PL 06/20/1984 - 6837PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
CITY OF FRIDLEY
AGENDA
WEDNESDAY, JUNE 20, 1984
CALL TO ORDER:
ROLL CALL:
APPROVE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES: JUNE 6, 1984
, 7:30 P.M.
PAGES
1-8
1. PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDERATION OF A REQUEST FOR A SPECIAL g_ 15
USE PERMIT, SP #84-11, BY CHERYL A. MISCHURSKI: Per Section
205.07.1, 3 A of the Fridley City Code, to allow the con-
struction of a second accessory building, a 22 ft. by 24
ft. detached garage on Lots 47 and 48, Block 11, Spring
Brook Park, the same being 298 Ely Street N.E.
2• LOT SPLIT REQUEST, L.S. #84-08, 3Y DON ifCCLUSKY:, Split off the 16 - 22
Sautherly j2j± feet ef Ept 28, Auditor's Subdivision No. 129,
to make a new building site at 1501 73 1/2 Avenue N.E.
3. RECEIVE APPEALS COMMISSION MINUTES: JUNE 12, 1984
4. OTHER BUSINESS:
AWOUNMENT:
YELLOW
CITY OF FRIDLEY
PLANNItJG COMMISSION MEETING, JUNE 6, 1984
CALL TO ORDER:
Chairwoman Schnabel called the June 6, 1984, Planning Comnission meeting to
order at 7:35 p.m.
ROLL CALL:
Members Present: Ms. Schnabel, Ms. Gabel, Mr. Kondrick, Mr. Minton, Mr. Saba
Members Absent: Mr, Oquist, Mr. Nielson
Others Present: Jim Robinson, Planning Specialist
John Flora, Public Works Director
Mary Erickson, 650 Ely St. N.E.
Ron Miller, 953 Mississippi St, N.E.
John Dunphy, 155 Stonybrook Way N.E.
John Hitchcock, 9516 Tyler St. N,E.
APPROVAL OF MAY 23, 1984, PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES:
MOTION BY MR. KONDRZCK� SECONDED BY MS. GABEL� TO APPROVE TNE MRY 13� Z984�
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES AS WRITTEN.
UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTZN6 AYE� CXAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE MQTSON
CAf2RIED UNRNIMOUSLY.
1. PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDERATION OF A SPECIAL USE PERMIT SP #84-10 BY
Y ERICKSON: Per Section 05. 4. ,D, o ri ey ity o e, to a ow
t e co-Ti nstruction of a detached garage, 24 ft, by 32 ft., in CRP-2 zoning
(flood fringe), on Lots 34, 35, 36, Block V, Riverview Heights, the same
being 650 Ely Street N.E.
MOTION BY MR. KONDRICK� SECONDED BY MR, MINTON� TO OPEN THE PUBLIC NEARING
ON SP N84-10 BY MARY ER7CKSON,
UPON A VOICE VOTE� RLL VOTING AYE� CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE MOTION
CARRIED UNRNIMOUSLY.
Mr. Robinson stated the property is located on the south side of Ely Street in
the Riverview Heights area. The petitioner is proposing to build an accessory
building (a garage) in the rear yard. The foundation is in at the present
time. The setbacks are adequate and do meet code. The special use permit
is required because this accessory building will be in the flood frin9e.
Staff wou7d recommend the following stipulations if this request is approved:
1. Need to waterproof to required elevation of 825.25 ft. This
may consist of two additional courses of block or the use of
water resistant wood.
ING COMMI55ION MEETING. JUNE 6. 1
2. Structure should be securely anchored with anchor bolts,
3. Driveway to garage should be paved with concrete or asphalt
material. �
4. Garage to be completed by Sept, 1, 1984.
5. Petitioner will eliminate the continuing outdoor storage and
curbside parking problems.
Mr. Minton asked why the stipulation that the garage be comp7eted by
Sept. 1, 1984.
PAGE
Mr. Robinson stated Staff felt that because of the nature of the problem
they are trying to correct here, the garage sho��ld be completed immediately.
Staff felt a date of Sept. 1 was ample time for completion by the petitioner.
Ms. Schnabel asked the petitioner, Mary Erickson, if she had any comments to
make.
Ms. Erickson stated she was concerned about cost, and she was assuming the
two additional courses of block would be sufficient. She stated they do
intend to have the garage built imnediately, so she did not see the need for
a completion date of Sept. 1, 1984 as a stipulation of the special use
permit. She stated there was no problem with paving the driveway as almost
all of it was concreted at this time.
Ms, Schnabel stated that regarding the outside storage and parking problems
that currently exist, would this garage e7iminate those problems?
Ms. Erickson stated the garage would be used for storage and this would
eliminate the problems.
MOTION BY MS, GABEL, SECONDED BY MR. MINTON� TO CLOSE SNE PUBLIC HEARING ON
SP #84-10 BY MARY ERSCKSON.
UPON R VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRWOMAN SCXNRBEL DECLARED THE PUBLIC
HEARSNG CZASED AT 7:46 P.M.
Mr. Saba stated he had no problem with this request as long as the stipulations
were met.
Ms. Gabel stated she thought this construction was an excellent idea, and it
may be a way of solving a problem that has been going on for a long time.
She felt the stipulation of Sept. 1 for the completion of the garage was a
necessary stipulation.
MOTION BY MR. MINTON� SECANDED BY MR. KONDRZCK� TO RECOMMEND TO CITY COUNCIL
APPROVAL OF CONSZDERATION OF SPECIAL USE PERMIT, SP #84-10� BY MARY ERICKSON�
PER SECTION 205.24�4�D� OF FRIDLEY CSTY CODE� TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF A
DETACHED GARAGE� 24 FT. BY 32 PT.� ZN CRP-2 ZONIN6 (FZAOD FRINGE)� ON ZATS
34� 35� 36� BLOCK V� RIVERVIEW XEIGHTS� THE SAME BEZNG 650 ELY STREET N.E,�
WITH THE FOLIAWING STIPULATIONS:
PLANNIN� COMMISSION MEETING, JUNE 6, 1984 PAGE 3
1. NEED TO WATERPROOF TO REpUIRED ELEVATION OF 825.25 FT. THIS
MAY CONSZST OF TWO ADDITIONAL CDURSES OF BLOCK 9R THE USE O£
WRTER RESISTANT WOOD.
2. STRUCTURE SHOULD BE SECURELY ANCXORED WITH ANCXOR BOLTS.
3. DRZVEWAY R� GARAGE BE PAVED WITH CONCRETE OR ASPHALT MATERIRL.
4. GARAGE BE COMPLETED BY SEPT. 1, 2984
5. PETITIONER WILL ELIMINATE THE CONTINUING OUTDDOR STORAGE AND
CURBSIDE PARKING PROBZEMS.
UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTINC, AYE� CHRIRWOMAN SCHNRBEL DECLRRED TXE MOTION
CARffiED UNANIMOUSLY,
Ms. Schnabel stated this item would go to City Council on June 18,
2, TABLED: LOT SPLIT REQUEST, L.S. �84-05, BY JOHN HITCHCOCK: Split off the
�outherly 84 feet of Lot 8 H, Second Revise Au it�or— s Subdivision No. 21,
to make a new building site at 953 Mississippi Street N.E. (Other lot will
be changed to 6530 Oakley Drive N.E.
N.OTZON BY MR. KONDRICK� SECONDED BY MS. GABEL� TO REMOVE IS 1�84-OS FROM
THE TABLE,
UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CHAZRWOMAN SCXNABEL DECLARED THE MOTIOfI
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Mr. Robinson stated they still need the owner's signature on the lot split
request, and the owner, Ron Miller, was in the audience.
Mr. Robinson stated ihe property in question was located on Mississippi St.
west of Oakley Drive. It was a corner lot. Previous7y, the northerly 81 ft.
had been split off, and at this time the petitioner was asking that the
southerly 84 ft, be sp7it off. This lot is presently built on and the
house faces Mississippi St.
Mr. Robinson stated one of the problems expressed by the Flannin9 Comnission
at their last meeting was the variance situation. He stated three variances
are scheduled to go to the Appeals Comnission on June 12. The lot split will
create a new front yard for the existing house. Presently, in the front .yard
there is an accessory garage building that would need a variance. Another
variance would be that the front yard be 25 ft, versus 35 ft., and a variance
that the rear yard be 21 ft. roersus 27 ft.
Mr. Robinson stated the proposed house on the new lot would front Oakley Dr,
Mississippi St. then became the side yard, and 17.5 ft. would be the required
setback. However, Staff was suggested that 30 ft. be provided. The adjacent
house has a front yard setback from Mississippi of 110 ft. There are similar
setbacks as they proceed westward to Jackson St. After Jackson St., the
houses are closer to Mississippi. He stated the side of the proposed house
would �e on Mississippi and would not be consistent with the neighborhood.
He stated Staff would recommend the following stipulations if the lot split
request is approved:
PLANNIN6 COMMISSION MEETIN6, JUNE 6 1984 PA6E 4
1. Approval of variances created by lot split (scheduled for
Appeals Commission on June 12)
2. Existing structure (now facing Mississippi) havs new address on
Oakley Dr, after lot split
3. Signed park fee agreement for one lot of $750
4. L:t split to be registered with County prior to issuance of a buildin9
permit. October 15, 1984 is deadline to split 1985 taxes.
