. Chairperson Fischer requested a paragraph to be added to page 17, in the fifth paragraph. To state the commission requested staff to contact the cities of Oakdale and Roseville that passed this ordinance. Staff should find out what was stated in the ordinance and why those cities chose to pass the ordinance. Commissioner Rossbach moved to approve the planning commission minutes for June 17, 2002 with the amended change. Commissioner Dierich seconded. Ayes - All Planning Commission Minutes of 07-01-02 -2- V. PUBLIC HEARING None. VI. NEW BUSINESS a. Conditional Use Permit Revision - Bruentrup Farm (2170 County Road D) Mr. Roberts said the Maplewood Historical Society is proposing the addition of a parking area on the eastern edge of the leased city land along County Road D. Approval of parking lot addition requires a revision to the conditional use permit (CUP) for the Heritage Farm. Mr. Roberts said the farm is currently governed by a conditional use permit, which found that the relocated farm would be compatible with the existing development and land uses in the area. The 1999 permit identified that additional parking shall be added to the site if the city council deems it necessary. Attached is a revision to the site plan showing a 21 space parking area with a bus turnaround. This proposal is a substantial reduction from the original plan, whic6' included over 50 parking stalls. The reduction in stalls is due to the discussion of events at the site and the overall plan for using various spaces as overflow parking areas for the limited number of events per year where the parking lot capacity is exceeded. The parking lot plan includes a connection to the trail constructed as part of the County Road D project and will also serve as a trailhead for the Lake Links trail. Substantial additional landscape plantings are shown on the eastern and northeastern park of the parking plan, although no details on the type and extent of plantings is identified. A condition of approval of the revised CUP is to provide extensive screening of the residential properties to the north and the northeast. Staff recommends that the city council adopt the attached resolution approving a revised conditional use permit (CUP) for the Bruentrup Heritage Farm at 2170 County Road D. Commissioner Rossbach asked staff if there were any neighbors that were upset by this proposal? Mr. Roberts stated neighbors were not surveyed, but the city engineer has spoken with two neighbors that are immediately affected by this proposal. Commissioner Monahan-Junek asked staff which neighbors have complained about this proposal? The city engineer has been in contact with the neighbors at 2191 and 2212 County Road D regarding their concerns for this proposal. Commissioner Trippler asked what the hours of operation were for the farm and if headlights would be bothersome to the neighbors? Mr. Roberts said he did not believe the city set any hours of operation for the farm. Mr. Roberts was not sure if the headlights would bother the neighbors or not. Planning Commission Minutes of 07-01-02 -3- Commissioner Rossbach moved to adopt a resolution approving a revised conditional use permit for the Bruentrup Heritage Farm at 2170 County Road D. Checking to ensure that the proposed parking lot is on the property set a side for the Bruentrup Heritage Farm and weighing the concerns of the neighbors. Approval is subject to the following conditions: All construction shall follow the approved site plan dated May 17, 2002, for the proposed 21- car parking lot for the Bruentrup Heritage Farm to be located on the eastern side of the farm house building, which shall include a bus turnaround, subject to the addition of extensive landscape features which shall be designed by a registered Landscape Architect to screen from view, the properties to the east and northeast of the parking lot. Approval is granted citing the fact that the space, and that the parking lot would not change and is consistent with the operation of the Bruentrup Heritage Farm as a public facility. 2. All construction shall follow the site plan approved by the city. The city engineer may approve minor changes to the site plan. 3. The city council shall review this permit in one year. 4. Any parking lot lights shall be installed per city code, subject to the approval of the city engineer. 5. The site plan dated May 1999, shall be deemed the approved site plan for the Bruentrup Heritage Farm site, except the addition of the 21 -car parking lot on the eastern side of the site. Commissioner Pearson seconded. Ayes - All The motion passed. This proposal goes to the city council July 8, 2002. b. Home Occupation License - Eckhoff Photography (2443 Montana Avenue East) Mr. Roberts said Ms. Karla Eckhoff is requesting a home occupation license to start and operate a portrait photography business from her home at 2443 Montana Avenue. The applicants business would be taking portrait photographs of individuals and families. Ms. Eckhoff would be using a 12-foot by 9-foot den on the first floor of her home as the photography studio. The applicant would be using lighting in the studio and cameras in the home occupation. Ms. Eckhoff lives on the premises and would be the only employee in the home occupation. In addition, she would not be developing the pictures at home. The applicant states that she would receive customer visits between the hours of 10 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday through Saturday, and she expects about 15-20 customers per week. Planning Commission Minutes of 07-01-02 -4- Mr. Roberts said a majority of the neighbors who responded to a survey are for the home occupation or had general comments. The most common comment from the neighbors was about traffic in the neighborhood. Ms. Eckhoff told me that she expects an average of two or three customers per day. If the city approves the photography business, the city's home occupation ordinance allows only residents of the home, plus one outside employee, to be employed within the business. In addition, the city council may place conditions on the business to ensure that surrounding residential properties are not negatively impacted. Commissioner Pearson moved to approve the home occupation license for Ms. Karla Eckhoff of 2443 Montana Avenue to conduct a portrait photography business from her home. This approval shall be subject to the following conditions: (changes are in bold) 1. Meeting all conditions of the city's home occupation ordinance. This includes that the area of the home occupation is limited in size to 20 percent of the floor area of the house. 2. Customer hours for this home occupation are limited from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Saturday. 3. There shall be no more than 20 customers visiting the home per week. 4. Customers will be requested to park in Ms. Eckhoff's driveway, Commissioner Rossbach seconded. Ayes - All The motion passed. This goes to the city council on July 22, 2002. c. Follow-up from meeting with Barb Strandell Mr. Roberts asked commission members to take a look at the suggestions that Ms. Strandell offered and to make comments. Commission members discussed some of the suggestions that were listed. Commissioner Rossbach agreed there should be shorter minutes. The minutes should include more of an outline and not word for word transcription. Commissioner Rossbach said he has been the official greeter at the meetings and has been introducing himself to people in the audience. Commissioner Monahan-Junek said she felt the idea was to wear nametags so people in the audience would not feel intimidated and would feel welcome to approach commission members. Commissioner Rossbach said he felt that the commission has to take the initiative to have change. There could be changes in the way the meetings are conducted. He said one idea could be to ask audience members to write down their ideas before coming forward to speak. Chairperson Fischer thought maybe putting it in writing on the back of the cover sheet for the planning commission packet for people to write down their ideas before coming forward to speak. Planning Commission Minutes of 07-01-02 -5- UNFINISHED BUSINESS The commission discussed the letter from APAC. Commissioner Pearson asked members if they felt there was a conflict of interest having him on the commission regarding this subject. Commission members shared their feelings and asked Commissioner Pearson to make his own decision. VIII. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS None. IX. COMMISSION PRESENTATIONS a. Mr. Rossbach was the planning commission representative at the May 28, 2002, city council meeting. Some of the agenda items included the following: .. · Commissioner Rossbach said the Schlomka accessory building CUP was approved ayes all. · The house moving on Sylvan Street for Bart Crockett was tabled until cost estimates were given to the city council for review. · Kline Nissan was voted 3-2 to have a 50-foot wetland setback on all sides of the property. · Beaver lake townhomes was approved ayes all. b. Ms. Fischer was the planning commission representative at the June 10, 2002, city council meeting. Some of the agenda items included the following: · Lexus CUP revision was approved ayes all. · Home occupation sewing business on Highwood Avenue was approved ayes all. · Dearborn Meadow townhomes was approved ayes all. · Tillges office building was approved ayes all. · Housing moving on Sylvan Street was tabled for a second time for more information. · Organized collection was tabled until fall. · Beaver Lake sanitary sewer and bike path improvement project passed ayes all. Mr. Pearson was to be the planning commission representative at the June 24, 2002, city council meeting. He was told there was no need to attend as a representative of the planning commission. · Mr. Roberts reported the house moving on Sylvan Street was denied. · Kline Nissan asked the city council to reconsider the 50-foot wetland setback. The city council did reconsider it and voted to require a 50-foot wetland setback and 25-foot wetland setback. d. Ms. Monahan-Junek will be the planning commission representative at the July 8, 2002, city council meeting. e. Mr. Trippler will be the planning commission representative at the July 22, 2002, city council meeting. Planning Commission Minutes of 07-01-02 -6- X. STAFF PRESENTATIONS Mr. Roberts asked commission members what size paper they prefer to get their plans on. The consensus was to keep getting them on large paper 22X34 for more detail. Although it was okay to use small plans 11X17 when small detail was not needed. Mr. Roberts said there was a misprint in the city newsletter. It was printed incorrectly that there was a planning commission meeting on July 17, 2002. The correct date is Monday, July 15, 2002. Xl. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 8:50 p.m. MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: SUBJECT: LOCATION: APPLICANT: DATE: City Manager Ken Roberts, Associate Planner Proposed Apartment Building County Road D, between White Bear Avenue and Ariel Street MWF Properties (Dave Steele) July 8, 2002 INTRODUCTION Project Description Mr. David Steele, representing MWF Properties, is proposing to build an 80-unit apartment building. He is proposing this project on a 7-acre site on the south side of CountY Road D, between White Bear Avenue and Adel Street. (See the location map on page 2 and the property line/zoning map on page 5.) The project would be a 2-story apartment building with a mix of 72 two-bedroom units and 8 three- bedroom units. There also would be 80 detached garage stalls and 101 surface parking spaces on the site. (See the proposed site plan on page 6 and the enclosed site plan.) Requests To build the development, the applicant is requesting that the city approve the following: A change in the city's land use plan. This change would be from BC (business commercial) to R-3(H) (residential high density). (See the existing and proposed land use plan maps on pages 3 and 4.) A conditional use permit (CUP) for a planned unit development (PUD) for an 80-unit apartment development. The applicant is requesting the CUP because the BC (business commercial) and LBC (limited business commercial) zoning districts limit the uses on the site to a vadety of commercial, retail and office uses. The code, however, allows multi-dwellings on land that the city has zoned BC by CUP. (See the property line/zoning map on page 5.) 3. Design approval. DISCUSSION Mr. Steele has asked staff to present these preliminary plans to the planning commission and city council for comments. Please review this proposal and be prepared to give staff and the applicant comments that they may use when reviewing the upcoming formal applications for this development. kr/p: Sec 2N/mwf apartments prelim.doc Attachments: 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Location Map Existing Land Use Plan Map Proposed Land Use Plan Property Line/Zoning Map Site Plan Project Plans (Separate Attachment) Attachment 1 EHILL RD. RAMSEY COUNTY COURT KOHLMAN AVE. COPE NORTH ST. PAUL O' 1700' ,3400' 0" 1" 2" ~ SCALE RD. LOCATION 2 MAP Attachment 2 interchange E County Hd__j II I ~ ~ I1 ,-- ' ' '. : : ' ~~ ~-~ .... ~~ ~~~'~ = orth St Paul Attachment interchange~ _-- E __-~r~'"~ ~ ~'- arterial ~ .._ ar Lake .... White Be ~ ~L...~._ 111 ..... ----. ! H-1 ==~n;,d:- nllllm t ~-~--__..R 2 ~ ___L__~..., ....... ~ ~ I~ ~ - ...... ~ --- ... ~ ....... ~. "c ' ~~ ,,..~, 1 ~ ~, ~~~~ :~ 3-. 1"' ~_~ - -~~ .,. :s ~- ~~ "--~ ~ Attachment 4 3100, 3.47 SITE SITE DAYCARE I./S a.c CENTER 2029 3.0 ! ~.,:. . 'NNAVENUE ..- (7) t. I~, PLAZA 3000 ~ F Attachment 5 SITE~ PLAN MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: SUBJECT: DATE: City Manager Tom Ekstrand, Assistant Community Development Director Manufactured Home Park Closing Ordinance July 10, 2002 INTRODUCTION The All Parks Alliance for Change (APAC), and many manufactured home park residents in Maplewood, have requested that the city council pass an ordinance that would guarantee park residents financial assistance to relocate if their park closed. On February 25, 2002, the city council directed staff to review this request and forward a recommendation to them. Refer to the attached April 3, 2002 memorandum for details. On June 17, 2002, the planning commission discussed this request and tabled action so staff can address their questions. Refer to Discussion below. BACKGROUND Apdl 9, 2002: The Maplewood Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) discussed this matter. The HRA tabled this issue until the city receives notification of a manufactured home park closing. They felt that since there are no proposed or pending closings at this time, there is no urgency to act immediately. The HRA discussed the needs-vs.-greed aspects of APAC's suggested ordinance. The HRA also wanted to know from the city attorney if the city would have sufficient time to enact an ordinance at the time of a proposed park closing that would be applicable to that park or if it would only apply to future closings in the city. (The city attorney said that, in such a case, an ordinance enacted would apply to future closings, not to a current one.) DISCUSSION Planning Commission's Questions A. What government programs support affordable housing? Affordable housing can be funded by: tax-increment financing (TIF), community development block grants and livable communities grants. B. Why didn't the Cities of Brainerd and Willmar pass the manufactured home park-closing ordinance? What were their reasons for not passing an ordinance before making any decisions? Brainerd The City of Brainerd discussed a park-closing ordinance on May 7, 2001 and after much discussion and testimony denied the proposed ordinance (the motion died for lack of a second). The Brainerd City Council stated the following reasons for not adopting their proposed ordinance (dedved from the Brainerd City Council minutes): 1. This is a social issue that shouldn't be solved by adopting an ordinance that may not be in the best interest of all parties involved. 