Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2000 12-19 HCM MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE HOUSING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND STATE OF MINNESOTA REGULAR SESSION DECEMBER 19, 2000 CONFERENCE ROOM B CALL TO ORDER The Brooklyn Center Housing Commission was called to order by Chairperson Erickson at 7 p.m. ROLL CALL Chairperson Ernie Erickson, Conunissioners Shawn Taylor, Dennis Snook, Lloyd Deuel, Kathleen Carmody, and Mark Yelich. Also present were Council Liaison Bob Peppe, and Community Development Specialist Tom Bublitz. Commissioners Martin Frawley and Elizabeth Davis and Michael VonDeLinde were absent and excused from the meeting. APPROVAL OF AGENDA There was a motion by Commissioner Deuel and seconded by Commissioner Yelich to approve the agenda as submitted. The motion passed. APPROVAL OF MINUTES November 21, 2000 There was a motion by Commissioner Yelich and seconded by Commissioner Carmody to approve the November 21, 2000 Housing Commission minutes as submitted. The motion passed. CHAIRPERSONS REPORT Chairperson Erickson noted that the Mayor had sent him a letter regarding reappointment of Commission Members whose terms expire at the end of 2000. He noted the Commissioners included Kathleen Carmody, Martin Frawley and himself. Commissioner Carmody stated that she would be willing to be reappointed to an additional term. Chairperson Erickson noted that he would contact Commissioner Frawley regarding appointment to an additional term. REVIEW AND DISCUSSION OF CITY ORDINANCES The Communiry Development Specialist reviewed a memorandum from May 1991 titled 12-19-00 -1- Controlling Driveway Widths and Paving in Front Yards and Yards Abutting a Public Street. He explained that the 50% limit on paving of front yards was enacted at the time Ordinance 19-103 (Public Nuisances) was amended in 1988. He noted the 50 limit was enacted to prevent an entire yard from being paved. The Community Development Specialist explained, that even with the 50 limitation on paving, there were still problems with the ordinance. One specific problem occurred on Brooklyn Boulevard where one single family homeowner elected to create a parking area in the front yard adjacent to the driveway. The individual essentially carved out a semi circle adjacent to the driveway and in the front yard and did not provide any surface for parking on this area. The individual was subsequently prosecuted for parking on an inadequate surface but then brought the area up to a minimal standard with regard to surface material. Even though the individual minimally complied with the ordinance, the parking area created an undesirable situation with regard to vehicle parking in residential neighborhoods. The issue with regard to parking areas created by the individual on Brooklyn Boulevard prompted the 1991 discussion contained in the May 13, 1991 memorandum and proposed the ordinance language contained in the 1991 discussion and which is included in the Housing Commission's agenda packet. Essentially, the ordinance language proposed in the draft ordinance submitted in 1991 would delete the provision that allows authorized driveways and paved or graveled extensions of these driveways to be up to 50 of the front yard or yard area abutting a public street and substitute it with a requirement that paved or gravel expansions of authorized driveways would be limited to 12 feet for parking or turnaround areas. The ordinance language would also require that driveways be hard surface such as concrete or asphalt. Ultimately, the proposed ordinance discussed in 1991 was not adopted by the City Council. The Community Development Specialist briefly reviewed Fridley's ordinance and program requiring paving of driveways by the year 2002. He noted the ordinance was enacted in 1997 and that at that time there were approximately 430 unpaved driveways in the City. Fridley staff had informed him that presently there are approximately 70 unpaved driveways in the City. He also noted that the Fridley program allowed homeowners to take advantage of the City's street improvement project and have their driveways paved as part of the street project. In the Fridley program homeowners were given a unit price for installing a driveway and could elect to have the cost of the paving assessed on their tax bill. The Community Development Specialist next reviewed the survey data from a 1991 survey of driveways throughout the City. He noted that the 1991 survey showed 258 total unimproved driveways in the City with a majority of unpaved driveways occurring in the southeast neighborhood at 132. Additionally, there was a rental property survey done at the same time which showed 22 unimproved driveways in the City for rental property. Commissioner Carmody commented thaZ if only a small percentage of driveways are not paved a 12-19-00 -2- case could be made that the standard in the City is a paved driveway. Commissioner Carmody also inquired as to the cost of paving a typical driveway. The Community Development Specialist stated that he would obtain figures from the Engineering Department with regard to a cost estimate for paving driveways and have it available at the January meeting. Commissioner Yelich commented that, based on the Council discussion of the ordinance, it seemed to have support of staff and Council. He inquired as to why the ordinance was never discussed further or acted upon. Council Liaison Peppe commented that at the time, the Council may have had other issues that were larger problems and they wanted to address those items first. He noted that if the Housing Commission wants to move the issue forward they should look at what the problem is today. He commented that with the implementation of the street improvement program, there will likely be a change in attitude with regard to improving properties noting that real estate prices have increased significantly and the City's successful street improvement project may have some influence on how people view the value of improvements. Commission Carmody stated that she thinks there is a new standard now as opposed to when the southeast neighborhood initially rejected the first street improvement project. Commissioner Yelich stated that he believes the Commission should review the 1991 proposed ordinance amendment and take the language up again when they meet with Ron Warren at the January meeting. Commissioner Carmody stated that she did not believe any communication with the neighborhoods should go through the planning advisory groups but that information meetings could be held on any ordinance changes proposed like the City does for street improvement projects. Council Liaison Peppe stated that he believes Commissioner Yelich has suggested a good approach and that he believes we need to educate ourselves and eventually discuss the issue with neighborhoods. Chairperson Erickson inquired if it would be advisable to concentrate on a specific neighborhood. Commissioner Carmody suggested that the Commission determine where and when the street improvement meetings for projects this summer will be held and determine whether or not the Cominission could potentially piggyback with these meetings. 12-19-00 _3_ Commissioner Yelich inquired that, with regard to the proposed ordinance in 1991, would there be a limit on the number of entrances, meaning a limit on the number of curb cuts. He noted the New Hope City Ordinance only allows one driveway per residence. Also, in the 1991 minutes, he noted that there was a reference to a discussion by the Council of the term "well compacted gravel" He noted there was a discussion with regard to what this means and he noted that personally he would like to require a hard surface and not "well compacted gravel" The Commission continued a brief review of other items to be addressed in their ordinance discussion including the issue of collector cars, fence maintenance and yard cover. The Community Development Specialist noted that he would try to put together a report which outlined the Commission's directions to date with regard to their ordinance discussion. OTHER BUSINESS As followup to an inquiry made at the last Commission meeting, the Community Development Specialist briefly reviewed the grant received by the Ciry from the Metropolitan Council with regard to a planning study. He noted that the area to be addressed would be the area roughly bounded by a triangle area with Brooklyn Boulevard, I694 and Highway 100 as the boundaries. He noted that it was his understanding the study would analyze the geographic area previously described and determine what opportunities there might be for growth and development. He noted he would keep the Commission informed of the progress of the study as it proceeded. Commissioner Deuel inquired as to the status of the Brookdale project. Council Liaison Peppe noted that the City Council will be holding a meeting on December 21 to discuss changes in the Development Agreement with the City and Brookdale's owners. ADJOURNMENT There was a motion by Commissioner Carmody and seconded by Commissioner Deuel to adjourn tt►e meeting. The motion passed. The Brooklyn Center Housing Commission adjourned a 8:30 �afrmari 12-19-00 -4-