Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/12/1991~,GEND~. MApLEWOOD HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT ~UTHORITY FEBRUARY 12, 1991 7:00 P.M. 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Approval of Minutes a. December 11, 1990 4. Approval of Agenda 5. Communications 6. Unfinished Business CITY HALL MAPLEWOOD ROOM a. R-1S and R-2 zoning districts b. Block Grant Information 7. New Business a. Plaque Presentation - Dale Carlson b. Group Home Presentation 1. Mary Mahoney - Ramsey County Social Services 2. Kathy LeMay - Dakota's Children's Inc. c. Code Amendment - Truth-in-Housing Ordinance d. Definition of objectives and tasks from HRA Annual Report e. Federal Housing (HUD) Program Information f. Applicant interviews 8. Date of Next Meeting a. March 12, 1991 9. Adjournment HRAAGEND.MEM MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY DECEMBER 11v 1990 CALL TO ORDER Chairman Fischer called the meeting to order at 7 p.m. ROLL CALL HRA Commissioners: Lorraine Fischer, Tom Connelly, Gary Pearson, Larry Whitcomb City Staff: Ken Roberts APPROVAL OF MINUTES a. November 14, 1990 Commissioner Connelly moved approval of the minutes of November 14, 1990, as submitted. Commissioner Whitcomb seconded Ayes--Fischer, Connelly, Pearson, Whitcomb APPROVAL OF AGENDA Commissioner Whitcomb moved approval of the amended agenda, adding Item 7 c. - HRA Resignation and Resolution of Appreciation. Commissioner Pearson seconded Ayes--Fischer, Connelly, Pearson, Whitcomb COMMUNICATIONS There were no communications. UNFINISHED BUSINESS a. Minneapolis Housing Evaluators in Maplewood Secretary Ken Roberts presented the staff report. Jim Yannarelly, Administrator of the St. Paul Truth-in- Housing program, spoke concerning St. Paul's program and evaluators. Mr. Yannarelly said St. Paul does approximately 5,000 Truth-in-Housing inspections a year. Mr. Yannarelly said St. Paul strives for consistency with evaluators and evaluations. The Commissioners asked questions of Mr. Yannarelly about the St. Paul program. HRA Minutes 12-11-90 -2- % Commissioner Pearson moved that Maplewood ·valuators be utilized exclusively from St. Paul until such time that the HRA finds this policy inadequate or requires a review. Commissioner Connelly seconded Ayes--Fischer, Connelly, Pearson Nays--Whitcomb b. R-iS and R-2 Zoning Districts Secretary Roberts presented the staff report for this request to change the R-2 (double dwellings) zoning district. The HRA discussed their preference of mixing duplexes throughout the City rather than having large areas of duplexes only. Also discussed were the disagreements which develop in neighborhoods when rezoning of undeveloped properties is proposed. The Commissioners discussed the possibility of staff surveying property owners in these districts for their comments on how they would like their property to be zoned. Also discussed was the possibility of the City initiating a one-time City-paid rezoning for these properties, thereby saving the property owners the cost of the fees involved. Commissioner Connelly moved the HRA recommend: No change to the R-2 zoning district ordinance at this time. We do not recommend initiating rezoning. However, if such rezoning is contemplated, no action be taken before "feeler letters" are sent to the property owners to determine their wishes. Commissioner Pearson seconded Ayes--Fischer, Connelly, Whitcomb, Pearson NEW BUSINESS a. Inspection of Multiple-Unit Residential Buildings Secretary Roberts presented the staff report. commissioners discussed possible guidelines to determine how many units the truth-in-housing The HRA Minutes 12-11-90 -3- evaluators ~hould inspect when inspecting multiple-unit buildings. Secretary Roberts said there are very few multiple-unit buildings sold each year in Maplewood. Commissioner Connelly moved the HRA recommend the housing evaluator inspect all units in multiple- dwelling buildings. Commissioner Whitcomb seconded Ayes--Fischer, Connelly, Pearson, Whitcomb b. Brainstorming Session: Ideas for Block Grants Secretary Roberts presented information he received for Ramsey County Block Grants for 1991 and asked the Commission for project ideas. Mr. Roberts said he will be attending a meeting on December 13 and would have more information for the Commission at that time.. The Commission asked Secretary Roberts to get information on all past block grant award projects and amounts by year. The Commission also directed the secretary to contact HUD for grant money information. c. HRA Resignation and Resolution of Appreciation Commissioner Whitcomb moved adoption of the resolution of appreciation for Dale Carlson for his service on the Housing and Redevelopment Authority. Commissioner Pearson seconded Ayes--Fischer, Connelly, Pearson, Whitcomb DATE OF NEXT MEETING The date of the next HRA meeting is scheduled for January 8, 1991 The Commissioners discussed group homes in Maplewood and asked Secretary Roberts to research and report to the Commission any applications for future group homes. ADJOURNMENT Meeting adjourned at 10 p.m. TO: FROM: SUBJECT: DATE: City Manager Ken Roberts, Associate Planner Code Change: R-lS and R-2 Zoning Districts January 31, 1991 INTRODUCTION The City Council, on June 25, 1990, requested information on separating small lot single dwellings and double dwellings into separate zoning districts. The R-2 (double dwelling) district allows both. The Council wants to study this change because of a complaint from Vicki Seltun, the owner of a single dwelling at 2474 Gall Avenue. She complained about a double dwelling the Community Design Review Board approved for a lot across from her house. She said that her realtor told her that all of the lots on Gall Avenue would be developed with single dwellings. Later, the owner of the lot across from Ms. Seltun changed his plans and decided to build a double dwelling. The City allowed this because all of the lots on Gall Avenue, including Ms. Seltun's and the double-dwelling lot, are zoned R-2 (double dwelling). The