Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCouncil Workshop Minutes 10.11.2011 MINUTES COUNCIL WORKSHOP OCTOBER 11, 2011 6:30 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS A Council Workshop was held in the Council Chambers and called to order by Mayor Ken Olson at 6:36 p.m. on October 11, 2011. COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: _x Emelie Eaton _x_ Doug Poehls _x_ Bruce McGee _x_ Mark Mace _x_ Chuck Rodgers _x_ Chuck Dickerson _x Tom Nelson _ Norm Stamper OTHERS PRESENT: Heidi Jensen Rick Musson Gary Colley Public Input (three - minute limit): Citizens may address the Council regarding any item of City business not on the agenda. The duration for an individual speaking under Public Input is limited to three minutes. While all comments are welcome, the Council will not take action on any item not on the agenda. There was no public input. General items: • Laurel Police Reserves: Bill Rash Chief Musson introduced Bill Rash as a candidate for the Laurel Police Reserves. Bill, who is currently the fire chief in Lockwood, worked in law enforcement for 23 years in Gallatin County, Belgrade and Lewistown. He also has 34 years of fire service, starting as a volunteer and then ten years in a full -time position. Chief Musson stated that Bill is excited about joining the Laurel Police Reserves and that he will bring a lot of experience and information to the reserve unit. The appointment will be on the October 18 council agenda. Executive Review: • Zoning variance request — Ann Kero, 215 East 5 Street, Lots 3 -4, Block 22 of Laurel Realty Second Subdivision Mayor Olson stated that this is an opportunity for the council to become more informed on the issue and is not the public hearing, which is scheduled for October 18 Mayor Olson asked CAO /City Planner Heidi Jensen to present the issue. Heidi Jensen spoke regarding the variance for 215 East 5 Street and the packet of information regarding the variance. The property is zoned R -6000, which allows for modular homes. Ms. Kero is asking for a mobile or manufactured home to be allowed on the property. She stated that Building Inspector Gary Colley attended tonight to answer any questions on the difference between a modular and a manufactured home. Heidi explained that the first page of the staff report provides a description of the location of the property and the request for a variance. The second page outlines the Zoning Commission's considerations and recommendation and explains the section of the LMC and the seven Council Workshop Minutes of October 11, 2011 criteria that are required for the council to make a decision. The staff findings explained another part of the LMC the council needs to factor into the decision next week. The Planning Board held a public hearing and recommended approval with the conditions included on page three of the staff findings, as well as the attached exhibit letter from the applicant's attorney, Bill Cole. Heidi explained that number four was included to expedite this process, as Ms. Kero has been in the city office since July regarding this issue. It has been requested that the council make a decision on October 18 instead of waiting until the next regular council meeting. Heidi stated three staff conditions. The first one is a reminder to the applicant to get a building permit. The second one is that the applicant shall perform normal upkeep and maintenance of the premises to maintain a neat and tidy appearance and control for noxious weeds. The third one is that, should the council approve the variance, the variance would become null and void in the case of any removal, fire or other natural disaster. The attachments included the applicant's application, a drawing of the property, a letter of protest and some other information. Mayor Olson stated that public input would be allowed for three minutes each at this time, after which the discussion would be only for the council. Corey Styles, 219 East 5 Street, lives to the right of the property. He stated that he found out about the meeting this afternoon and did not receive a certified letter from the city. He stated that 22 out of 23 people that live in the whole block signed a petition that read "we the property owners signed below are totally against putting a mobile or manufactured home on the vacant lot at 215 Fifth Street, Laurel Montana. We have serious concerns as to how this will affect our property in the future. To our knowledge this area is not zoned for mobile homes. If we had thought a mobile home would be placed in our neighborhood, we would not have bought a home in this area. We would like the city council to know that we are very disturbed that this could be a possibility for our neighborhood. Please be considerate to our feelings and wishes when you approach to allow this possibility." Corey stated that only Ms. Goodpaster received a certified letter, and she sent a letter of protest. Corey continued to speak regarding the current R -6000 zoning of the property, manufactured homes and HUD houses, the petition signed by the surrounding neighbors, the need for honesty, and control of the weeds on the property. Mayor Olson asked the public to limit their time to three minutes each. Candi Anderson, 119 East 5 Street, and Scott Ostermiller, 119 East 5 Street, stated that they had no knowledge of this until today. Scott stated that putting a mobile home next to their property will drop the value of the property. Scott agrees with Corey's statements and does not think it is fair for the city to try to change the zoning. Fred Keller, 7339 Symetra Place, Billings, MT 59106, spoke about Anne Kero's proposed home, which is a HUD coded home. He stated that there are two different code issues and ways houses are built, which include HUD coded homes and IRC modular homes. The outside appearance of Anne's home on a permanent foundation will have the same appearance as a site -built home. If her home had been built to IRC code and put on a permanent foundation, it would look no different than it is going to look as a HUD coded home. Fred read a letter from Jason Lillie, of Prudential Floberg Realtors in Billings. The letter was presented at the zoning hearing. 