July 5, 2005, Public Hearing

The Clarion Borough Council held a Public Hearing on July 5, 2005, at 6:45 p.m. in the Assembly Room of the Clarion Free Library, the purpose of the hearing was to receive testimony regarding a request from Mr. and Mrs. Kline Proud for reconsideration of the occupancy requirements at 615 Wood Street afforded under a previously granted conditional use of property (July 2, 1991) to allow multi-family (4-unrelated persons) occupancy for each apartment.

A list of those people in attendance is attached to the Official File Copy of these minutes.

Ms. Vavrek, Chair of the Housing and Zoning Committee, called the hearing to order at 6:45 p.m.

Ms. Vavrek announced Mr. and Mrs. Kline Proud have made application to the Borough for a reconsideration of a conditional use of property located at 615 Wood Street.  This property is in the Commercial District.  In 1991, the Prouds were given a conditional use to re-designate this property to an R-1, meaning two unrelated occupants in each apartment.  Mr. Proud is now asking for an amendment to allow multi-family occupancy as not more than four unrelated persons, which would be R-3.  Ms. Vavrek asked for further comments.

Attorney Terry Heeter, representing Mr. and Mrs. Proud, passed around pictures for Councilmembers to see the dwelling, both upstairs and downstairs, to show there is more than adequate space to permit this request.  Currently, there are 7-9 parking spaces available and additional ground could provide more spaces, which is Mr. Proud’s intent.  Based on the size of the property and since all the parking issues have been alleviated, the Prouds feel that they should be entitled to the requested use.  Attorney Heeter commented he would be glad to answer any questions.

Ms. Vavrek inquired how much space is in each apartment in terms of bedroom facilities.

Mr. Proud commented there are three bedrooms on each floor, a bathroom, and kitchen.  It is a big home and is oversized for what they have.  To have a structure sitting there with only two people on each floor has added a great deal of expenses to the Prouds, resulting in not making any money on the venture.  Last year, the porch cost was $25,000 and the parking ramp in the back was about $5,000.  The property is neat.  The pictures indicate that the bedrooms have new carpet and furniture.  No concessions have to be offered to people that want to rent there.  He/she look forward to living there and their mothers and fathers visit and have praised the Prouds for their duties to the apartments.  Mr. Proud reported the parking lot is not fully completed but will be by July 15th.  Lines have been painted on the proposed lot.  The parking was arranged so no one has to back out into the street. Each bedroom on the lower floor has a fireplace, which is only cosmetic now.  The rooms are wired for computers and the students have study rooms.

Ms. Vavrek asked Mr. Ragon if he has seen the pictures.

Mr. Ragon stated yes.  The pictures were at the Planning Commission.

Ms. Vavrek inquired how many parking spaces were there now.

Mr. Proud informed everyone there are 9 spaces available.  It could be expanded. 

Ms. Moore asked if Mr. Proud is happy with the R-2.

Mr. Proud reported the two people that stay on each floor sign a contract.  Those individuals may have visitors come on board, who actually register with the University as his/her mailing address.  Mr. Proud stressed those particular people do not have any contracts and wishes to attempt to make it legal.

Ms. Moore commented R-2 means two apartments and that house has always been that way.

President Wilshire announced R-2 is more of a definition of a family.

Ms. Moore wondered if the number of people is what is being discussed.

Ms. Vavrek pointed out this property is located in the Commercial District.  In 1991, the Prouds requested a conditional use; and, at that time, it was changed to R-1.  Now Mr. Proud wishes the designation be R-3.

Ms. Moore verified the Prouds weren’t asking for an R-2.

Ms. Vavrek stated no.  The Planning Commission was recommending R-2, because then it would be three unrelated in each apartment.

For clarification purposes, Mr. Ragon stated when the Prouds came to Council in 1991 it was a single-family dwelling and the request was to create a two-family dwelling.  Council put a condition on it then that the occupancy be R-1, which is single-family no more than two unrelated persons.  Essentially, it created a two-family with an R-1 occupancy status.

Ms. Vavrek asked Mr. Ragon to comment on Mr. Proud’s statement about visitors.

Mr. Ragon has a problem with this situation.  After research, it’s been discovered that there were more people staying in those apartments than two.  Mr. Ragon is unsure about the contracts but believes this has been a continual occurrence for 3 to 4 years.

Mr. Proud feels 90% of the time there were only two people there.

Mr. Ragon disagreed.

Mr. Proud informed Council he traveled a lot and stated it could have been some absenteeism on his part as to how many were actually living there.  But the contracts read two people only for each apartment.

Mr. Ragon received his information from the student listings in the Student Address Handbook.

Mr. Proud reported the first floor bedrooms could accommodate two full-size beds and another room could have a single-size bed.  There is plenty of room for three or four people to stay in that dwelling.

Mr. German asked Mr. Ragon the reason why the Planning Commission recommended R-2.

Mr. Ragon announced the reason was density.

Mr. Proud questioned what that meant.

Mr. Ragon stated the number of extra people that would be there.

Ms. Vavrek reminded everyone last month there was a similar situation where 25-30 neighbors were insisting a property be designated R-1 even though the particular property was located in the Industrial District and the owner was requesting R-3.  Ms. Vavrek commented Council has been promoting R-1 in places where it is possible and thinks Council needs to think about this before a decision is made.

In Mr. Proud’s defense, Mr. Ragon informed Council there are three bedrooms per apartment and there is adequate parking.  It is up to Council on what to do with the Commercial District as far as residential property.  It has been Council’s position to limit those to single-family occupancy.

Hearing no other questions or comments, Ms. Vavrek adjourned the Public Hearing at 6:59 p.m. with action to be taken at the Council Meeting.

                     ______________________________

                     Carol Lapinto

                     Borough Secretary