Loading...
020310 planning commission CITY OF NEW HOPE 4401 XYLON AVENUE NORTH NEW HOPE, HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA 55428 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES February 3, 2010 City Hall, 7 p.m. CALL TO ORDER The New Hope Planning Commission met in regular session pursuant to due call and notice thereof; Chair Houle called the meeting to order at 7 p.m. ROLL CALL Present: Paul Anderson, Jim Brinkman, Jeff Houle, Sandra Hunten, Roger Landy, Ranjan Nirgudé, Tom Schmidt Absent: Pat Crough, Kimberly Johnson, Steve Svendsen Also Present: Curtis Jacobsen, Director of Community Development, Steve Sondrall, City Attorney, Eric Weiss, Community Development Assistant, Pamela Sylvester, Recording Secretary CONSENT BUSINESS There was no Consent Business on the agenda. PUBLIC HEARING PC09-12 Chair Houle introduced Item 4.1, discussion of an ordinance amending Chapter 3 of the New Hope City Code by requiring registration of vacant Item 4.1 buildings, city of New Hope, petitioner. Mr. Weiss stated that the city was considering adopting a Vacant Properties Registration (VPR) program to help ensure properties are maintained in a safe and healthy condition despite their vacancy status. Staff researched VPR programs from around the state and provided information to the Codes and Standards Committee. A draft ordinance based on Brooklyn Center’s program was provided to the Committee for consideration. The Planning Commission reviewed the draft at its meeting in January and recommended that several areas be revised to fit the needs of New Hope. The Committee thoroughly reviewed the ordinance at its meeting in January. The New Hope VPR would require the owner of a vacant property to register with the city and provide contact information, a timeline and property plan for the property within 30 days of the property becoming vacant. A property is considered vacant after two months. Owners should inform the city regarding the status of all utilities, and a property plan would be submitted to the building official for re-use. A one-time fee would be established based on administrative costs for registering and monitoring the vacant property. All vacant buildings must be secure. The city reserves the right to secure any unsecured buildings, which is authorized under another section of the city code. Building exteriors and yards must be maintained. Definitions for vacant and abandoned properties were added to the draft ordinance. A property would be defined as vacant after two months of being unoccupied and an abandoned property would be a building that is not being actively monitored or maintained. The language in the previous draft pertaining to demolition of a vacant building was removed. Exceptions to the vacant property registration were expanded to include fire, water, storm, ice and other extreme forms of damage. The exemption for “snowbirds” was renamed “seasonal residence” to reflect those who take extended vacations outside of the winter season. If an application for a vacant property would be made in conjunction with a point of sale application, the VPR fee would be waived. Timelines were altered to allow the property owner more time to register the property and make changes to the property. The program is intended to protect the vacant properties and adjacent properties. Mr. Weiss stated that staff and the Codes and Standards Committee recommend approval of the ordinance. Commissioner Brinkman commented that the Committee, staff and consultants did a very thorough job on this proposed ordinance and stated he felt it was ready to be approved. Commissioner Nirgudé initiated discussion on registration for property owners away from their residence for an extended period of time. Mr. Weiss stated that those owners would not be required to register, however, the owner should contact the city and request the exemption and provide contact information. Discussion ensued on the minimum length of time a property owner would be gone before being required to register. Registration would be beneficial to the city to know how long the property may be vacant and have contact information on file in the event of an emergency. The property owner would benefit knowing that the city was keeping an eye on the property. Currently, if a someone calls to inform the city of a vacant property, staff does not know if the homeowner intends to return or if the property was abandoned. The exemption excludes the seasonal residence owners from providing a property plan and paying a fee. Mr. Sondrall, city attorney, stated the difference between registering as a vacant property or a seasonal residence is that the owners of the seasonal residence intend to come back within a specified period of time. A property owner could determine if he wanted to contact the city based on his comfort level for less than two months. A homeowner planning on being away for two months or more would be the general rule when to seek an exemption and register the property. However, a homeowner could register if away for less than two months, as well. Commissioner Nirgudé pointed out that many people may be away from home due to business reasons and may be working out of the state or country for an extended period of time. He stated he felt it would be good to advise the city of the situation. In answer to a question regarding liability to the city, Mr. Sondrall responded that this ordinance exempts homeowners from registering as a 2 Planning Commission Meeting February 3, 2010 vacant property and there would be no liability on the city’s part. In order to exempt the seasonal residence owners, they need to register as seasonal and not a vacant property. Commissioner Hunten stressed that the city should not be obligating itself to look at all these properties, it would just