2 Council Workshop Minutes of October 11, 2011 Fred stated that the home will be put on a permanent foundation, de- titled and be real property taxed like a site -built home in the City of Laurel. Anne's total construction costs for this project are in excess of $185,000 and she has not done any landscaping yet. It will not be a cheaply constructed home, will not look like a trailer house on a city lot, and will have a site built garage. Anne plans to pour new sidewalk and clean up the lot. Fred works for Centennial Homes and stated that Anne was not swindled into buying a home that did not go on a lot. He stated that Anne wants to retire and be part of this community. Mayor Olson asked the public to be cognizant that this is not a public hearing. Laura Mussetter lives at 1920 East Maryland Lane in Laurel. Laura's company, Magnum Development, builds an engineered frost -free HUD compliant permanent foundation system. She agreed with the opponents that nobody wants the stigmatic trailer park in their back yard. But manufactured homes of today are visually virtually identical to their IRC modular counterpart. They are energy efficient, clean, comfortable, and very affordable. Between a Federal HUD code home and an IRC modular home, there are some minor differences in plumbing and electrical codes. The major difference is that the frame stays under the HUD code home, and it comes off a modular home. She stated that they are probably built to a better standard than the existing homes as far as energy efficiency, insulation, and cost per square foot. She suggested providing pictures of the proposed home so the opponents can visually see what would be located on the lot. Bill Cole, Cole Law Firm, 3733 Tommy Armour Circle, represents Anne Kero. Bill stated that communication is needed with the neighbors and proposed setting up a meeting this week. He spoke regarding the difference between what the city allows in a modular home and what it prohibits in this particular manufactured home and stated that it has to go beyond aesthetics. Legally, it needs to go to something that would really impact the neighborhood. He spoke regarding his letter that laid out the seven criteria. In this case, this particular house will be roughly a $200,000 house. He stated that Mr. Styles' is one of the nicer ones on the street there, and Zillow.com says it has about $150,000 value. The average house on the street is worth about $118,000. Mr. Cole is confident that Mr. Styles' house will not devalue Anne's and Anne's won't devalue his. The home will be on a permanent foundation, look like stucco or concrete, and have 1,500 square feet with three bedrooms. Most of the other houses in the neighborhood are about 1,100 square feet, so this is larger and newer, with the exception of Mr. Styles' house. Mr. Cole stated that, unfortunately, Anne is here because of what she was told by Centennial Homes about the zoning, and Centennial was told something by a city representative, according to Centennial. Mr. Cole stated that he would try to communicate with the neighborhood in the week ahead. Anne Kero stated that she would like to reside at 215 East Fifth Street. She is currently staying with a friend in Billings. She thought she was trying to improve the neighborhood. There was a burned out foundation on the lot, the foundation is gone, and the lot is ready for her home. She stated that she has sprayed weeds, intends to replace the sidewalk, and wants to have a nice - looking home to live in. Mayor Olson asked for further public input. Seeing none, he asked for council discussion. Doug asked that Gary Colley explain the exact difference between modular and manufactured homes. Gary stated that the electrical and plumbing are not built to the same standards as adopted in the City of Laurel, which is the International Residential Code. They are built to HUD specifications, not 3 Council Workshop Minutes of October 11, 2011 International Residential Code. The basic differences are in the electrical and plumbing. The vent piping in a manufactured home is probably going to be a little bit smaller than required by the State of Montana, which is 11/2 to 2 -inch and through the roof. The city would require engineered plans to set the house on a foundation before the city would approve it. Emelie questioned the process and Anne's plans for the lot if the variance is not approved. Anne would sell the lot and try to sell the house back. Tom asked if the purchaser of the home or if Centennial Homes contacted the City of Laurel. Gary stated that Fred contacted him and asked if manufactured homes or modular homes would be allowed in R -6000. His answer was that, as long as it sits on a full foundation, it would be all right, which to him meant a modular home. When the manufactured home was presented, he had to say no because code says so. There was further discussion regarding a similar situation within the city's jurisdiction on West Maryland, the construction of the building, and the procedure at the public hearing on October 18 and the council's normal process to wait until the next regular meeting to make a decision. Mayor Olson cautioned the council regarding the ex parte