Neighbors at war in suburban Minnesota over resident's perfectly LEGAL plan

Daily Mail​

2 days ago

A Minnesota suburbs' solution to the housing crisis backfired and sparked an almighty debate among residents who are up in arms over one neighbor's plan to build a tiny home on his land.
The Blaine City Council decided to allow residents to build 'accessory dwelling units' (ADUs) on their properties in an attempt to allow for more affordable housing.
Now, four years later, homeowner Alex Pepin became the first to apply for planning permission to build one.
But in doing so, Pepin sparked uproar within the community and the council began to completely reconsider their solution.
'Everybody is upset,' said resident David Hime, Star Tribune reported. 'The neighborhood is up in arms over this.'
Pepin runs a nonprofit for the homeless and his plans for his ADU would be with hopes to rent it out to a family in need.
'There's no encampments in the north metro or anything like that, but there is, you know, homelessness is an issue,' Pepin told CBS News.
'It would be families coming out of homelessness, so they would have gone through a program first.'
His goals were to help families eventually find permanent housing solutions, working alongside nonprofits.
His application was approved, before the council then revoked the permissions following backlash within the community.
'Their ruling was based on the concerns from other people that were not necessarily grounded in fact or anything,' Pepin told the outlet.
'It was disappointing for us. We're just trying to do an allowable activity in the city. This is an allowable means to get affordable housing for people who need help in our community,' Pepin told the Tribune.
Hime furthered in April that their area was for 'private homes' and hadn't been designed for 'low income housing,' CBS News reported.
'This will destroy the enjoyment of our backyard,' he added, and cited worries of traffic, and the safety of their neighborhood as well as home values in the area.
Blaine Mayor Tim Sanders, however, also argued that the ADU movement was not intended for low incoming housing but instead for family or starter homes.
'The intent was for families to have an option for housing, whether it be for parents or in-laws, or kids trying to get their start,' Sanders told the Tribune.
'It was not intended to be a revenue generator for the homeowner to rent out the space to a second family more or less living in someone else's backyard.'
Resident Gregory Nelson wrote to the council in April stating: 'This is zoned single family housing... It would be a horrible eye-sore. Plus they want to put a driveway next to the exiting house to drive into the back yard... No one wants cars driving alongside their house into the backyard...'
'This proposal would just decrease the property value of everyone else who lives on the Park... I know to some it may not be a big deal since we are not as big as the new developments in town, but it is important to us.'
Jeff and Rhonda Brekkestran wrote in to voice their concerns, and cited property values dropping, the view from their backyard, estrangement between neighbors, as well as security and privacy concerns.
Reggie Meyer wrote: 'While I think they are trying to do the right thing, this is not the right place for something like this. These properties are right off a park where children are constantly running around and I don't think having homeless people and recovering addicts in the park is a good thing for families in the neighborhood.'
Meyer also pleaded to the council to 'please consider all the families and children at this park while making a decision'.
But Pepin said, while he understood the concerns of those within the community who opposed his plans, he believed they had misinterpreted who he would be renting the unit out to.
His plan was to build the unit, within the city's restrictions, and most likely rent it out to a single-mother with children following a criminal screening and recent drug testing.
Pepin has already submitted a proposal for a unit he intends to use for his family, but has yet to decide if he will contend the decision to deny his unit for a homeless family considering it was within city requirements
Pepin's proposal - meeting city requirements- included a two-bedroom, 616 square foot home, with a maximum of four occupants.
Pepin hoped that living on the same property as his family would also help provide a support system for the renter, which homeless people often lack.
'We try to live out our Christian lives by caring for people who need support,' he told the Tribune. 'And we know that people coming out of homelessness need time and stability.'
Pepin added that he felt 'bad' that the code was being revised following his proposal, but asked how big of a problem it was truly going to be considering he was the first and only application since the policy's approval.
He has already submitted a proposal for a unit he intends to use for his family, but has yet to decide if he will contend the decision to deny his unit for a homeless family considering it was within city requirements.
Council member Chris Ford said: 'I know it's a highly emotional, charged thing. I do feel for you, the neighbors that don't want this. But right now, it's policy.'