2. It should be discussed on a regional basis rather than just a City of Brainerd issue. 3. There is no eminent park closing and there is time to come up with a better solution to the problem. One problem with this is the compensation issue. There are only two reasons that a park would close; it is on a lakeshore property and the value has increased, or it is adjacent to a shopping mall that wants to expand. 5. Perhaps agreements should be worked out between the owners and the residents of the parks on an individual basis. o Regarding a sunset clause: The residents may feel that this will benefit them, however they may never move and their park may never close and in the long run, they will be out more money, as the park owners have already stated that rent will have to be raised in order to compensate for the possibility of the closing. 7. Taking "no action" would not leave the tenants high and dry, as there is state statute language that provides for tenants if their park is closed. Willmar The City of Willmar initiated the closing of a manufactured-home park due to health and safety code violations. The park owner refused to correct the code infractions. Michael Schmit, the Willmar City Manager, said that they decided not to enact a park-cloSing ordinance since the state statute already covers this situation and provides guidelines for public notice, public hearings and requires compensation should the city council deem it to be warranted. The Willmar City Council did require compensation. Mr. Schmit did not see any reason for a city to enact such an ordinance since state law already covers this. C. How/why did the city attorney Come to the conclusion that an ordinance enacted at the time of a proposed mobile home park closing would not apply to that one, only to a future closing? The city attorney explained that, in his eadier statement, he meant that an ordinance must be adopted and published before it becomes effective. He further stated and clarified, however, that the city could adopt an ordinance after an announcement of a manufactured-home park closing which would include that park. Procedurally, the City of Maplewood wants to give all involved parties ample time to respond to any potential ordinance change before the city council would amend the code. Oakdale and Roseville The cities of Oakdale and Roseville have adopted manufactured home park closing ordinances. I have enclosed copies of their ordinances for the planning commission's information. CONCLUSION Staff has not formed a recommendation about this matter. The input received at the planning commission meeting will aid staff in forwarding a recommendation to the city council. p:com_dvpt\ord\manufactured home parks.7'O2.doc Attachments: 1. City of Oakdale Ordinance 2. City of Roseville Ordinance 3. Planning Commission Minutes dated June 17, 2002 4. Memorandum dated April 3, 2002 Attachment 1 City Of Oakdale ORDINANCE NO. 550 AMENDING THE CODE OF ORDINANCES FOR THE CITY OF OAI<DALE, C~TER 11 MANUFACTURED HOMES AND MANUFACTURED HOME PARKS, ADDING ARTICLE II . - 5'L~NUFACTURED HOME PARK CLOSINGS. The City Council of the City of Oakdale hereby ordains: Section 1: Oakdale Code of Ordinances, Chapter I 1, AJ-ticle II, is added to read: Sec. ll-lS. Purpose, In hew' of the unique nature and issues presented by the closure of conversion of manufactured home parks, the Ciw Council finds that the public heaJth, safety and genera] welfare wilt be promoted by requiring relocation assistance and/or compensation to displaced home owners and residents of such parks. The purpase of this Section is to require park owners to pay displaced home owners and residents reasgnable relocation costs and purchasers of manufactured home parks :o pay additional campensation, pursfiant to the authority granted under Minnesota Staruies,'Section 327C.095. Sec. 11-16. Definitions, The following word, and terms when used in this Section shall have the following meanings unless the context clearly, indicates othe.,'xvise: "Closing Statement" - A stateroom prepared by the park owner clearly stating the park is closing, addressing the ~vailability, location -and potential costs of adequate replacement housing within a r~venty-five (,25) mJJle radius of the park that is closing Md the probable relocation costs of the. manufactured homes located in the park. "Displaced Resident" - A residem of an owner-occupied manufactured home who rents lot in a manufactured home park, inciufling the members cf the resident's household, as of the date park owner submits a closur,~ statement to the City Council. "Lot" An area W~thin a manufactured home park, designed and used for the accommodation of ~ man,factored home. "Manufactured Home" - A structure~ not affixed to or part of' real estate, transportable in one or more sections, which in the traveling mode, is eigk, t (8) feet or more in width or forty (a0) feet or more in length, or~ when erected on sire, is three hundred twenty (320) or more square feet, and which is built on ~ permanent chassis and designed to be used as a dwelling with or without a permanent f'ound~tion when connected to the requi~ed utilities, and includes the plumbing, heating, air conditioning, and electrical system contained in it. 5 "Park Owner" - The owner of a manufactured home park and any person act_!n_g on behalf of the owner in thc operatign or man.'agement of a ~ark. ~ "Person" - ,any individual, corporation, tim, partnershi¢, incorporated and unincorporated, association or an~ other legal or commercial entity. :]:: Ordinance No. 550 Page Two Sec. 11-17. Noiice of closing. If a manufactured home park is to be closed, conve.'ted in whole or part to another use or terminated as a use of the property, the park owner shall, at least nine (9) months prior to the closure, conversation to another use or termination of use, pro-v/de a copy ora closure statement to a resident of each manufactured home and to the City Council. Sec. 11-18. Notice of public hearing. The City Administrator sh~il submil the closure statement to the City' Council and request the Ci~ Council to schedule a public hearing. The City ahatl mail a notice at least ten (10) days prior to the public hearing to a resident of each manufactured home in the park stating the time, place and purpose of the hearing. The pack owner shall provide tk, e city with a list of the names and addresses of at least one resident of each manufactured home in the park at the time the closure statement is submitted :o the City Council. Sec, 11-19. Public hearing. A public hearing shall be held before the City Council for the purpose of reviewing the closure statement and evaluating what impact the park closing may have on the displaced residents mud the park ovmer. The City Council shall determine the adequacy of the closure statement and direct payment of relocation costs pursuant to the Ordinance. Sec. 11-20. Payment of relocation costs. A,P~er service of the closure statement by the park owner and upon gubmittaJ by the displaced resident of a contract or other verification of relocation expenses, yhe laark owner ;hall pay to the displaced resident the reasonable cost of relocating the manuTactured home to another manufactured home park located within a twenty-five (25) mile radius of the park that is being closed, converted to another use, or ceasing operation. Reasonable relocation costs shall include: The actual expenses incurred in moving the displaced resident's manufactured home and personal property, including the reasonable cost 0£ disassembling, moving and reassembling any attached appurtenances, such as porches, decks, skirting and awnings, which were not acquired ai=:er notice of clo~ure or conversion of the park, and utility "hook-up" charges. b. The cost o[' insurance ,"or the ;replacement value of the property being moved. The cost of repairs or modifications that are required in order to take down, move and set up the manufactured home If a resident cannot relocate the manufactured home within a twenty-five (25) mile radius of :he park which is being .closed (>r some other agreed upon distance, and the resident elects not to tender title to the man:ufactured home, the resi~en! is entitled to relocation costs based upon an average of relocation costs awarded to ,other residents in the park. A displaced resident compensated under this section shall retain rifle to the manufactured ' home and shall be responsible for its prompt removal from the mamffacrured home park. Ordinance No 550 Page Three The park owner shall make the payments under this section directly to the person performing the relocation sen, ices at2er performance thereot; or, =con submission of written evidence of pa,v'rnent of re),oc2tion costs by a displaced resident, shall reimburse the displaced resident for such costs. Thc displaced resident must submit a contract cr other verified cost estimate ['er relocating the manufactured home to the park owner as a condition to the park owner's liability to pay relocation expenses. 6. The total compermation computed as payment for relocation costs shall be the greater ct': a) 25% of the sale or purchase price by the park owner to a buyer for the closure or conversion of the park for re-use, or b) the Washing'ton County Assessor's assessed value of' the manufactured or mobile home for the current tax year The park owner, to the greatest extent practicable, shall allocate the relocation costs prop.ortionally to the displaced residents. Sec. 11-21. Payment of additional compensation. Ifa resident ca"mot relocate the manufactured home withi~ a twe~ty-five (25) mile ra:tius of the park that is being closed or some other agreed upon distance and tenders title to the rnanuhcrured home. the resident is entitled to additional compensation to be pa. id by the ?urchas~,r q)f the park in order ~o mitigate the ad,/erse ~'ina~cial impact of the park closm,g. In such instance, the additional compensation ~tmount equal to the estimated marke~ va:lue of ~he manufactured home as determined by an independent at~pr?.iser experienced in mobile home appraisal approved by the Cit'/Ad,'ni~ TEe purchaser shall pa5' ,uch :.ompensgtion into an escrow account, established by the park owr~er, for ciismbution upon transfer oftit!e to the home. Such compensation sh~il be paid to the displaced residents no la, er than t~e earlier of sixty (60) da:~,s prior '~o the closing of the park or [ts conversion to another use. Sec. 11-22. Enforcement. 1. Violation of any provision of this Se:riCh shall be a misdemeanor. 2 ,-%ny provisions of ~his Section :,nay be enforced by injunction or other appropriate civil remedy. The city may withhold issuance of a building ~ermit in conjunction witt; reuse of manufactured home park property unless the park owner has paid reasonable relocation costs and the purchaser of the park has provided additional compensation in accordance with the requirements of the OrOina.nce. Approval of any application for rezoning platting, conditional use permit, planned unit development or variance in con. lunction witt', a park closing or conversion shall be conditional on compliance with the requirements of this compliance with the requirements of this Ordinance Ordinamcc No. 550 Page Four Pascal and adopted ~hJs 25th day of]'uly, 2000, by :he City Council of:he City of O~da]¢. F-ff¢ctive upon passage and publication. Section 2: This ordinance shzll take cfi'tm ~nd be in full forc.~ from and ai!cr adoption and publication, a~ provided by law. Carmen Sarrack, Ma~or AYES: Sarrack, Bcarth, Dot~, Pulkr~bek. and Tim. memnann. NAYS: None. P~ss=d by the City Council of thne ~i,'y of Otkda~e this 25th day of 3uly, 2000. //". / crai~ ~dr°n. C~ty ~bli~ed: Au~st 15, 2000 Attachment 2 CITY OF ROSEVILLE ORDINANCE NO. 1235 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE III, BY ADDING A NEW CHAPTER 313 TO THE ROSEVILLE CITY CODE CONCERNING MANUFACTURED HOME PARKS, REQUIRING OWNERS TO PAY RELOCATION EXPENSES TO DISPLACED RESIDENTS UPON PARK CLOSINGS THE CITY OF ROSEVILLE ORDAINS: SECTION 1. Title III of the of the Roseville City Code is amended by adding a new Chapter 313 to read as follows: MANUFACTURED HOME PARK CLOSINGS SECTION 313.01 PURPOSE In view of the peculiar nature and problems presented by the closure or conversion of manufactured home parks, the City Council finds that the public health, safety and general welfare will be promoted by requiring compensation to displaced home owners and renters in such parks. The purpose of this ordinance is to require park owners to pay displaced residents reasonable relocation costs and purchasers of manufactured home parks to pay additional compensation, pursuant to the authority granted under Minnesota Statutes, Section 327C.095. SECTION 313.02. DEFINITIONS The following words and terms when used in this Ordinance shall have the following meanings unless the context clearly indicates otherwise: CLOSURE STATEMENT: A statement prepared by the park owner clearly stating the park is closing, addressing the availability, location and potential costs of adequate replacement housing within a twenty-five (25) mile radius of the park that is closing and the probable relocation costs of the manufactured homes located in the park. DISPLACED OWNER: A resident of an owner-occupied manufactured home who rents a lot in a manufactured home park, including the members of the resident's household, as of the date the park owner submits a closure statement to the City. DISPLACED RENTER: A resident of a renter-occupied manufactured home who rents both the lot and the manufactured home in the manufactured home park, including the members of the resident's household, as of the date the park owner submits a closure statement to the City. JANan2002 .-.