rule between now and the public hearing next week. Any information received by a council member should be made known to the whole council as soon as possible or at least at the next meeting. Emelie asked Council Member McGee to present his opinion with regard to the fact that he is employed in the real estate market. Council Member McGee stated that, from his perspective as a realtor, the difference between a manufactured and a modular home is miniscule these days. In his opinion, it is not the neighborhood that would run the risk of losing any value in the home, but it is the owner of the actual manufactured home. Since a manufactured home is on rails rather than high beams, the stigma attached to manufactured homes would cause some value to be lost in resale down the road. There are a number of homes in this neighborhood with foundation issues and some of them would serve their owners and the city better if they were removed and replaced by manufactured homes. It is his opinion that it is not a manufactured home devaluing the neighborhood. It is a matter of how much an individual will spend in order to put that kind of home on a lot, and they will never be able to reclaim the actual value spent on that home. • Resolution — Accept MDT $10,000 Traffic Grant for Laurel Police Department Mayor Olson removed the item from the agenda. • Resolution — Contract for utility cut repairs Mayor Olson stated that the resolution is for the utility cut patch on the 200 block of Fifth Avenue. The total price of the contract is $8,637.00. • East / West Railroad speed study Mayor Olson stated that staff has not yet reviewed the study. He asked the council to delay this item until staff has reviewed the study and has a presentation for the council. 4 Council Workshop Minutes of October 11, 2011 • Council Issues: o Request Fire Department to burn area surrounding the footbridge/Stage 1 fire restrictions (Chuck Dickerson) Mayor Olson stated that the fire department will schedule it when possible. There was discussion regarding the council's plans to work at the footbridge on Saturday, October 15 since the council retreat will not be held that morning. Council members will meet on October 15 at 9:00 a.m. to work on the landscaping at the footbridge. Mayor Olson will contact Dan Clark regarding possible dates for the council retreat and then forward the information to the council. Other items • Resolution — Final levy of special assessments on property in SID No. 112 and SID No. 113 Mayor Olson stated that the resolution will be on the October 18 council agenda. Review of draft council agenda for October 18. 2011 • Public Hearings: o Zoning variance request to allow a mobile home in Residential 6000 zoning — 215 East 5 Street, Lots 3 -4, Block 22 of Laurel Realty Second Subdivision. Mayor Olson stated that the council could elect to place the resolution regarding the variance on the October 18 council agenda. This would require a unanimous vote by the council. o City of Laurel's intent to increase the water and sanitary sewer rates and charges to become effective on November 10, 2011. Tom asked regarding repercussions if the variance was not allowed. Heidi stated that the question was posed to legal counsel, but the guidance was vague. Unfortunately, it is a "he said, he said" disagreement between Fred and Gary. As long as the council makes its findings based on the seven criteria from the LMC and has a defensible finding, legal counsel should be able to defend it. Mayor Olson spoke regarding the council's power, which is exhibited by a legitimate foundation for the decision. The seven criteria have to be met in order for a variance to go forward. Emelie stated her concerns with how far the issue has gone already. Mayor Olson stated that a variance is not a normal request, but has to go through the variance process because the requested action is not allowed in the codes. There was further discussion regarding the amount of money proposed for the project versus the value for future resale, the changes in modular and manufactured homes that make it difficult to determine the visible differences, and the need to state the information at the public hearing next week. Heidi cautioned the council with doing as the Planning Board did and adopting Mr. Cole's letter and the findings that he wrote. She stated that his letter is strictly financially based and in all seven of his explanations, he refers to the monetary amount and that is only one aspect of the seven that need to be met. She asked the council to make its own findings and determination regarding the seven criteria. 5 Council Workshop Minutes of October 11, 2011 Attendance at the October 18, 2011 council meeting All council members present will attend. Announcements Mark Mace stated that Chairman Stamper asked him to lead the Park Board meeting last week. Since only two members attended, the meeting was cancelled. Discussion items were supposed to include the list that went out for people to sign in support of the spray park and the council retreat on October 15 The retreat will be rescheduled to a future date. Since minutes were not taken at the recent Park Board meeting, Mark will prepare some minutes from the items listed on the agenda. Tom will inform Norm regarding the change in plans for Saturday morning. Tom stated appreciation for the opportunity to attend the Montana League of Cities and Towns Conference, which was interesting and informative. Chuck Rodgers recently sanded and painted over the bare spots to keep the rust away on the pipe at the footbridge. He asked regarding purchasing paint to finish the job. Mayor Olson stated concern about whether temperature changes in the pipe would