The URL can be used to link to this page

PL 08/06/1969 - 31027� : ;,� - PLANNING COrIl�IISSION MEETING AUGUST 6, 1969 PAG� 1 ROLL CALL• The meeting was called to order by Ch�irman Lrickson at 7t30 P.Mo Members Present: Myhra, Mittelstadt, Exickson, Jeasega Member Absent: Fitzpatrick Others Present: Engineering Assistant Darrel Cl�rk APPROVF PLANNING COI�IISSION MINUTES: JULY 23. 1969 MOTION by Jensen, seconded by Myhra, that rhe Planning Comm�i�sioxa apprave the Planning Co�nission 1Kinutes of July 23, 1969. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carrieci unanimously. RECEIVE PLATS � SUBDIVISIONS-STREETS � UTILITIES SUBCOI�II�TEE MYNLTTEg; JUI,y 30 1969 Myhra called attention to Page 2 of the minute� and the wording in the motion for lot split �69-21 by Walter 6�ittm� �.sking that the intent of the motion be clarified. The first sentence of the motiora should read "recom- mead denial of the lot Split, L.S. �69-21,----". � MOTION by Myhra, seconded by Jensen, that the Plaiming Co�ission receive the minutes of the Plats & Subdivisioas-Streets � Utilities Sub- cou�ittee dated July 30, 1969 and iaclude the above clarification. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motioa ca�ried unanimously. RECLI�IE BUARD OF APP�LS PffN[T'dES : JULY 30. 1969 : MOTTON by Mittelstadt, seconded by Myhra, that the Plannin� Co�iss�on receive the minutes of the Board of Appeals elated July 30, 1969. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carsied unaaimously. ORDER OF AGENDA• Chairman Erickson explained that the two requests received thfs eveniag would be taken in the following order: (10) Lot Split �69-22, Itichard Gjevre and (11) Arthur Deys referred by Board of Appeals. 1. CONTINUED REZONING RFQUEST: ZOA #69-10, G�ORGE BALTHAZOR• Lot 3, Subdivi� sioa �10, Auditor's Subdivision �94. Bezone from R-1 to R-3A. Mr. and Mrs. Balthazor were present. Reviewiag the facts discussed at the last meeting, Mr. Myhrs said that one of the thiags suggeated was the fact that thia would be an economic hardship if denied. There is evidence right from the begi�ing that the � City tried to make it clear to the petitioner it was a duplex which allowed �_, only two families. Plamain� ��s�io� M�etin� -�1u�ust 6fl 1969 �� 2 � The Chaixman said he could understand that a r�tired pexs�a9 livia�g on a /� fixed i.ncome, could find that keeping the house a�d paying the taace�� would be } di.fficult. However, to rezone �khe property would be bad �pot zoning of �h� worst type. He was �ot sure he would be willing to ask the Ci.ty Council tq allaw the petitionex to have use of the property as three family dwelling under the present osdinance. Mr. Mittelstadt asked to have this request aad the Peterson request o� 69th Avesrue clarified. The difference was that Mr. Petersoa waa going to build on a lot where there was no structure, and Mr. Balth�zor's structure was a�- ready there. The Chairman suuaned up the discussion by �aying it seemed to him that what the Planning Ca�ission is trying to say to the petitioner is that if he can't put three families in the dwelli.ng, he would have to sell. This may be true. It would not make any difference to him if � setired persoae livin� iai a aingle family dwelling, would want to put a faffiily in the bas�,ment, but put� tiag three families into a two family xesidence should not be granted. MOTION by Jeasen, seconded by Myhra, that the Planning Commission deny the rezoning request, ZOA �69-10, George Balthazor, of Lot 3, Subdivision �10, Auditor's Subdivision �94 to be rezoned from R-1 to R�3A for the re�son� that it would be a very flagrant example of spot rezoning and that such rezonin� would be detrimental in the center of a single family neighborhood, Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, �he motion carried unanimously. 