~?:i:: ? :¥ ~;:,..::..:!..i: :::.! . . ..... DISPLACED RESIDENT: Displaced owner or displaced renter. LOT: An area within a manufactured home park, designed and used for the accommodation of a manufactured home. MANUFACTURED HOME: A structure, not affixed to or part of real estate, transportable in one or more sections, which in the traveling mode, is eight (8) feet or more in width or forty (40) feet or more in length, or, when erected on site, is three hundred twenty (320) or more square feet, and which is built on a permanent chassis and designed to be used as a dwelling with or without a permanent foundation when connected to the required utilities, and includes the plumbing, heating, air conditioning, and electrical system contained in it. PARK OWNER: The owner of a manufactured home park and any person acting on behalf of the owner in the operation or management of a park. PERSON: Any individual, corporation, firm, partnership, incorporated and unincorporated association or any other legal or commercial entity. SECTION 313.03 NOTICE OF CLOSING If a manufactured home park is to be closed, converted in whole or part to another use or terminated as a use of the property, the park owner shall, at least nine (9) months prior to the closure, conversion to another use or termination of use, provide a copy of a closure statement to a resident of each manufactured home and to the City's Community Development Director. SECTION 313.04 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Upon receipt of the closure statement, the Community Development Director shall schedule a hearing on the proposed park closing before the City's Planning Commission. The City shall mail a notice at least ten (10) days prior to the public hearing to a resident of each manufactured home in the park stating the time, place and purpose of the hearing. The park owner shall provide the City with a list of the names and addresses of at least one resident of each manufactured home in the park at the time the closure statement is submitted to the City. SECTION 313.05 PUBLIC HEARING A public hearing shall be held before the City Planning Commission for the purpose of reviewing the closure statement and evaluating what impact the park closing may have on the displaced residents and the park owner. SECTION 313.06 PAYMENT OF RELOCATION COSTS TO DISPLACED OWNERS 1. After service of the closure statement by the park owner and upon submittal by the displaced owner ora contract or other verification of relocation expenses, the park owner shall pay to the displaced owner the reasonable cost of relocating the manufactured to another manufactured home park located within a tw ..... c.. _ f-,~-, ., ,. home ,.,,ty-l~v~ tz~) mne radius of the park that is being closed, convened to another use, or ceasin~ operation. Reasonable relocation costs shall include: ~ A. The actual expenses incurred in moving the displaced owner's manufactured home and personal property, including the reasonable cost of disassembling, moving and reassembling sheds and any attached appurtenances, such as porches, decks, skirting and awnings, which were not acquired after notice of closure or conversion of the park, and utility "hook-up" charges. B. The cost of insurance for the replacement value of the property being moved. C. The cost of repairs or modifications that are required in order to take down, move and set up the manufactured home. · 2. Ifa displaced owner cannot relocate the manufactured home within a twenty-five (25) mile radius of the park which is being closed or some other agreed upon distance, and the displaced owner elects not to tender title to the manufactured home, the displaced owner is entitled to relocation costs based upon an average of relocation costs awarded to other residents in the park. 3. A displaced owner compensated under this section shall retain title to the manufactured home and shall be responsible for its prompt removal from the manufactured home park. 4. The park owner shall make the payments under this section directly to the person performing the relocation services after performance thereof, or, upon submission of written evidence of payment of relocation costs by a displaced resident, shall reimburse the displaced resident for such costs. 5. The displaced owner must submit a contract or other verified cost estimate for relocating the manufactured home to the park owner as a condition to the park owner's liability to pay relocation expenses. SECTION 313.07 PAYMENT OF ADDITIONAL COMPENSATION TO DISPLACED OWNERS If a displaced owner either cannot or chooses not to relocate the manufactured home within a 25-mile radius of the park that is being closed or some other agreed upon distance and tenders title to the manufactured home, the displaced owner is entitled to additional compensation to be paid by the p. urchaser of the hark in order to mitigate, the adverse financial impact of the ~ark cl°~ing. In such instance, the additional -- compensation shall be an amount equal to the estimated market value or the tax assessed value of the manufactured home, whichever is greater, as determined by an independent appraiser experienced in manufactured home appraisal approved by the City. The purchaser shall pay the cost of the appraisal or shall reimburse the City for any advances it makes to such appraiser for such cost. The purchaser shall pay the additional compensation into an escrow account, established by the park owner, for distribution upon transfer of title to the home. Such compensation shall be paid to the displaced owners no later than the ninety (90) days prior to the earlier of closing of the park or its conversion to another use. SECTION 313.08 PAYMENT OF RELOCATION COSTS TO DISPLACED RENTERS 1. After service of the closure statement by the park owner and upon submittal by the displaced renter of a contract or other verification of relocation expenses, the park owner shall pay to the displaced renter reasonable costs of relocating. Reasonable relocation costs shall include: A. The actual expenses incurred in moving the displaced renter's personal property. B. The cost of insurance for the replacement value of the property being moved. C. The difference between (New Lot Rent - Closed Lot Rent) for a period of 2 years, if the new lot rent is greater than the old lot rent. SECTION 313.09 PENALTY 1. Violation of any provision of this Ordinance shall be a misdemeanor. 2. Any provisions of this Ordinance may be enforced by injunction or other appropriate civil remedy. 3. The City shall not issue a building permit in conjunction with reuse of manufactured home park property unless the park owner has paid reasonable relocation costs and the purchaser of the park has provided additional compensation in accordance with the requirements of the Ordinance. Approval of any application for rezoning, platting, conditional use permit, planned unit development or variance in conjunction with a park closing or conversion shall be conditional on compliance with the requirements of this Ordinance. SECTION 2. __...) and publication. Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect upon its passage PASSED by the City Council of the City of Roseville, this 28th day of FebrUary, 2000. ATTEST: Steven 1~. Sa~k~z~ City-lV¥;nager- CITY OF ROSEVILLE ~::'"' John ~y~sSqyczyn, Mayor Subscribed and sworn to before me on This~ day of ..~~2000 ~ ~..~'l~i~ NOTARY PUBLIC - MINNESOTA ~ ~ My Comm. Ex~lres Jan 31 2005 Attachment 3 MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION 1830 COUNTY ROAD B EAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA MONDAY, JUNE 17, 2002 c, Manufactured Home Park Closing Ordinance Amendment Mr. Roberts said the All Parks Alliance for Change (APAC), and many manufactured home park residents in Maplewood, requested that the city council pass an ordinance that would guarantee park residents financial assistance to relocate if their park closed. On February 25, 2002, the city council directed staff to review this request and forward a recommendation to them. Staff has invited the five Maplewood manufactured home park owners and representation from APAC to attend the planning commission meeting to discuss APAC's request. On April 9, 2002, the Maplewood Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) discussed this matter. The HRA tabled this issue until the city receives notification of a manufactured home park closing. They felt that since there are no proposed or pending closings at this time, there is no urgency to act immediately. The HRA discussed the needs-vs.-greed aspects of APAC's suggested ordinance. The HRA also wanted to know from the city attorney if the city would have sufficient time to enact an ordinance at the time of a proposed park closing that would be applicable to that park or if it would only apply to future closings in the city. (The city attorney said that, in such a case, an ordinance enacted would apply to future closings, not to a current one.) Staff has not formed a recommendation about this matter. The input received at the planning commission meeting will aid staff in forwarding a recommendation to the city council. Mr. Roberts said in 1987, the Minnesota State Legislature passed a law allowing cities and municipalities to pass park-closing ordinances (Minnesota Statutes, Section 327C.095). The purpose of such an ordinance is to help protect citizens living in manufactured home parks in the event of a park closing by requiring park owners to reimburse homeowners for relocation costs if their home can be moved, and it not, purchase the manufactured home. The City of Maplewood received a proposed manufactured home park-closing ordinance for the city council's review from All Parks Alliance for Change (APAC). APAC is a non-profit organization that serves as a tenants union for manufactured home owners. They help organize park residents to understand and protect their rights as specified in state law. APAC sent a mailing to a majority of the city's park residents regarding their proposed ordinance. In the mailing they requested that the residents show their support of a park-closing ordinance by signing their name and address to a postcard and sending it to the city. To date, the city has received 190 postcards in support of the proposed ordinance. On February 25, 2002, after reviewing APAC's proposed manufactured home park-closing ordinance, the city council directed staff to review the request and forward a recommendation to them. Staff is requesting input from the Maplewood Housing Redevelopment Authority (HRA) to assist us in our review of APAC's request, and the many manufactured home park residents' request, for the city to pass a manufactured home park-closing ordinance. The park-closing legislation came out of a situation in Bloomington when Lyndale Lodge Manufactured Home Park was sold for redevelopment as a car dealership. Many of the homes were too old to move and therefore forced the residents to sell their homes for very little. This left many of the residents financially devastated and homeless. Alarmed by these events, the legislature passed the park closing law in 1987. The law states that a park owner must notify the city and the residents of a park closing nine months prior to the proposed closing. Once notice is received, the city must hold a public headng to review the impacts that the park closing may have on the displaced residents and the park owners. The city may require payment by the park owner to be made to the displaced resident for reasonable relocation costs. If a resident cannot relocate the home to another park within 25 miles of the park that is being closed, the resident is entitled to relocation costs based upon an average of relocation costs awarded to other residents. The law further states that the city may also require that other parties, including the city, involved in the park closing provide additional compensation to residents to mitigate the adverse financial impact of the park closing upon the resident. After the law was enacted, the City of Bloomington adopted a park-closing ordinance and required the Lyndale Lodge Manufactured Home Park owner to reimburse the park residents for relocation costs or purchase the homes. The park owners brought the City of Bloomington to court over the ordinance claiming that it was a land taking. The Minnesota Court of Appeals upheld Bloomington's ordinance in Arcadia vs. City of Bloomington, 1994, and the park owners were required to reimburse the homeowners for relocation costs or purchase the homes. Thirteen cities within the State of Minnesota currently have park-closing ordinances: Apple Valley, Bloomington, Burnsville, Hopkins, Elk River, Dayton, Fridley, Lake EImo, Mounds View, Oakdale, Red Wing, Roseville, and Shakopee. Most of these ordinances require that park owners reimburse manufactured home owners to relocate their homes within 25 miles. If relocation is not possible, the park owner or land developer must purchase the home for the market value as determined by an independent appraiser approved by the city. In addition, some cities' ordinances place a cap on the amount of reimbursement. For example, the park owner or land developer would only have to reimburse up to 20 percent of the purchase price of the park or the assessed value of the park. Two cities within the State of Minnesota, Brainerd and Willmar, reviewed park-closing ordinances and chose not to pass one. Both of these proposed ordinances were brought on by actual park closings. APAC's proposed ordinance mirrors Elk River's ordinance passed in 1997. It states that the park owner or land developer shall pay the displaced resident the reasonable cost of relocating the home to another park within 25 miles. Reasonable costs include expenses incurred in moving the home and personal property, insurance for replacement value of the property being moved, and cost of repairs or modifications that are required in order to take down, move and set up the home. If the home cannot be moved, the resident is entitled to relocation costs based upon an average of costs awarded to other residents plus the park owner or land developer must purchase the home at the amount equal to the estimated market value of the home. APAC's proposed ordinance does not include a cap on the amount that a park owner or land developer would have to reimburse the residents. Upon notice of APAC's proposed manufactured home park-closing ordinance, Traci Tomas, agent for the St. Paul Tourist Cabins, submitted a letter to the city regarding her experience with park- closing ordinances passed in the cities of Fridley and Shakopee. As a manufactured home park owner representative, Ms. Tomas found that the City of Shakopee's ordinance allowed for the most flexibility for possible future city development of manufactured home park properties. St. Paul Tourist Cabins and Maplewood Manufactured Home Park have older manufactured homes, many of which would not meet current building code standards. Since the St. Paul Tourist Cabins have been under new ownership as of last year, six of the older manufactured homes have been removed. The new owners state that they will be replacing the older homes with newer homes. Beaver Lake, Rolling Hills, and Town & Country have a mix of new and old homes. These three parks have given residents the opportunity to trade-in their existing manufactured home for newer models, or when a resident leaves, the park owners purchase the older home and replace it with a newer home. Manufactured home park residents own their home but rent the land the home sits on. The average cost of a new manufactured home is from $30,000 for a standard size to $60,000 for a double wide. The average cost of an older manufactured home varies widely from $500 for the oldest models to $4,000. Rental space is approximately $270 per month and usually covers sewer, water, garbage, and snow removal. There are no studies to indicate the average annual income of manufactured home park residents within the City of Maplewood. However, a study of manufactured home park residents in East Bethel, Minnesota, conducted by the Center for Urban and Regional Affairs in 1998, indicated that the mean annual household income of manufactured home residents was from $10,000 to $29,999. APAC points out that it would prove difficult to find an available manufactured homesite within a 25-mile radius of a park within the City of Maplewood because of the Iow vacancy rates. Also, many of the manufactured homes are older and cannot be moved. Because of this and the fact that most of these homeowners have lower income, a park closing could prove to be a financial catastrophe for many of the city's residents. As stated by APAC, residents living in conventional homes receive compensation when their property is sold for redevelopment. However, residents that own a home within a manufactured home park are not guaranteed any kind of compensation if their park is closed because they do not own the land that their home sits on. APAC states that a park-closing ordinance would ensure that the residents of the manufactured home parks in Maplewood would receive fair compensation for their homes in the event a park closes. Mark Brunner, executive vice president of Minnesota Manufactured Housing Association (MMHA), states that such an ordinance would hinder redevelopment within the City of Maplewood due to the added expense to the developer. Mr. Brunner points out that bank lenders may also be more hesitant to refinance loans for park upgrades and improvements