cause the paint to pop off the pipe and whether it would be better to wait until spring. Chuck will check with the people at the paint store. Bruce stated thanks for the chance to attend the Montana League of Cities and Towns Conference. Bruce asked if discussion regarding a shooting range could be discussed at a future council workshop, as it seems like shooting is a regular part of the community. When qualifying with the police department for the reserves last Saturday, it became obvious that shooting and ranges in Laurel are tending to become a conflict and a problem. He asked if the council would form a committee or have one of the committees discuss the needs and possible remedies in the future. Mayor Olson asked if a committee could review the issue and bring its findings back to the council as the basis for the discussion, and Bruce agreed. Mayor Olson asked if the Emergency Services Committee would consider the issue, and Doug agreed to do so. Emelie asked regarding utility cuts and repair of streets where there was a cut for services. Mayor Olson explained that there was a water line break in the 200 block of Fifth Avenue. Since the contract is over $5,000, the council has to authorize the mayor to sign the contract for the repairs. Emelie explained that, when a new home was built on her street, they cut clear across the street and it remained gravel for a long time. Just last week, someone was out there cleaning out the gravel and then asphalt was brought in, but now there is a divot in the road instead of the previous overfill of gravel. 6 Council Workshop Minutes of October 11, 2011 There was discussion regarding the process for utility cuts to tie into city services, which is the responsibility of the developer or property owner. A street cut permit is required and the developer or property owner is responsible to restore the street to public works standards after completing the utility cut. Emelie stated that the area is located in the 200 block of West Avenue. Mayor Olson will talk to staff about this. Mayor Olson spoke regarding the Montana League of Cities and Towns Conference. The council workshop adjourned at 8:00 p.m. Respectfully submitted, �� J Cindy Allen Council Secretary NOTE: This meeting is open to the public. This meeting is for information and discussion of the Council for the listed workshop agenda items. 7 4 LAUREL CITY - COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT TO: Laurel City Council FROM: Heidi Jensen, Laurel Planner RE: Variance for 215 E. 5 Street HEARING DATE: October 18, 2011 DESCRIPTION /LOCATION Ms. Anne Kero submitted a land use /zone map amendment to allow the property commonly known as 215 East 5 Street. The property is currently zoned residential R -6000, which allows for modular homes, but not manufactured homes. The request is being made after Ms. Kero purchased a mobile home from Centennial Homes in Belgrade and Billings, where she was informed that zoning for a mobile would not be an issue on 215 E. 5 Street. The property is located in an area currently zoned residential R -6000 and the variance requested would allow for Ms. Kero's mobile home to be placed on the lot. Should the home be moved, burnt or destroyed by other acts of natural disaster a mobile home would not be allowed to be p laced back on the lot. The legal address of the property is Lots 3 and 4, Block 22 of the Laurel Realty Second Subdivision, City of Laurel in the City of Laurel, Yellowstone County, Montana. STAFF FINDINGS: 1. The property owner has submitted a zone change /land use variance to "...install a 2012 model, 1540 square foot, 3 bedroom 2 bath manufactured home permanently on the lot," located at 215 E. 5 Street. 2. The attached exhibits are copies of the variance application request, dimension drawing, photo of similar models of manufactured homes and a letter from Ms. Kero. 3. As per the requirements of LMC 17.72.070, a public hearing on the matter shall be held before the zoning commission before being heard by the Laurel City Council. As per B. of the section, public notice was published in the Laurel Outlook and adjacent property owners were notified by certified mail more than 15 days prior to the public hearing. ZONING COMMISSION CONSIDERATIONS AND RECOMMENDATION: The Zoning Commission considered the following chapters and sections of the Laurel Municipal Code (LMC): 1. According to Chapter 17.60.020 of the LMC the Zoning Commission may not recommend granting a zone change /land use variance: 1. Unless the denial would constitute an unnecessary and unjust invasion of the right of property; 2. Unless the grant relates to a condition or situation special and peculiar to the applicant; 3. Unless the basis is something more than mere financial loss to the owner; 4. Unless the hardship was created by someone other than the owner; 5. Unless the variance would be within the spirit, intent, purpose, and general plan of this title; 6. Unless the variance would not affect adversely or injure or result in injustice to others; and 7. Ordinarily unless the applicant owned the property prior o the enactment of this title or amendment. 2. As per LMC 17.72.060 the Zoning Commission shall make a recommendation to the City Council to: 1. Deny the application for amendment to the official map; 2. Grant action on the application for a period not to exceed thirty days; 3. Delay action on the application for a period not to exceed thirty days; 4. Give reasons for the recommendation. 3. At their regularly scheduled Thursday October 6, 2011 meeting the Laurel City- County Planning Board, acting as the Zoning Commission, voted unanimously to recommend approval of the variance with staff suggested conditions and the attached letter from Attorney Bill Cole satisfying LMC 17.60.020. 