2. CONTINUED P80POSED PR�LII�IINAtLY PLAT�, P.S. #69009A Z�III� 0'B�]NON: Lot� 11, 12, n 13 and 14, Auditor's Subdivision �22 and Lots 1 th�ough 16s 24, 25 and 269 Block 1, Irvington Addition. ' The Chairman stated the Planning Coffiission h�d asked for a pseliminary plat with topog and more specific details aa f�r a� l�t eize were conceraed. Mr. 0'Bannon came fozward with the topog �p. Se �howed the plane for the sewer and road and ackaowledge that he had forgotten to have the locatioa of the Skog house showa. His measurements showed a littie over 35 feet of setb�ck. The Chairman said he was satisfied with �he preliminary plat, except for ane thing -- that the building should be shown. Mr. Jensen euggested Mr. 0'Banxion get a boundary ssurvey showis� the buildix�s and the lot linee. This would be for his own protection. In a spirit of cooperation, Mr. 0'Batmon ia woricing details out with the two owners. He would have no objections if the road were to �ve one way or the other a couple of feet. Thie is the kind of thing that ought to be considered in the actual computfa� of the final plat. T�e Engineering Assistant said the Council is looking at a preliminary plat, and until after the final plat is made, no boundaries are required. 1�TION by Jensen, seconded by Mittelstadt, that the Plaaning Commissiomm recommend apprwal of the proposed preliminary plat, P.S. �9-09, Mike 0'Banaon of Lots 11, 12, 13 and 14, Auditor's Subdivision ,�22 aad Lots 1 through 16, 24, 25 and 26, Block 1, Irvington Addition as shown on the drawing labeled "Pro- posed Plat, P.S. �69-09, August 6, 1969" including the �rea outlined ia a red pencil oa this print subject to the provision that the petitioner prwide a boundary survey which indicates that the existing buildings on the property "`� will fit on the lots as described by the zoniiag ordi�ace prior to the accept- ance of the final plat. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried � unanimously. Pl�at�� Co�i�sion MeetinQ -�u�ust 6, 1969 P��e 3 � /� 3. CONTIN[TED PROPOSED PRE'd,�ARY PLAT. P.S. ��69-07, B�T1`iw100D ES�iTES ��EVISED� THOMAS SWANSON: All that part of Lot 34, Revised Auditox's Subdivision �77 lying East of the East l�.ne of Block 1, Mississippi View Adclition. Pub�ic hearing closed 7/9/69. MOTION by Myhra, seco�ded by Mittelstadt, thag the Planning Co�nission continue until September 3, 1969 the proposed prel3minary plat, P.Se �69-07, Brentwood Estates (Revised), Thomas Swansona iTpon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried una.nimously. 4. CONTINUED REZONING REQUEST: ZOA �69-08. R. W. WORMSBECI�R: Northwest Quarter of Northwest Quarter, except ATorth 16.6 acres and Sou�hwest Quarter of North- west Quarter of Section 2; also the North 34e68 acres of Northeast Quarter of Northeast Quarter of Section 3, to xezone from 1K-2 to R-3. Mr. Wormsbecker said his plan was that they have found same of the ground is good and some is bad, and until �.hey can get the City Engineer to tell them the elevation of the service road on University Avenue, they cannot develop the property. The ground is generally sloping towards the river and theq might have to put in four or five feet to make it level. He said he would like to put in a shopping center, but you have to have people and there is enough laad to put iax 500 f�ilies. This would be adequate for a shopping center. He asked the Planning Co�ission to pass the request to Council inRSmuch_ ^ as they have a couple parcels of laaid they could sell to industxial. Darrel Clark said the Federal Gover�ent approved Fridley's request for Federal Aid for Park Developmente i'he Federal Governmen� approved the xe- �uest for park acquisition, but the City must bond itself for the entire cost and after that is done, the