R-2 zone allows single and double dwellings. BACKGROUND Gall Avenue Development Tilsen Homes had previously proposed to build double dwellings on this site. The City approved a planned unit development and preliminary plat in 1983 for 18 double dwellings and one single dwelling. The project was never built and the permit expired. The Council rezoned theis site to R-2 in 1985 for double dwellings. The Council approved the final plat for the current project in 1988. The City approved an adjustment of the lot lines for the four lots at Gall Avenue and County Road D. This adjustment gave enough room to build double dwellings on the two corner lots. The R-2 District The R-2 district has been in use since before the Council adopted the City Code in 1965. It has always allowed single and double dwellings. July 5, 1979: The City Council Changed the R-2 district to reduce the minimum lot area for single dwellings from 10,000 square feet to 7,500 square feet. December 9, 1985: The City Council reduced the minimum interior and corner~lot widths for single dwellings to 60 and 85 feet respectively. In addition, the Council changed the minimum lot width for double dwellings from 75 to 85 feet. October 15, 1990: The Planning Commission considered a proposal to separate single and double dwellings into two separate zoning districts. The Planning Commission recommended: 1. That there be no change made in the existing R-2 zoning requirements. 2. Initiate hearings to investigate zoning of all R-2 zoning requirements. e Staff be directed to explore alternative disclosure methods of making sure all purchasers are aware of zoning conditions around them. (See the minutes on page 30.) November 15, 1990: The City Council tabled the proposed change until the Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) could review it. December 11, 1990: The HRA considered the proposal and recommended: 1. No change to the R-2 zoning district ordinance at this time. No rezonings. However, if such rezonings are contemplated, no action be taken before "feeler letters" are sent to the property owners to determine their wishes. (See the minutes on page 32.) ALTERNATIVES (R-2 Zoning District) Change the R-2 District by dropping single dwellings as a permitted use and create a new R-iS (small-lot single- dwelling) district. Create a new R-iS (small-lot single-dwelling) zoning district and make no changes to the R-2 district. 3. Take no action. DISCUSSION The problem in this case is between the buyer and seller of a lot on Gall Avenue. Ms. Seltun relied on assurances from a realtor, rather than on the property's zoning. This is unfortunate. One of the reasons for having a land' use plan and zoning ordinance is to inform buyers of how undeveloped land could be developed. While the realtor probably had g.::od intentions when he talked to Ms. Seltun, times and situations change. When they do, the zoning ordinance determines how property can develop. There are several things the Council could do to avoid this situation in the future: Adopt an ordinance creating a new R-lS district that is limited to single dwellings with a minimum lot size of 7,500 square feet. 2. After adopting an R-lS district the Council should: ae Rezone small-lot single-dwelling developments, such as the Gall Avenue project, to R-iS. be Rezone existing single dwellings that the City has zoned R-2 to R-1 or R-iS. Buyers should be responsible for checking on the zoning of the undeveloped land around the lot they plan to purchase. They can then decide whether they want to buy a lot that is close to a lot that could be developed with a double dwelling. This is one of the reasons for having a land use plan and zoning map. Buyers, however, will probably not check the zoning of existing single dwellings in the neighborhood. This could be a problem if a home is zoned R-2 and the owner decides to convert it to a duplex in the future. The attached maps show the undeveloped lots zoned R-2 and the lots the Council should consider for a change in zoning. Staff has added a note to the truth-in-sale-of-housing disclosure form that advises home buyers to check the land use plan and zoning for their neighborhood. I recommend against rezoning undeveloped R-2 lots in single-dwelling neighborhoods to R-1. This would result in objections from R-2 property owners who would feel that the City is reducing the value of their property without cause. The City's current policy in the Comprehensive Plan is to allow occasional double dwellings in single-dwelling neighborhoods. The Council has also adopted a new policy that double dwellings should be located on the periphery of single-dwelling neighbor- hoods; preferably on higher-volume streets. There are many double dwellings scattered throughout single-dwelling neighbor- hoods in the City, especially in the older sections of the City. They are generally good neighbors. Also, there are studies by appraisers in the Metro area that show that double dwellings do not depreciate the value of surrounding single dwellings. The Council was sympathetic to this argument in 1985, when the Council raised the minimum lot width for double dwellings to 85 feet. Several owners, with R-2'lots less than 85 feet, objected and the Council "grandfathered" them into the ordinance. An example of this was Dick Schreier's lot on Desoto Street. I concur with the Planning Commission and HRA that the Council should not.drop single dwellings from the R-2 district. This would only discourage owners of undeveloped R-2 property from developing single dwellings. RECOMMENDATIONS Adopt the ordinance on page 4 that creates a new R-lS district that is limlted to smaller-lot single dwellings with the minimum requirements in the R-2 district. 