4. In the interest of time, it has been requested that the Council make a motion to waive the requirements of LMC 2.10.080 which, would require the final decision on the variance to be made at the November 1, 2011 Council meeting and instead make their final decision on October 18, 2011. STAFF SUGGESTED CONDITIONS: If the Laurel City- County Planning Board makes findings from the above requirements and recommends approval of the land use variance, the following conditions are suggested: 1. Applicant shall apply for a building permit and comply with all department requirements before placing the home on the property. 2. Applicant shall perform normal upkeep and maintenance of the premises to maintain a neat and tidy appearance, and control for noxious weeds. 3. This variance shall only be applicable for as long as this mobile resides on the lot. Any removal, fire or other natural disaster voids the variance and the Tots must be reviewed with R -6000 zoning regulations. Cole Law Firm PLLC October 5, 2011 Anne Kero PO Box 273 Laurel, MT 59044 Fred Keller Centennial Homes 5082 Laurel Road Billings, MT 59101 -4607 RE: Zoning variance — 215 E. 5 th Street Dear Anne and Fred: This letter addresses the legal basis for Annie's zoning-variance. " As you know, Anne has been forced to move into her friend's house even though she spent almost = ` $140,000 to purchase a lot in Laurel and a new 1540 square feet, 3 bedroom, 2 bath house sold by Centennial Homes. After building a matching garage, concrete stairs, sidewalks, and other improvements, will have more than $185,000 invested in the project. The neighborhood is ideal for Anne as it is located near downtown and will allow her to walk to the grocery store and medical clinic if she is unable to drive when she gets older. The home is larger than three of the four other houses on the block and generally looks like a conventional modular or even site - built house. Anne will rebuild the decrepit city sidewalk in front of the house at no cost to the city. Anne agreed to purchase the land and the home after a Laurel city official reportedly told a Centennial employee that the zoning was not a problem and the Centennial employee passed that information on to Anne. "Modular homes" are allowed in this R -6000 zone, but Anne's home is technically a "manufactured home" because it sits on a metal frame and is built to meet strict federal Housing and Urban Development (HUD) standards instead of local building codes. Section 17.60.020 of the Laurel Zoning Ordinance (LZ0) -allows a variance where "owing' to special conditions, a literal enforcement of the provisions of'the : Tel (406) 294 -5700 or. Fax (406) 294 -5702: • • • bcoleeeolefitm.com= 3860'AVE. STE C WEST •`BILLINGS MT59102- 7550,. Anne Kero Fred Keller October 5, 2011 Page 2 ordinances or regulations will result in unnecessary hardship, and so that the spirit of the ordinances shall be observed and substantial justice done." The ordinance identifies the following seven factors that support granting a variance given the unique circumstances of this case. 1. Denial would constitute an unnecessary and unjust invasion of Anne's property rights. Anne is literally homeless. When Anne's landlord learned she was buying a place of her own he terminated her lease even though she had never been late on a rent payment. Anne should be allowed to use the lot and home she purchased because it would not significantly prejudice the public interest. This manufactured home is not a "trailer." The home is large, new, sits on a permanent foundation, and is indistinguish- able from a modular home in many ways, including 2x6 exterior walls, 3:12 roof pitch, etc. Before Anne cleaned the lot up, it was weed - infested and scarred by the remnants of a burned -out house. The public will not be harmed if the variance is granted, in fact the neighborhood will be improved. It would be arbitrary and unjust to deprive Anne of the use of her property under these special circumstances. 2. This is a special situation peculiar to the applicant and will not create a precedent. The facts of this case are truly unique. Anne is a 73- year -old woman of limited means. She invested her savings to buy a home based on assurances that the zoning was okay, and those assurances originated, she was told, with a representative of the city. She wants to improve a neglected lot in a modest neighborhood by putting in a large "Cadillac- quality" manufactured home, matching garage, and upgraded sidewalks at a total cost of roughly $185,000. The variance would only allow this particular home and would not change the underlying R -6000 zoning. These are rare and unusual circumstances that clearly distinguish this situation from other variance applications that might be submitted in the future. 