5. Existing garage (accessory building in front yard) to be relocated
to side yard if it is to be replaced or substantially improved
(at 50% of garage replacement cost)
6. Owner to sign lot split and variance requests
Ms. Gabel stated she felt this was all inconsistent with the neighborhood.
She could not remember any instance where a variance was granted so a garage
could be put in front of a house. She stated the garage in front of the
existing house was the biggest problem she had with this lot split, and she
was not sure what could be done to alleviate that problem.
Mr. Kondrick stated the house and garage are already there, and that will
not change. The people who build the new house are going to see the same
thing. He stated he did not have.a problem with this request since the situa-
tion is an existing situation.
Mr. Saba stated he agreed with Mr. Kondrick, but he could also understand
Ms. Gabel's point of view.of what this was doing to the neighborhood in
general. All of a sudden they are allowing a garage to be in a front yard,
and the City wouid be setting a precedent.
Ms. 6abe1 stated she also felt they put some burden of proof back on the
City if they grant this kind of a lot split, because this lot split does
require variances, and this was not a variance she had ever seen before. It
was not the kind of variance that comes because of the "lay of the land",
Mr. Kondrick stated he would agree if they were talking about new construction.
He stated he would consider the new proposed house mare of a visual problem
than the problem of the garage in front of the existing house.
Ms. Gabel stated she thought the intitial problem started with the garage
in front of the existing house, but then it was compounded by putting a new
house on the corner of Mississippi and Oakley Dr. when the setbacks are as
far back as they are in that area.
Ms. Schnabel stated Ms. Gabel had a valid point in that the variances wouTd
not be necessary if the Planning Commission does not grant the lot split
request. The City, in effect, is creating the variances that become necessary
to be appealed. The variances are not sanething the petitioner is creatin9,
but the City is creating them if it approves the lot split.
Ms. Schnabel asked the petitioner or the owner of the property if they had
any cort¢uents to make.
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, JUNE 6, 1984 PA6E 5
Mr. Hitchcock stated he could see a probiem if they were proposing to con-
struct an auxiliary building in the front yard--something the neighborhood
would be upset about. He was not sure what Ms. Gabel was objecting to.
Ms. Gabel stated she was clearly concerned about the garage in the front
yard. She felt it was inconsistent with the Cornprehensive Plan and the total
planning for the City. The visual impact is that people cannot see the house
from the street, only the garage. She stated her other concern was that the
Planning Comnission's granting of the lot split was what was creating the
variances. If the Planning Commission does not grant the lot split, there is
no need for the variances. What is the position of the Appeals Comnission
in denying the variances when the City has granted the lot split? She
stated she was very uncomfortable about granting the front yard variance for
a garage in the front yard.
Mr, Hitchcock asked if Ms. Gabel would be more willing to look at this if he
moved the garage to the side of the house.
Ms, Gabel stated, yes, she would be more willing to take a look at this if
the garage was moved to the side of the house.
Mr. Hitchcock stated he was not convinced that moving the garage was going
to improve the looks of the property, but he would do whatever was necessary,
Mr, Robinson stated that if the garage was moved, there would be quite a
difference between the proposed house and the existing house. The petitioner
might want to consider moving the proposed house back 5 ft, to make it more
consistent with the existing house and the new house to the north on Oakley.
Ms. Schnabel stated she was very reluctant to grant the lot split. She
honestly had a hard time visualizing a house going in on the corner of
Mississippi and Oakley in front of all the rest of the homes in that two block
area. She felt it would dramatically change the nature of the street. It
was really inconsistent with the neighborhood.
Mr. Hitchcock stated that considering the fact that they are in conformance
with the homes on Oakley Dr., could the Planning Cortmission impose something
that was stronger than the code?
Ms. Schnabel stated the Planning Commission can only make recommendations
to the City Council. Then all the legalities have to be handled by the City
Council who has legal counsel. The Planning Commission does not have that
legal counsel. The Planning Cortmission can only go by what the Zoning Code
says which does not give them legal expertise.
Mr. Hitchcock stated that because of the demand for land being what it is,
he believed that at sane future time it was likely that this same kind of
lot split would be proposed for the other side of the street on Oakley.
If Fridley wants new construction, it is going to have to work with these
types of things.
PLANNIWG COMMISSION MEETING JUNE 6 1984 PAGE 6
Ms. Schnabel stated they did not know what was going to happen in the future.
She agreed land was not easy to come by, but she still felt the Planning
Comnission had an obligation to preserve the neighborhoods,
Mr. Kondrick stated that because of the trees on the lot, he did not find
this as objectionable as he would if it was up about two blocks. He stated
he did feel this was the best use for the property as opposed to having
nothing there. He would be in favor of tfie lot split, even though it was
going to create some problems for the Appeals Comnission. However, he would
be in favor of a stipulation tfiat the garage be moved to the side of the
existing house.
Mr, Saba stated he agreed with Mr. Kondrick. He stated this is a very unique
area, and there is not a lot of conformance in that whole area. His main
concern was the garage in front of the existing house. He would be in favor
of the lot split with the stipulation that the garage be moved to the side
of the existing house.
Ms. Gabel stated they will be creating a"monster" if this lot split is
granted and it then goes on to the Appeals Comnission.
MOTION BY MR. KONDRICK� SECONDED BY MR. SABA� TO RECOMMEND TO CZTY COUNCIL
APPkOVRL OF LOT SPLZT REQUEST� L.S. N84-O5� BY JOHN HITCHCOCK� TO SPLIT OFF
THE SOUTHERLY 84 FT. OF L(Yl 8 H� SECOND REVISED RUDITOR'S SUBDIVISZON NO. 2I�
TO MAKE A NEW BUILDING SITE RT 953 MISSISSIPPS STREET N.E. (OTHER LOT WILL BE
CXANGED 2t� 6530 OAX.LEY DRZVE N.E,)� WITH THE FOLLOWING STIPU211TIONS:
I. APPROVAL OF VARIANCES CREATED BY LQZ' SPLIT
2. EXISTING STRUCTURE (NOW FPCING MISSISSZPPI ST,) TO HAVE NEW ADDRESS
ON OAKLEY AFTER ZAT SPLIT
3. SIGNED PARK FEE RGREEMENT FOR ONE NEW LOT OF $750
4. LOT SPLIT TO BE REGISTERED WITH THE COUNTY PidIOR TO ISSU:�NCE OF A BUILIr
P,�2MIT, OCTOBER .IS, 1984 ZS DEADLINE TO SPLZT 1985 TAXES.
5, EXISSING GARRGE TO BE MOVED FROM PRESE:JT LOCATION TO A LOCATZOP7
SOUTH OF THE PRESENT HOUSE 2HAT IS CONTIGUOUS WITH THE ZONING ORDINANCE.
6, NEW HOUSE ON THE NEW�LOT 2'O BE SET BACK RN RDDITIONAL 5 FT. 3'O 40 FT,
(AS OPPQSED TO 35 FT.) FROM ORKLEY DR,� BASED UPON WHERE THE EXZSTING
GARAGE IS RELOCATED.
UPON A VOICE VOTE� KONDRICK� SABA� AND MINTON� VOTING RYE� SCXNABEL AND GRBEL
VOTING NRY� CHRIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED.
Ms. Schnabel stated the variances would go to the Appeals Cortonission on
June 12. The lot split request and the variances would then go to the City
Counci7 in one package on July 12.
3. LOT SPLIT REQUEST: L.S, #84-07, BY BRANDON CONSTRUCTION COMPANY: Split
ot , Bloc 4, City iew, in ha f and ad one alf to Lot 4 and one half to
Lot 6, to make two residential sites, the same being 411 ana 415 57th Place
N.E.
PLANNIN6 COMMISSION MEETING JUNE 6 1984 PAGE 7
Mr. Robinson stated there are three existing lots on 57th Place, located
just east of TH M47. The petitioner is requesting that Lhe middle lot, Lot 5,
be split in two, and that 20 feet be tiven to each of the adjoining lots to
make two 60 ft. residential lots. The lots are each 40 feet by 740 ft. Total
square footage of the three lots right now was 16,860, yielding two lots each
at 8,430 sq. ft. Since this plat was recorded in 1887, the Code states that
50 foot widths or greater and 7,500 sq. ft. or greater, are allowed, so even
though t�e proposed lots would not be up to today's code, they are acceptable
because the are was platted prior to December. 1955.
Mr. Robinson stated there are several 60 ft. ]ots in the area. so this would
be in scale with the neighborhood and would meet all setback requirements.
Mr.Robinson stated Staff would recommend the following stipulations:
1. Signed park fee agreement for one lot of $750
2. Houses to face 57th Place (as others on double frontage block)
3. Lot split to be reg istered witj� the,Count� orior to issuance of a
building pernit. October 15, i984 is dea ling to s�iit 1885 taxes.
Mr. John Dunphy stated he was representing Brandon Construction. He stated
he believed this was a very simple lot split. If everything goes well,
the builder would like to start construction the first half of July. Ne
stated he felt these new horties would really improve that neighborhood.
MOTION BY XR, KONDRiCK, SECONDED BY MR. SABA� TO RECOMHEND T�0 CITY COUNCZL
RPPROVAL OF IAT SPLIT REQUEST� L.S. N84-07� BY BRANDCJN CONSTRUCTZON COl�ANY,
2�0 SPLIT LOT 5� BLOCK 4� C71'Y VIEW, ZN FIALF AND ADD ONE HALF TO IAT 4 AND
ONE f1ALF � LOT 6� 1t� MAKE TWO RESIDENTIAL SITES, THE SAME 6EZNG 412 AND
4I5 57TH PLACE N.E.� WITH TXE FOLLOFIING STIPUZATIONS:
1. SZGNED PARK FEE AGREEMENT FOR ONE ZAT OF 5750
1. HOUSES TO FACE 57TH PLACE
3. LOT SPLZT TO BE REGZSTERED WZTH COUNTY �°RIOR TO ISSUANCE OF A BUILDING
PERMZT. OCTOBER 25, 1984 IS b£ADLZNG TD SPLST 1985 TAXES.
UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE MOTZON
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Ms. Schnabel stated this request would go to City Council on June 18.
4. RECEIYE MAY 10, 1984s,H0USING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MINUTES:
NOTIaV BY MR. SABA� SECONDED BY PII2. KONDRICK, TO RECEIVE THE MAY 1D, 1984,
XOUSING 6 REDEVELOPMENT AUTNORITY NZNiI!'ES.
tlPON A VOICE WTE, AI,L VOTING AYE� CXAIR(+'OMAN SC(QJAHEL DECLARED THE MOTInN
CARRIED UNANZMOUSLY.
PLANNING COMMISSION MEEfING JUNE 6 1984 PAGE 8
5. RECEIVE MAY 14 1984 PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION MINUTES:
MOTION BY MR. KONDRICK� SECONDED BY MR, MINTON� TO RECEZVE TXE MAY I4� 1984�
PARKS & RECREATION COINMISSION MINUTES.
Ms. Gabel stated that in reading the Parks & Recreation Comnission minutes,
she was quite concerned about the possibility that the beach house at Moore
Lake would be torn down and not be reconstructed and the possibility that
the beach would not be guarded, She stated the beach is really used, and
there are really too many people using the beach and the lake to not have a
lifeguard,
Mr. Kondrick stated there were alot of quesiions about the use of the beach,
the lake, and the beach house. He stated'that at this time, this is all
just discussion and nothing has been decided.
UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTZNG AYE� CHAIRWOMAN SCHNRBEL DECLARED THE MOSION
CARRTED UNANIMOUSLY,
6. RECEIVE MAY 15, 1984, ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY COMMISSION MINUTES:
MOTION BY MR, MINTON� SECONDED BY MS, GABEL� TO RECEIVE TNE MAY 25� 1984�
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY COMMISSION MINUTES.
UPON A VOTCE WTE� ALL POTING AYE, CHAIRWOMAN SCHNRBEL DECLARED THE MOSION
CARRIED UNRNIMOUSLY.
7. RECEIVE MAY 22, 1984, ENERGY COMMISSION MINUTES:
MOTION BY MR. SABA, SECONDED BY MR. KONDRiCX, TO RECEZVE THE MAY 22, 1984,
ENERGY COMMISSION MINUTES.
UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOSING AYE� CHRIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
8. RECEIVE MAY 29, 1984, APPEALS COMMISSIOW MINUTES:
MOTION BY MS. GABEL� SECONDED BY MR. MINTDN� TO RECEIVE THE MAY 29, 1984,
APPEAIS COMMSSSION MINUTES,
UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTTNG AYE� CHAIRWOMRN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
ADJOURNMENT:
MOTION BY MR. KONDRICK, SECONDED BY MR. MINTON, TO ADJOURN THE MEETING. UPON A
VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING RYE� CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE JUNE 6� 1984�
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AA70URNED AT 9:30 P.M.
Respectfully su mitted,
�n.G /
Lyn Saba, Recording Secretary
PUBLIC HEARIN6
BEFORE THE
PLANNING COMMISSION
Notice is hereby given that there will be a
Planning Cortmission of the City of Fridley
University Avenue Northeast on Wed�esday,
in the Council Chamber at 7:30 P.N. for the
Public Hearing of the
in the City Nall at 6431
June 2�, 19fl4
purpose of:
Consideration of a Special Use Permit, SP �84-11,
by Cheryl A. Mischurski, Per Section 205.07.1, 3,
A, of the Fridley City Code, to allow the construc-
tion of a second aE�essory building, a 22 ft. by
24 ft, detached garage, on Lots 47 and 48, 81ock
1l, Spring Brook Park, the same being 298 Ely
Street N.E.
Any and a>> persons desiring to be heard shall be given an opportunity
at the above stated time and p7ace.
VIRGINIA SCNNABEL
ChAIRWOMAN
PLANNING COMMISSION
Publish: �4ne 6, 1984
June 13, 1984
MAILIt�G LIST
SP #84-11 Cheryl A. Mischurski
2nd accessroy building
298 Ely Street N.E.
Cheryl A. Mischurshi
298 Ely Street N. E.
Fridley, Mn 55432
Mr, & Mrs. Eugene Erickson
264 E1y Street N.E.
Fridley, Mn 55432
Mr. & Mrs. Curtis Wahberg
265 Ely Street N.E.
Fridley, Mn 55432
Mr, & Mrs. Kenneth Brustad
272 Ely Street N.E.
Fridley, Mn 55432
Mr. & Mrs. Robert freeman
273 Ely 5treet N.E.
Fridley, Mn 55432
Mr. & Mrs. Dennis Pietrek
280 Ely Street N.E.
Fridley, Mn 55432
Mr. & Mrs. James Benson
281 Ely Street N.E.
Fridley, MN 55432
Mr. & Mrs. Moroz Mykolal
289 E1y Street N.E.
Fridley, Mn 55432
r, rs. uane Motzko
240 E1y Street N. E.
Fridley, Mn 55432
Mr. & Mrs. Brad Klassen
295 Ely Street N. E.
fridley, Mn 55432
Mr. & Mrs. D. J. Rydbom
269 Liberty Street N.E.
Fridley, Mn 55432
Mr. & Mrs. S. J. Norn
279 Liberty Street N.E.
Fridley, Mn 55432
Mr. & Mrs. Warren 5tock
289 Liberty Street N.E.
Fridley, � MN 55432
Planning Corc�nission June 5, 1984
10
Mr. & Mrs. Jerry Hanson
299 Liberty Street N.E.
Fridley, Mn 55432
Mr. & Mrs. James Olmsche�d
301 Liberty Street N.E.
Fridley, MN 55432
Mr. & Mrs. James Klipstein
303 Liberty Street N.E.
Fridley, Mn 55432
Mr. & Mrs. Willim Kwan
8002 Ruth Street N.E.
Fridley, Mn 55432
Mr. & Mrs. Laurence Coulter
8008 Ruth Street N.E.
Fridley, Mn 55432
Mr. & Mrs. E. W. Froiland
8Q1Z Ruth Street N.E.
Fridley, Mn 55432
Mr. & Mrs. David Schroeder
8016 Ruth Street N.E.
Fridley, Mn 55432
J
��F �
e.�83�� 5P6GIAL �E �/
Se � �%
�y � � 5"'� �
�'�'.�*� .r
.r 3 �an,s''` . - Oa� �yp.,,,,,.--^"'� �
M • �
� r
��� � �/
' s� � p1S1�pROVEdi
qQ aQeapVED / O15Ap VE�/ �E
�1551��� � _ p��
�Sl:
a- �
L�/ ttEL�1Qj N�
FEE� ��
�„--- `� N � �QE�'�-"''� � � y `f /
�' Vs� pF pl VSE; n,J- o'�
�x15�IN� fiV ZNE 54�C1Q cct �
�A� ���RTQi1� �51FtLp1t��CR1� �R1� � ��
��'(� 5_ ,��t, SQ`�� �0.
�SExj 10Nt� �PER��-^'''`�� U f� 1at• �{t3 n/ eSJ�
Se�yQEpGE Q� Y E `oa �p5 0� ous�y 5 S pj �t s�te �o , pa� o{ ��yro9er'
�f the a4Q�tca�t �'it on the S anb °"n'ers � Si9ned
� �ia �e °c Sp Sted aQd �eR? �ist °{ D�a � S;aeS�cat� is r°t t fa�lur t�
va S,�,eque �a) Ah�s epP� 'Sp;s aPp tb�s m tne rtY �n
What wa d5 tbathe� to t• �b� �ve� "�'�tir9 { oq proPg
de.�tan atta� nation � 5 ce5� d,ienrs the
�ers j g�e fe t wjil be ..' � c an t�pe Q�� a�d� ���rtY �e d, ShOw t h �0t e t
ihew �in?� the pro4e ��ect� �S�de^ts and attru�tureks q, S�re
�y .ecs o� for anY S e{ D� ed, be �Ya`�n' Sea 5 5etbas feetl •
bY �ll S�ns;bi5 a d a,d tne u�deTSi9� r�ct�re �S p{ t� p� ana 5�thir 35� d �n
��� � e na� n S to ard Sti Lflcatio�� a�� f}din95 tM ns state
- q�s o�' �e,��po5ed D a��ti ��pposed 5 rt Cex stin9 huj d�sPreSent�t�o
A Ske� �g f.,�ns o c pr0 snb u5e of ad�a�ea1' �e �a�ts a�
3}� pime 5 �O �oceti°r ��lare ���e�t• � ��
�� �N �O �
'thes�'de l; st an � true an Sl�pjuRE ��p� �
th�s aPp � 5 ,- Y �
pp'SE '�� ,
�
f' J �
,,,;, ..
„� . ..,; `
� . �,y� ,
a �..c� ,
,
� Rc� �-►r,
�,. .
,-.�+
�s�J� N J `,
i � :
♦
f�) , f r i �j t
�:; 7 �
i�lti ; �.q � .