if such an ordinance were in place and questions the fairness of how the values of the manufactured homes are determined in some of the existing ordinances. Also, MMHA believes that the language in the law which states "other parties involved in the park closing may provide additional compensation to residents" is intended to not only mean the park owner or developer, but entities such as the city, housing redevelopment authority, or other entities that may be able to tie into reimbursement. Mr. Brunner states that the current law gives the manufactured home residents the protections needed because it allows cities to determine compensation to the residents at the time of a closing. MMHA is opposed to such an ordinance because it could be considered a land taking and would put a burden on the property owner. Commissioner'Trippler said in regard to the letter from Jeff Swanberg of APAC, he asked staff if a resident has to move because the city bought the street out, would the city pay for the land and the moving of the home and all of the property in it? Mr. Roberts said if it was a public project they would pay for the home and land, and there would be some relocation costs involved. The following people spoke regarding the Manufactured Home Park-Closing Ordinance: 1. Jeff Swanberg, 969 Frost Avenue, St. Paul Tourist Cabins 2. Richard Smith, 1056 Bellecrest Drive, Town & Country Mobile Home Park 3. Renae Bronson, 1083 Deauville Drive, Town & Country Mobile Home Park 4. Dan Le, Attorney for APAC in St. Paul 5. James Paist, Executive Director of APAC 6. Tiffany Ellswoan, 946 Frost Avenue, St. Paul Tourist Cabins 7. Robert Ogilvie, 1249 Antelope Way, Beaver Lake Estates Mr. Jeff Swanberg of 969 Frost Avenue in the St. Paul Tourist Cabins addressed the commission. He also represents APAC. He wanted to correct some misrepresentations and facts. He said there were eight court cases filed by management, and seven of those were dismissed. The one case was brought through the court system. The individual was given time to correct some problems and did not do so. He moved out but his home is still standing. He has lived at the St. Paul Tourist Cabins for 2¼ years now and enjoys living there. It is close to Lake Phalen, close to the parks, and close to the Gateway Trail. He said it would be a perfect spot for a townhouse development to be built. For this reason, he and the residents are fearful that they will lose their homes to a development, and this is why they would like to see this ordinance passed. He is a Iow-income individual, and the residents are financially vulnerable. This ordinance would give them the security and the protection the residents need in the City of Maplewood he said. Mr. Richard Smith at 1056 Bellecrest Drive, Town & Country Mobile Home Park addressed the commission. He said he has done a lot of research regarding mobile home parks. To move a single-wide mobile home costs $10,000 not including the mileage that is $250 a mile and $250 to hook you up. That is because there is a shortage of people doing manufactured homes because nobody wants to be involved in mobile homes anymore. There isn't enough Iow-income housing for people anymore. If you live in an apartment, you have no privacy and can hear your neighbors through the walls. In a mobile home you have your own yard and privacy, and it is a safe environment. Mr. Smith said most people buy mobile homes in place already. To get out of one mobile home park and into another, there is a 3~-year waiting list. Most of the time they want you within a 25- mile radius. To move anything over that, you have to pay a driver $100 and pay for a night's stay. Once you disconnect it, you can't just reconnect it. The mover just sets you up and blocks you up. Then you have to pay the city you moved into to put in new meters, and they charge you for the electricity. Then the sewer and water needs to be checked out. There is not a municipality that will let you move a mobile home onto the property within 50 miles. Then if you do, the mobile home has to be doublewide and you have to have at least 5 acres of property. Then the city allows you up to three years to build a permanent home on the property and remove the mobile home from the property. Mr. Roberts clarified that the city code states you can have a mobile home on a lot in the City of Maplewood, but it has to be a doublewide mobile home. Commissioner Mueller asked staff if there was any indication why Brainerd and Willmar did not pass the manufactured home park-closing ordinance? He said he would be curious what their reasoning was. Mr. Dan Le, attorney for APAC in St. Paul, addressed the commission. When a park closes, the people have no say. They lose their homes, their friends, and their neighborhood. They deserve compensation for relocating their lives. They don't own the land, but they do own the home and they are not given fair market value like you would get if you lived in a stick-built home. This has to do with owners of manufactured home parks that are offered a deal to sell the whole park and they take the money and run. This leaves the mobile home owners homeless with only nine months to find another home. Nine months is not enough time for somebody to find another home and make arrangements to move their things. There are five mobile home parks in this fine city of Maplewood. Two parks have 254 mobile homes and one has 357 mobile homes. This .is a huge amount of people to displace. Is the City of Maplewood comfortable with deciding the fate of that many homes in a period of nine months? This ordinance is preventive and it does not cost the city anything. It is going to benefit the city greatly if it should ever happen here in Maplewood. This also protects the interest of people with affordable housing. Commissioner Pearson said he has been in the manufactured home park business for over 25 years. They do it far better than any government agency out there, and it does not cost the government any money. They do the upkeep, all the streets, lights, and infrastructures with the residents help. Mr. Pearson asked Mr. Le when the property at the St. Paul Tourist Cabins was for sale a long time, why didn't APAC help the residents get together and buy the property as a co-op? He said if his mobile home park community was being threatened to close, he would be the one doing a co-op with the community and buy the park. Commissioner Trippler asked Mr. Le why he believes people that live in mobile homes see themselves as different from people living in condominiums, apartment buildings, or townhouses? He said there seems to be a monetary difference, but there doesn't seem to be any equity difference. Mr. Le said there is a big difference in equity. When you as a homeowner sell your property, it is your decision and you get the profit from the sale. It is not their decision, and they are not entitled to those profits from the property. You are also talking about a difference of 254 or 357 homes verses one home. He doesn't think Maplewood has a problem attracting a developer to the City of Maplewood. This is one of the "cons" because they could take over any one of these manufactured home parks. Mr. James Paist, Executive Director of APAC, addressed the commission. He said he is a renter. Being a renter, you don't own the unit as you would a manufactured home, and this is why they deserve compensation and a renter doesn't. This is why state lawmakers took action on this issue in the City of St. Paul in 1987. The mobile home park in Bloomington called the Lyndale Lodge Manufactured Home Park closed, and the people had no place to go. People were living in their cars, and there was a lot of negative press for the City of BlOOmington, That was the inspiration for this law that was passed in 1987. He believes any owner of manufactured home parks in Minnesota since 1987 should be aware of this law, and it is a cost of doing business and a cost of development. Mr. Paist said currently there is not a threat of a park closing in the City of Maplewood at this time. Ten of the thirteen cities that have taken this action so far have done so far without a park closing. They did it at the request of the park residents who asked for it to be passed. This is all done without using any public tax dollars. Most recently, the neighboring cities of Oakdale and Roseville passed this ordinance. This is about affordable housing and fairness. This is about families and having this security in place. Neither of these two cities have nearly as many manufactured homes as the City of Maplewood does. The answer to the question eadier about where was APAC when the park was for sale to purchase the park as a co-op. The only time the right of first refusal kicks in for residents is if a closure is announced. The residents don't get the right to match the developer's offer if it just switches hands from one park owner to another. The residents were never informed until the park was sold, so they could not form a co-op. The reason the law was passed was to allow cities to pass this ordinance to protect the residents in the manufactured home parks. The commission requested staff to contact the cities of Oakdale and Roseville that passed this ordinance. Staff should find out why those cities chose to pass the ordinance and what was stated in the ordinance. Commissioner Mueller asked staff what they would like the commission to do with this information. Mr. Roberts said staff would like the commission to provide as much specific direction on the things the commission is not clear on or would like more information on. Then staff can research · and bring back more clear information to the commission. Commissioner Pearson would like to form a task force to form an ordinance for the City of Maplewood implementing an ordinance will be difficult because of the price comparison in the different manufactured home parks. These ordinances have a cap rate. Whatever price a buyer is willing to pay for an ongoing park they use a cap of 20% of that price as a maximum that can be paid out to the residents in that community. 20% is not adequate for residents in Beaver Lake Estates and Town and Country because they have a greater value than other manufactured homes in other parks. Mr. Roberts said the direction from the city council is they have not decided if there should be an ordinance for the manufactured home parks. That is step one. They were looking for direction from the HRA and the Planning Commission. The next step is how to implement that ordinance. If a task force was set up, it would have to be appointed by the city council. Chairperson Fischer said she would like to see why the cities of Brainerd and Willmar did not pass the ordinance and their reasons they chose not to pass the ordinance before making any decisions. Commissioner Mueller said he thought it was interesting that there were no representatives from ,any of the parks at the meeting to state their comments. Mr. Roberts said he did get a telephone call from the owner of Rolling Hills, and they were against the ordinance. Commissioner Pearson said he would like a clear interpretation from the city attorney of how he came to the conclusion that he came to in the report. Commissioner Rossbach moved to table this item. Commissioner Pearson seconded. Ayes -All The motion is tabled until staff has more time to get some questions answered that were brought up during this discussion. Mr. Roberts will update the commission when the information becomes available for a report. Attachment 4 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: SUBJECT: DATE: City Manager Shann Finwall, Associate Planner Manufactured Home Park-Closing Ordinance Discussion April 3, 2002 INTRODUCTION Background In 1987, the Minnesota State Legislature passed a law allowing cities and municipalities to pass park-closing ordinances (Minnesota Statutes, Section 327C.095). The purpose of such an ordinance is to help protect citizens living in manufactured home parks in the event of a park closing by requiring park owners to reimburse homeowners for relocation costs if their home can be moved, and if not, purchase the manufactured home. (See Section 327C.095 on pages 5 through 8.) The City of Maplewood received a proposed manufactured home park-closing ordinance for the city council's review from All Parks Alliance for Change (APAC) (see attached APAC letter and proposed ordinance on pages 9 through 13). APAC is a non-profit organization that serves as a tenant's union for manufactured home owners. They help organize park residents to understand and protect their rights as specified in state law. APAC sent a mailing to a majority of the city's park residents regarding their proposed ordinance. In the mailing they requested that the residents show their support of a park-closing ordinance by signing their name and address to a postcard and sending it to the city. To date, the city has received 190 postcards in support of the proposed ordinance. (See the language used by APAC on the postcard and the names and addresses of the residents in support of the proposed ordinance on pages 14 through 24.) On February 25, 2002, after reviewing APAC's proposed manufactured home park-closing ordinance, the city council directed staff to review the request and forward a recommendation to them. Request Staff is requesting input from the Maplewood Housing Redevelopment Authority (HRA) to assist us in our review of APAC's request, and the many manufactured home park resident's request, for the city to pass a manufactured home park-closing ordinance. DISCUSSION Manufactured Home Park-Closing Legislation The park-closing legislation came out of a situation in Bloomington when Lyndale Lodge Manufactured Home Park was sold for redevelopment as a car dealership. Many of the homes were too old to move and therefore forced the residents to sell their homes for very little. This left many of the residents financially devastated and homeless. Alarmed by these events, the legislature passed the park closing law in 1987. The law states that a park owner must notify the city and the residents of a park closing nine months prior to the proposed closing. Once notice is received, the city must hold a public hearing to review the impacts that the park closing may have on the displaced residents and the park owners. The city may require payment by the park owner to be made to the displaced resident for reasonable relocation costs. If a resident cannot relocate the home to another park within 25 miles of the park that is being closed, the resident is entitled to relocation costs based upon an average of relocation costs awarded to other residents. The law further states that the city may also require that other parties, including the city, involved in the park closing provide additional compensation to residents to mitigate the adverse financial impact of the park closing upon the resident. After the law was enacted, the City of Bloomington adopted a park-closing ordinance and required the Lyndale Lodge Manufactured Home Park owner to reimburse the park residents for relocation costs or purchase the homes. The park owners brought the City of Bloomington to court over the ordinance claiming that it was a land taking. The Minnesota Court of Appeals upheld Bloomington's ordinance in Arcadia vs. City of Bloomin.qton, 1994, and the park owners were required to reimburse the homeowners for relocation costs or purchase the homes. Existing Park-Closing Ordinances Thirteen cities within the State of Minnesota currently have park-closing ordinances: Apple Valley, Bloomington, Burnsville, Hopkins, Elk River, Dayton, Fridley, Lake Elmo, Moundsview, Oakdale, Red Wing, Roseville, and Shakopee. Most of these ordinances require that park owners reimburse manufactured