3. The variance should be granted for numerous reasons, only one of which is the financial loss to Anne. Anne stands to lose tens of thousands of dollars if the variance is not approved, but that is not the only reason it should be granted. Anne desperately needs a place to live. She has spent months cleaning up the lot and finalizing the layout and installation of the house. This controversy has taken a severe toll on her emotional well - being. A literal enforcement of the zoning code in this situation would result in an unnecessary hardship given the neutral, or more likely beneficial, impact that the house would have on the neighborhood and various other factors described in the variance application and this letter. Anne Kero Fred Keller October 5, 2011 Page 3 4. The hardship was created by persons other than Anne. Anne bought the lot and the manufactured home based on the understanding that she could legally place the home on the lot. That misunderstanding originated with people other than Anne who have considerable expertise with manufactured homes and zoning issues. In theory, Anne might have been able to catch their mistake by doing even more due diligence, but Anne is a layperson who is not experienced in zoning law or real estate development. Her reliance on their assurances was reasonable under the circumstances. If the source of this misunderstanding could be traced back to a city official then the principle of "municipal estoppel" would require that the city grant the variance. See Town of Boulder v. Bullock, 193 Mont. 493, 632 P.2d 716 (1981). Of course, it is theoretically ' pbssible that the representative from Centennial shares some responsibility for the misunderstanding. But those details do not really matter now. Under any scenario the misunderstanding was not Anne's fault. Given the unique circumstances of this case it was reasonable for her to rely on what she was told. 5. The variance would be within the spirit, intent, purpose and general plan of the Laurel Zoning Ordinance (LZO). This variance will promote the purposes of the LZO set out in Section 17.04.020. For example, those purposes include "to stabilize property values," "to prevent waste and inefficiency in land use," and "to preserve and housing values and maintain residential neighborhood aesthetics." Right now the subject lot is abandoned and full of weeds. According to Zillow.com, the four other houses on the block were built in 1924, on average, and each have an estimated average value of $118,500. When Anne is done putting in her home, garage, and concrete work she will have approximately $185,746 invested, meaning that the cost - value of her property will be $67,246 (56 %) more than the average value of the other houses on her street. If the variance is granted the city will enjoy additional tax revenue and Anne will improve property values and neighborhood aesthetics. On the other hand, if the variance is denied, the vacant lot could become an eyesore and turn into a white elephant? Stick -built construction is expensive, and it is unlikely that Anne could find anyone who would be willing to spend the $200,000+ that would be necessary to build on this small lot surrounded by inexpensive houses built almost a century ago. The LZO is intended "to encourage innovations in residential development and renewal ... [and] greater variety in type and design of dwellings." The city can achieve that purpose by granting the variance. 6. The variance would not adversely affect, injure, or result in injustice to others. Anne is just trying to redevelop a lot after the house on it burned down so she will have a place to live. It is obvious that redevelopment will benefit everyone in the Anne Kero Fred Keller October 5, 2011 Page 4 community. The only issue is the type of house that should be allowed to be built on the lot. As discussed above, the home Anne is proposing will be more valuable than neighboring properties, esthetically pleasing, structurally sound, and a major improvement over the vacant lot that is there now. 7. The applicant did not own the property prior to the enactment of the LZO, but that factor is not definitive. I believe that the city enacted the LZO (Title 17) in the early 1970s. Anne purchased her lot in 2011. The seventh criterion in Section 17.60.020 creates a "grandfather" preference for variance applications submitted by persons who "owned the property prior to the enactment of this title or amendment." Now that almost 40 years have passed since enactment of the LZO I do not think that the seventh criteria is meant to carry much weight, as indicated by the use of "ordinarily" at the beginning of the sentence. Nowadays most applicants for a zoning variance probably purchased the subject property long after the LZO was enacted, and it would not make sense to discriminate against them in this way. I hope this letter has been helpful. I will forward a copy to the Laurel city planner, Heidi Jensen; pursuant to your request. Please let me know if you have any questions. Very truly yours, - 1 } ' i l i � William A. Cole WAC cc: eidi Jensen k/g), // f 577t, 7 1.& oe`e,f fia 62_ /1 --7-47)at- re/ (-ty CITY OF LAUREL, MONTANA CITY- COUNTY PLANNING BOARD APPLICATION FOR VARIANCE S550 for residential variance $1,100 for commercial variance This application covers appeals for decisions of the City Building Inspector and for requests for variances concerning setbacks, structure heights, lot coverage, etc. but not for variances that change allowed land uses. The undersigned as owner or agent of owner of the following described property requests a variance to the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Laurel as outlined by the laws of the State of Montana. /etc ,� c��f � 13/ cie ,Z1 0 7 g �X 1. Legal description of property: � , � .� �r f � . G eevt f/ p, 2. Street address and general location: 07/c Lc 65i' 3. Present zone classification: if t& 4. Requested variance /appeal: j e 5. Attach site plan showing ingress /egress, off - street parking, existing building loctions (use solid lines), proposed building additions (use dashed lines), and other information relevant to the variance. 6. Recorded Owners(s): / / Address: �� CL � G� - gas"' Telephone: rge e-‘/ lf /4 Agent(s): / / ec7 kes ,e — /' l C kL /o1i i, grar Address: %, !ice ! If - lJ�l / GCGLQ� Telephone: 0151— /(C 0 7. Provide copy of covenants or deed restrictions on property. I understand that the filing fee accompanying this application is not refundable, that it pays part of the cost of process, and that the fee does not constitute a payment for a variance. I also understand I or my agent must appear at the hearing of this request before the Planning Board and all of the information presented by me is true and correct to the best of my knowledge. A Signature of applicant: Date of submittal: - / / 4,9ST t- //-.7 /67' / icc -sue (Q PLOT PLP 4 o !CE--`?