be done as a courtesy. If something did happen to a registered property, the city would have contact information on file. Mr. Sondrall commented that the seasonal residence section could be removed and treat anyone on vacation or extended business or out of their home due to casualty damage to the property in the same manner as any other vacant property. If the property would remain vacant for two months or if they had not started repairs on a casualty issue for two months, the city could start enforcement action. Commissioner Anderson raised the issue of the Minnesota Statutes 463.15 dealing with hazardous buildings. He stated he was concerned with the amount of time spent reviewing this ordinance. Other ordinances in the city code already dealt with most of the issues caused by the vacant buildings. Mr. Sondrall stated that statute 463 mainly dealt with hazardous buildings, which was removed from this ordinance. Anderson stated he did not support this ordinance. Chair Houle initiated discussion on foreclosed residential properties and the steps the city takes to monitor those properties. Mr. Sondrall pointed out that this ordinance was a continuation of an ordinance passed a year ago to allow the city to secure vacant unsecured buildings that were getting close to becoming hazardous due to broken water pipes and so forth. The City Council felt it would be beneficial for the city to have property owners with vacant buildings to register with the city. In answer to a question from Chair Houle, Mr. Jacobsen responded that Brooklyn Center mainly applies their ordinance to commercial/industrial properties. New Hope’s housing stock has been maintained in good condition through the city’s point-of-sale inspections and the City Council desires to continue that practice. Mr. Jacobsen indicated that once residents become aware of the ordinance the majority of them would comply with registering their vacant properties so that in the event of an emergency or damage from graffiti, they could be contacted by the city. Commissioner Hunten commented that the registration of the property and monitoring the property by the city not only protects the property owner, but also the neighbors. She added that adjacent communities have adopted ordinances regarding the registration of vacant buildings and must have found it beneficial. 3 Planning Commission Meeting February 3, 2010 Chair Houle raised the issue of whether or not owners of multi-tenant buildings needed to register if one or more tenant bays were vacant and the answer was no. Mr. Sondrall replied that the intent of the ordinance was to insure that a property manager was overseeing the property and that if the property became vacant that there was a plan for the re- occupation of the building. The city would like to build a database of the properties so if someone contacts the city regarding a particular vacant building, the city can respond with the current plan. Discussion ensued regarding the registration permit and whether or not it would be a good idea to post the permit on the building. The name of the permit was discussed and if it was intended to be posted on the property, it should not indicate building is vacant. The permit would be developed by staff upon adoption of the ordinance. MOTION Motion by Commissioner Brinkman, seconded by Commissioner Landy, Item 4.1 to approve an ordinance amending Chapter 3 of the New Hope City Code by requiring registration of vacant buildings, city of New Hope, petitioner. Voting in favor: Brinkman, Hunten, Landy, Schmidt Voting against: Anderson, Houle, Nirgudé Absent: Crough, Johnson, Svendsen Motion approved. Chair Houle stated that this ordinance would be considered by the City Council at its meeting on February 22. PC09-13 Chair Houle introduced Item 4.2, discussion of an ordinance amending Chapter 3-31(e)(7) and 14-2(10) by reducing the point-of-conversion Item 4.2 inspection fee for rental property, city of New Hope, petitioner. Mr. Jacobsen stated that staff and the Codes and Standards Committee had been reviewing the Rental Registration Program, focusing on the rental conversion fee at this time. The fee was approved in late 2008 and enacted in January 2009. Since that time, numerous residents and property owners have complained about the $1,000 conversion fee. Per correspondence sent to the city on this matter, the most common complaint is that the owner feels little is received for the large fee amount. The conversion fee is in addition to the annual registration fee charged to all single family rental properties. An inspection is included with the annual registration. The rental inspection and conversion inspection are essentially the same. The city inspects for compliance with minimum standards as set forth in the property maintenance code. The City Council reviewed the point of conversion portion of the rental program in February 2009 and declined to make any changes at that time. Since that time, the Codes and Standards Committee was directed to study the rental housing registration program in its entirety. In 2009, 39 4 Planning Commission Meeting February 3, 2010 properties paid the $1,000 fee, and four have paid the fee in 2010. There are approximately 370 single family rental properties in the city. The Community Development Department is unaware of any problems with the remainder of the Rental Registration Program. The Codes and Standards Committee intends to review the remainder of the program in the near future. The inspections staff has noted that rental properties have vastly improved since the rental program was enacted in 2006. The Codes and Standards Committee recommended the code be amended to provide for a smaller initial fee and a partial refund if property owners complete a course provided by the Minnesota Multi- Housing Association. The