home owners to relocate their homes within 25 miles. If relocation is not possible, the park owner or land developer must purchase the home for the market value as determined by an independent appraiser approved by the city. In addition, some cities' ordinances place a cap on the amount of reimbursement. For example, the park owner or land developer would only have to reimburse up to 20 percent of the purchase price of the park or the assessed value of the park. Two cities within the State of Minnesota, Brainerd and Willmar, reviewed park-closing ordinances and chose not to pass one. Both of these proposed ordinances were brought on by actual park closings. All Parks Alliance for Change Proposed Ordinance APAC's proposed ordinance mirrors Elk River's ordinance passed in 1997. It states that the park owner or land developer shall pay the displaced resident the reasonable cost of relocating the home to another park within 25 miles. Reasonable costs include expenses incurred in moving the home and personal property, insurance for replacement value of the property being moved, and cost of repairs or modifications that are required in order to take down, move and set up the home. If the home cannot be moved, the resident is entitled to relocation costs based upon an average of costs awarded to other residents plus the park owner or land developer must purchase the home at the amount equal to the estimated market value of the home. APAC's proposed ordinance does not include a cap on the amount that a park owner or land developer would have to reimburse the residents. Upon notice of APAC's proposed manufactured home park closing ordinance, Traci Tomas, agent for the St. Paul Toudst Cabins, submitted a letter to the city regarding her experience with park-closing ordinances passed in the Cities of Fridley and Shakopee (see attached St. Paul Manufactured Home Park Closings 2 Apdl 3, 2002 Toudst Cabin letter and Fridley's and Shakopee's park-closing ordinances on pages 25-30). As a manufactured home park owner representative, Ms. Tomas found that the City of Shakopee's ordinance allowed for the most flexibility for possible future city development of manufactured home park properties. City of Maplewood Manufactured Home Parks There are five manufactured home parks with a total of 789 homes within the City of Maplewood (see map on page 37): Park Name Date Established No. of Sites No. of Homes Beaver Lake 1970 254 254 2425 Maryland Ave. Maplewood Man. Home Park Approx. 1957 1880 English Street N. 19 19 Rolling Hills 1319 Rolling Hills Drive 1984 357 357 St. Paul Tourist Cabins 940 Frost Avenue Approx. 1955 45 39 Town and Country 2557 Highway 61 Approx. 1950 120 120 TOTAL 795 789 St. Paul Tourist Cabins and Maplewood Manufactured Home Park have older manufactured homes, many of which would not meet current building code standards. Since the St. Paul Tourist Cabins have been under new ownership as of last year, six of the older manufactured homes have been removed. The new owners state that they will be replacing the older homes with newer homes. Beaver Lake, Rolling Hills, and Town and Country have a mix of new and old homes. These three parks have given residents the opportunity to trade-in their existing manufactured home for newer models, or when a resident leaves, the park owners purchase the older home and replace it with a newer home. Manufactured home park residents own their home but rent the land the home sits on. The average cost of a new manufactured home is from $30,000 for a standard size to $80,000 for a double wide. The average cost of an older manufactured home varies widely from $500 for the oldest models to $4,000. Rental space is approximately $270 per month and usually covers sewer, water, garbage, and snow removal. There are no studies to indicate the average annual income of manufactured home park residents within the City of Maplewood. However, a study of manufactured home park residents in East Bethel, Minnesota, conducted by the Center for Urban and Regional Affairs in 1998, indicated Manufactured Home Park Closings 3 Apdl 3, 2002 that the mean annual household income of manufactured home residents was from $10,000 to $29,999. Possible Pros and Cons Pros: APAC points out that it would prove difficult to find an available manufactured home site within a 25-mile radius of a park within the City of Maplewood because of the Iow vacancy rates. Also, many of the manufactured homes are older and cannot be moved. Because of this and the fact that most of these homeowners have lower-income, a park closing could prove to be a financial catastrophe for many of the city's residents. As stated by APAC in their attached letter, residents living in conventional homes receive compensation when their property is sold for redevelopment. However, residents that own a home within a manufactured home park are not guaranteed any kind of compensation if their park is closed because they do not own the land that their home sits on. APAC states that a park- closing ordinance would ensure that the residents of the manufactured home parks in Maplewood would receive fair compensation for their homes in the event a park closes. Cons: Mark Brunner, executive vice president of Minnesota Manufactured Housing Association (MMHA), states that such an ordinance would hinder redevelopment within the City of Maplewood due to the added expense to the developer. He points out that bank lenders may also be more hesitant to refinance loans for park upgrades and improvements if such an ordinance were in place and questions the fairness of how the values of the manufactured homes are determined in some of the existing ordinances. Also, MMHA believes that the language in the law which states "other parties involved in the park closing may provide additional compensation to residents" is intended to not only mean the park owner or developer, but entities such as the city, housing redevelopment authority, or other entities that may be able to tie into reimbursement. Mr. Brunner states that the current law gives the manufactured home residents the protections needed because it allows cities to determine compensation to the residents at the time of a closing. MMHA is opposed to such an ordinance because it could be considered a land taking and would put a burden on the property owner. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the HRA provide input into the proposed manufactured home park-closing ordinance. P:ord~nan. home park Attachments 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. State Park Closing Law APAC's Letter Dated 1/11102 APAC's Proposed Park-Closing Ordinance Manufactured Home Park Residents' Petition in Support of Ordinance St. Paul Tourist Cabin's Letter Dated 3/11102 including Fridley's and Shakopee's Ordinances Maplewood Manufactured Home Parks Map Manufactured Home Park Closings .4 April 3, 2002 Attachment 1 327C.095 Park closings. Subdivision 1. Conversion of use; minimum notice. At least nine months before the conversion of all or a portion of a manufactured home park to another use, or before closure of a manufactured home park or cessation of use of the land as a manufactured home park, the park owner must prepare a closure statement and provide a copy to the local planning agency and a copy to a resident of each manufactured home where the residential use is being converted. A resident may not be required to vacate until 60 days after the conclusion of the public hearing required under subdivision 4. If a lot is available in another section of the park that will continue to be operated as a park, the park owner must allow the resident to relocate the home to that lot unless the home, because of its size or local ordinance, is not compatible with that lot. Subd. 2. · Notice of hearing; proposed change in land use. If the planned conversion or cessation of operation requires a variance or zoning change, the municipality must mail a notice at least ten days before the hearing to a resident of each manufactured home in the park stating the time, place, and purpose of the public hearing. The park owner shall provide the municipality with a list of the names and addresses of at least one resident of each manufactured home in the park at the time application is made for a variance or zoning change. Subd. 3. Closure statement. Upon receipt of the closure statement from the park owner, the local planning agency shall submit the closure statement to the governing body of the municipality and request the governing body to schedule a public hearing. The municipality must mail a notice at least ten days before the hearing to a resident of each manufactured home in the park stating the time, place, and purpose of the public hearing. The park owner shall provide the municipality with a list of the names and addresses of at least one resident of each manufactured home in the park at the time the closure statement is submitted to the local planning agency. Subd. 4. Public hearing; relocation costs. The governing body of the municipality shall hold a public hearing to review the closure statement and any impact that the park closing may have on the displaced residents and the park owner. Before any change in use or cessation of operation and as a condition of the change, the governing body may require a payment by the park owner to be made to the displaced resident for the reasonable relocation costs. If a resident cannot relocate the home to another manufactured home park within a 25 mile radius of the park that is being closed, the resident is entitled to relocation costs based upon an average of relocation costs awarded to other residents. The governing body of the municipality may also require that other parties, including the municipality, involved in the park closing provide additional compensation to residents to mitigate the adverse financial impact of the park closing upon the residents. Subd. 5. Park conversions. If the planned cessation of operation is for the purpose of converting the part of the park occupied by the resident to a common interest community pursuant to chapter 515B, the provisions of section 515B.4-111, except subsection (a), shall apply. The nine-month notice required by this section shall state that the cessation is for the purpose of conversion and shall set forth the rights conferred by this subdivision and section 515B.4-111, subsection (b). Not less than 120 days before the end of the nine months, the park owner shall serve upon the resident a form of purchase agreement setting forth the terms of sale contemplated by section 515B.4-111, subsection (d). Service of that form shall operate as the notice described by section 515B.4-11 !, subsection (a). Subd. 6. Intent to convert use of park at time of purchase. Before the execution of an agreement to purchase a manufactured home park, the purchaser must notify the park owner, in writing, if the purchaser intends to close the manufactured home park or convert it to another use within one year of the execution of the agreement. The park owner shall provide a resident of each manufactured home with a 45-day written notice of the purchaser's intent to close the park or convert it to another use. The notice must state that the park owner will provide information on the cash price and the terms and conditions of the purchaser's offer to residents requesting the information. The notice must be sent by first class mail to a resident of each manufactured home in the park. The notice period begins on the postmark date affixed to the notice and ends 45 days after it begins. During the notice period required in this subdivision, the owners of at least 51 percent of the manufactured homes in the park or a nonprofit organization which has the written permission of the owners of at least 51 percent of the manufactured homes in the park to represent them in the acquisition of the park shall have the right to meet the cash price and execute an agreement to purchase the park for the purposes of keeping the park as a manufactured housing community. The park owner must accept the offer if it meets the cash price and the same terms and conditions set forth in the purchaser's offer except that the seller is not obligated to provide owner financing. For purposes of this section, cash price means the cash price offer or equivalent cash offer as defined in section 500.245., subdivision 1, paragraph (d). Subd. 7. Intent to convert use of park after purchase. If the purchaser of a manufactured home park decides to convert the park to another use within one year after the purchase of the park, the purchaser must offer the park for purchase by the residents of the park. For purposes of this subdivision, the date of purchase is the date of the transfer of the title to the purchaser. The purchaser must provide a resident of each manufactured home with a wdtten notice of the intent to close the park and all of the owners of at least 51 percent of the manufactured homes in the park or a nonprofit organization which has the wdtten permission of the owners of at least 51 percent of the manufactured homes in the park to represent them in the acquisition of the park shall have 45 days to execute an agreement for the purchase of the park at a cash price equal to the original purchase price paid by the purchaser plus any documented expenses relating to the acquisition and improvement of the park property, together with any increase in value due to appreciation of the park. The purchaser must execute the purchase agreement at the price specified in this subdivision and pay the cash price within 90 days of the date of the purchase agreement. The notice must be sent by first class mail to a resident of each manufactured home in the park. The notice period begins on the postmark date affixed to the notice and ends 45 days after it begins. Subd. 8. Required filing of notice. Subdivisions 6 and 7 apply to manufactured home parks upon which notice has been filed with the county recorder or registrar of titles in the county where the manufactured home park is located. Any person may file the notice required under this subdivision with the county recorder or registrar of titles. The notice must be in the following form: "MANUFACTURED HOME PARK NOTICE THIS PROPERTY IS USED AS A MANUFACTURED HOME PARK PARK OWNER LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PARK COOPERATIVE ASSOCIATION (IF APPLICABLE)" Subd. 9. Effect of noncompliance. If a manufactured home park is finally sold or converted to another use in violation of subdivision 6 or 7, the residents do not have any continuing right to purchase the park as a result of that sale or conversion. A violation of subdivision 6 or 7 is subject to section 8.31, except that relief shall be limited so that questions of marketability of title shall not be affected. Subd. 10. Exclusion. Subdivisions 6 and 7 do not apply to: (1) a conveyance of an interest in a manufactured home park incidental to the financing of the manufactured home park; (2) a conveyance by a mortgagee subsequent to foreclosure of a mortgage or a deed given in lieu of a foreclosure; or (3) a purchase of a manufactured home park by a governmental entity under its power of eminent domain. Subd. 11. Affidavit of compliance. After a park is sold, a park owner or other person with personal knowledge may file an affidavit with the county recorder or registrar of titles in the county in which the park is located certifying compliance with subdivision 6 or 7 or that subdivisions 6 and 7 are not applicable. The affidavit may be used as proof of the facts stated in the affidavit. A person acquiring an interest in a park or a title insurance company or attorney who prepares, furnishes, or examines evidence of title may rely on the truth and accuracy of statements made in