�
, � useRnr
�� �
,
n��,.w �
i
�.'
Z 3I��r ajs +f�
�i ��fj
<�P #84-11 Cheryl Mischurski
�
�_�s_i�� L����o�--_
5
� _
L'; :' � ` �'
�y .. rn!!'� ._ ._....,,.'.. ....
� � ��
�� � �� ,�
�,� : C.
tT ,�� ✓ °,I ir
�� f�°' y e3 30 ( Z
\ , �
�o • .�__
'�s � . ;
�. —
..,�y;�,;. �; �, 4z} r, Y,,. � , n Q�r �� L�� -
3 � � •,
" �� � � � a ,.
\� .
q,�r �. �!3 4s; �� oq s� y sr� � i 1 I«� w %s SS
• i ' • ` < � F Y y� i, .: ✓? � i 3 I �. ' / �f ! it n ti /� W � . � a I
� S
_ a� � �, � • � /7 . �' �,A
�, r. . . K 1
.. _ . . . . „ 4 �`Y
Mr lM �wI�M -• •�ti�I ��!•` t
f � -IA�• /•OM �r T �Y {i�.
•�I• 1 CfJ �t !.//IJ' � • •• �\ •�♦
� x�i y, •.^' • ; ��`; � �'Ol..fr /1r/i`- ) •' `�, `�
�� ,I �� ♦ Y" �. . • �`� 1
�' ♦ • ,,' •�, � ``{••�1P� � '�� � �'
71t2' y ��} '� � � 'p �11
� �1t • " O!� . � '�O 4� '
� �se�'yy-f�" t ;�d�� �. � � �� �^ 'f�r7�� �O �
� < . �. _,� r � � i
f r � � `� �
� ����o . /'► � `�-� . �*'�1 '. ,
. ._ a1 � , ,� ,� �' '
_ RxR� k ".�',�►� � A t� �� ,,��'�,�
12
�
�
�
��. �♦ 4Ml
�t
yr �
��`�� ME
_ .
��.: �:�:,. :
_.__. . _... _ _�_.�__ �'`.� -_ r.. 1 � • G~ K � �1 .^.^. LL� 1 � _" � ��.F' �L � �i
"'°°'.•°� C. E. C O U LT E R SP #84-11 '-"' "°
•Jf`hft{ I��Y \J�.�.•
� `o, LAND SUArE�pR CF1CJ"yI Mischurski •`•"^O"
•o.oc+..+�.c r•..,.a •ec�s�t�ra utioaw ��ws or s*�*t or r.wa�so.• .+=c.•i
..n+.�o �, o.:.•.u• o. c.. o• �+..•ro. •
3300 LvrrO��E •�'E SD M�NNEI1POl�5 ! MINM
TAr�OR •.0770 "
,'
'
/ V
SG:�F �1� :T�7
f►urbepor's [erldtcatt
�� � : �' � = ��
, --- - 6�.�- --
3G,0 � 30.0
� � (w r�
Ot —t N T
,�l
( ,,,
� �2
�
.l
�
0
�
?
�
� �
f
� I
`I' � J.
—30 _22,
��� '
- - 6,.c _ _ _
A ��'_E `f'
�c'� f.P-c� �t"'� <�e.�1
� -ir-- � —
D�
�
e�
�-S-F
�i � .a4
�Y��aib, ��'
..�
,�
'N
-�
.s•"',viFR P��Ep1:
�•_ �'.:;1:E'k
I tierets ceztify that tite aboce i= a true ano correct plat o.` a sur.•c. o::
I,ot� 47 ar,d 4A, 41ock 11, Spr3ng Broo�c Park, Ano<a Count;•, Minnesota.
As surveyed b� r�e this 2GL'� dap of Auqus� 190� A.D.
� . ;� �-- .:
Signed��- _ . •-. , . . , f. —
L.
Minnesota Reai=tration No. 2�84
� �
� � , .� _�:
; , �`,, * <..� ' � s. �:
>�i �''� ' ?.
� �
� ^ t . ::
,
� ff � z ..t
f1 1 * �4 �
�.
+' p_ y . �'t�. z� ' '". P _ � �' I ..
4 ''� Y _� , 1 � . 5
� Y
' 5�.... `�k+.r.i, Sx��• y
. .�.yT �,�"
,..r } ..
s r
, �-L
: ,,; {TL � � .
A ' f� � � .
.� ti .• � ���
�21. y
. - �_,� � iV` �' � � u
. � � M1 '� �1 �. S �' _1
2' h
1 '
�}- ty 4w
a� v E` i. Y,;
. _ � ""` ri i ,.�
5
.. �[. �µ'S. .Z �' } i
l �
, ' �� r
y. �T � .
�C� � � �� ��� � �� -.
. � � �2 � tf'Y ��
` . ��.1
1. i r {
(} `� ' >y ��.,(¢p�'' t � .'1�y `+
„�`� ._•!*�1lC�.^ ��a��s 4�a,1
k';
� � �`r�� ���.�
i�� � �� �� �
��r
'*� •
�Y :h.
��
� �' � �
�
f `�� :
� �
� �'
i E �`.�."`� •�,?
I ;� �`�
�. �
/i �� ,f.
�SY A �
� Y' �
.
^'� .'.
'�r, 4Y�. -�:�
t� . % _n
t4
� . s . f .Ya-.:
y� ���
�� i ,�y
�` , �:
s':: ,�r-
n *
!• � �.
� R '{
� r .� .
~ ��
�` { r�
�{ �
�� � � .
� �s�
�
v
C�c'.{�t � 1�!d
� �
R� z �'�`�°�?-
.. �'ri� � }- r��
S ;-; �r
. . ` �:
� � �c".,.+,.�
� '_
. �-
*s� . . .;;� �, = . ,
� - i ..; . .% . � �
�y{ ~� . ZYY' 3 . �� `
,.`�. j ..,. � _
e
� •'
1 '
._�p� .
+��
i
F:'
1
l��' v4��� fr .
� � �k. ', :
�f : ���-� 7 ' i�
� Y,� �s� �
�r z s; t ' ,
. a ' �"�i ' a " � i
Q
�
2.
vy
� . � . �.
r ;�'' yy ft. �, 'r'
+�r "��� yt'.�b� � `a.A��
� a
� � �
: t� � � F�� r t �
.:s�._.��:�`+� � � ,
j � ,
� r 4
} e 7y
.� � . . � � .
� �' ^
i��- �_ 4 � �
�, � } �
`'vti°' , �G +, � 7"+., ,�*14� �
t ' �� '.: -; � '��„ ; ' :� ' ��
� ° � �"�� �. t :t �p. . ..
r "� � ? _s '�y. �;'��
� �� .r� -` � �'�'Y} �1,s it.
r � � �'� � 'r # p � i? ° yl f , .
i�:' .�E � �, c ? •:3 �t?� ~
+r'-" �... � ��� s'�� _.��"..t:s
. r �'� . . p � � L � -'�.".
.�t �'x � �`'
:' q ;�
. .':� t �i�i-'NFTY',' t: .
- . . + ' L } �s.1�y}.'.— , '
"" "'E i. rr � t�
. ���"`� ,,;;,
� f . Y� �i`1 'i' ♦ i�
ff Y �� a 2� .
�� .�'''�ts �� s i.%'`t\ .;F� 7� i w:
�3: �kz �+` �- ;1 e r
� ' - '• ' Y3 � i•Y. � • � 2 #•�
R �- .,� i � ' �
� y � A 7 a������.;,� •� �,
` v
. a`�` �
, .��sr K�i��� v.�f �?N1-a �' c'
� ��t� '�.`�..��- w y �. � �. � � .
; y y�:.
� �� � ; � ,
�° , -.y,n•J•c
. . � ...F.',_ '
-Y . ♦ Sy
� 8 ' s �i
. � ��-- Y■ x - p� �r'D
^ S ,
� � �I�+� T.. �� R
i
?
�F . . � � y�a_r i .,{
• �
. '� � � �` p%*�f �j.��-- � P �'
x;� s i
� .�.�r�� .+ �' ��'vVa •
Y �
�� . � � aa;, { * .. .` tw,4 - . `;.� C:Y+
� � ��a
� 1 � '= 4,�. ` � i�° •J�, �i.
'� . % ��8 � ,�' . i„ ._i F$ a`.2 S � +��'�' �
•_.� ��'� ����+�'��,- ��
� __ 4 4
�, :� �4. `•� .
�
.
� • � � �s
•� � �
z
� �i4_�..
:S� ��..�. ��
«G . F ,`. �,# '
a
,: �,
s
i
.