2. After adopting an R-lS district the Council should: Rezone small-lot single dwellings, such as the Gall Avenue project, to R-lS. Rezone existing single dwellings, that the City has zoned R-Z, to R-1 or R-1S. mb\kenmem3 (5.1) Attachments 1. Ordinance 2. Location Maps 3. Property Line/Zoning Maps of R-2 zones 4. HRA Minutes 5. Planning Commission Minutes ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE R-2 (DOUBLE-DWELLING RESIDENCE) ZONING DISTRICT AND CREATING THE R-1S (SMALL LOT SINGLE-DWELLING RESIDENCE) ZONING DISTRICT THE MAPLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: (Deletions are crossed out and additions are underlined.) Section 1. Section 36-9 is amended as follows: Section 36 9 ~ ..... ~ = ~oning districts =-- ~ .......... = ~"~-~- The City is hereby divided into the following ~- '~ .... ~ .... ~0) zoning -~--s~ of districts: which ~ha!! F, Farm Residence District. R-I, Residence District (Single Dwelling). ~-lS, Small-Lot Single-Dwelling District. R-2, Residence District (Double Dwelling) R-3, Residence District (Multiple Dwelling). R-E, Residence Estate District. NC, Neighborhood Commercial District CO, Commercial Office District. SC, Business and Commercial District. LBC, Limited Business Commercial District. BC(M), Business Commercial Modified District. SC, Shopping Center District. M-I, Light Manufacturing District. M-2, Heavy Manufacturing District. Section 2. Sections 36-84.1 - 36-84.11 are added as follows: DIVISION 3.6 R-IS SMALL-LOT SINGLE-DWELLING DISTRICT. The following requirements apply to all lots in the R-IS .District: Sect. 36-84.1. Uses The City shall only allow the following uses: .(a) Permitted uses: (1) Any permitted use in the R-1 District. Conditional uses. The City may permit the following by conditional use permit: Any use permitted by conditional use permit in the R-1 District. Attachment 1 Sect. 36-84.2 Height of buildings. The Maximum height of a single-family dwelling shall be thirty (30) feet, measured from any street-side grade of the site. Sect. 36-84.3. Lot area and width; sewer requirements. (a) No person shall build a single-family dwelling on site less than seven thousand five hundred (7,500) square feet in area. .(b) No person shall build a single-family dwelling on a lot with less than sixty (60) feet of width for an interior lot or eight-five (85) feet of width for a corner lot. ¢c) No person shall build a single-family dwelling unless public sanitary sewer is available. Sect. 36-84.4. Front yards. Each lot shall have a front yard of not less than thirty (30) feet in depth facing any street. If fifty (50) percent or more of the dwellings on the same street have a predominant front yard setback different than thirty (30) feet, then all buildings thereafter erected, altered or moved on that street shall conform to that predominant front yard depth. Sect. 36-84.5 Side yards. Each lot shall have a side yard of at least five (5) feet on one side of a lot and ten (10) feet on the other side. The following exceptions shall apply: (1) The side yard on the street side of a corner lot shall have a width of at least thirty (30) feet. (2) A church or school shall have a side yard of at least fifty (50) feet on each side adjoining other property. (3) When two (2) or more adjoinin~ lots are used as a single-building site, the side yard requirements shall apply only t© the outside lot lines. Sect. 36-84.6. Rear yards. (a) Sinqle-family dwellinqs shall have a rear yard setback of at least twenty (20) percent of the lot depth. (b) Accessory buildinqs shall have rear yard setback of at least five (5) feet. Sect. 36-84.7. Tower, antenna and flagpole setbacks. Towers, antennas and flagpoles shall meet the same setback~ as accessory buildings. Sect. 86-84.8. Minimum foundation areas; room requirements. (al The minimum foundation area shall be at least: (1) A one-story dwelling, nine hundred fifty (950) square feet. A one and one-half story dwelling, seven hundred twenty (720) square feet. (3) A bi-level dwelling, eight hundred sixteen (816) ~quare feet. (4) A tri-level dwelling, seven hundred sixty-fiva (765) square feet. (5) A two-story dwelling, five hundred twenty-eight .(528) square feet. (b) Room size and number shall be consistent with Uniform Duildinq Code standards. Sect. 36-84.9 Building width requirements The minimum building width on any side shall be at least twenty-one (21) feet. The building width shall not includo entryways or other appurtenances that do not run the full depth of the building. Sect. 36-84.10 Accessory buildings. Section 36-77 in the R-1 District shall apply to accessory buildings in the R-lS district. Sect. 36-84.11. Exterior design approval. The exterior design and appearance of all single-family homes in the R-lS Residence District must be approved by the Director of Community Development as required in Section 25-67 of City Code. Section 3. This ordinance shall take effect upon its passage and publication. Passed by the Maplewood City Council on~ 1991. ATTEST: Mayor City Clerk mb~ord~zoning2 NORTH SA/N T PA UL CT RIE RD LOCATION MAP Attachment 2 I~OHL MAN AV tON AV ec F"RISB~E AV 'lf// PONO ~ co GE~AIS /'(nuc/~/e Head COPE EHILI fid IOIII RIE RI:) 0Uv Gu PA UL LOCATION MAP 10 i £ 2400 N.' PLAZA CIR ALVER.4DO PR BEI..LCRESr O~.'. DEAUVILL£ aI£RIDIA N FENTON. LMAN AV ?DOWNS ;:AV lOSE:LAWN BELLWOOD SUMMER AV PL i~ PLEY AV o ~ B [LLWOOO LAURIE BURKE SKILLMAN g KII~STON AV SAINT LOCATION MAP 11 NORTH SA 14/T PA UL. ! 3 4 ]. ~R~4~.L4 ..:.:.:. ~ .~,/ ., . .' 8e~r MAGNOLI H~I~'HO R I~ ST LOCATION MAP 12 PA~K ~'$T RREN NitR ~$ , 4ORTH TOV/14SHIP 694 GALL AVE. ,o ~REZONE TO R2 ~t. '" ~ L-''';,o . $ · I I · m AVEi REZONE TO R1 I i0 AREA I PROPERTY LINE / ZONING MAP DOUBLE-DWELLING LOTS TO REMAIN R2 SINGLE-DWELLING LOTS TO BE REZONED TO R1 AND R1S · : : R3 ~ " ,, .~ '" ROLLING HILLS MOBILE HOME PARK .... ~jji~]l m n m m m mm m m m m i~J iVY 4/13/81 AREA 2 R3 ('~) r PROPERTY LINE/ZONING MAP UNDEVELOPED DOUBLE DWELLING LOTS TO REMAIN R2 SINGLE-DWELLING LOTS TO BE REZONEDTO RIS 14 R3 BULKSERVICE ~ ,~~ · · MOBILE HOME PARK AREA 3 COUNTY OPEN SPACE PROPERTY LINE/ZONING MAP UNDEVELOPED PROPERTY ZONED R2 SINGLE-DWELLING LOTS TO BE REZONED 15 -R YA N----',~V E AV-- -- BELMONT ,o'.J · I · i IIRYAN ~ ~ST AVE.m ,=m = _ ?.._: (~) AV-E. "' AREA 4 r PROPERTY LINE / ZONING MAP UNDEVELOPED PROPERTY' ~ i · 4. KINGSTON ' -"AVE: "3 " ' llJ Z " L?