Federal Government would reimburse 50%. This procedure would talee some time. R�r. Wormsbecker wondered if it would be feasible to rezone the South 40 acres and keep i�he past the Cfty would be interested in abeyance. The �haixman felt this would put the City in a peculiar position because if they rezoned the 40 acres �nd the project did not go through, the land would be rezoned for apartments in the middle qf an industrial area. Mr. Wox�nsbecker said that if the park did not go through, and if the City would rezone the land to multiples, they would fill it with apartm�nts, and in time they will get a shoppiag center and some industrial -- it would not be spot zoning, but apartments, shopping center and industxy. The Chairman listed items to be considered: 1) whether or not this corner should be R-3 development. 2) whether or not the park bond issue is decided 3) whether or not any decision should be made until the Planain� Co�ission complete the study of multiple dwellings in Fridley, but the petitioner has practically solved this decision because he wants a dec3.�ion this evening. /"`�, 1�TION by Myhra, seconded by Mittelstadt, that the Planning Crnrmi.ss3.on , recoamend denial of the rezoning request, ZOA �69-08, R. W. Wormsbecker o� the NW� of the NW�, except North 16.6 acres and SW� of the NW�y of Sectioa 2; also the N. 34.68 acres of the NF.� of the NE� of Seetion 3, to rezone fxom Plana�aa� �c,�ni�sion �ee�gng ° Au�us� 6� 1969 p$�� 4 _ � �� M,2 to R-3, �,n view af the fact that we recogaiize that there is a very active proposal for this area of open space the Planning Commissionccould not in good judgment change the zoning at this timeo Tlie petitioner has related some infor- mation to us that presumably could affect the decision oa the part of the Couacil but did not think that the Planaiing Co�ission �ould use it as par� of their judgment. Upon � voice vote, all votiaa� ay�� the motion carried unanimously. 5. IAT SPLIT REQUEST: �.Ss ��69-21, WAL� E, WIT�Ts South Half of Lot ln Blo4k 1, Spring Valley Addilcion. Iylr. Walter Wi�tman caas pxesent. The Subcommittee at tlieir meeting of July 30, i969 reco�ended deaial of the lot split request, the prime facgor being the iEact t�a�t th� hal£ road waa needed on the South and would not leave ea�ough land to split. Mr. Wittanan said he still would like to g�t Cwo buildable lots. Referring to the easemeat for road, he said rehere wexe oaily two lot� in the area that dedicated the easement. Ii� wondexed if he could build on a smaller lot next to Larsen and have a bigger lot on ttie South end �o th�t if the easem�nt did go through, he would still h�ave a good sized lote He h�.d �ot talked to Mr. Lars� about either buying some of his property o� selling paxt oiE his lot. He checked the area and found there were home� build on 60 foot lots. Tf tlae easement i� a must, he continued, he would give eraougln land for easement, but he s�,ill wants two buildable lotsm /"1 - Mr. Myhra said that those houses built on 60 foot lot� were e3.ther built earlier or else built uaader variances. They could have been built on lot� platted prior to the present ordinaaice. I�. J'ensesi said it i� obvious �hat people in this area with very large lots will somed.�y thinlc in terms of getti.aig rid of some of their property. If we were to start on the end where Mr. Witt�m�aa's parcel is without a street, and thea� find, in ttae fu�ure, the rest of the people want to split the back off their lots �nd dispose of some of their propertq, we would not have � road tto get to the intemal lots. Mr. Wittman was informed that if tdze City decided a street should go through, thea they could condemn. If a 25 foot easement were given, Mr. Wittmar► would have a 125'x125' lot. Mx. Wittman did not feel that he could build a house on the laadmwithout the lot splitmwhich would sell because the neighborhood has smaller homea. He felt the kind of house th�t should be built to conform with the neighbor- hood, could be put on �wo lots. Ae said he could not have a 75 foo� coraer lot if he gave 25 feete He has owned the propegty fos twelve years. 