, -�
�
�
�� 4
i;�
• 3
� � b
�:
1 '
R.� } .�
�
}r3i
� �
�t3�r -�-
� �, `+
�
. �� � �
.� �
• CITY OF FAIDLiY. SUHJECT
�� sp�rni .Vwws ssse osr.s�-a+ao
❑i
LOT SPLIT
RECORDEO:
7'%lri
16
�$ /� -'S� U �
WIT�:
P111}WING COM1155I011: APPROVED ,_ DISAPPROYEO DATE _— �
CItY COUNtII:
PARK FEE REQUIRED:
STIPUU7IONS:
NAME '
PROPERTI' OHNER(;
ADDRE55(ES) � y
APFROYED,_ DISAPPROYEO, DATE _ _ NO
PROPfRTY LOLATION ON STREET
LEGAL DESCFIPT(ON Of PROPE�cTY
TOTAL AREA OF PROPERT1f
�� PAIO
FEE � dU � RECf1PT MO/3�7
TELEPHONE NO,Z,B�-2ZZ3
TELEPHONE NO
� �., vv��. SSat3 z_
i
_
12
PRE5EN7 ZONING��___,_
REASON FOR LOT SPLIT �T<� v�,���. Uok�i'z� —
The undersi9ned'hereby declares that ilt the facts and representations stated in this
•pplication are true and wrrect. �
��, � „f�,��C,�.��,.� �- � -�t
a�: z � �9s sisNaru
� /`Yf,� Dr��=
NOTiCE: A sketcA of the property and the proposed 1ot split with any existing struc-.
tures shorm should acconpany tl►is application. "
(See reve�se side for sdditional instructionsj
i�
Effective January 17, 1984
�g84 POLICY STATE?�NT ON PARK FEES
ON LAAD SIIBDIVISION
Date
In determining fair market value of public areas for land subdivision for cash payment as
reQuired by Ordinance i633, the following values will be used:
ResiGential Subdivision
Residential Lot Split
Commercial/Induatrial Subdivisloa or Lot Split
E1,500.00 per lot
E 750.00 per lot
= 0.023 Per sq. ft.
This fee is to be paid at the time of final plat or lot split approval. The City Council
may de£er collection to the time a buildiag permit is requested for individual lota
created by auch subdivision/lot sp11t.
The City retains the optian to accept an equivalent emount in cash from the applicant for
part or all of the portion required to De dedicated.
PARR FEE AGREENENT
The underaigned understands that according to the City Pla`ting Ordinance, the following
public park land dedication is required to plat residential, commercial or industrial
zoned property.
St is further understood that the puDlic park land dedication or cash payment equivalent
is at the discretion of the City.
d�
It is agreed that e cash payment of E� will be paid according to the above stated
pollcy for the follo�+ing subdivision/lot split.
IL is agreed that the following land dedication is provided according to the above stated
policy for Lhe 2'ollowing subdivision/lot split:
Dedication:
Subdivisioo/Lot Split
The unders2gned further agrees to notiPy all future property oxners or assigns of the cash
payment requirement, if it is to be collected at the tlme of lasuance of a building
permit.
Date:
(Property Qrner Sigaature)
3/0/8/8
'� • _ �/ !l _ _sr i .. F A�'.� . 11eLCi
-5-�"l� � � yl3t% ;�76'zE= /��uZ��, t�j wl�..�%.� ��..., � .
`Vl� �� � � •� t� M (w�.s ;y.r r ..
�5.,� :;,, ^; * ,� .Z;#s�/ H sys�� �.,...,. .. �„ LS. #84-OS 18
`_ ' � '� ���� � i' :� � /��l �s:� r 1501 73 1/2 Ave. N.E.
' � ;`'j° _ C•.. �; �'so� .i
i#c��; Q ;���y;t �. � M�sin•� ,- . ., f � ��/
� T. . y��• {i% � •� 1a r \
�,�,, 'T�a � � ,T .,rr . r p .. �� ,� �O �5 a , ,.se, s ' • -
� - s 11 �i �' S �"J� _ � a . - � � • .
j /M�t /i' �ir ;, �h' �
�,. ...... !f� , � j . �sa ; �4 cs , i� -' � � ti� ,. � ir+s ��K irr+ �r oi �s�s ~
LIM'FSAt /Sa
['.� ♦%,i-ii M+ .. `iir T6 TH µtM � ^ 'i� � � �
•i�rs r rn .
- ^ � ' iK .. F . �
�� �sa��: ,�b �t.� .--. ';, :...:. ��o UDITOR, S isc � .`�"s �� s.
� 5'' '7t� �?7,s ".. .� , �
�,/ .,, i c :, � - F.,�s.�., "' ..
e�.. s r 7t9d ��` ` � r Ar•r. �v/: � � �r.l..+ �t-
, c • � ��,vy. �. /J i! /:. �!y� � IM'�, •
� " 1: P .
_ = , W .. + .,,� i 7 � �....,.. �,.rr � � , �
..� �'• ,..� "� � -
r�v � a} �. • + w s • �i g 2 ., � �f �2 7 �, � . .o
i4/ /i�? 1 / 7 ! � .�.r. �'.1Lf `� - �::. "ry ` � N°' ;'� _' '
'+ � \. � � J�' a
- . DRIVE . � ,.• �z �O ". ���s �.�'' , ,.
:r• r �• �-►R�^ .i0� C ..
i3so �3GO �s�o -- .., <.� =".�� '� P'a � � .� . ,
! .. � ...,..
�.� 7 ��O ,
(a ` O � � /��,�H� _.�_ �c�� � , t � � 4� !�
Q.t�. �e u` r 4-
V • �' s � � `•, � � _�I t� �� 1
�I� z �� � B tI, � a' 0 �' '�� ? O � l�� �hMi �;
i33s 13cs /!Bi 13�S��ni� ifx n.ir �.:�*� �7e � � ISl3 �7
. ,�
.ON � 1�GA STR r =
T� �
�I, _�I� j��� ,f�l11 ' ii �J3S I BDI { +O� t7G .`� 4� � Jo is: . Z `y'O js/
ll' �%� H m N '�e 12 <� r °/
9lYS ,.si � r�o,. t ' �j!r"
2 2 26 � '' �` � 2`E
,, r :. � 4/r+1.!(... . - ,s� .. . �. 7 io
t �� . ��� `y �5 /�+r�� �.r� i f! i �s � . ii
;-,�Rs _—���' t �' L p, W��s, J
w��c
,i � ��-.. q � 4 " �c�.► ��r.., Z ,. ! Is9�
` w
. �
�2 • w�� `.�,r:I j a ,�.ce.�. -�Sr �- v. �c. i l t
� iw/T ��T�II�
p.� h I . .� �� /lip ��� �)� ��� /ff0 fYYA
� // 1ii
..... �°' N+ . .�, �.�.� �� («a ' AT S �.�,
•�- •, .,�.,,,�o; 2 3 2 S 27 29 �
,
t; w u.r � �sos �s
'� f ��a � rs..,
�1�t� /��� `K J� y ls�� � � I f t t ti�
•. � _�. N„ r s � � 1� �r itts j - ---- �� _.
t�-S�A�f-Ai� i �FtMFA�f i�i�� 't - --� 3it@-- - - If f . - — --
. � , • _ ,
� � - ---- 7 , - __ s ,rt� :_ " ' ; ic���_-- �: _. -
r'i . �� . i ' - �:�.t j�y� —� Ai �. �� '� ,!
� �. � .. ' I #. Y�{. _• ' ' � . �� , , _
*f,} '.� .. �, !. , .' ' ry �i A4. �: ..,� .�M � - �. . .
�j� � . I
i, �J�� '• • iK� � � Y � . .:�� � -� �►. � � �(
�"' , j�- � . s r .. ' i ' i ,yi � '� �
�J�C�t� � .. t, '���`� �.]l► F �~• •���.=r � ��.F?��.wi' j�
'i " i _�� '_ — .�
�..�I, �j ;.!'�
ONONDAGA ST"�?,EE� N. E; 19
0
� �
L.S. #84-06 1501 73 1/2 Avenue PJ.E.
AvE
21
STIPULATIONS
Anne Hanson
Lot Split �84-08 -
1. Provide 25' street easement for possible future use.
2. Concrete curb work on 73 1/2 to be done by City's contractor at owners
expense.
3. Petitioner to provide driveway to street.
4. Driveway to be removed at no cost to City in the event that the street
goes through.
5. Signed park fee agreement at $750.
6. Split to be registered at the County prior to issuance of a building permit,
or before October 15, 1984.
y,�r '{ o
j, . : ; �. ti . . �
_:�. �v ` ` '�� -.:i� �� .S. �84-06 20
�. • � a
� r :i ,`^'•> � � 1501 73 1/2 Ave N.E.
� �X_ � .
j � �� �:� �� ;, •
� � `� , • �
' -��.� w �' 7�,: ? . �•�.
E'y� v j ,�t 'f, 7.. �,��:�_ �� i �
�1.� ; - ' � �•�;& � � �f,.!+.
�r . .!�� � ' _� a"
•... �' � ��'.
r.. ��.s ;. i.c d _w. }'_�.. _
- f�f 7 R f.
. �1� jl,ti . ._ tv .`�,� ' _
-,� • ���x' .� � ���� '�'��'� •�i�� ��� �. . ♦��`
H � ` �:
(� � .. . � � � � � : � � � . � �
ais:'se-, . �j ,E' �. . ' .i'. ti`,� . i.•,'� T � r
r0 � q �`� <: �i
.�i f ' .����1� i:��. . �lw -. ''.�
• j '� � � .�l
�ri.: � � .
.',. y.,. . � . . �.`, � .
i(�.:_ 1 � . . '� j" ♦ -.> �
.�., , . ..� �� �k .
Yj: .• �, � �-a �. .��. -�� . .� <<�. . � r. .t;!�r ' �����j�.
A. �� .• . •` - �' - . � --� '' . s�.
��M . . c�� + :„
O '� �. Y�::�,� a 4_ .-• � "_� .... - � i c. . �� Jr a.`i• • {� .
� � . � %� �.i , .l� �S. . y �: . y . •
� �.�:�r' ����9� �,R` � � f.,.� �y.,.� •`F�i A�.,�X��*� ,,'i ,♦ .�•a .t�. l� ��v.
!L. '7G'3 '.1 Y.1 .t � (. .