_':'_ ~1 ~l I"-$ P R lC E~ xx ...... AVE .... I~ L~.RPEN1;EUR AVE" -- 1690 JESSIE ~ O'~t~tT-Y-- R-OA ~)-1! I ! Ii ~li' -I ST. PAUL t I AREA 5 PROPERTY LINE / ZONING MAP UNDEVELOPED PROPERTY ZONED R2 SINGLE-DWELLING LOTS TO BE REZONED TO R1 17 ,';. 'v' E. ROAD i(z~) z,, z,I 7 ~) ,r' AVE ~ PROPERTY LINE / ZONING MAP UNDEVELOPED PROPERTY ZONED R2 [~X~DOUBLE-DWELLING LOTS TO BE REZONED ~TO R2 SINGLE-DWELLING BE REZONED~ DOUBLE-DWELLING LOTS TO REMAIN R2 LOTS TO TO R1 :' 1R _ CO. RD. D -,,, ~ .4t &r.. ('~) , ~ IGHT$ ~~AREA I0 II J4 (,7) 5 "4 ; Z.4.$ I -/ PROPERTY LINE/ZONING MAP ~ SINGLE-FAMILY LOTS TO BE REZONED TO RIS 19 OUTLO T A AREA 8 PROPERTY LIN,E / ZONING ~ SINGLE-DWELLING LOTS TO BE REZONED TO R15 MAP 2O NORTH HAZLEWOOD PARK F $& I~' 7 .?$ ~c. (~3) ~' (,so) .?~' ac 8 PROPERTY LINE/ZONING MAP SINGLE-DWELLING LOTS TO BE REZONED TO R1 DOUBLE-DWELLING TO REMAIN R2 21 18.~'3 R1 Z.33 ,ac. 2.30 ~.c.. 4.80 &c. CiTY OF A~APIF WOOD AREA 10 PROPERTY LINE/ZONING MAP ~. SINGLE-DWELLING LOT TO BE REZONED TO R1 . 2~ N 5'; ,AVE. GROUP HEALTH -;~-'-CO. RD.-B~-:~--z~--.. -,,, t,~ .-, -- ........ ~-_____ 1758 1764 "'-' AREA 11 ! PROPERTY LINE/ZONING MAP SINGLE-DWELLING LOTS TO BE REZONED TO RlS I© 23 1927 I PROPERTY LINE/ZONING MAP ~ SINGLE-DWEI'LING LOT TO BE REZONED TO RlS 24 2 AREA 13 12 .416C 1740 1726 /.O I'/ · &o 28 ~7 7 (~) ,~"'(~s) J -- ! ~'~,~t - zo('~) (70) 6 I (4]) I PROPERTY LINE/ZONING MAP DOUBLE-DWELLING LOT' TO REMAIN R2 SINGLE-DWELLING LOTS TO BE REZONED TO R1 25 -.-mai ~.1'7 ar. 0 ,, LARK, 4 '~) AREA 14 COUNTY ROAD B : J PROPERTY LINE/ZONING MAP ~SINGLE-DWELLING LOT TO BE REZONEDTO R1 ~ DOUBLE-DWELLING LOT · TO REMAIN R2 26 SCHOOL NORTH ST. PAUL I 2 TIERN 5 -,,,,/MEADOW NORTH ST. PAUL zz) 3 4(z"); RIPLEY 2.32 ,~. . ¢ [a.a., I' KNOLL CIRC F F AREA 15 PROPERTY LINE/ZONING MAP SINGLE-DWELLING.LOT TO BE REZONED TO R1 O0*fG. AREA 16 ~) PUD F ~~ 90~0 %%% LARPENTEUR AVE. 17,4 I ~ ,~ , ,~1.3~' 9e).OZ..~Ii 97' '; mmml 't PROPERTY LINE/ZONING MAP ~ EXISTING SINGLE'-DWELING TO BE REZONED TO R1 28 Planning Commission Minutes 10-15-90 -6- Commissioner Gerke asked staff if the three existing home,would remain as ~hey are. Staff responded that no inf~mation pertaining to these homes was received on the_ -~sh~eY mailed to those property owners. Commissioner~rson moved the Planning Commission recommegd adopt~i~n of the resolutions to rezone the properties on the~uthwest corner of Clarence Street and Frost Avenue. T)tese change the zoning from BC (business commerc~l)~BC-M (business commercial modi~ie~) and..R~ (singl~llings). Commission/erGerke seconded ~es--Anitzberger, / A hl, Fischer, Gerke, ~ Lars , Rossbach, __// . Sigmundik, Sinn ~/~e motion passed. b. Code Amendment: R-1S & R-2 District Ken Roberts, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. Commissioner Rossbach said he is not comfortable with this proposed amendment. Mr. Rossbach explained there should be some flexibility with zoning allowed to developers in times of economic hardship. Mr. Rossbach said if this is approved, R-3 zoning should also be considered for amendment. Commissioner Fischer said she is concerned with this proposed amendment because of the zoning difficulty of large single dwellings, which at times could be used as double dwellings, or vice versa. Commissioner Rossbach moved the Planning Commission recommend: (1) That there be no change made in the existing R-2 zoning requirements. (2) Initiate hearings to investigate zoning of all R-2 properties used as R-1 and all R-1 properties used as R-2. (3) Staff be directed to explore alternative disclosure methods of making sure all purchasers are aware of zoning conditions around them. 29 Attachment 4 Planning Commission Minutes 10-15-90 -7- Commissioner Anitzberger seconded Ayes--Anitzberger, Axdahl, Fischer, Gerke, Larson, Rossbach, Sigmundik, Sinn The motion passed. BUSINESS me Planning Commission Resignatign / i loner Fischer moved /he Planning Commission z nd approval of the ~esolution of appreciation to is Larson for his ser~ce on the Planning ission. / Comm sioner Axdahl seconded / / / The ~asse~ Ayes--Anitzberger, Axdahl, Fischer, Gerke, Larson, Rossbach, Sigmundik, Sinn 8. VISITOR PRE There were no r presentations. 9. COMMISSION ~NS a. Council g: )ctober 8 Commi ~ners meet and Gerke reported on this Re 'esentative for the ctober 22 Council Meeting: is no represE scheduled for this meeting. 10. STAF PRESENTATIONS were no staff presentations. 11. g adjourned at 9:58 p.m. 30 ~~oner Pearson moved the Ma~ evaluators be the.HRA f~i~'poli~adequate or requires a Co~issiO~onnelly sec~ ~yes--Fischer, .~ ~, Pearson Nays--Whitcomb R-IS and R-2 Zoning Districts Secretary Roberts presented the staff report for this request to change the R-2 (double dwellings) zoning district. The HRA discussed their preference of mixing duplexes throughout the City rather than having large areas of duplexes only. Also discussed were the disagreements which develop in neighborhoods when the rezoning of undeveloped properties is proposed. The Commissioners discussed the possibility of staff surveying property owners in these districts for their comments on how they would like their property to be zoned. Also discussed was the possibility of the City initiating a one-time rezoning for these properties, thereby saving the property owners the cost of the fees involved. Commissioner Connelly moved the HRA recommend: No change to the R-2 zoning district ordinance at this time. We do not recommending initiating rezoning. However, if such rezoning is contemplated, no action be taken before "feeler letters" are sent to the property owners to determine their wishes. Commissioner Pearson seconded Ayes--Fischer, Connelly, Whitc°mb, 7 .