2010.05.06 04 SUP-10-04 Mt. Pleasant Planning Commission

Present: English, Holtgreive, Kostrzewa, Lux, Orlik (Chair), Rautanen, Smith (Vice-Chair)

Absent: Brockman – excused; Robinette.

Staff: Gray, Ridley, Murphy.

Agenda

SUP-10-04 – 400-402 S. University – The Wellman Group. Request for a Special Use Permit to convert the property to a residential duplex.

Minutes

SUP-10-04 – 400-402 S University - Request to allow existing building to be converted to residential, single-family duplex.

Chairman Orlik called the applicant forward and asked why they were applying for a Special Use Permit as a duplex is a permitted use by right in the OS-1 district. Cliff Wellman, owner and applicant, indicated there had been some miscommunication. Although they discussed their plan with Staff a year ago and were told they didn’t need a SUP, recent conversations with other staff members conflicted with this information resulting in the confusion.

Chairman Orlik clarified with staff that this was an allowed use by right. Staff explained that the use is an allowed use in the OS-1 district, provided the requirements of the ordinance are met. Staff stated the requirements include sufficient lot size, parking requirements to include not only a sufficient number of hard surfaced spaces, but that the required parking does not encroach into the side yard setback. Staff explained that by removing the first ten feet of the pavement that is currently on the site, the applicant would meet these requirements.

Commissioner English asked if a duplex in the OS-1 District would be for single-families. Staff stated that it would, and any over-occupancy issues would be cause for revoking the rental license.

Commissioner Smith suggested that the applicant may wish to withdraw their request. Cliff Wellman requested the case be withdrawn.

Chairman Orlik suggested a motion to postpone action indefinitely based on the applicant’s withdrawal. Motion by Rautanen, support by Smith to postpone Case SUP-10-04 indefinitely. Discussion continued with Commissioner Holtgreive expressing concern over not holding a public hearing since the notice was posted. Commissioner Kostrzewa concurred; stating he would be in favor of hearing the neighbor’s comments and suggested it may beneficial for the Wellman’s to hear the concerns as well.

Commissioner English stated the applicant doesn’t really need approval to convert the property to a duplex, and asked for clarification on what postponing the case would mean. Commissioner Lux asked if there were any legal ramifications on not holding the public hearing. Chairman Orlik stated the only legal action the Board could take on this case would be to approve the request if they move forward with it. Smith stated that as the applicant has withdrawn the case, it’s a moot point.

Staff reminded Commissioners that even without a Public Hearing, anyone who wishes to speak will still have a chance to do so during the Public Comment section of the agenda.

Chairman Orlik re-stated the motion on the table and asked staff to roll call the vote.

All ayes, given the public would have an opportunity to speak.

Public Comments:

Chairman Orlik opened the public comments portion of the meeting.

Sherman Rowley, director of the funeral home north of 400/402 S. University, spoke in opposition of another rental in the area. Mr. Rowley had letters from 17 of the neighbors in the area, who were also opposed. Mr. Rowley expressed concerns over the lack of maintenance on the property as well as the difficulty in regulating the occupancy. He was concerned with the effect the rental could have on the neighboring funeral home business.

Mariana Quick, 404 S. University, voiced opposition to another rental in the area, noting two of her main concerns as noise and property maintenance. Ms. Quick stated that the owners of 402 S. University were not residents of the area, therefore for them it is a business, where for the residents, it is their home. Ms. Quick shared some pictures of homes in the area, comparing the condition of the owner occupied homes with those that are student rentals.

Jim Smolko, 406 S. University, voiced opposition to a duplex in this location and reiterated Ms. Quick’s concerns.

Geoffrey Quick, 404 S. University, spoke in opposition to a duplex at 400/402 S University. Mr. Quick stated he was shocked to learn that duplexes were allowed in the OS-1 district as a use by right and asked that the Planning Commission take a look at the ordinance. Mr. Quick stated that a duplex in this location would adversely impact the value of neighboring properties and would adversely impact the neighbors’ enjoyment and quality of life. Mr. Quick stated that Mt. Pleasant has a history of rental properties not being maintained. He further stated that with the property having no back yard, it would be difficult to attract families and fears this will turn into a student rental. Mr. Quick also referred to the City’s Owner Occupied Residential Incentive Program and suggested that the ordinance goes against what the city is trying to promote with this program.

Elaine Betts, 413 S. University voiced opposition to a duplex in this location, voicing concerns with the declining neighborhood, noise and vandalism. Ms. Betts stated that just because the owners were not successful in renting the property as office space, it should not mean that the neighborhood has to suffer. She further questioned how to get the ordinance changed.

Scott Owen, 417 S. University, voiced opposition to another rental in the area. Mr. Owen stated he understands that the owners are good people, and want good renters; however, he stated the reality is they need to pay the mortgage and fears that this means they will end up renting to students if they can’t find families who wish to rent the property. He too questioned what the public could do to get the ordinance changed.

There being no one else who wished to speak, Chairman Orlik closed the public comments section of the meeting.

New Business:

OS-1 Districts: Chairman Orlik asked if there was any interest from the Board in looking at the ordinance and what is allowed in the OS-1 District.

Commissioner Smith stated he was on the Planning Commission when the requirement for SUP’s for duplexes was added for Residential districts and suggested that it may be appropriate to require them in the OS-1 as well.

Commissioner English stated she was in favor of looking at the OS-1 district in regards to the allowed uses, including why duplexes are allowed by right and what ramifications that may have on neighboring properties.

Commissioner Kostrzewa stated he feels the OS-1 is fine the way it is.

Motion by Lux, support by Rautanen to instruct staff to bring back an analysis of uses currently allowed in the OS-1 district and if such uses are appropriate for what the zoning district was created for, along with recommendations on action the Commission could take if they deem action is warranted.

Ayes: English, Lux, Holtgreive, Orlik, Rautanen, Smith,

Nays: Kostrzewa.

Motion carried.

Commissioner English asked staff what recourse there is for neighbors to address their concerns.

Staff stated that all rentals are subject to licensing, therefore, issues with the structure itself, and over-occupancy issues should go to the licensing staff at the Fire Department. Code Enforcement deals with outside issues, such as tall grass, garbage, etc. Noise complaints should be directed to the Police Department.

Commissioner Kostrzewa stated he feels like duplexes are being given a bad name and sees nothing wrong with them. He feels they are a good housing option for people. He further stated there can be properties in any area that aren’t maintained and does not see a need to change the OS-1 language.

Commissioner Rautanen commented that he doesn’t feel that duplexes are necearrily bad, but perhaps there should be a process in place for putting one in the OS-1 district as there is in the R districts.

Commissioner Holtgreive suggested that increased code enforcement in areas where student rentals are sprinkled in with family homes is needed.

Commissioner Lux asked staff what the process is now for the S. University property if the owners pursue a duplex.

Staff explained that the owners can have a duplex as a matter of right providing they comply with the requirements, as the OS-1 district pulls in all allowed uses in the R and M-1 Districts. He further commented that if they wished to convert the building into 3 units, they could. Staff stated that the owners will need to obtain a building permit for any structural changes they need to make to the building. They will need to obtain a rental license and pass the licensing inspection and will need to remove a portion of the pavement.

Staff further commented that the property is for sale and although he agrees that office use may be better for that area, there does not appear to be a market for that right now and if the owner’s choose to keep the building as office use, there is a good chance the property will remain vacant.