� � 4 � V� �'' '�:'iF v�{,, ,' � � � �+��¢{y ,.. -
� �� � J i � ��•� r v.
::. sj �i
k � {' �� �- 3� -� ; .e�� �- r - �
,� ' ,�..,,, r' `�r.�_ `�`�r°�'tis. '
° ,i���`' � � � � �}. '� �.�,, - . � ' `4::Ya?l
��,$� , � r , „• : � _ . ,.` `•� �: �n
��;' +i �� :5 � � 'r .! _ . � �"'�'.
�r. - � .� �.. �- i} � :r ' 4 � ,:
? '' , � .. � ' � �� a ; ' � � � . ;� M� - `�'. -
. �� . N � . � � ' T � .
� � . �,y� -t._
1:'. �� I
f
!
���y � . �� •l � � 'j ��
��(/�i �M7V� F �1 •
V �_ ' +si �`���:l�. L! •C • -�.
� � . � ` ✓11 '
��� ���� J . . �`- P
. � ! l� . � �� �tjK i � S �4 ' � � „(�� � �
�"�w�.�.. :.�� � � . •� � �' i� � � . i � �'s ..N � :�`
��� � f � � •d'� l:• 1 ~ � :.' ��.(
.t . ��r, �. � �� - �� i, �.
y S • ���f .
�.-� j y.j L -�• ... �,s�wy ��5 '[YS .
�` ��� l�� r+�+N. '�.i�uG.: I�• , p 1 "� -
7 ± , ` -� . � , � ��.'.
;: . - '� ) •` �r .y.
kp'�� . •f . . < . p
�� -`q .y� = •. ! ..` A � A
f
y� '�� . 1 `, � i, . i�' � .n .i i' , � ! Y •_.
.s p t; }
R ��q af •
Fi. i: +� � } �_ F'[. * � t x ,.�
�:'-�f�RS `�W �? �? '_ � S - - -`_ �
, , � .:,. ' �� ls �i.54c r - ' . , L '_ i1�
. .... .. /� �P.>, a`�"} 'T � � �.`:' � -i+ �:
i .�-` �� °
� ��� fe� Iw'�i b..^FKw.`� �'`3�°j.i�ia'�^Ya? t
���. '- a 1 -i:.� '+ • * ` �' s `� ` t .. .
-*� T,t :�.-� �,-w-.x . -. - : � ��: � _ v. �- .�+1'�"�y_ i'�i 's�.
� .'y,�5 ' k � � ��. ..f s��'�� � j .
/ y � �3 '� } � I���' �!` ��
��• � 4:, ;` � �� fn,.
Y �~ T �� s. .
�� � �
� p 3 � �
• l� • I
� :! �, .�, �_ '
1s ' • � � " h°�l� ,�,
,c , r ' . ,�'' ` i� . � ` .;.
i�16 . : > „ : : ° , _
CITY OF FRIDLEY
APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING, JUNE 12, 1984
CALL TO ORDER:
Chairperson Gabel called the June 12, 1984, Appeals Comnission meeting to order
at 7:30 p.m.
ROLL CALL:
Members Present
Members Absent
Pat Gabel, Alex Barna, Jim Plemel, Jean Gerou, Donald Betzold
None
Others Present: Darrel Clark, City of Fridley
Rhoda M. Sprang, 4600 West 78th St., Mpls. 55435
John W. Hitchcock, 9516 Tyler 5t. N.E„ Blaine
See attached list
APPROVAL OF MAY 29. 1984, APPEALS COMMISSION MINUTES:
MOTION BY MR. BETZOLD� SECONDED BY MS. CEROU� TO APPINJVE TXE MAY 29� 1984�
APPERL; COMMISSION MINUTES AS WRITTEN.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTZNG RYE� CHAIRPERSON GABEL DECLARED THE MOTION
CRRRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
1, REQUEST fOR VARIANCE PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 214 OF
4J1 K1VtK KUHU IV.t, �rceques
, inneapo is, n. 55455).
Y CITY CODE T
ng,
MOTIQN BY MR, BETZOLD� SECONDED BY l�IIt. PLEMEL, TO OPEN TXE PUBLZC HEARZNG.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTZNG AYE� CHAIRPERSON GABEL DECLARED THE PUBLIC
HEARING OPEN AT 7:32 P.M.
Chairperson Gabel read the Administrative Staff Report:
ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF REPORT
6485 East River Road N.E.
A. PUBLIC PURPOSE SERVED BY REQUIREMENT:
Spcti�❑ ?14,11,2B reauires a maximum size of eiahtv (80) souare fPPt in
area for a free-standing sign.
Public purpose served by this requirement is to control visual pollution
and excessive use of signs in comnercial areas.
APPEALS CONPIISSION MEETIfJG, JUNE 12 1984 PAGE 2
Section 214.11.2E requires a minimum distance of ten (10) feet between
a free-standing sign and any property line or driveway.
Public purpose served by this requirement is to control visual pollution
and to maintain a landscaping strip between properties.
B. STATED HARDSHIP:
"Existing sign was grandfathered in. It lost grandfather clause exception
when sign was damaged over 50 percent due to wind damage."
C. ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF REVIEW:
The original 8' x 4' message center was erected on June 9, 1976. This
sign was damaged by a storm and allowed to be repaired in July 1983. A
storm this spring again damaged the sign and since it was greater than
50 percent damaged, the property owners were told they could not replace
the sign without a variance.
The existing pylon sign has a total of 66, sauare feet and approval of
these variances would raise this total to 98� square feet, with the sign
placement only 7 foot off the south property line and 7 1/2 feet off the
west property line.
Mr. Clark stated the Commissioners had some pictures of the site as it is
today, along with an aerial photo, and a picture showing both signs last
fall before the message center sign was damaged.
Ms. Gabel asked the petitioner to explain this request,
Ms. Rhoda Sprang stated they are asking to replace the sign that was there
with an illuminating sign on a metal py7on. She stated there is already a
base on the property on which the sign would be erected by a professional
sign erector. It will be no larger than the sign that was blown down and will
be much more attracitve.
Ms. 6abe1 asked what the message center had been used for in the past.
Ms. Sprang stated Mr. John Swingdorr, the lessee of the property, has used
it to advertise merchandise in his store, has advertised the open air church,
congratulations to graduates, etc., anything that pertains either to his
merchandise or participation in the community.
Mr. Betzold stated that in looking at the stated hardship, he could not
really understand what the hardship was. Was the hardship that because the
sign was destroyed, they wanted to replace it with a similar sign?
Ms. Sprang stated, yes, that was tfieir intent. She stated that as a business-
man in the community, Mr. Swingdorf needed a certain amount of advertising
space. He has had this space for a period of l years at this location. She
APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING, JUNE 12, 1984 PAGE 3
stated they are not allowed under the sign ordinance to use-the free-standing
swing signs to advertise that are available and used in sane communities.
Mr. Barna stated he could attest to seeing 49'er Days advertising on this
sign for the last couple of years. Mr, Swingdorf does not have his building
plastered with a lot of advertising.
Ms. Sprang stated Mr. Swingdorf is quite a civic minded person. Mr. Swingdorf
runs a very clean, respectable business.
MOTSQ/ BY MS. GERDU� SECONDED BY MR. BARNA� TO CIASE THE PUBLIC HEI.RING.
UPON A VOZCE VOTE� RLL VOTING AYE� CXAIRPERSON GABEL DECLARED THE PUBLIC
HEARING CLOSED AT 7:45 P.M.
Mr. Plemel stated he has driven by this station many times, and he did not
think this sign has been an eyesore in the past. He stated he would be in favor
of the variance.
Mr. Barna stated he did not think the sign was an eyesore. Actually, it was
not that visible to northbound traffic and for southbound traffic it served
. a purpose as far as advertising for the store itself. He did not think this
lot was excessively signed, and 18 sq. ft. over existing code was not that much
of an overage.
Ms. Gerou stated that since there was already a 5' x 10' "Spur" sign and a
4' x 4' price sign, was there really a need for another 4' x 8' sign? She was
thinking of the Union 76 station where the Appeals Comnission denied a similar
request.
Mr. Betzold stated he also recalled that example. The Union 76 station made
the same pitch that they had products to advertise and messages to convey,
and the Appeals Corrmission denied that request stating the code.
Ms. Gabel stated that was part of the reason for the ctause ir the code that
if something has been grandfathered in and is more than 50% damaged, a variance
is needed. It gives the City an opportunity to re-examine things and bring
things into compliance that are out of code. She stated that, as Ms. Gerou
and Mr. Betzold had mentioned, there is sane history for this. The Appeals
Comnission did deny similar requests for Union Oil and Western. She stated
everyone wants more space to advertise, but there is a limit and a reason for
the code, She stated she was not in favor of this variance for those reasons.
Ms. Sprang stated that with regard to the Western Station, it is a company-
operated station, owned and operated by the corporation. In this case,
Mr, Swingdorf is an individual businessman. His family depends on that
station for their livelihood. He is at a competitive disadvantage with a
company that operates a chain of stations.
APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING, JUNE 12 1984 PAGE 4
Ms. Gabel stated the problem the Cortmission runs into is that if they grant
one of these requests, it then sets a precedent for other people to come
in with similar requests, She stated they understand thAt people need to
advertise to remain in business, and they are not unsympathetic to that;
however, the Comnission does have a responsibility to the community to make
sure there is not a proliferation of these kinds of signs.