~ BUS IN~~S Pearson · i~ of Multiple-Unit Residential Buildings 8. /~_A~E OF NEXT ME~ ADJOURNMENT / 31 Attachment 5 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: SUBJECT: DATE: City Manager Ken Robert, Associate Planner Ramsey County Block Grants February 7, 1991 INTRODUCTION Ramsey County is now accepting applications for the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program for fiscal year 1991. The County receives about $1 million in CDBG which they distribute. DISCUSSION I attended an informational meeting with county staff on December 13, 1990. County staff explained the application criteria and give examples of projects that have received funding in the past. All projects receiving CDBG funds must meet one of three criteria. These are: 1. Providing benefit to low-to-moderate income persons. The alleviation of slums or blight. This is usually for an entire area (neighborhood) or census tract. It takes care of "urgent need." This is a very difficult criteria to meet as HUD has a tough definition of urgent need. A variety of projects have received CDBG funds in the past~ Some have been for economic development or redevelopment which can include acquiring land for new building or to move an existing business. Such projects are usually done to remove blight. Another type of project included in the funding in the past are service or social in nature. Examples of these are the crisis nursery service of the Children's Home Society and the remodeling of three rooms in the Fairview Community Center for use by seniors. These projects qualified for CDBG funding since HUD assumes that children and seniors are low-income persons. Senior housing has also received CDBG funding. Examples include the $5-unit Golden Pond project in New Brighton and the 59-unit Cottages of Maplewood on Woodlynn Avenue. The CDBG program limits senior housing developments to those persons meeting the low-to-moderate income guidelines set by HUD. The County and the Metropolitan Housing and Redevelopment Authority (Metro HRA) have a low-interest home rehabilitation loan program that has received CDBG funds. This program is for all of suburban Ramsey County (including Maplewood) and has been on-going for three years. Health, safety and energy savings improvements to the homes of low-income persons is the purpose of this program. This is not a give-away program, however. Groups applying for CDBG funds~have well developed proposals. The proposal must include knowing how many persons will benefit, the construction schedule and cost and letters in support of other funding sources for the project. These other funds should be at least fifty percent of the projects total cost. Another application requirement is a resolution from the group requesting the money. In Maplewood's case, this would require project planning and budgeting well in advance of the CDBG application deadline. No such project work was done in 1990 for 1991. Maplewood cannot meet the application deadline of February 15, 1991 because of the application requirements and the short amount of time left. RECOMMENDATION Consider applying for CDBG funding with a private developer on a qualifying project in the future. mb/mem/grants TO: FROM: SUBJECT: DATE: INTRODUCTION MEMORANDUM City Manager Ken Roberts, Associate Planner February 8, 1991 The Saint Paul Area Association of Realtors is ~equesting an amendment to the Maplewood Truth-in-Housing Ordinance. Their request is to exempt those properties that were marketed for sale and continued to be marketed for sale on January 1st from the requirements of the truth-in-housing evaluation. (See their letter on page 3.) BACKGROUND On July 9, 1990, the City Council passed the Truth-in-Sale of Housing Ordinance. It became effective on January 1, 1991. The ordinance states the following: "An owner shall not show a housing unit or residential building to a prospective buyer without publicly displaying and making available a truth-in-sale- of-housing disclosure report. This report shall be at the housing unit or residential building at the time of showing and within three days of listing. A copy of the disclosure report shall be issued to the buyer before the execution of a contractual agreement.,, The ordinance defines a contractual agreement as: "An agreement, written or otherwise, between a buyer and seller for the conveyance of, or the intent to convey, all or a part of a housing unit residential building. A contractual agreement shall include, but not be limited to, an earnest money contract, deed or purchase agreement.,, ALTERNATIVES Change the truth-in-housing ordinance to exempt those properties that the owners had marketed for sale and continued to be marketed for sale on January 1, 1991, from the ordinance requirements. This is the request of the Realtors Association. Change ~he truth-in-housing ordinance to exempt those properties that had signed earnest money contracts or purchase agreements before January 1, 1991. 3. Make no change to the ordinance. DISCUSSION The City should separate sellers into two groups - those that had listing agreements before January 1 and those that had purchase agreements or earnest money contracts. The first group has decided to sell their homes, but do not have buyers yet. The second group has buyers that have signed contracts with the intent to buy. We agree with the Realtors that the City should exempt sellers in the second group. Buyers have already made an emotional and legal commitment to buy a house. It is probably too late for a housing evaluation to serve its intended purpose - buyer protection. A truth-in-housing evaluation would serve its purpose for the first group. The City intended the truth-in-housing ordinance to give prospective buyers more information before entering into a purchase agreement. Exempting those properties that were for sale, but did not have buyers before 1991 would be contrary to the purpose of the truth-in-housing ordinance. Having a truth-in-housing evaluation would help realtors and sellers in marketing their properties. A buyer would feel more confident buying a home with a housing evaluation over a house that does not have one. This evaluation will also help to protect the realtor by revealing information about possible defects with the property. Exempting sellers that have marketed, but not sold, their homes before January i creates administrative problems for the City. How does the City deal with sellers who do not use a realtor and, therefore, do not have a listing agreement? How do we know that they were marketing their homes as of January 17 How do we know that owners of sale-by-owner homes, that were marketed a year or two ago, have continued to market them as of January 17 Exempting only those sellers with signed earnest money contracts or purchase agreements would solve this problem, while maintaining the integrity of the ordinance. RECOMMENDATION Adopt the attached ordinance which exempts sellers with a signed purchase agreement or earnest money contract, before January X, from doing a truth-in-housing evaluation. memol.mem (5.6 T-I-H Ordinance) Attachments 1. 