Committee recommended the fee be lowered from $1,000 to $400. After the owner completes the course, “The Fundamentals of Renal Property Management in Minnesota,” the city would refund the property owner $150. The cost of the course is $49. The course would be very beneficial to individuals who are not experienced landlords. Robbinsdale has approved a similar approach to its rental conversion program. Commissioner Hunten clarified that it would be up to the property owner whether or not they took the class to educate themselves about rental property management. The property owner would need to provide the city with a copy of the certificate received after taking the class to receive the refund. A question was raised whether or not the property owners who had paid the fee would get a refund, and Mr. Jacobsen indicated that would be up to the City Council. Commissioner Nirgudé questioned whether there were any other expenses to the city for the conversion of the property. Mr. Jacobsen responded the utilities generally are changed into the tenant’s name, but there was no cost for that. Commissioner Hunten stressed that the city should not penalize the property owners who, due to circumstances, may be forced to rent their property. Mr. Jacobsen mentioned that many times landlords who own multiple properties have more experience and are aware of issues related to rental property. The class offered by the Minnesota Multi-Housing Association would provide a good rental background for property owners who are renting their property for the first time. Commissioner Schmidt stated that he was saddened to read the letters from property owners who were forced to pay the $1,000 fee and felt the Council should have dealt with this issue last year. Commissioner Hunten initiated discussion on the length of time allowed 5 Planning Commission Meeting February 3, 2010 for a rental property owner to attend “The Fundamentals of Rental Property Management in Minnesota” class. She recommended six months prior to until six months after renting was ample time rather than 12 months as stated in the draft ordinance, depending on how often the class is offered. Commissioner Nirgudé requested clarification on the effective date of the ordinance. The ordinance would be effective upon publication in the city newspaper. It would also be advertised in other city publications and posted on the city’s website. MOTION Motion by Commissioner Hunten, seconded by Commissioner Landy, to Item 4.2 approve an ordinance amending Chapter 3-31(e)(7) and 14-2(10) by reducing the point-of-conversion inspection fee for rental property, city of New Hope, petitioner, subject to the following change: 1.The 12 month time frame to attend the Minnesota Multi-Housing Association’s rental housing orientation program called “The Fundamentals of Rental Property Management in Minnesota” be changed to six months prior to or subsequent of the property’s conversion. Chair Houle added that he felt there was a perception with the public that there were too many single family rental properties in the city and the residents he spoke to had indicated a concern. Commissioner Schmidt commented that he felt the city’s rental inspection program had encouraged property owners to maintain the property. Commissioner Nirgudé stated he was not in favor of changing the conversion fee. Voting in favor: Anderson, Brinkman, Hunten, Landy, Schmidt Voting against: Houle, Nirgudé Absent: Crough, Johnson, Svendsen Motion approved. Chair Houle stated that this ordinance would be considered by the City Council at its meeting on February 22. COMMITTEE REPORTS Design and Review Chair Houle stated that the Design and Review Committee did not meet in January. Mr. Jacobsen added that no pre-application meetings were Committee conducted and staff was not anticipating any new applications to be Item 5.1 submitted on February 5. Codes and Standards Commissioner Schmidt reported that the Codes and Standards Committee met in January to revisit the vacant building ordinance and Committee 6 Planning Commission Meeting February 3, 2010 Item 5.2 rental conversion fee. The committee will be continuing its discussion on the entire rental registration program and the licensing of massage parlors. Mr. Jacobsen mentioned that the City Council indicated it wanted solicitors to register and have the city conduct background checks. The city attorney would be drafting an ordinance and it will then be reviewed by the Citizen Advisory Commission and Human Rights Commission for comments. The next Committee meeting will be on March 17 at 6 p.m. OLD BUSINESS Chair Houle called attention to the memo in the packet stating the City Council thanked the Codes and Standards Committee and Planning Miscellaneous Issues Commission for their work on the temporary sign code regulating the Item 6.1 setbacks for small temporary signs and finding a solution to meet the needs of New Hope citizens. NEW BUSINESS Discussion Item Mr. Jacobsen gave a brief update on the Village on Quebec redevelopment project that was constructed in 2006/2007. He commented Planning Case 06-06 that the end product was very close to what had been approved by the Item 7.1 Planning Commission and City Council. This project was approved prior to the adoption of the Design Guidelines. The vacancy issue was beyond the scope of the Planning Commission. Motion to Approve Motion by Commissioner Landy, seconded by Commissioner Brinkman, Minutes to approve the Planning Commission minutes of January 5, 2010. All Item 7.2 voted in favor. Motion carried. ANNOUNCEMENTS There were no announcements. ADJOURNMENT The Planning Commission meeting was unanimously adjourned at 8:40 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Pamela Sylvester Recording Secretary 7 Planning Commission Meeting February 3, 2010