MOTION BY MR. BETZOLD� SECONDED BY MS. C'iEROU� RU RECOMMEND TO CITY COUNCIL
DENIAL OF REQUEST FOR VARIANCE PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 214 OF TTiE FRIDLEY CITY
CODE TO INCREASE THE SI2E OF A FREE STANDING SIGN FROM 80 SQUARE FEET TO
=98 SQUARE FEETj TO REDUCE TXE REQUIRED SETBACK FROM 10 FEET TO 7 I/2 FEET
OFF TNE WEST PROPERTY LINE AND TO REDUCE THE REQUIRED SETBRCK FROM 20 FEET
TO 3 FEET OFF THE SOUTH PROPERTY LINE� ON LOT I0� AUDITOR'S SUBDIVISION
NUMBER 23� THE SAME BEING 6485 EAST RZVER ROAD N.E.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, BETZOLD� GABEL� RND GEROU VOTING AYE� PLEMEL AND BARNA
VOTING NAY� CHAIRPERSON GRBEL DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED.
Ms. Gabel stated this request would go to City Council on July 2.
2. REQUEST FOR VARIANCES PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 205 OF THE FRIDLEY CITY CODE TO
I
. HltchcoCK, yblb lyler Street N.t., �Iaine,
MOTIDN BY MS, GEROU� SECONDED BY FII2. PLEMEL, 4YJ OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARiNG.
UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL Z7pTING RYE� CHAIRPERSON GABEL DECIARED THE PUBLIC
HEARING OPEN AT 7:55 P.M.
Chairperson Gabel read the Administrative Staff Report:
ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF REPORT
953 Mississippi Street N,E.
A. PUBLIC PURPOSE SERVED BY REQUIREMENT:
Section 205.07.3D.1 requires a front yard depth of not less than 35 feet.
Public purpose served by this requirement is to allow for off-street
parking without encroaching on the public right-of-way and also the
aesthetic consideration of the adjoining neighbor to the rear who has
frontage along the side street, to reduce the building "line of sight"
encroachment into the neighbor's front yard.
APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING, JUNE 12, ]984 PAGE 5
Section 205.07.3D.3 requires a rear yard depth of not less than 25 percent
of the lot depth, with not 7ess than 25 feet permitted or more than
40 feet required. '
Public purpose served by this requirement is to provide rear yard space
to be used for green areas which enhance the neighborhood.
Section 205.04.56 requires any accessory buildings to be placed in the
rear or side yard only.
Public purpose served by this requirement is to limit visual encroachment
into neighboring sight lines and to allow for aesthetically pleasing open
areas adjacent to public right-of-ways.
B. STATED HARDSHIP:
"The structures a7ready exist but if the proposed lot split is approved,
variances are necessary to make the structures legal, nonconforming
buildings."
C, ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF REYIEW:
The present lot is 168.94 feet by 111.35 feet, located on the northwest
corner of Mississippi Street and Oakley Drive, wi±h the frontage on
Mississippi Street.
The applicant proposes to split off the southerly 84 feet to make a
buildable site fronting Oakley Drive. The existing house is set back
121 feet fran the front property line (Mississippi 5treet). If the lot
split is approved, the existing house will then front on Oakley Street.
This will result in the following variances being needed: (1) Front
yard setback of 25 feet versus required 35 feet; (2) Rear yard setback
of 21 feet versus requires 27,8 feet; (3) Encroachment of accessory
building (detached garage) into required front yard.
If the Board's decision is to grant this request, the staff would suygest
that the following conditions be met: (1) The existing house chanae
its address to Oakley Drive; (2) If the existing garage ever needs
replacing, that it be moved from the front yard.
Ms. Gabel stated this item was before the Planning Commission twice. It was
tabled the first time because it came to the Planning Comnission as a lot split
with a request for variances. Both she and Ms. Schnabel, Chairwoman of the
Planning Corrrnission, could not recall a lot split being granted with variances,
primarily because there is a public hearing involved with variances and there
is not a public hearing with a lot split.
Ms. Gabel stated the lot split was tabled with a request from the Planning
Cortpnission that further research be done. Last week� the Planning Comnission
approved the lot split on a 3-2 vote with some stipulations, One stipulation
APPEALS COM4ISSION MEETING, JUNE 12 1984 PAGE 6
was based on the approval of the variances by the Appeals Commission, and
another stipulation was that the existing garage be moved from its present
location to a location south of the existing house, so there would not be a
garage in front of a house.
Mr. Clark stated three variances were being requested. However, as Ms. Gabel
had stated, the Planning Corimission recommended approval of the lot split
with the stipulation that the garage be relocated from the front to the south
of the house, between the house and the lot line. If that were to be done,
it would result in the need for only one variance and that was for the rear
yard between the house and the westerly property line from 28.7 ft, to 21 ft,
Ms. Gabel stated one of the reasons she voted against the lot split at the
Planning Commission was because of the garage being in the front yard. Other
reasons were there would be no need for variances if there was no lot split
and because of the deep setbacks of 50+ ft. a7ong Mississippi St.
Ms. Gabel asked Mr, Hitchcock if he had any comnents to make regarding his
proposal,
Mr. Hitchcock stated he had nothing to add at th4s time. He stated he had a
blueprint of the house he proposed to build in the new lot if the lot split
and variances were approved.
Chairperson 6abe1 declared a 5-minute recess in order for the people in the
audience to have a chance to look ai the blueprint.
Ms.Gabel asked if there was anyone in the audience who would like to make any
comments or ask any questions regarding this request for variances.
Mr. Peter Eisenzimner, 6535 Oakley Drive, stated he lived across the street.
He stated the idea of the type of home that would be constructed with a tuck-
under garage was out of character for this neighborhood. He stated the homes
along there all have a setback of around 100 ft., and he did not think a house
should be put in on that corner. The house would be closer to Mississippi St.
than Oakley Drive.
Mr. Hilary Mayers, 969 Mississippi St., stated his house was set back 95 ft.
from Mississippi. He stated something should be done about the existing
garage before anything else was done.
Ms. Barb Tauer, 6534 Oakley Drive, stated she lived two houses to the north.
No matter where the existing garage is placed, they are going to look at the
side of a house unless Mr. Hitchcock remodels the house and puts in a door
on the east side of the house.
Mr. Jim Tauer, 6534 Oakley Drive, stated if the garage was removed, there
would be plenty of setback, but the house should be remodeled and upgraded so
it looked like a house that faces Oakley Drive,
APPEALS COhMISSION MEETING, JUNE 12, 1984 PAGE 7
Mr. Ed Berntson, 925 Mississippi 5t., stated that at the time he built here,
these houses were set back 100 ft. from the street so thgre would be a nice
frontage. That 100 ft, setback runs from Able St. to Highway 65. He would
be opposed to any development ahead of that building line from Able St, to
Highway 65 as being out of compliance with the existing properties on
Mississippi St.
Mr. Wayne Brodal, 931 Mississippi St., stated he really opposed having a house
on the corner of Mississippi St. and Oakley Drive because it would make every-
thing look cluttered in that corner.
Mr, Tim Gustafson, 935 Mississippi St., stated his house was the closest one
to Mississippi St., and in the future he planned to lift his house and move
it back. He stated he bought his home because of the deep sethack. He stated
if the new house was 6uilt on the corner, he would be looking at saneone's
back yard, rather than down Mississippi St. He did not want to see a house
go in on that corner.
Mr, Hitchcock stated that based on past experience, was he asking for an
unreasonable rear yard variance?
Ms. Gabe] stated she could not really answer that. She stated she has been
on the Commission for a long time, and she has not seen anything that is
comparable to this particular item. It was unique in that the lot split
created the need for the variances. It was unique because of the 50-100 ft.
setbacks along Mississippi 5t. The Commission has to look at each situation
individually.
Mr. Sarna stated it would not be unique of Mr. Hitchcock already owned the
property and wanted to put an addition onto the back of the house and for
that reason requested a variance. What they are finding here is that the
petitioner is creating the need for the variance by splitting the lot, so
technically there is no hardship, and the Appeals Comnission has to base
its decision on the hardship.
Mr. Hitcficock stated he was creatin9 one problem, but he felt he was also
cleaning up another problem in terms of the appearance of the property now
from Oakley Drive. Some people oppose the building onthe corner of Oakley
and Mississippi. At the Planning Comnission meeting, he made the statement
that at some time in the future, because of the lack of land in Fridley,
there will be other people coming in for similar requests.
MOTION BY MS, GEROU� SECONDED BY MR. BETZOLD� TQ CLOSE THE PUBLZC HEARING.
DPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CHRZRPERSON GRBEL DECLARED THE PUBLIC
HEAR2'NG CLO.SED AT 8:30 P.M.
Mr. Betzold stated this particu7ar area was developed in a certain way, and
it is going to remain this way for a long time. The houses that exist there
now are going to remain in the same position, To grant the variances for the
purposes of the lot split would significantly alter this particular block,
APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING JUNE 12 1984 PAGE 8
Mr. Betzold stated the neighbors have expressed their concerns. They all
have a certain amount of pride and enjoyment in the way their property is
situated nav. The approval of the lot split and variances would very
drastically affect them, He stated he did not think it would be in the
best interests of the neighborhood to grant the variances and allow the
lot split.