1-11-91 letter from the Saint Paul Association of Realtors 2. Proposed Ordinance Amendment 2 ST. PAUL AREA ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS, INC. REALTOR ® 325 East Roselawn Ave., St. Paul, MN 55117 · (612) 774-5206 January 11, ]ggo lq~O Officers President Joy Pringle, GRI President-Elect Donald Moietto Secretary Sherdll McClure Treasurer Dan Sullivan, GRI 19~;K) Directors Scott BarTaclough Don Currell Timothy Gallivan Ronald Glassman Patrick Jones Patrick Kinney. CRS Margaret Langeslay Clare Lillis, GRI,CRB Kathy Madore Robert Nicholson. GRI,CRS BoI~ Peltler Felicio Resig Fred Schmiclt Dean Trompe Susan Rose Ward. GRI '~mediate Past President Uonal Director chael Muske, GRI Past President National Director Deanna Wiener, GRI National Director Susan Rose Word, Gill Executive Vice President Keith O. Holm Geoff Olson, Director Community Development 1830 East County Road B Maplewood, MN 55109 Dear Geoff, As per our discussions related to enforcement of the truth-in- sale of housing evaluation process, I am requesting either an administrative interpretation or an ordinance ammendment that will serve the interest of homeowners in Maplewood that listed their properties for sale prior to January 1, 1991. Our Association members had interptreted the ordinance to mean that enforcement would not apply to homes listed for sale prior to January 1, 1991. This is an important point to consumers and to the listing agent because listings taken prior to January 1, are already part of a contractual agreement even though closing has not yet occurred. For example: -The seller has signed a contractual listing agreement. -The seller has disclosed and signed the Sellers Statement of Condition form. -In some cases the seller has already received and accepted an a written purchase agreement. -Consumers believing they are aware of all costs associated with the transaction are now adivsed that even though they listed their home months ago, they will now be charged an additional $90-$125 and the purchase agreements may no longer be applicable. -Some housing evaluators are using the interpretation of the oridnance as a tool for marketing their evaluation services. These evaluators are operating within the current interpretation. -Our current data shows that there are over 130+ single-family detached (this does not include townhomes and condos} homes in Maplewood that were listed for sale prior to January 1. Many of these listings were taken in the summer of lggO. Requiring homeowners to get housing evaluations done on homes listed last summer (or longer) appears to the consumer to be enforcement-after-the-fact. 3 Attachment 1 page 2 truth-in-sale of housing I recommend that to protect the integrity of the ordinance but yet accommodate consumers who initiated the sale of their property prior to January 1, 1991, add a sentence to Section 9- 242 Section 2. that says property marketed for sale and continued to be marketed for sale on January 1, 1991 are exempted from the truth-in-sale of housing evaluation. I am requesting that this modification be made as quickly as possible. Sincerely, i~ar~etl ~.-nr 1 sl:orrerson cc: Ken Roberts Members of the Realtor® Task Force ORDZN~NCE NO. AN ORDZN~NCE CONCERNZNG ~ AIq~ID~ TO THE TRUTH-TN-BALE OF HOUBZNG ORDZN~ICE THE MAPLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL HEREBY ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Sec. 9-237 is amended to read as follows: (Additions are underlined and deletions are crossed out.) (al This article shall not apply to any newly constructed housing or residential building when the title is conveyed to the first owner, except that no owner shall convey or contract to convey a newly-constructed housing unit or residential building without first providing to the buyer: (1) A list of the names, addresses and telephone n~mhers of all contractors and subcontractors who constructed the building. (2) The items in Section 9-238 (b) (2) (a, b, c, e, f, g, h and i). This article shall not apply to the sale of a property thai had an executed purchase aqreement or earnest money contract. before January 1. 1991. section 2. This ordinance shall take effect upon its passage and publication. 5 Attachment 2 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: DATE: City Manager Ken Roberts, Associate Planner HRAObjectives and Task Definitions February 6, 1991 INTRODUCTION The work program of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority's (HRA's) Annual Report for March 1989 through February 1990 has six general objectives and six task goals. (See pages 3, 4 and 5.) To help staff in setting a work program for the upcoming months, the HRA should further define and rank these objectives and tasks. BACKGROUND December 10, 1990: The City Council accepted the HRA's Annual Report for March 1989 through February 1990. The Work Program in the Annual Report has six general objectives and six task goals. At this meeting Commissioner Fisher asked the City Council to rank the six task goals in order of their importance. Staff received two responses from the Council. They are on pages 6 and 7. DISCUSSION The HRA should further define and clarify several of the objectives and task goals in the HRA Annual Report. A discussion of