1�TION by Jeasen, seconded by Myhsa, that the Planning Co�ission concur with the recommendations by the Sixbcoc�nittee to deay ttae Lot Split, L. S.�69-21, Walter E. Wittman, of the South Half of Lot 1, Bloek 1, Spriag Valley Addition; the reasons behind the disapproval involve a 25 foot road easement which is deemed necessary, thereby yielding � lot which is not auitable to give t�ao buildable lots, thus there is no logic behind �ppxov3.ng the lot split. Upon a voice vote, all votis�g sye, the mot3on casried unaraimously. ,� 6. VACATION REQUEST: SAV �'69-06, LEO 0. I�: Vacate 47t1x Avenue between 3rd Street aad University Avenue (Lot 30, Block 9, Plymouth Addition). Plaa�i�� s�i�� ee�in� ° Au�s� 6, 1969 Page 5 � Mr. and Mrs. Lemlce wexe pxesent. � �� Mr. Lemke said he acquired the lot tax forfeit in 1962. He bought it as a 40 foot lot and found out later it was only 38'� feet. He kept the lo� and paid the taxes. Since 47th Avenue was closed, he hoped to put a houae qn it. The sewer lateral is in the road so the City probably would want to re�sia the e�sement. The Engineering Assistant explained that it ia a storm sewer located 1� feet South of the centerline of 47th Avenue. �'he City's recommendation is to retain ten feet on either side of the pipee This would give Mr. Lemice 7 � feet more to build on and the rest would be la�n. MOTION by Mittelstadt, e�coadeal by Myhra, that the letter from Mr. and Mrs. Garald Sarwell, 4710 3rd Stseet Northeast refescrin� �o SAV #69-06, Leo 0. Lemke, be received. Upon a voice vote, all eoting aye, the motion carried unanimouely. The Engiaeering Assistant said he received a call from Mrs. It. E. Gordon who said she did not object to the vacation, but did see a dire ne�d for a walkway to cross the highway to the bus stop. She had talked to the neighbpr- hood and felt there would be quite a few at the meetiaago In the discussion regardixig the walkway, the coffient was made that because the party on the north side of 47th Avenue did aot respond to the notice mailed to him, he was not interested in the vacation. In that case, the City could retain the North Hal£ for possible walkway. rir. Jenseaa said the path i� well �''�1 worn and there is old surfacing on it. Referring to tthe alley adj�cent �o T.H. #47, the Co�issioa felt same right of way should be �aintained to keep access to it. 1�DTION by Mittelstadt, seconded by Jensea�, that tt►e Platming Coam4iasioa reco�end approval of the vacation request, SAV �69-06, by Leo 0. Lemke, to vacate 47th Avenue between Third Street and University Aveaue, vacatin� onlq the South Half of 47th Avenue and that the petitioner should grant an easem�nt to the City on all but the South 7 feet for utilities. That said vacation would be only to the West line of the alley and should not be closed off at thi8 time. Upon a voice vote, all voting sye, the �tion carried uaaniffiausly. 7. LOT SPLIT RDQUEST: L.S. �69-20, FRANK DIRCZ: Combine 10 feet of Lot 29 with Lot 30, Block 1, Plymouth Addition. Mr. Di.rcz was present. The Chairman said the acti�n of the Subca�ittee wae to recozmnend denial for two reasons, one being the fact that the proposed lot would have on one side 49th Avenue which is a heavily traveled main artery affording little boulevard, therefore the proposed 11 foot setback seemed very inadequate and that the total of five variances,already granted from the Board of Appeals, doee not seem to meet the intent of the City ordinances designed to prevent this sort of thing. � Mr. Dircz presented a petition by the adjoining property ownera approving the building of a suitable home to be built on Lot 30. The petition was aigaed P1�� i�sion l�eetin� - Au�ust 60 196� Page 6 /'�, by f�fteea people generally in the 4800 block on 3rd Street aad �om� on �9th ' ` Aveaue.' MQTION by Mittelstadt, seconded by Myhxa, that the Planning Coaanias�oa rec�ive the petit�on, dated August 5, 1969, refexring to Lot Split, L.S. �69-2Q, by Frank Dircz appxoviaig the building of a suitable home on Lot �0. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unaxiimously. MOTION by Mittelstadt that the Planning Co�ission recaa�end appxaval of Lot Split request, L.S. �69-20, by Frank Dircz to combine 10 feet of Lot 29 with Lot 30 and also approve reco�endations made by the Board of Appeals to grant the following variances: Section 45.29 reduce lot width from 5q feet to 45.12 feet; Section 45.29 (2C) distaace between living areas from 20 ieet to 15 feet; Section 45.24 etreet side corner lot £rom 17� feet to 12 feet; 3ection 45,28 reduce lot area r�quirement from 7500 to 5820 square feet; Section 45.23 sideyard reduced from 10 feet to 5 feet on existing home, to allow the applicant to split his lot for a saleable home. The 1��'ION FAILED for lack of a s�cond. Mr. Jeasen explained that he did not think it would be �ppropriate to grant the proposed lot split with i�s many variances. The minimum lot eize is 60 feet. With these numerous variances, the lot i� really not suitable for a siagle family dwelling. It was his own impression that this lot would be more suitable purchased by the City or Couatgr iai all or part for a ro$d � right of way. There is a most serious shortage of right of way in thie area. The boulevard for the lot would be five feet. Plowis�g a street with a five foot right of way is not wide enough, and a sidewalk is needed on that ai.de of the street. For children to be walking in such a atreet is ridiculous. He thought it would be a far more appropriate thing for the City or Coun�y to acquire part of that lot and Mr. Dircz retain what is deemed necessarq. MOTION by Jensen, seconded by Myhra, that the Planning Commission recam- ment denial of the lot split request, L.S. ��69-20, Frank Dircz, to combin� 10 feet of Lot 29 with Lot 30, Block 1, Plymouth Addition aad concur with the recoum�endations of the Subco�nittee as follows: 1) The proposed lot would have on one side 49th Avenue which is a heavily traveled main artery affording little boulevard, and the proposed 11 foot setback seems very iaadequate. 2) The total of five variancea already graated fram the Bo�rd of Appeals does not seem to meet the iatent of the City ordinaacee desigmed to prevent this sort of thiag. 3) The City should study this lot as a pos- sible area to acquire more right of way to, perhaps, provide room for fu�ure turn lanes and sidewalks. Upon a voice vote, all votiag aye, except Mittelstadt who voted nay, the motion carried. 8.. CONTINUED LOT SPLIT REQUEST: L.S. �69-19. 1d04tTH AIR SONN� ASSOCIATION J� R. PLEMEL: South 150 feet of Lot 18, Brookvie�w Addition subject to road easse- meait over South 50 feet. Mr. Plemel was present. i� The Engineering Assistant reported that there was no need for a sew�r easement for this request because the sewer was located about 12 or 15 feet oato the property of the Knights of Columbus in Harstad Addition. Plansa�,� �o�i�s�an %teetint� ° Au�st 6. 1969 �� 7 �'", MOTION by My►hra, seconded by Jense�, �hat the Planniag Co�ission recvm- mend approval of the lot �plit reque�t, LoS. �69-19, North Air Home Aaeoci�tioa, J. R. Plemel o£ the South 150 feet of Lot 18, Brookview Addition, subject to road easement over South 50 feet. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, tlle motioa carried unanimously. 