„‘.,, d L..CC,ac_.. DtSL2�P� o� `: 12,6 0 • .27`(0" x S(o `I New 14Ofr)E o :4 L& D �CJk. uzrkT.o i 1 1 J 1 1 1 I 9 i. i a 1 zo X2.N i 1 ; 0,No&p,c._c_._, 1 ,1 , 1 30 ,,i) ,r1 ! I „:. 1 i , , P LL. E.``,,. Permanent Foundation Systems for Manufactured Homes Insulated Concrete Panel Perimeter Foundation & Skirt Wall System for Manufactured Homes .. 0111114-1.47.z. E !. a cs jig i 7 •,., - - - - 4 - , 4,1-t .: 161;1 t , 13 3 ,..,...4,S.„,,,,, r . rrr - . f i ■ , 4 g ' • earn r ;= 1 -- r3=- 1 � :. -Ni f41711 ,f ;I j- I I • Requires NO Onsite Poured Concrete or Major Excavation • Lower Cost vs Traditional Poured Concrete Foundation • Qualifies for FHA, VA and All Conventional Financing • Perfect Solution for New Homes is Easily Installed on Existing Homes (without moving the home!) HUD /FHA Compliant Permanent Foundation Engineering Certification Included With Every Installation Installation available in Montana & Wyoming 671 W Rosebud Rd Fishtail, MT 59028 Innovative Products For Manufactured Homes 408-328 ' \ I,' ",.. U..1 1._ . ' ‘ / /I , 'ba \ r --.1 ,11 g , ,11 i'. ' \. t - . ....._ " rl, iltd ....,_ t .._. \i I, _,.' I -.."...."' -1.4-i , ---= 0 ---- ---r..-___-7--_,, - ,---- ' ' T -r ' - ' t ' '' - , , ■ ' A I _ .' 1 11,.. 1 1 , i r i - I t. t .._ , _ _ ‘ :, \ — A in e— r 1 s, iti, 751$11 A \ , , vit i -- I , . %, , • -- - - c a _ -.,,. -- V r Nty :: ,,ti„ ' ,, N _ _ \ ,1 .„,. — , — 1 T 7 / ( \V - - 1 viA: . I t 01;4'. X % -------4111 IV" '! - - Si ' i f ti,'),!■"i"+"■ ''', 1 -_,--..- rt‘t \ I 1 i h t _ _ It" / k ail .z,b . \ ---- A 11% - .4,U.t\td7;IN - . 4 tk A ..--------,,....„,_ _ ill ett:V“k ISW9r4191 -I t 4 A m i t ,ii, , ,.0, 4 ,,t t _, ,g,1 _ --:- . - 4 •i, ,,' 14 yk 4 t t i A f‘,„,it, -tottux.. 4 43 ii '.' 3 , ‘" ' ' 3 '1 3, =2fM"e=?5-- ,.. -,' fr,cfr lir ;,0,frip44,...!Ifttm ilpgAisivf tft. ,4 y 4 , 4: A : 7 t l i . 7 ... 7 - . : 1:: x:,.I., 1`.,,,, '',',,,,,, - --- 1■0 Z ,--y . ---,,, ..N\ . , 7:71 f , A /,,_ - ---, vim. . 0 i ft 41 1- 4 Ot A ''''.": '' \ ''''''''" — 7' gm, .. , ilt I - VI t.. A t , r. g.. • _ i .. yz...,, , 1 , .,... ..., ,.../: 4 4 I it 4il''‘).14,4r".111 iiiir t r tilt tip s - , , ,l' ■ ■ Hiitt ,:tti ,i ti 4 ,41 r_, _,.. ii 1 _, -- 1, / .------ ol le no A ..___ in , i f .,, ,,..o. „,„",,,,‘ „ „.„. 0 . 0 14 p oi ,sl i . rlimys i , ,f,,. - i -----'-'-'-' fike ,, " , :iii ii , ,,,,,,,,,,,, , ‘ 1 ,i, ,,_ i a l 1 i v. , :c:i:..._.... , 4: - - - .74'4,-..,,s14 4 ,,,,),L.,=_____ __=.7.-- F , 1 , 1`. , ; 1 11111 '' '- -1‘' 'n. 1/ iif " A•-- ,- . -.. ., 4 fp:P* I\ f #14 1 lo 4 - li -',.,- , .---.--."-"1.-"""":!", -.!!' fr."!t _ _ \ \ / - I i too, _ k it ,yi 4 4 ti't,0%, \ t .,,,. i f 4- -fi i -i-, 7,1, / i I/ '''\" f ftAl VI i - ,40. ' ' 111WileirI , ,„I r, V.u4 , I f -: - ' 41 - „ot, ,/ ' \ if Vii " 3 ! / / i 'if / / / - 7 f , ' :''' ■: ' VW/ _., r , 0, , , . Heidi Jensen From: Chris Goodpaster [chrisgoodpaster @yahoo.com] Sent: Monday, October 03, 2011 3:48 PM To: Heidi Jensen Subject: Residential Zoning Ms. Jensen, As property owner of 209 East 5th Street, Laurel, MT 59044, I do not want the zoning, or any variation of the zoning, to allow for mobile homes. Sincerely, Christine A. Goodpaster 1903 Sawmill Court Frederick,MD 406 -698 -7354 1 i � � II ,,,... 1 1, 4 4 0116, LAUREL CITY -COUNY PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT TO: Laurel City- County Planning Board FROM: Heidi Jensen, Laurel Planner RE: Variance for 215 E. 5 Street HEARING DATE: October 6, 2011 DESCRIPTION /LOCATION: Ms. Anne Kero submitted a land use /zone map amendment to allow the property commonly known as 215 East 5 Street. The property is currently zoned residential R -6000, which allows for modular homes, but not manufactured homes. The request is being made after Ms. Kero purchased a mobile home from Centennial Homes in Belgrade and Billings, where she was informed that zoning for a mobile would not be an issue on 215 E. 5 Street. The property is located in an area currently zoned residential R -6000 and the variance requested would allow for Ms. Kero's mobile home to be placed on the lot. Should the home be moved, burnt or destroyed by other acts of natural disaster a mobile home would not be allowed to be placed back on the lot. The legal address of the property is Lots 3 and 4, Block 22 of the Laurel Realty Second Subdivision, City of Laurel in the City of Laurel, Yellowstone County, Montana. STAFF FINDINGS: 1. The property owner has submitted a zone change /land use variance to "...install a 2012 model, 1540 square foot, 3 bedroom 2 bath manufactured home permanently on the lot," located at 215 E. 5 Street. 2. The attached exhibits are copies of the variance application request, dimension drawing, photo of similar models of manufactured homes and a letter from Ms. Kero. 3. As per the requirements of LMC 17.72.070, a public hearing on the matter shall be held before the zoning commission before being heard by the Laurel City Council. As per B. of the section, public notice was published in the Laurel Outlook and adjacent property owners were notified by certified mail more than 15 days prior to the public hearing. ZONING COMMISSION CONSIDERATIONS AND RECOMMENDATION: The Zoning Commission considered the following chapters and sections of the Laurel Municipal Code (LMC): 1. According to Chapter 17.60.020 of the LMC the Zoning Commission may not recommend granting a zone change /land use variance: 1. Unless the denial would constitute an unnecessary and unjust invasion of the right of property; 2. Unless the grant relates to a condition or situation special and peculiar to the applicant; 3. Unless the basis is something more than mere financial Toss to the owner; 4. Unless the hardship was created by someone other than the owner; 5. Unless the variance would be within the spirit, intent, purpose, and general plan of this title; 6. Unless the variance would not affect adversely or injure or result in injustice to others; and 7. Ordinarily unless the applicant owned the property prior o the enactment of this title or amendment. 