I can't speak to the condition of the house at this time, but the house has some historic value in the neighborhood and the large lot would have made it attractive for buyers looking to have a decent-sized yard in a crowded city. According to the Star Tribune's information on real estate transactions over the past ten years, the property last sold on 12/17/1999 for $75,000. I don't know if it was owner occupied after that purchase or rented out. Regardless, the property still had value as a single-family home with a garage and large lot.On 1/26/2005, the St. Paul City Council approved that the lot could be split, clearly for the purposes of building a new home. Here are the entries for 662 Duluth on the St. Paul Property Information web site:
It's the first entry (later in date) that troubles me. First, both 662 Duluth and the new home at 664 Duluth needed variances in order to fit on the two lots. In an area that often has many homes crammed together, I think that granting a variance for smaller lots would not be showing good stewardship of the neighborhood. I say "would" because according to these records, the variances were never actually granted: the request expired. I may be misreading these records, and I'll try and do some further research to see what actually happened.
So, with the two lots and the need to put in a new home, the garage was torn down and two concrete slabs were put down in its place to provided parking for the new homes. Here's a satellite view after the home was built:

(image from Google Maps)
View Larger Map
View Larger Map
As you can see, the two homes are abutting each other with little space between. Even worse, neither home has a garage and they share a driveway. Both properties have now lost significant appeal as single-family homes. 662 Duluth has almost no usable yard; what's left are the portions that are downward sloping. They both seem doomed to a life as rental properties (in no way meant to be a knock against rental properties, but the East Side had a glut of them in 2005 and did not need two more).
Four years after the decision to turn a neighborhood asset into cramped living space, we have drug dealing; we have a murder. Are they connected? Maybe. But certainly, our community lost some value to the gain of a developer.
Here are some street views of the property:
View Larger Map
View Larger Map

No comments:
Post a Comment