9. LOT SPLIT RF�2UEST: L.S. �69-22, RICHARD GJEVRE: Splitting a stgip o£ land approximately 10 feet wide along the Westerly edge of Lot 4, Blocic b9 5�� huxst Addition for additional yarde The Engineering Assistant explained that the purpose was to acquire more yard for Lot 5. Mrs. Lori Rakos, owaieg of Lot 4, signed the petition. A�DTION by Mittelstadt, seconded by Myhra, that the Pla�ning Co�missioa recommend approval of the lot split application �69-22, by Richard Gjevre which calls for selling a strip of land approximately ten feet wide along the Westerly edge of Lot 4, Block 1, Sandhurst Addition. Upon a�►oice vote, all voting aye, the �tion cargi.ed uaiaaaimously. 10. LOT SPLIT REQUEST: L.S. �69-15, ARTiiUIt DEYS: Lots 3 to 5, Block 7, Hyde Park Addition. Referred to Plamning Co�ission by Board of Appeals at their meet- ing of July 30, 1969. The Chairman explained that the Board of Appeals sequested denial of the lot split until the old house caas toa-ai down ansi thea Mr. Deys retura for the �.., lot split.' ' I�01ZON by JeaLSen, seconded by Mittelstadta that the Planniag Commission ackaowledge the action of the Board o£ Appeals and table the lot aplit request, L.S. �69-15, Arthur �ysy for Lots 3 to 5, Block 7, Hyde Park Addition until such time as Mr. Deys comes back. The lot split is to be granted at auch time as the new house is built �nd the old house s�orn dowa and the application be mnde for the lot split showing that there are no variances other thaa thoae already granted. Upon a voice vote9 all voting aye, the motian carried unani- mously.. 11. AI�ER OAKS PLAT; To correct platting error, returaing "triat�gle" from Lot 1, Amber Oaks to Lot 2, Block 2, Worrel's Addition. The Engineering Assistant explained that in the Worrel's Addition, part of Outlot 2, a 50 foot strip out to Stinson Boulevard was proposed for future street and a radius w�s included with it. However, in the plat of Amber Oaks, this street was changed which caused this portion to be part of Lot 1. There- fore, part of Lot 1, Afmber Oaks is actually ia front of Lot 2, Block 2, Worrel's Addition.�he owner of Lot 2 in Worrel'� Addition is w�.11ing to accept a deed for the amall tri�ngle which would result in a atsaight lo� line between adjoining iots. MOTION by Mittelstadt, �econded by Myhra9 that the Planaixig Co�ission has no objections to splitting off the "triangle" from Lot 1, Amber Oake, ^ provided a propea lot split application is signed by the petitioner and the � party it is being sold to, being the property lying south of the south line of Ambor Oaks. Upon a voice vo�:�, all voting aye, the ffiotion carried unaaimously. �laaning Comnissioa Meeting - August 6, 1969 �� 8 ,.•. Mr.Jensen coumnented that aormally the Plamning Coa�ission asks that the criteria for a lot aplit be a aimple description, but in this case, the plat has already been filed and tlxe parcel iavolved is so small, that the description part of the ordinance should be waived. 12. MULTIPLE nWELLING STUDY II�T THE CITY OF �RIDLEY: The Engineering Assistant said the data is completed, but is being checked aad has to be typed. Because there would not be a regular meeting on August 20, 1969, the Commission would take that time to study the f�cts compiled for the Miultiple Dwelling Study. ADJO�T• There being ao further busiaess, Chairman Erickeon adjourned the ameeting at 10:20 P.M. apect ully submitted � �� 1 0 Brian RecoYding Secretary � .�""1 � , �%��.�� ' � sv � � _ g�� _ �'�� _� v c c: � GGL c s��.,/ __ L 3 S$ S K 7wo�9 �9tiE �uR'fi s �fi�� _ �3 �� Sk wa� ��H�- Y � _ L,�lZoy �v�/�n/ _ /3G�� SKywo�d �t��r_ �� ° f�-� -�yy�� , ' �� ?� � (�'r1� �� l� � � � � -� � � � � ��i�' �� .�/� � � � �-9 � �, � � �, � � � ;.� ..�� .��. ,�. ��. ,�_ :i�� a°°�2 �� _ � � � � � � 0