2. As per LMC 17.72.060 the Zoning Commission shall make a recommendation to the City Council to: 1. Deny the application for amendment to the official map; 2. Grant action on the application for a period not to exceed thirty days; 3. Delay action on the application for a period not to exceed thirty days; 4. Give reasons for the recommendation. STAFF SUGGESTED CONDITIONS: lithe Laurel City- County Planning Board makes findings from the above requirements and recommends approval of the land use variance, the following conditions are suggested: 1. Applicant shall apply for a building permit and comply with all department requirements before placing the home on the property. 2. Applicant shall perform normal upkeep and maintenance of the premises to maintain a neat and tidy appearance, and control for noxious weeds. 3. This variance shall only be applicable for as long as this mobile resides on the lot. Any removal, fire or other natural disaster voids the variance and the lot must be treated with R -6000 zoning regulations. . Prudential Floberg REALTORS® City of Laurel: The proposed construction of the home located at 215 East 5 Street in Laurel is a manufactured home on an FHA approved permanent foundation. It is approximately 1,540 square feet. There will be a newly constructed attached 1 garage with the home. In addition there will be new concrete flat work done — stairs and walk ways. The home will be located on a city lot. It can be argued that the proposed new construction at 215 East 5 Street is the "highest and best use" of the property. This area of Laurel is primarily older homes. In the last six months there have been 7 homes of comparable style to the proposed construction at 215 East 5 Street sold. The 7 homes in this area with similar features that have sold had a sales price in the range of $121,000 to $178,000. The average age of the homes sold was 1966. The average sales price was $154,977.14. There was no new construction sold. Of the homes currently on the market that are in the 1,500 square foot range with no basement, there are 2 newer construction homes. One built in 2010 and one in 2003. They are 1,561 square feet listed at $219,900 and 1,568 square feet listed at $229,900 respectively. The other 6 homes currently on the market for sale that are comparable in size to the proposed home at 215 East 5 Street have an average listing price of $126,450 and an average age of 1956. A new construction home of this size, while a manufactured or HUD code home, should not negatively impact home values in the immediate area. This proposed construction can be argued to be an improvement to the neighborhood and a "highest and best use" of the property. Sinc / Ja Lim Ilie Prudential Floberg Realtors 1550 Poly Drive Billings, MT 59102 (406)869 -7648 An In•_1r: i:rf, 0:.:'a, and CY +r d!!ca'ha of The Pred Rndl E7af. +.:\ ale Inr. TO: LAUREL CITY COUNCIL FROM: THE UNDERSIGNED CITY PROPERTY OWNERS DATE: OCTOBER 11, 2011 RE: PROPERTY OF 214 E. 5 STREET (EMPTY LOT NEXT TO 219 E. 5 STREET) We, the property owners signed below are totally against putting in a mobile or manufactured home on the vacant lot of ? 214 E. 5 Street, Laurel, Montana. We have serious concerns as to how this will affect our property in the future. To our knowledge, this area is not zoned for mobile /modular homes. If we had thought a mobile home would be placed in our neighborhood, we would not have bought a home in this area. We would like the City Council to know that we are very disturbed that this could be a possibility for our neighborhood! Please be very considerate of our feelings and wishes when you are approached to allow this possibility. Some of us were not even made aware of this request. NAME ADDRESS TELEPHONE # �o �y Si'y ks Z ice( ,5 z, s? ` 76`1 S1456 n S 1 Cr S) � Cbil Ppvr;r , 79 - F3 c anoLL L5/ 7 Co /vrado .y l --D[oD 5 / S (9 Cd orad Ave ate -6 ) • 5 tec ���"6. "Mr /710/, 6 '72 - 9Vd, ��� o f a ? 5 44 4 P —/3f0 itltPAJ/\ C OL I Vi( cx iatt-evi TO: LAUREL CITY COUNCIL FROM: THE UNDERSIGNED CITY PROPERTY OWNERS DATE: OCTOBER 11, 2011 RE: PROPERTY OF 214 E. 5 STREET (EMPTY LOT NEXT TO 219 E. 5 STREET) We, the property owners signed below are totally against putting in a mobile or manufactured home on the vacant lot of ? 214 E. 5 Street, Laurel, Montana. We have serious concerns as to how this will affect our property in the future. To our knowledge, this area is not zoned for mobile /modular homes. If we had thought a mobile home would be placed in our neighborhood, we would not have bought a home in this area. We would like the City Council to know that we are very disturbed that this could be a possibility for our neighborhood! Please be very considerate of our feelings and wishes when you are approached to allow this possibility. Some of us were not even made aware of this request. NAME ADDRESS TELEPHONE # (1/)/ail //9 e f4e Y - - 11 ?E 5 V- , 0 (-11k..A 31 aCk 409 A_A ( 317 /14 .4aktctit'e- CE.PC ;cao CO M'Aletk 66 t- oCe6 sus W ,Oa 4te 7J41 -6.3o9 �`°� 544 Oz g5