each needing further work follows. General Objective~ Se Use various media, including Maplewood in Motion, the Maplewood Review, the St. Paul paper and sewer bill inserts, to improve public awareness of housing issues. This should include information on the housing programs and developments in the City. The HRA should give staff direction on the use of the media about housing matters. Should staff place stories with the media at regular intervals or only when unique or special items come up? Task Goals Determine how suburban cities such as Maplewood can fund various support services for elderly persons. These services may include the home-share program. This program helps to keep elderly persons in their homes rather than sending them prematurely to a nursing home or apartment. Work with the seniors committee to determine how Maplewood can maintain an information and a referral service to aid older adults in finding available services. Sponsor or aid in any necessary code, law or policy revisions to make this information readily accessible to Maplewood residents. What support services do senior need? Are these a function of the HRA or should the Seniors Advisory Committee take up these items? The HRA should focus its energies on housing matters. As such, many of the needs of seniors raised in the two items above are beyond the scope of the HRA. Sponsor or review any necessary code or law revisions to address the problem areas about housing for City residents. What are the problem areas in housing in the City? Staff would welcome suggestions for improving the housing in the City. This might include additions or revisions to the City Code or trying to get the City Council to provide additional funds for housing improvement programs. RECOMMENDATION Clarify and then rank the general objectives and task goals in the HRA's Annual Report. kr\mem24.mem Attachments 1. Pages 2, 3 and 4 of the 1989 - 1990 HRA Annual Report 2. Mayor Bastian response to HRA 3. Council member response to HRA 1989-1990 HRA Annual Report Page 2 served on the Home Share Task Force Commission. Shown on page 11 are the Share-A-Home statistics. The Share-A-Home budget for 1990-1991 is $22,974. Funding includes $9,987 from the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency (MHFA), $11,487 from a Community Development Block Grant from the County and the remainder from fees collected. This program requires that the participating communities provide some of the funding. Maplewood's share of this cost is about $2,000. EMERGING CONCERNS After years of looking at senior housing needs, the HRA believes that support services are an integral part of the housing picture for seniors. There are a wide variety of services available from an equally wide variety of sources. Some of these are governmental, some quasi-public, some private, some available to others when compared to the need. Information on what is available and how to get it may not always be readily available to those in need. What is the role of the City in the resolution of these problems or the dissemination of such information? Another more traditional area of concern to an HRA is that of neighborhoods with deteriorating housing. Maplewood has some areas of older, pre-code housing which has the potential to deteriorate. As appropriate, the HRA will review the issue and consider possible solutions to lessen the problem. Exhibit G (page 13) notes the possible changes in the housing market. The City should prepare for them. The numbers of .people aged 25 to 34 in the region and country will be dropping. A possible effect from this population decrease may be a drop in demand for the modestly priced single-family houses in Maplewood. This drop in demand for starter single-family homes may, however, make them more affordable to people with lower incomes. 1990-1991 WORK PROGRAM General Objectives Continue to participate in Metropolitan Council and MHFA programs. Continue to review ordinances and policies about housing costs. Monitor subsidized housing proposals for consistency with the City housing plan and the guidelines for tax-exempt, tax-increment and Community Design Block Grant financing. 3 Attachment 1 1989-90 HRA Annual Report Page 3 Se Keep informed on happenings and changes that will influence the provision of affordable housing. Use various media, including Maplewood in Motion, the Maplewood Review, the St. Paul paper and sewer bill inserts, to improve public awareness of housing issues. This should include information on the housing programs and developments in the City. Encourage and aid in the provision of life-cycle housing, including alternative housing for older-adults. These efforts should include participation on the Older Adult Home-Share Stee~ing Commission. Task Goals Determine how suburban cities such as Maplewood can fund various support services for elderly persons. These services may include the home-share program. This program helps to keep elderly persons in their homes rather than sending them prematurely to a nursing home or apartment. Sponsor or review any necessary code or law revisions to address the problem areas about housing for City residents. Work with the seniors committee to determine how Maplewood can maintain an information and a ~eferral service to aid older adults in finding available services. Sponsor or aid in any necessary code, law, or policy revisions to make this information readily accessible to Maplewood residents. Participate in the Comprehensive Plan update process. is so the plan addresses: This ae The revision of the housing element to reflect current and possible future programs, housing needs and conditions. With this, develop housing policies for the city which address: Mortgage assistance for first-time home buyers and other persons who cannot afford to buy a house. (2) The encouragement of reinvestment in existing strong neighborhoods. (3) The need to encourage rehabilitation or redevelopment of severely deteriorated or abandoned housing. 