Laserfiche WebLink
<br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />Council Meeting Minutes <br />May 25, 1993 <br /> <br />Page 5 <br /> <br />Council Business. continued <br /> <br />Greg Walker, 366 Cleveland, said the proposed building is attractive, but <br />would impose resale difficulties for his property. An appraiser told him that <br />it would be difficult to sell his house if it were zoned B-1. He suggested to <br />Mr. Schweiters an equitable land trade between the two parties, Schweiters <br />did not respond to his suggestion. Mr. Walker paid $70,000 for the home. <br /> <br />Rebelein asked whether the homeowner would be in a better position to sell <br />his property if it were zoned B-1 versus R-2. Mr. Walker was told by real <br />estate brokers that he would take a loss if it were zoned B-1. The Walker <br />home would be visible from the highway if the lilac bushes were removed. <br /> <br />Williams asked Mr. Walker is he plaIll1ed to expand his house. Mr. Walker <br />would like to expand and remodel his home. Rebelein asked if a special use <br />permit is needed to expand the home. Mattila confirmed that if Mr. Walker <br />enlarged his home, the residence would become a Type II Non-conforming <br />Use. Council permission is needed to expand the residence. <br /> <br />Mr. Walker asked if he could sell the residence as a single family home if it <br />were zoned B-1. LeFevere said the problem is that the home would become <br />a non-conforming use. Although, it is not considered a title problem, some <br />lenders may not prefer to finance such a property. Benke noted that the City <br />is not qualified to assess the marketability of any property. <br /> <br />Rebelein asked if the City could be legally liable for any lost of marketable <br />value if the rezoning was approved. LeFevere feels that because no part of <br />the property would be taken physically, there is very likely no legal liability <br />concerning the decreased market value. <br /> <br />Larson asked if it is advantageous for W ooddale to buy the Walker property. <br />Mr. Schweiters' proposal does not require the Walker property, and he does <br />not feel the Walker property would be devalued because of the office <br />building. He could offer to the Walkers the option of 25 additional feet to <br />increase their lot size to 125 ft. Schweiters feels it could be advantageous for <br />the Walkers to stay and later sell the property. <br /> <br />Williams hears movement between the parties and suggested a mediation <br />session. The City could arrange the mediation and the parties could then <br />return to Council in two weeks. Mediation is a voluntary, no fee process <br />which both parties agreed to participate. He thinks highly of the process, and <br />noted that an impartial real estate appraiser would be brought in. <br /> <br />Gunderman supports the mediation idea. <br /> <br />Benke agrees and suggested that staff research the adjoining R-3A parcel as <br />relates to amending the Comprehensive Plan. <br />Schweitzers feels the real estate appraiser should be instructed to evaluate the <br />site before mediation. Benke said staff will arrange the mediation. <br /> <br />Council Business <br /> <br />W ooddale Builders <br />Rezoning <br />Report 93-146 <br />