2015-10-07_PC_Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular Planning Commission Meeting Minutes – Wednesday, October 7, 2015 Page 13 had previously provided to resolve issues at the Woods Edge Townhome Complex and 597 drainage onto the adjacent 3253 single-family property and encroachments. 598 Specific to Roseville Commons Condominiums, as stated in his written comments, Mr. 599 Runquist stated that rezoning these parcels from HDR to MDR would be a serious 600 financial blow to the Henz estate, and reduce the potential sales price if rezoned to lower 601 density for interested developers, and referenced the history of the properties during his 602 service as Trustee included in his written comments. Given the development of the 603 adjacent properties for Woods Edge and Roseville Commons and their density and 604 zoning of HDR, Mr. Runquist opined it would be unethical for the City to designate these 605 two parcels at a lower density. Mr. Runquist also reviewed the appraisal history and 606 survey for the Henz properties since 1997 and offers received from developers over the 607 last 7-8 years and the results of those offers based on this pending zoning designation. 608 As Trustee for this property, Mr. Runquist advised that it was duty to ensure the property 609 rights of the remaining heirs of the trust were protected; and reviewed drainage issues 610 created by development of the townhomes and on recourse given by the city with Mr. 611 Henz’s death in 2005. Mr. Runquist advised that if the parcels are rezoned from HDR to 612 MDR, it would significantly reduce the heir’s inheritance by half or more. 613 While unsure of the issues raised, Mr. Runquist expressed frustration and disappointment 614 that the City Council had chosen to reopen this process based on the testimony of one 615 resident at their June 2015 meeting, when there was much more history involved from 616 both sides. Regardless of emotions involved and expressed by a vocal few, Mr. Runquist 617 asked that the Planning Commission not support or recommend changing this zoning or 618 comprehensive plan designation. Mr. Runquist noted there had already been damage to 619 the property and its value and developability based on previous actions take, and 620 ongoing delaying tactics, and asked that the Henz Trust be given equal consideration 621 based on the considerable financial impacts with any lowering of current zoning 622 designations. 623 As Mr. Runquist reviewed property concerns raised by Ms. Rita Mix, owner of the 3207 624 parcel, and prompting this latest request, he noted past efforts on his part in negotiating 625 drainage and encroachment issues impacting property boundaries with the Henz 626 property. 627 Before proceeding too far with this portion of Mr. Runquist’s testimony, Chair 628 Boguszewski clarified that the boundary issues were a distinct and separate issue 629 between Mr. Runquist and Ms. Mix and were not part of this zoning issue; nor was this 630 the forum to do so. 631 Mr. Runquist argued that it was indeed relevant to tonight’s discussion; stating he had 632 pictorial evidence to support that Ms. Mix’ sump pump was still draining onto the Henz 633 property as well as adjacent townhomes (#3) not having sufficient clearance from the 634 Henz property, all supporting his view that adjacent property owners are still 635 disrespecting the Henz property. 636 At the request of Member Bull in his review of Ramsey County property records and his 637 inability to determine when the property had been acquired by Mr. Henz, Mr. Runquist 638 advised that the property had been acquired in about 1946 upon Mr. Henz’ return from 639 the war. 640 rd Brian Buck, 3609 33 Avenue NE, St. Anthony 641 Mr. Buck stated that he had been looking forward to this opportunity for rezoning this 642 area for five years now; and proceeded to provide additional background from his 643 perspective. 644 Mr. Buck advised that his property on the northeast corner and the make-up of this 5- 645 corner intersection made him a strong advocate to reduce zoning to MDR. Mr. Buck 646 opined that County Road C-2 is very different in this area than in the heart of Roseville, 647 with this Roseville triangle having lots of single-family homes north of County Road C-2 648