1989-90 Annual Report Page 4 be de The incorporation of the HRA's task goals and objectives into the plan as appropriate. Providing criteria and the identification of residential and commercial target areas for ~.rehabilitation or redevelopment. The stricter enforcement of City codes to help prevent deteriorating housing, neighborhoods and blight in Maplewood. Have a tour for HRA, Council and interested Planning Commission members of areas of interest or concern in the Research why there has been a decline in MHFA grants to Maplewood residents. Classify each of the task-specific goals as high, medium, or low priority. WORKING WITH THE COUNCIL If .the HRA feels that additional input or guidance from the Council is desirable, we will make a request for a shirt-sleeve work session. The HRA could also make a presentation under the "Visitor Presentation" item on your agenda. Also included with this report, as Exhibit F, is an item we thought might be of interest to you. This is a summary of rental housing developed with tax-exempt financing to date. This includes number of units, amount of the bond issue, fees paid to the City and federal financing restrictions. LORRAINE B. FISCHER Chairperson Maplewood Housing and Redevelopment Authority kd JanuarM 4, lggo To: McGuire From: Bastian Ee: HRA Topics I would like to see proposals following ogee out of the HRA in 1991: (with options) for the (1) Support Services for elderly. I still am very much support the home-share program. I would like to see some utilization of volunteers, corrdinated through city using local chambers, to do repairs on needy senior homes. (2) Affordable housing opportunities for the first time home buyers, the empty nesters and the single parent w or w/o children. (3) Housing stock review and evaluation. What are the needs of the various neighborhoods to improve and maintain existing housing stock. Task Goals stated in HRA report: 1. High 2. Low .to Medium 3. Medium 4. High 5. After #3 above 6. High Attachment 2 H.R.A. ANNUAL REPORT -- PRESENTED 12-10-go COUNCZL MEMBER RESPONSE -- 12-15-90 II. III. IV. Vo Though brief and filled with numerous figures and statistical information, I found the report easy to understand after the second reading. If this commission is an important part of City Government, I am of the opinion that it should be staffed by advertising for commission members or it should be incorporated in the Planning Commission. The City of Maplewood is at a period in its development where some one or commission should be charged with the sole responsibility of identifying areas and developments that are in need of rehabilitation. If the H.R.A. wants to leave its mark on the citizens of Maplewood, I would ask them to accept this charge and file a report with the City Council on the areas to be cleaned up, what the needs are, how the code can be changed to mandate upkeep, address the use of the courts to enforce the concerns, etc. The H.R.A. might be the moving force to make sure any and all future developments, regardless of who they serve, or how they may be funded or who may receive housing assistance, will be of such construction, landscaping and ongoing maintenance written into the C.U. permits so that any and all residents of these developments can live there for many years and have the pride of being a resident of a city that will always back them and represent their needs. I believe that researching financial needs for current and future residents is important, but if my other concerns are addressed, a financial program will fall in place because of the restrictions placed on them by other agencies of government. 7 Attachment 3 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: DATE: 'City Manager Ken Roberts, Associate Planner HRA &ppointment February 4, 1991 INTRODUCTION There is a vacancy on the Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) created by the resignation of Dale Carlson. Mr. Carlson's term expires in March 1993. I have attached the applications for the two applicants. I advertised this opening in the Maplewood Review and in the Northeast section of the Saint Paul Pioneer Press. These announcements ran on December 26, 1990 and on January 16, 1991. RECOMMENDATION Interview and vote on the candidates. kr\memo12.mem Attachments 1. Theresa Leko application 2. Sandra Weis application CITY OF MAPLEWOOD BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS APPLICANT INFORMATION DATE NAME ADDRESS PHONE: (H) 777 (W) .~v~; 7v7- FFoO 1. How long have you lived in the City of Maplewood? ~g ~r~ Does your employment require travel or being away from the community which would make regular attendance at meetings difficult? Yes ~ No 3. On which Board or Commission are you interested in serving? __Community Design Review Board Housing & Redevelopment Authority Park & Recreation Commission Planning Commission Human Relations Commission Police civil Service Commission Do you have any specific areas of interest within this Board's or Commission's scope of responsibilities? 5. List other organizations or clubs in the Community in which you have been or are an active participant: 6. Why would you like to serve on this Board or Commission? ADDITIONAL CO~ENTS: ~3'~ .~ ~ ~ ~z~f ,~ ~m~ ,~ CITY OF MAPLEWOOD BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS APPLICANT INFORMATION HOW long have you lived in the City of Maplewood? Does your employment require travel or being away from the community which would make regular attendance at meetings difficult? Yes ~<~ No On which Board or Commission are you interested in serving? __Community Design Review Board fi~ Housing & Redevelopment Authority Park & Recreation Commission __Planning Commission Human Relations Commission Police civil Service Commission Do you have any specific areas of interest within this Board's or Commission's scope of responsibilities? / Se Se List other organizations or clubs in the Community in which you have been or are an active participant: Why would you like to serve on this Board or Commission? ADDITIONAL COMMENTS: / / 4 Attachment 2