the affidavit and is not required to inquire further as to the park owner's compliance with subdivisions 6 and 7. When an affidavit is filed, the right to purchase provided under subdivisions 6 and 7 terminate, and if registered property, the registrar of titles shall delete the memorials of the notice and affidavit from future certificates of title. HIST: 1987 c 179 s 10; 1991 c 26 s 1-7; 1997 c 126 s 6; 1999 c 11 art 3 s 10 Copyright 2001 by the Office of Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota. An Organization of Manufactured Home Residents 2395 University Avenue West, Suite 302 St. Paul, MN 5.5114 (phone) (651) 644-5525 flax) (65!)523-0173 (email) apac~mtn, org www. allparksallianceforchange, org January ll, 2002 Attachment 2 Shann Finwall Maplewood Planning Dept. 1830 E. County Rd. B Maplewood, MN 55109 Dear Ms. Shann Finwall, We are writing to ask for your support in the passing of a park-closing ordinance for the city of Maplewood. This ordinance would protect manufactured homeowners' families from displacement in the case of their park closing for redevelopment. A park-closing ordinance would ensure that the residents of manufactured home parks in Maplewood would receive fair compensation for their homes, which likely cannot be moved, in the event that their manufactured home park would close for redevelopment. Residents living in conventional homes receive compensation when their property is sold for redevelopment. However, residents that own a home within a manufactured home park are not guaranteed any kind of compensation if their park is closed because they do not own the land that their home sits on. Under a standard park-closing ordinance, if a home is a newer model and can be moved to another park, the owner and/or new buyer of the park would have to pay to relocate the home to another park within a 25 mile radius or buy the home at its assessed value. Under Minnesota State Law (§327C.095), cities and municipalities have the authority to pass a park-closing ordinance. Thirteen cities in Minnesota have already passed Park Closing Ordinances because they understood the necessity of an ordinance to protect their constituents. This ordinance is very important to your constituents in Maplewood that live in manufactured home parks. These voters and taxpayers make up nearly 5% of the population of Maplewood, almost 900 households. Many of the parks in Maplewood are very large and if a park closed it would be catastrophic. We plan to present the proposal before the city council on February 25t~, 2002. We hope that you and the other Council Members will decide to pass this ordinance for manufactured homeowners in Maplewood. Enclosed with this letter are some informational materials for your perusal, including a copy of the proposed ordinance and Minnesota Statute 327C.095. If you have any questions regarding this issue we urge you to contact us. Thank you for your consideration and we look forward to meeting with you on the 25th. Sincerely, Jeff S2~rg,~Chal~' r ~Cabins Resident Association 9 Attachment 3 City of Maplewood, Minnesota Ordinance NO. - Manufactured Home Park Closings Section XXXX.00 Purpose: In view of the peculiar nature and problems presented by the closure or conversion of manufactured home parks, the City Council finds that the public health, safety and general welfare will be promoted by requiring compensation to displaced residents of such parks. The purpose of this ordinance is to require park owners to pay displaced residents reasonable relocation costs and purchasers of manufactured home parks to pay additional compensation, pursuant to the authority granted under Minnesota Statutes, Section 327c.095. Section XXXX.02 Definitions: The Following words and terms when used in this Section shall have the following meanings unless the context clearly indicates otherwise: Closure Statement: A statement prepared by the park owner clearly stating the park is closing, addressing the availability, location and potential costs of adequate replacement housing within a twenty-five (25). mile radius of the park that is closing and the probable relocation costs of the manufactured homes located in the park. Displaced Resident: A resident of an owner-occupied manufactured home ho rents a lot in a manufactured home park, including the members of the resident's household, as of the date park owner submits a closure statement to the City's Planning Commission. Lot: An area within a manufactured home park, designed and used for the accommodation of a manufactured home. Manufactured Home: A structure not affixed to or part of a real estate, transportable in one or more sections, Which in the traveling mode, is eight (8) feet or more in width or forty (40) feet or more in length, or, when erected on site, is three hundred and twenty (320) or more square feet, and which is built on a permanent chassis and designed to be used as a dwelling with or without a permanent foundation when connected to the required utilities, and includes the plumbing, heating, air conditioning, and electrical system contained in it. The City of Maplewood also elects to expand these provisions of protection to manufactured homes that are smaller than the dimensions of, eight (8) feet or more in width or forty (40) feet or more in length, or, when erected on site, are three hundred and twenty (320) or more square feet, and which are built on a permanent chassis and designed to be used as dwellings with or without permanent foundations when connected to the required utilities, and include the plumbing, heating, air conditioning, and electrical system contained in them. Some manufactured homes that are currently in Maplewood are smaller than the definition for manufactured homes provided in Minnesota Statute 327C thus, the City of Maplewood feels that since these homes fall 10 under the definition of a manufactured home, except for their size, that these home should also be covered under this ordinance. Park Owner: The owner of a manufactured home park and any person acting on behalf of the owner in the operation or management of a park. Person: Any individual, cooperation, firm, partnership, incorporated and unincorporated association or any other legal or commercial entity. Section XXXX.04 Notice of Public Hearing: The Planning Comnfission shall submit the closure statement to the City Council to schedule a public hearing. The City shall mail a notice at least ten (10) days prior to the public hearing to a resident of each manufactured home in the park stating the time, place and purpose of the hearing.. The park owner shall provide the City with a list of the names and address of al least one resident of each manufactured home in the park at the time the closure statement is submitted to the Planning Commission. Section XXXX. 06 Public Hearing: A public hearing shall be held before the City Council for the purpose of reviewing the closure statement and evaluating what impact the park closing may have on the displaced residents and the park owner. Section XXXX.08 Payment of Relocation Costs: After the service of the closure statement by the park owner and upon submittal by the displaced resident of a contract or other verification of relocation expenses, the park owner shall pay to the displaced resident the reasonable cost of relocating the manufactured home to another manufactured home park located within a twenty five (25) mile radius of the park that is being closed, converted to another use, or ceasing operation. Reasonable relocation costs shall include: The actual'expenses incurred in moving the displaced resident's manufactured home and personal property, including the reasonable cost of disassembling, moving and reassembling any attached appurtenances, such as porches, decks, skirting and awnings, which were not acquired after notice of closure or conversion of the park and utility "hook-up" charges. B. The cost of insurance for the replacement value of the property being moved. C. The cost of repairs or modifications that are required in order to take down, move and set up the manufactured home. 11 If a resident cannot relocate the manufactured home within a twenty-five (25) mile radius of the park which is being closed or some other agreed upon distance, and the resident elects not to tender title to the manufactured home, the resident is entitled to relocation costs based upon an average of relocation costs awarded to other residents in the park. A displaced resident compensated under this section of the bill shall retain title to the manufactured home and shall be responsible for its prompt removal from the manufactured home park. The park owner shall make the payments under this section directly to the person performing the relocation services after the performance thereof, or, upon submission of written evidence of payment of relocation costs by a displaced resident, shall reimburse the displaced resident for such costs. The displaced resident must submit a contract or other verified cost estimate for relocating the manufactured home to the park owner as a condition to the park owner's liability to pay relocation expenses. Section XXXX. 10 Payment of Additional Compensation: If a resident cannot relocate the manufactured home within a twenty-five (25) mile radius of the park that is being closed or some other agreed upon distance and tenders title to the manufactured home, the resident is entitled to additional compensation to be paid by the purchaser of the park in order to mitigate the adverse financial impact of the park closlng ;tn such instance, the additional compensation shall be in an amount equal to the estimated market value of the manufactured home as determined by an independent appraiser experienced in mobile home appraisal approved by the City Administrator. The purchaser shall pay the cost for the appraisal. The purchaser shall pay such compensation into an escrow account, established.by the park owner, for distribution upon transfer of title to the home. Such compensation shall be paid to the displaced residents no later than the earlier of sixty (60) days prior to the closing of the park or its conversion to another use. Section XXXX. 12 Penalty: 1. Violation of any provision of this Section shall be a misdemeanor. 2. Any provisions of this Section may be enforced by injunction or other appropriate civil remedy. The City shall not issue a building permit in conjunction with reuse of the manufactured home park property unless the park owner has paid reasonable location costs and the purchaser of the park has provided additional compensation in accordance with the requirements of this Section. Approval of any application for rezoning, platting, conditional use permit, planed unit development or variance in conjunction with a park closing or conversion shall be conditional on compliance with the requirements of this Chapter. Section XXXX. 14 Effective Date: This ordinance shall be effective upon publication, 13 Attachment 4 Dear City Council Members and Mayor Robert Cardinal, I am a resident of Beaver Lake Manufactured Home Park in Maplewood. We, residents of manufactured home parks, make up nearly 900 households in Maplewood. I am sending this post card to request that the City Council pass the proposed Park Closing Ordinance. Passing the ordinance at the meeting on February 25th would help protect and preserve these existing units of affordable housing in Maplewood, as well as give a sense of security and stability to nearly 900 Maplewood families. Thirteen other cities in Minnesota, including Oakdale, have passed this important ordinance, in doing so protecting Iow-income families from displacement. By passing this ordinance, Maplewood would further its commitment to preserving affordable housing and serving its Iow to moderate- income residents. Thank you for your consideration. Beaver Lake Estates 2425 Maryland Avenue Maplewood MN 55119 Vicki Aerbst Beaver Lake Estates 2405 Elkhart Lane Maplewood MN 55119 Dorothy Anderson Beaver Lake Estates 2420 Amberjack Lane Maplewood MN 55119 Vera Anderson Beaver Lake Estates 1231 Cougar Lane Maplewood MN 55119 Donald Andrews Beaver Lake Estates 1277 Antelope Way Maplewood MN 55119 Mary Jane Belisle Beaver Lake Estates 1259 Bobcat Lane Maplewood MN 55119 Leonard Bergman Beaver Lake Estates 2425 Dolphin Drive Maplewood MN 55119 JoAnn Bohrer Beaver Lake Estates 1293 Antelope Way Maplewood MN 55119 Tom Brockway Beaver Lake Estates 1217 Antelope Way Maplewood MN 55119 Kevin Burns Beaver Lake Estates 1232 Deerfield Drive Maplewood MN 55119 Steve Carlson Beaver Lake Estates 2409 Amberjack Lane Maplewood MN 55119 Constance Conroy Beaver Lake Estates 1253 Antelope Way Maplewood MN 55119 lone Coon Beaver Lake Estates 2461 Dolphin Drive Maplewood MN 55119 Louise Crosby Beaver Lake Estates 1231 Deerfield Drive Maplewood MN 55119 Margaret Cunningham Beaver Lake Estates 1218 Beaverdale Road Maplewood MN 55119 Rita Deutsch Beaver Lake Estates 1240 Bobcat Lane Maplewood MN 55119 Judith Ehnstrom Beaver Lake Estates 1200 CougarLane Maplewood MN 55119 Wallace Eilers Beaver Lake Estates 1237 Antelope Way Maplewood MN 55119 Mary Sue Fiola Beaver Lake Estates 1247 Deerfield Drive North Maplewood MN 55119 Steve Fry Beaver Lake Estates 2400 Dolphin Drive Maplew0od MN 55119 Karen Galvin Beaver Lake Estates 2404 Coyote Lane Maplewood MN 55119 14 Quanita Garcia Beaver Lake Estates 2440 Dolphin Drive Maplewood MN 55119 Lawrence Giles Beaver Lake Estates 1269 Antelope Way Maplewood MN 55119 Tina Gray Beaver Lake Estates 1211 Deerfield Drive Maplewood MN 55119 Cory T. Griffin Beaver Lake Estates 1246 Beaverdale Road Maplewood MN 55119 Lillian Hanna Beaver Lake Estates 2412 Amberjack Drive Maplewood MN 55119 Anthony Herbert Beaver Lake Estates 2461 Elkhart Lane Maplewood MN 55119 John Herron Beaver Lake Estates 2428 Coyote Lane Maplewood MN 55119 Steve Hill Beaver Lake Estates 1268 Bobcat Lane Maplewood MN 55119 Warren Hobbick Beaver Lake Estates 1216 Bobcat Lane Maplewood MN 55119 Owen Hoff Beaver Lake Estates 2453 Elkhart Lane Maplewood MN 55119 Dadeen Hofland Beaver Lake Estates 2408 Elkhart Lane Maplewood MN 55119 Carol Johnson Beaver Lake Estates 1227 Bobcat Lane Maplewood MN 55119 Colleen Jones Beaver Lake Estates 2408 Dolphin Drive Maplewood MN 55119 Jim Kallio Beaver Lake Estates 2425 Elkhart Lane Maplewood MN 55119 Wendy Kelley Beaver Lake Estates 1212 Deerfield Drive Maplewood MN 55119 Thomas Krenn Beaver Lake Estates 2425 Coyote Lane Maplewood MN 55119 Euphemia Kroll Beaver Lake Estates 1283 Bobcat Lane Maplewood MN 55119 Casey LaCasse Beaver Lake Estates 1208 Deerfield Drive Maplewood MN 55119 Mr. Larson Beaver Lake Estates 2477 Elkhart Lane Maplewood MN 55119 Jeannine Latterell Beaver Lake Estates 2420 Elkhart Lane Maplewood MN 55119 Harold Lee Beaver Lake Estates 2400 Elkhart Lane Maplewood MN 55119 James Lyons Beaver Lake Estates 1235 Cougar Lane Maplewood MN 55119 Ray Mann Beaver Lake Estates 2453 Dolphin Drive Maplewood MN 55119 William McAmis Beaver Lake Estates 1228 Deerfield Drive Maplewood MN 55119 Kerry McAmis Beaver Lake Estates 1224 Cougar Lane Maplewood MN 55119 Michael McCormack Beaver Lake Estates 1228 Bobcat Lane Maplewood MN 55119 Margaret McCrank Beaver Lake Estates 2472 Elkhart Lane Maplewood MN 55119 Dorothy Metzger Beaver Lake Estates 1238 Beaverdale Road Maplewood MN 55119 Michael Mierva Beaver Lake Estates 2473 Dolphin Drive Maplewood MN 55119 Catherine Minnear Beaver Lake Estates 2413 Dolphin Drive Maplewood MN 55119 15 Arnold North Beaver Lake Estates 2469 Elkhart Lane Maplewood MN 55119 Jerry Page Beaver Lake Estates 1215 Cougar Lane Maplewood MN 55119 Frances Parent Beaver Lake Estates 1215 Bobcat Lane Maplewood MN 55119 Delores Price Beaver Lake Estates 1219 Deerfield Drive Maplewood MN 55119 Teresa Reichert Beaver Lake Estates 2413 Coyote Lane Maplewood MN 55119 Robert Schirmer Beaver Lake Estates 2465 Elkhart Lane Maplewood MN 55119 David Schneider Beaver Lake Estates 1239 Bobcat Lane Maplewood MN 55119 James Scott Beaver Lake Estates 1222 Beaverdale Road Maplewood MN 55119 K.D. Smith Beaver Lake Estates 1259 Deerfield Drive Maplewood MN 55119 Richard Stevens Beaver Lake Estates 1220 Cougar Lane Maplewood MN 55119 L. Odden Beaver Lake Estates 1224 Bobcat Lane Maplewood MN 55119 Kathleen Pakulski Beaver Lake Estates 1272 Bobcat Lane Maplewood MN 55119 Donna Peick Beaver Lake Estates 2416 Dolphin Drive Maplewood MN 55119 Tricia Quaale Beaver Lake Estates 2460 Elkhart Lane Maplewood MN 551-19 Carol Ristau Beaver Lake Estates 2424 Dolphin Drive Maplewood MN 55119 Elba Schirner Beaver Lake Estates 12131 Bobcat Lane Maplewood MN 55119 David Schreier Beaver Lake Estates 1236 Deerfield Drive Maplewood MN 55119 Mike Sheehan Beaver Lake Estates 1247 Bobcat Lane Maplewood MN 55119 Tina Sorenson Beaver Lake Estates 2424 Elkhart Lane Maplewood MN 55119 Mark Swanson Beaver Lake Estates 2433 Amberjack Lane Maplewood MN 55119 Robert Ogilvie Beaver Lake Estates 1249 Antelope Way Maplewood MN 55119 Leonard Parent Beaver Lake Estates 1267 Deerfield Drive Maplewood MN 55119 John Pfluger Beaver Lake Estates 1297 Antelope Way Maplewood MN 55119 Walter Rasmussen Beaver Lake Estates 2412 Dolphin Drive Maplewood MN 55119 Jan Rottach Beaver Lake Estates 1196 Antelope Way Maplewood MN 55119 Donna Schmitz Beaver Lake Estates 1210 Beaverdale Road Maplewood MN 55119 Jerome Schultz Beaver Lake Estates 1216 Cougar Lane Maplewood MN 55119 Mary Sizemore Beaver Lake Estates 2461 Bison Drive Maplewood MN 55119 Craig M. Spreigl Beaver Lake Estates 1219 Bobcat Drive Maplewood MN 55119 Thomas Sward Beaver Lake Estates 1251 Deerfield Drive Maplewood MN 55119 16 David Toff Beaver Lake Estates 2420 Dolphin Drive Maplewood MN 55119 Robert Warner Beaver Lake Estates 1214 Beaverdale Road Maplewood MN 55119 Lisa Williams Beaver Lake Estates 2449 Elkhart Lane Maplewood MN 55119 Sandra Zimmerman Beaver Lake Estates 1255 Bobcat Lane Maplewood MN 55119 17 Dear City Council Members and Mayor Robert Cardinal, I am a resident of Maplewood Manufactured Home Park in Maplewood. We, residents of manufactured home parks, make up nearly 900 households in Maplewood. I am sending this post card to request that the City Council pass the proposed Park Closing Ordinance. Pa~ing the ordinance at the meeting on February g5th would help protect and preserve these existing units of affordable housing in Maplewood, as well as give a sense of security and stability to nearly 900 Maplewood families. Thirteen other cities in Minnesota, including Oakdale, have passed this important ordinance, in doing so protecting Iow-income families from displacement. By passing this ordinance, Maplewood would further its commitment to preserving affordable housing and serving its Iow to moderate- income residents. Thank you for your consideration. Douglas Chestnut Maplewood Mobile Home Park 1876 English Street Maplewood MN 55109 -' Mike Cobb Maplewood Mobile Home Park 1880 English Street North Maplewood MN 55109 18 Dear City Council Members and Mayor Robert Cardinal, I am a resident of Rollin.q Hills Manufactured Home Park in Maplewood. We, residents of manufactured home parks, make up nearly 900 households in Maplewood. I am sending this post card to request that the City Council pass the proposed Park Closing Ordinance. Passing the ordinance at the meeting on February 25th would help protect and preserve these existing units of affordable housing in Maplewood, as well as give a sense of security and stability to nearly 900 Maplewood families. Thirteen other cities in Minnesota, including Oakdale, have passed this important ordinance, in doing so protecting Iow-income families from displacement. By passing this ordinance, Maplewood would further its commitment to preserving affordable housing and serving its Iow to moderate- income residents. Thank you for your consideration. Mary Andersen Rolling Hills 2622 Oakhill Court Maplewood MN 55119 Klm Atkinson Rolling Hills 2638 Angela Court Maplewood MN 55119 Myron Axtman Rolling Hills 1324 Birchview Drive Maplewood MN 55119 Scott Benson Rolling Hills 1340 Birchview Drive Maplewood MN 55119 Floyd Brown Rolling Hills 1398 Pearson Drive Maplewood MN 55119 Carol Brown Rolling Hills 1394 Birchview Drive Maplewood MN 55119 Richard Bunde Rolling Hills 1387 Birchview Drive Maplewood MN 55119 Dan Charboneau Rolling Hills 2628 Benlana Court Maplewood MN 55119 Shelly Christensen Rolling Hills 1358 Pearson Drive Maplewood MN 55119 Larry Coffman Rolling Hills 2676 Mickey Lane Maplewood MN 55119 Rene Comstock Rolling Hills 2633 Mickey Lane Maplewood MN 55119 John Cournoyer Rolling Hills 2655 Oakhill Court Maplewood MN 55119 Fred Creager Rolling Hills 2644 Benlana Court Maplewood MN 55119 Dorothy Dickinson Rolling Hills 1341 Birchview Drive Maplewood MN 55119 Denise Elmquist Rolling Hills 2700 Mickey Lane Maplewood MN 55119 Mona Lou Emerfoll Rolling Hills 2638 Oak Hill Court Maplewood MN 55119 Ray Garcia Rolling Hills 2637 Benlana Court Maplewood MN 55119 Carolyn Ann Garrison Rolling Hills 1373 Rolling Hills Drive Maplewood MN 55119 Judith Gilmore Rolling Hills 1332 Birch View Drive Maplewood MN 55119 Frank Goddfrey Rolling Hills 2642 An. gela Court Maplewood MN 55119 William Guerin Rolling Hills 1342 Pine Tree Drive Maplewood MN 55119 Diane Hakes Rolling Hills 1389 Rolling Hills Drive Maplewood MN 55119 Sonnia Hess Rolling Hills 1324 Pine Tree Drive Maplewood MN 55119 Melvin Johnson Rolling Hills 1392 Pine Tree Drive Maplewood MN 55119 Marjorie Krull Rolling Hills 2696 Mickey Lane Maplewood MN 55119 Wanda Leiner Rolling Hills 2624 Mickey Lane Maplewood MN 55119 Bert Logsdon Rolling Hills 1346 Pearson Drive Maplewood MN 55119 Jim Norring Rolling Hills 1380 Pine Tree Drive Maplewood MN 55119 Kathy Paulson Rolling Hills 1344 Birchview Drive Maplewood MN 55119 Jessica Reardon Rolling Hills 1349 Pearson Drive Maplewood MN 55119 Eva Snaza Rolling Hills 2630 Oak Hill Court Maplewood MN 55119 Nick Hanson Rolling Hills 1321 Birchview Drive Maplewood MN 55119 Donna Hickey Rolling Hills 2648 Mickey Lane Maplewood MN 55119 Sam Keenan Rolling Hills 2646 Angela Court Maplewood MN 55119 Patricia Lakman Rolling Hills 1356 Birchview Drive Maplewood MN 55119 Andrea Lewis Rolling Hills 2625 Mickey Lane Maplewood MN 55119 Colleen Murphy Rolling Hills 1335 Pine Tree Drive Maplewood MN 55119 Matt Olson Rolling Hills 2632 Benlana Court Maplewood MN 55119 Jean Pearson Rolling Hills 1339 Pine Tree Drive Maplewood MN 55119 Arthur Roy Rolling Hills 1372 Rolling Hills Drive Maplewood MN 55119 Terry Sokol Rolling Hills 2637 Benlana Court Maplewood MN 55119 20 Cindy Herrick Rolling Hills 2636 Mickey Lane Maplewood MN 55119 Wayne Hogstad Rolling Hills 1336 Birch View Drive Maplewood MN 55119 Chris Klein Rolling Hills 1357 Pearson Drive Maplewood MN 55119 Harold Larson Rolling Hills 2652 Mickey Lane Maplewood MN 55119 Wesley Lodge Rolling Hills 1352 Birchview Drive Maplewood MN 55119 Phyllis Nereson Rolling Hills 1331 Pine Tree Drive Maplewood MN 55119 Robert Olson Rolling Hills 2621 Mickey Lane Maplewood MN 55119 Richard Pearson Rolling Hills 1109 Crestview Drive Hudson WI 54016 Dave Seidel Rolling Hills 1369 Rolling Hills Drive Maplewood MN 55119 William Stangl Rolling Hills 2634 Oak Hill Court Maplewood MN 55119 William Thaluber Rolling Hills 1339 Rolling Hills Drive Maplewood MN 55119 J. Vasquez Rolling Hills 1350 Pearson Drive Maplewood MN 55119 Colette Votel Rolling Hills 1396 Rolling Hills Drive Maplewood MN 55119 Eldridge Wanlesi Rolling Hills 2635 Oak Hill Court Maplewood. MN 55119 Jackie Wanned Rolling Hills 2647 Angela Court Maplewood MN 55119 Barbara West Rolling Hills 2626 Oak Hill Court Maplewood MN 55119 Ronald Zemke Rolling Hills 1398 Birchview .Drive Maplewood MN 55119 Rolling Hills Mobile Home Park 1319 Rolling Hills Drive Maplewood MN 55119 Dear City Council Members and Mayor Robert Cardinal, I am a resident of St. Paul Tourist Cabins Manufactured Home Park in Maplewood. We, residents of manufactured home parks, make up nearly 900 households in Maplewood. I am sending this post card to request that the City Council pass the proposed Park Closing Ordinance. Passing the ordinance at the meeting on February 25th would help protect and preserve these existing units of affordable housing in Maplewood, as well as give a sense of security and stability to nearly 900 Maplewood families. Thirteen other cities in Minnesota, including Oakdale, have passed this important ordinance, in doing so protecting Iow-income families from displacement. By passing this ordinance, Maplewood would further its commitment to preserving affordable housing and serving its Iow to moderate-income residents. Thank you for your consideration. Madge Asp St. Paul Tourist Cabins 967 Frost Avenue Maplewood MN 55109 Robert Bland St. Paul Tourist Cabins 963 Frost Avenue Maplewood MN 55109 James Devanez St. Paul Tourist Cabins 954 Frost Avenue Maplewood MN 55109 Alphonso France St. Paul Tourist Cabins 943 Frost Avenue Maplewood MN 55109 Robert Hollingsworth St. Paul Tourist Cabins 986 Frost Avenue Maplewood MN 55109 Harry Lebo St. Paul Tourist Cabins 983 Frost Avenue Maplewood MN 55109 Duane Lonecor St. Paul Tourist Cabins 944 Frost Avenue Maplewood MN 55109 Richard Moore St. Paul Tourist Cabins 957 'Frost Avenue Maplewood MN 55109 Inez Schuchard St. Paul Tourist Cabins 965 Frost Avenue Maplewood MN 55109 Jeff Swanberg St. Paul Tourist Cabins 969 Frost Avenue Maplewood MN 55109 Sam Webb St. Paul Tourist Cabins 961 Frost Avenue Maplewood MN 55109 Steve Weib St. Paul Tourist Cabins 952 Frost Avenue Maplewood MN 55109 St. Paul Trailer Park 940 Frost Avenue Maplewood MN 55109 Tracy Thomas St. Paul Trailer Park CIO PLJ, INC. 2501 Lowry Avenue NE St. Anthony MN 55418 22 Dear City Council Members and Mayor Robed Cardinal, I am a resident of Town & Country Manufactured Home Park in Maplewood. We, residents of manufactured home parks, make up nearly 900 households in Maplewood. I am sending this post card to request that the City Council pass the proposed Park Closing Ordinance. Passing the ordinance at the meeting on February 25th would help protect and preserve these existing units of affordable housing in Maplewood, as well as give a sense of security and stability to nearly 900 Maplewood families. Thirteen other cities in Minnesota, including Oakdale, have passed this important ordinance, in doing so protecting Iow-income families from displacement. By passing this ordinance, Maplewood would further its commitment to preserving affordable housing and serving its Iow to moderate- income residents. Thank you for your consideration. William Bailey Town & Country 1055 Deauville Drive Maplewood MN 55109 Kenneth Bennett Town & Country 1100 AIvarado Drive Maplewood MN 55109 Orvis Bixby Town & Country 1044 Bellecrest Drive Maplewood MN 55109 Richard Buckley Town & Country 1058 Alvarado Drive Maplewood MN 55109 Roger Erickson Town & Country 2563 Plaza Circle Maplewood MN 55109 Aimee Evanson Town & Country 1059 Deauville Drive Maplewood MN 55109 Joyce Fernette Town & Country 1048 Bellecrest Drive Maplewood MN 55109 Rogert Fritz Town & Country 1059 Bellecrest Drive Maplewood MN 55109 William Gilbert Town & Country 1046 Deauville Drive Maplewood MN 55109 Robert Grillickson Town & Country 1050 Deauville Drive Maplewood MN 55109 Donna Gutwiler Town & Country 1066 Bellecrest Drive Maplewood MN 55109 Linda Harmeling Town & Country 2565 Plaza Circle Maplewood MN 55109 D. Hermann Town & Country 1063 Bellecrest Drive Maplewood MN 55109 David Huot Town & Country 1046 Bellecrest Drive Maplewood MN 55109 Donna MacRunnel Town & Country 1040 Deauville Drive Maplewood MN 55109 Pat Nau/JV Properties Town & Country 2557 Highway 61 Maplewood MN 55109 T.V. Nordstrom Town & Country 1036 Bellecrest Drive Maplewood MN 55109 Pearl Pitlick Town & Country 2581 Plaza Circle Maplewood MN 55109 Rebecca Potthoff Town & Country 1096 Alvarado Drive Maplewood MN 55109 Sandy Private Town & Country 1050 Alvarado Drive Maplewood MN 55109 23 Geraldine Pullen Town & Country 1065 Bellecrest Drive Maplewood MN 55109 Ronald Richardson Town & Country 1050 Bellecrest Drive Maplewood MN 55109 Tammie Schweiker Town & Country 1062 Alvarado Drive Maplewood MN 55109 Charlene Stansbury Town & Country 2568 Plaza Circle Maplewood MN 55109 Ron Strong Town & Country 2565 Plaza Circle Maplewood MN 55109 Paul Vankirk Town & Country 2573 Plaza Circle Maplewood MN 55109 Betty Verdick Town & Country 1042 Bellecrest Drive Maplewood MN 55109 Joanne Wagner Town & Country 1061 Bellecrest Drive Maplewood MN 55109 Carol Whaley Town & Country 2562 Plaza Circle Maplewood MN 55109 Beverly Winston Town & Country 1056 Alvarado Drive' Maplewood MN 55109 24 St. Paul Cabins 2501 Lowry Avenue NE St. Anthony, MN 55418 612-78 I-3149 FYI Attachment 5 Maplewood City Council Maplewood City Hall 1830 County Road B East Maplewood, MN 55109 March 11, 2002 Dear Mayor Robert Cardinal and City Council Members: I am writing in regards to the city council meeting held Monday, February 25, 2002. I attended the meeting to hear all of the comments and concerns regarding the Manufactured Home Park Closing Ordinance Discussion. I represent the owners of St. Paul Cabins Manufactured Home Community. I received information about the meeting from a letter sent by the City of Maplewood. I am happy to hear that staff is directed-to research and gather information to make an informed decision about whether a park closing ordinance is appropriate for the City of Maplewood. · Just last year I worked with the City of Ffidley on the wording of a park-closing ordinance. I have attached that ordinance for your review. When taking on such a large task, there is no way to satisfy the residents, the owners or even all city officials. Despite some wording I'd like changed in the City of Fridley ordinance, I believe the staff did a terrific job of diplomatically listening to all the party's viewpoints and coming to a fair compromise. Also enclosed please find the City of Shakopee park-closing ordinance. I represent the owners of a Manufactured Home Community in Shakopee as well. Many of the owners worked with the City of Shakopee officials to word the ordinance currently in effect. I believe this particular ordinance has the most flexibility for possible future city development of the property Manufactured Home Communities are on. In closing I'd like to offer any support or assistance I can. I'd appreciate the opportunity to work with staff on the wording 'of a park-closing ordinance if you decide to proceed. Thank you fOr your time. Sincerely, Agent 25 FRIDLEY CITY CODE CHAPTER 223. MANUFACTURED HOME PARK CLOSINGS (Ref Ord I151) 223.01. ~PURPOSlr. In .view oft. he peculiar nature and problems presented by the closure or conversion of manufactured home parks, the City Council finds that the public health, safety and gen~'al welfare will be promoted by requiring compensation to displaced residents of such parks. The purpose of this ordinance is to require park owners to pay displaced residents reasonable relocation costs and purchasers of manufactured home parks to pay additional' compensation, pursuant to the authority granted under Minnesota Stalutes, Section 327C.095. 223,02. DEFINITIONS The following words and terms when used in this ordinance shall have the following meanings unless the context clearly indicates otherwise: 1. Closure Statement. A statement prepared by the park owner clearly stating the park is closing, addressing the availability, location and potent/al costs of adequate replacement homing within a twenty-five (25) mile radius of the park that is closing and the probable relocation costs of the manufactured homes located in the park. 2. Displaced Owner. A resident of an owner-occupied manufactured home who rents a lot in a manufactured home park, including the members of the resident's household, as of the date the park owner submits a closure statement to the City's Planning Commission. · 3. Displaced Resident. A d/splaced owner. An area within a manufactured home park, designed and used for the accommodation of a manufactured home. Fridley City Code Chapter 223 Sect/on 223.02.10~. 5, Manufactured Home. A structure, not affixed to or part of real estate, transportable in one of more s~ctiom, which in the traveling mode, is eight (8) feet or mom ia width or forty (40) feet or more in lengh, or, when erected on site, is three hundred twenty (320) or more square feet, and which is built on a permanent chassis and designed to be used as a dwelling with or without a permanent foundation when connected to the required utilities, and includes the plumbing, heating air conditioning, and electrical system contained in it. 6. Park Closure. A closure, conversion of use, or termination of use, whether in whole or in part, cfa manufactured home park. For purposes of this defnxition, use shall mean any use related to the manufactured home park and related services. 7. Park Owner. The owner cfa manufactured home park. 8. Person. Any individual, corporation, finn: partne~hip, incorporated and unincorporated association or any other legal or commercial entity. 9. Purchaser. The person buying the manufactured home park ~om the park owner. In the event that fhe park owner intends to retain ownership and convert the park to a different use, all references to the purchaser refer to the park owner. 10. Rclocation Cost. The reasonable cost of relocating a manufactured home from a manufactured home park wi~in the City of Fridley that is being closed or converted to another use to another manufactured home park within a twenty-five (25) mile radius of the park as follows: A. Preparation for Move. The reasonable costs incurred to prepare the el/gible manufactured home for transportation to another site. This category includes crane services if needed, but not the cost of wheel axles, tires, flame welding or trailer hitches. 27 Fridley City Code Chapter 223 Section 223.04 B. Transportation to Another Site. Reasonable costs incm'red to transport the eligible manufactured home and personal ' property within a twenty-five (25) mile radius. This category also includes the cost of insuring the manufactured home and contents while the home is in the process of being relocated, and the cost of obtaining moving permits provided that the park owner shall not bc required to pay delinquent taxes on a manufaCtured home if necessary in. order to obtain a moving permit. This category also includes the reasonable cost of disassembling, moving, and reassembling sheds and any attached appurtenances, such as porches, steps, decks, skirting, air conditioner units and awnings, which were acquired before the notice of closure or conversion of the park. Hook-up at New Location.' Thc reasonable cost of connecting the eligible manufaCtured home to utilities at the relocation site, including crane services if needed. The park owner shall not be required to upgrade the electrical or plumbing systems of thc manufactured home. D. Insurance. The cost of insurance for the replacement value of the property being moved. Relocation costs do not include the Cost of any repairs or modifications to the manu-faetured home needed to bring the home into compliance with the state and federal manufactured home buQding standards for the year in which the home was constructed. Relocation costs also dO not include the cost of any repairs or modifications to the home or appurtenances needed to bring the home or appurtenances into compliance with the rules and regulations of the manufactured home park to which the manufactured home is to be relocated, if those rules and regulations are no more stringent than the rules and regu~tions of'the park in which the home is located and the resident was notified of non-complianoe w~th the rules and regulations of the park in which it is located w[thin sixty (60) days prior to delivery of the closure statement. 223.03. PARK CLOSURE NOTICE If a manufactured home park is to be closed, converted in whole or part to another use or terminated as a use of the property, the park owner shall, at least nine (9) months prior to the closure, conversion to another use or termination of use, provide a copy of a closure statement to a resident of each manufactured home and to the City's Planning Commission. 223.04. NOTIC]~ OF PUBLIC HEAR~G The City's Planning Commission shall submit the closure statement to the City Council and request the City Council to schedule a public hearing. Thc City shall mail a notice at least ten (10) days prior to the public hearing to a resident of each manufactured home in the park stating 28 Fridl~y Ci~ Code Chapte~ 223 Section 223.07.4 the time, place and purpose of the hearing. The park owner shall provide the City with a list of the names and addresses of at least one displaced resident of each manufactured home in the park at the time the closure staterncnt is submitted to the City's Planning Commission. 223.05, PUBLIC HEARING A public hearing shall be held before the City Council aider receipt of the closure statemeut for the purpose ofrevicw/ng thc closure statement and evaluating what/mpact the park closing may have on the displaced residents and thc park owner. 223.06. DISPLACED RESIDENT OBLIGATIONS As a condition o£rccciving assistance Under this Chapter, a displaced resident shall submit a contract or other verified cost estimate of relocation costs to the park owner for approval. If the park owner refuses ,to pay the contract or other verified cost cst/mate, the park owner must arrange for relocating the manufactured home and pay the actual relocation costsincurred. In the alternative, the displaced resident may submit a written statement to thc park owner, idc'ntifying that the displaced r~idcnt either cannot or chooses not to relocate Ms or her manufactured home to another manufacua-ud home park within a twenty-five (25) mile radius of the park to be closed and elects to receive either relocation assistance as defined in 223.07.02 or compensation as defined in 223.08. 223.07. ELECTION TO RELOCATE 1. After service of the closure statement by the park owner and upon submittal by the displaced resident ora contract or other verification of'relocation expenses, thc park owner shall pay to the displaced resident the reasonable costs as defined in 223.02.10 of relocating the manufactured home to another manufactured home park located within a twenty-five (25) mile radius of the park that is being closed, converted to another use, or ceasing operation. 2. If~a_d/splaced r?den! cannot or chooses not to relocate the manufactured home twenty, fi.v.e (25) rrule radiUs ofthe park which is be: ...... w/thin a ' lng ciosecl, and the displaced resident elects to retain title to the manufactured home, the d~splaeed resident is entitled to relocation costs as defined in 223.02 based upon an average o£the actual relocation costs ' res/dents in the manufactured h ,,o,.~. ~ ....... pard to other displaced Omc ~,o~. ~ oz os ' · · · purp es oxuus section, m the eveut that it is not possible to calculate the average using this formula, the amount of compensation shall be based on the average of the est/mated relocation costs submi~ed by other residents in the park. 3..6. displaced resident compensated under this section shall retain title to the manufactured home and shall be responsible for its prompt removal from thc manufactured home park. 4. The park owner shall make.the payments under this section directly to the person performing the relocation services after pefformauce thereof, or, upon submission of written evidence of payment of relocation costs by a displaced resident, shall reimburse the displaced resident for such costs. 29 l~ridley City Code Chapter 223 Sec~on223.11 5. The displaced resident must submit a contract or other verified cost estimate for .relocating the manufactured home to the park owner as a condition to the park owner's liability to pay relocation expenses. 223.08. ELECTION TO RECEIVE COMPENSATION Ifa displaced resident chooses not to relocate the manufactured home w/thirt a twenty five (25)- mile radius of the park that is being closed and tenders title of the manufactured home to the park owner, the displaced resident is entitled to compensation, to be paid by the purchaser of the park in order to mitigate the adverse financial impact of the park'closing, ha such instance, the compensation shall be an amount equal to: 1. The current fair market value of the manufactured home as determined by a real property appraiser licensed by the State of Minnesota, or 2. If no appraisal exists, the current assessed value fort,ax purposes of the manufactured home as established by Anoka County. Under 223.08.01, the appraisal may be prov/ded by either the displaced resident, the park owner or the purchaser. Any disputes over valuation shall be resolved through judicial action in Anoka County District Court. The purchaser shall pay such compensation into an escrow account, established by the park owner, for distribution upon transfer o£tifle to the manufactured home. Such compensation shall be paid to the displaced resident sixty (60) days prior to closing of the park, conversion to another use, or later at resident option and the park owner shall receive title and possession of thc manufactured home upon payment of such compensation. 223.09. LIMITATION ON TOTAL AMOUNT OF RELOCATION ASSISTANCE AND COMPENSATION pAID TO DISPLACED RESIDENTS The total anaount of relocation assistance and compensation paid to displaced residents of the manufactured home park, shall not exceed the greater of twenty percent (20%) of the County Assessor's estimated market val'ue of the manufactured home park, as determined by the County Assessor for the year in which the park is seheduled to close, or twenty percent (20%) of the purchase price of the park. 223.10. APPLICABILITY Relocation assistance and related compensation described under 223.02, 223.07 and 223.08 of this ordinance shall not apply in the event that a displaced resident receives compensation under the Uniform Reloeation Act et. al. (42 U.S.C. ~601-4655). 223.11. PENALTIES 1. Viohtion of any provision o£this ordinance shall be a m/sdemeanor. 3O Ffidley City Code Chapter 223 Section 223. I I 2. Any provisions of this ord/nance may be Chromed by injunction or other appropriate civil remedy. 3. The City shall not issue a building permit in conjunction with reuse of manufactured home park property unless the park owner has paid reasonable location costs and the purchaser of the park has provided compensation in accordance with the requirements of the ordinance. Approval of any application for rezoning, platting, conditional use permit, planned unit development or variance in conjunction with a park closing or eonversionshall be conditional on compliance with the requirements of this ordinance. 3] TOTAL P.07 O]UHNA-NCE NO. ~43_ ~ ~D~G ~C~ON 4.61 TO ~ C~ CODE ~ C~ CO~ OF ~ C~ OF S~OP~ ~OT~ O~~: ~a.6 p S ~t f~e~ t to he auth ~ . * bd 2 D S ~efo ' w s dt ~nu ' ' 'c~s ~e ' ' u cl ~d~ Ies '~ O re St -' ' ~o~ 'ts ~t th i 'sP~ o ~ n. D ~ Ho e- ~ ~ m oF te leto ~ d i to · ~ ~ ~ or~t a -flu ~ JJT- ! 32 APR 0 3 2002 ~ ~ ~ oo~on or m~~ of a ~ ~. p~n - ~ ~di~d,,~ ~o~ ~ p~P. ~om~ ~-~~ ~afi~ ~ ~v ot~ le~ or ~er~g ~. Subd. 3. NO~ OF ~OS~O. ~ a ~~ ~ o~k is to ~ olo~_ ~nv~ ~ w~ie ~r ~ to ~o~h~ ~ or ~~ ~ a u~ of~e ~. ~he V~ o~ sh~ ~ 1~ r~ mo~ ~m~t ~o a r~idmt of~ch m~,~ b~e ~ t9 the Ciw's P!a~g Con~,fi~ion. ~u~. 4. T~ ~~.~C~G. At ~ ~e valor to or ~ de[~ of the No6~f Clo~g to the Pl~-dn8 Co~ssio~ but prior to &e ~b~c H~g ~ fo~ ~ Su~. 6. o~ or ~ros~o~ve ~rch~ of the p~ may ~e app~c, fion to ~o Ciw for ~he u~ of ~c~t ~-~ m .~ce the w~ ofrei~ing *_~ ~rc~ing t~ disp!~e~ mm~r~ hom~. ~v ~cidm~ ~s ~6~t~ h~ero~tk ~d ~ o~h~ d~CJ~pm~t ~ that the C~ d~ ap~ro~te or di~ble for ~ch ~~ ~e CiF ~ ~ ~le ~d ~t~ ~on ~ d~= ~ ~ ~c~,,~t ~ should be u~ ~ ~ ~. ~t~ C~ d~-L~ ~,~'~nt ~ sho~d not ~ ~ for ~ ~s~. ~e p~ o~ ~ el~ to r~ ~o~ of Oo~re ~d re~me op~tion of the ~ar~ home ~ pw~. ~w~. pofic~ ~ ~ ~h tension ~ ~ ~v~ to v~ ~dmts no !at~ t~ 90 ~ ~et the Clo~,re h~ b~ ~. Subd. 5, NO~CE OF P~LIC ~~G. ~ Piing Co~ion ~ ~b~t ~e olo~e m~! a nofi~ ~ l~t ten ~ys prior to t~ vub~c he~ to a r~ident of e~h ~~ home p~k ~ti~ff the time. v!~ee ~d ~ose of &e h~g ~e ~ ~ ~ ~o~ ~ C~ ~ of ~ ~ n~d ~dres~s of at 1~ 0~ ~ of e~h m~~~ home h t~ p~ ~e ~ cio~e ~atemmt is ~b~ to the PI~ Co~ssion~ Subd. fi, P~LIC ~~G. A pubic h~g ~! ~ held bdo~ ~ Ci~ Coun~ ~t~n 90 ~ ~a~ that.~e p~k clgsi_~g may have on disv~e~ ~id~nts ~d t~ V~ o~ Sul~l, 7. PAYldENT OF RELOCATION COSTS. A. A,t~e/service of th~ closure s~_t__.~n~t by_ the park owner and comi)let~on of the public .heafinn _and upon .=~hir, ltXal b_v the disp!?_~_ resident ora cont~ or other ver~.-~ion 9f'relocatign ex~_ ens~ the _uark own~ dudl pay to the dJ~li~e--d- resident ',~ _re~on~!e c~st Of tel _oc~_ 'rig the manufactur~ home to .anoth~ rnan,_,~.c~,ured home park located within a 25 tm'lc r,,_~n,, of be Dark liu~t js bein,~ c. lose~± oonv,~ed to ~ther ,,m or ~,qln_~ ouerafion. R~o~tion costs must be paid not Im fl~n ~_ _days prior to ~he dosh-ig of the _u~rk or its conversion {o ~ngther u~e. Reason-ble.rdocation_cos~s shall 33 - - ' ~ l~ell ~w "~k-u~" c~. ~e ~ ~'~ for ~ ~l~t ~J.e of~c ~ ~ ~v~ ~ ~e ~z~ hu,,~ ~ its ~fl~ B. ~:~on co~ ~1 not ~chd~ Da~ts p~d on be~ of a o~ or p~io~r or ~ the o~r of ~ .fi-~f%~ home ~ to which t~ dlml~ ~.~ C. The t~ ~o,,~ of r~oc~on v~s 'p~d to a d~l~ ~t~ ~ ~? ~c home ~ d~~ ~ Sub~i°n ~.A oft~s S~on. Sub~, 8. PA~ OF ~D~ON~ CO~SA~O~ K ~ a msid~t ~ or ch~s not t9 ~te the m~u~ ~me ~ a 25 ~e~i~ o~ p~k that is ~ do~ due to a ~a~ or a~ ~m6on ~ck of~v aWil~hia lot.~e ~t~ the 25 ~e md~. ~ ~ ~m of~ ~e rd~on pa~ - · sp~?~ ~ent is ~ii~i~ W t~d~ ~he ~e m the ~~r~ ho~ w ~e ~_~ic~ m~ ~ .~ the ~-~3~ home ~ d~~ ~ow!~ie ~ ~he ~h~on of m~u~ homes ~d ~r~ifion of~e ~. ~e C~ -~-" ~ ~ ~ ~ t~ d~.ino ~ the ~ or ~ ~nve~ to ~ ,~se. ~ &e B. ~ ~ ai~t,~ ~ ~ot or c~ not to re~oc-se ~ ~~ ~e ~ ~ 25 ~. ~d ~e ~d~t ~ not to ~d~ ~ ~o ~he m~,,~*~ ~me. the av~e rel~on ~ ,hd~ ~ m~e -- ~0~: 5~ ~ 10 ~ of a~5~on ~r ~ ~. ~.~ home ~k P~mt for d~bl~e m~~d hom~ sh~ be ~ ~ ~t ~ to ~'r. zsn4~ 3 ~H1~23 34 su~. 9 cAP ON p~yMENT& Section~ e f h ' O ' ' ~ ~ ~ 699 o t , ' t t al ired b'" ~7 d8 .If · .tal u 9~ a pro rata ~ c~z ' bue~ ns ~r's or ecial 'd or asses~ b . IY n u¢ b theCi the d rc s I rider and doo_xm~a~a~,on ofth~ sale _ofior to the lmblic hearin~b. D ot ' in ' c6 n is' event ' th k er bt' ' · no 'c si in d" n i.~,,,~,R~einef~om eh' o ' in p~r of amounts d_oe to dispLs~d residents, Su . 0. K O O C S . Thc is id ' a v ' co ' r !o ' th u n~ o k er r i6ontothe own ' Ii iii to ~' rel ' . th wrier a. th or th v ' co ' e the ark wn s for rrJ 'n · ~me and pay thc reloc~_~6on costs idcO6fied in Subd. 7. Subd. 10. PENALTY. A. Any provision of this Section may b~ enforc¢cl_ by in_~unction or other a.opmprinte civj~ re. reedy. /JT. I59842 St!153-2~ 35 B. The City Sh, ll not.L~,e_.& b~d~_~_ _vermi! ~ ~on ~& r~t~ of ~~ ~ P~ ~-~ ~ ~,~ hom~ ~ for ~e ~t ~, ~ ~0 ~_~ ~ ~of~ of ~ ~u~, 11. ~lC~-~, ~s ~. app~ o~v m ~ ~1o~ of~~ ~ P~ S~on 2 - ~ D~. ~s o~ b~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~s ~e ~ ~on. or of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: :JT-15~)8~2 $ ~H!33..~3 P. 86 36 Attachment 6 Maplewood Manufactured Home Parks Town and Country 2557 Highway 61 St. Paul Tourist C~ 940 Frost Avenue 4ewood Man. Home Park 1880 English St. N. Rolling Hills 1319 Hills Drive Beaver Lake 2425 Maryland Avenue Manufactured Home Parks S 37