Mr. Barna stated he would definitely be opposed to the garage in the front
yard and the front yard variance. The rear yard variance was the only
variance he could see as a viable variance except for the fact that it is
self-created, and there is no hardship, Under the rules set up for the
Cortmission, they are required to find a reasonable cause for the variance,
and he could see nothing here that was not self-created. It is strictly a
speculation situation, and with the lot split not there, the variance would
not be required. He would have to vote against all three variances.
Ms. Gerou stated she could see no hardship. The house that would be built
on the corner of Mississippi and Oakley was not consistent with the neighbor-
hood, and she thought it would be an eyesore.
Mr. Plemel stated he agreed with all that had been said. This is a unique
area witfi the large setbacks, older homes, and nice trees. .It is something
different in Fridley, and he liked to think they still had room for that kind
of uniqueness. He stated he felt the neighbors had some valid ohjections.
He stated the existing garage was a problem, but moving it would create other
problems. He stated he would vote against the variances.
Ms. Gabel stated she felt the variances were brought on by the lot split.
There was no question that the hardship was self-imposed, and she did
think the Commission had a responsibility to the integrity of this neighbor-
hood that have 50+ ft.setbacks in their front yards.She did not disagree with
Mr. Hitchcock that because of the value of land here, these things may be
happening in the future, but for now, they have a responsibility to iive up
to the expectations of the community. At this point in time, she did not
see this as something the comnunity necessarily desired, and she would be
opposed to the variances.
MOTION BY FIl2, BETZOLD� SECONDED BY MS. GEROU� TO RECOMMEND TO CITY COUNCIL
DENIAL OF REQUEST FOR VARIANCES PURSUANT 21� CHRPTER 205 OF THE FRIDLEY CITY
CODE TO REDUCE TXE REAR YARD SETBACK FROM 27,8 FT. TD 21 FT.� AND REDUCE
THE FRONT YARD SETBACK FROM 35 FT. TO 25 FT,� AND TO ALZA47 A DETACHED
ACCESSORY BUILDING TO BE CHANGED ON THIS PROPERTY� THE VARIANCES ARE REQUIRED
BECAUSE OF A LOT SPLIT REQUEST� WHICH CHANGES TNE FRONT AND REAR PP.OPERTY
LINES ON PART OF LOT 8 X� AUDITOR'S SUBDZVISION NO. 21� THE SAME B£ING
953 MISSISSIPPI STREET N.E.
UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CHAZRPEILSON GABEL DECLARED SHE MOTZON
CRRRZED UNANIMOUSLY.
Ms. Gabel stated this item would go to the City Council on July 2 because
of the lot split involved and some of the things that have happened. The
City Council will have final action on the lot split request and request
for variances,
APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING, JUNE 12, 1984 PA6E 9
ADJOURNMENT:
HOTZON BY MS. GEROU� SECONDED BY MR. BETZOLD, TO AA70URN R77E�MEESINC,. UPON R
VOZCE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSQV GABEL DECLARED THE .7UNE 12� 1984�
APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING AA70URNED AT 8:40 P.M.
Respectfully su mitted,
� �-LL-
Ly e Saba '
Recording Secretary
�G/��,� _ 1� ,�;
7'_�`"�'�
���'`�„� �,, �y y
p��� ��,
��
;.
-�-: a�--rn�
..-�'
�t.:� �./�v
� 6.� w, �77 �✓„r�e.�.,;�
� > ,� � -
/ �'���fy,!✓«/
T���
,^ �
/!t��/ .,�.C„',tr,��.��V
H� ��� t-� /L� U•�,z U C
.
�
o r,�r�'G' P ��-��?)) r
� ��., ,
./. , t/� �s �'�,;,,M.�
�V�iJ"C�SZ6 ._. ��� GLi�J��
� /_ I � � .^� �� �,�', � %�
\.l �
?� <,t.��. ��,� �:�:°-
,� �r��' �
��_ , ��
��� /-
''��l/c�a��: � �,>� i�i�
✓��L�•:_7.� � �a �'�'�4`�.,.
�� 7
r
)�� �
' .L �t�� 1 " t•-��:}�y-•
� \ ?y ,��—
�`� ,�(�.L.r�:,-�--
i
.-
��
�-�-.°--�
G��3 / l �;�;�r_="�
,{ r
(�_:,; ; y' ���: �.. , ; I C'.�!
, r,
`, � � �� t�:%' � f. �
�
_ � ,-. � „ � �
�, � _. ,� .
� y,_
- �� � .i
��� 5,�� ��. �`: �2 �
�� 9 ,2�, s � . ; f.
�„.
�t ' �
�.,�.3c> ��f,� � . t., ' � - -
�31;: L,� 1,�:�:-4 y�� 1:, c r'; ��!... .. �: �
�cC� �C� lT✓J=1.z .`:%-
"' ' `,. �."'`, �' ,; � . , t . � . ._
' �' 7/ �" �i
n „ ..
/ .'
,�����
��f_>
���, �
�,i
� . �.. ti� . ��;�,
��A , t _
� _
, �_ N /.
�
,,li, �' �
`
� �
ti
CITY OF FRIDLEY
PLANNING COhMIS5I0N MEETING, JUNE 20, 1984
CALL TO ORDER: •
Chairwoman Schnabel called the June 2�, 1984, Planning Comnission meeting to
order at 7:32 p.m.
ROLL CALL:
Members Present: Ms. 5chnabel, Mr. Oquist, Ms. Gabel, Mr. Nielsen,
Mr. Kondrick, Mr. Saba
Members Absent: Mr. Minton
Others Present: Jim Robinson, Plannin9 Specialist
Gary & Cheryl Michurski, 298 Ely St. N.E.
Don Hanson, 1482 Onondaga St. N.E.
APPROVAL OF JUNE 6, 1984, PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES:
MOTION BY MR. KONDRICK� SECONDED BY MS. GABEL, TO RPPROVE THE JUNE 6, 1984,
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES AS WRITTEN,
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRWOMAN SCHNRBEL DECLARE➢ THE MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY,
l. PUBLIC
JY i1tS4- I I, t3Y [,I1tKYL H. M1�HUKSKI : N2Y S2Ct10I1 'LUb.U/, I� 3 H Ot the
ri ley ity Co e, to allow t e construction of a second accessory
building, a 22 ft, by 24 ft, detached garage on Lots 47 and 48, Block 11,
5pring Brook Park, the same being 298 Ely Street N.E.
MOTZON BY MR. KONDRZCK� SECONDED BY MR. OQUIST� TO OPEN THE PUBLIC
HEARZNG ON SP #84-1I.
UPON R VOZCfi VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRWOMAN SCHNRBEL DECLARED THE PUBLZC
HEARZNG OPEN AT 7:33 P.df.
Mr. Robinson stated this lot was located on the southeast corner of Ely St.
and Ruth St. The lot is approximately 8,680 sq, ft. The special use permit is
for a second accessory building, a 22 ft. by 24 ft. garage, to be built in the
rear yard and be set back 30 ft. from Ruth St, to make it compatible with the
existing house to the rear which faces Ruth St. According to code, when the
lot to the rear of a corner lot faces the side street, the setback is 30 ft.
He stated he had discussed this with the petitioner and she is agreeable to that.
Mr. Robinson stated the other stipulation v�as that the driveway be paved,
and the petitioner is also agreeable to that.
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, JUNE 20 1984 PAGE 2
Mr. Robinson stated there is an alley there that is an unpaved, unimproved
alley. The petitioner might want to consider petitioning to have it vacated.
Ms. Schnabel asked the petitioners if they had any comnents to make about
t6is request.
Mr. Gary Michurski stated the neighbor directly to the east also has a
double unattached garage at the back of his house. He stated the only
reason they are considering this garage is Decause they have an existing
single car garage. They own three vehicles. Since they both work, they
have to continue to move the three vehicles, and one ends up left on the
street more than it should. He stated they have one vehicle they use
seasonally, and they would like to store it in the garage, He stated they
will continue to use the existing garaqe as a garage,
Ms. Schnabel stated that if the Michurski's wanted the additional property
in their back yard, they might want to approach their neighbors about
requesting the City to vacate that alley.
MOTION BY MR. SABA� SECONDED BY MS, GABEL� TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARZNG
ON SP #84-12,
UPON A VOZCE VOTE, ALL S�CITSNG RYE, CHAIRWOFfAN SCHNABEL DECLARED TNE PUBLIC
XEARING CLOSED RT 8:40 P.M.
MOTION BY MR. XONDRICK� SECONDED BY hIIZ, SABA� TO RECOMMEND TD CITY COUNCIL
APPROVAL OF SPECIAL USE PERMIT REQUEST, SP �184-I2� BY CXERYL A. MZCHURSKI�
PER SECTION 205.07.I� 3 A� OF THE FRIDLEY CZTY CODE TO ALLOGI THE CONSTRUC-
TZON OF A SECOND ACCESSORY BUZLDING� A 22 FT. BY 24 FT. DETACXED GARAGE ON
LOTS 47 AND 48� BLOCK 1I� SPRING BROOK PARX� THE SAME BEING 298 ELY STREET N,E.t
WITH THE STIPULATZON THAT THE DRSVEA�AY R'p TqE NEY7 GARAGE BE PRVED AND A 30 FT.
SETBRCK BE MAINTAINED.
UPON A I�OICE YOTE, ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRWOMAN SCHNRBEL DECLRRED THE MOTION
CARRIED UNAIJIMDUSLY.
Ms. Schnabel stated this special use permit request would go to City Council
on July 2,
2. LOT SPLIT REQUEST, L.S. �184-08, BY DQN NANSON : Split off the Southerly
T21—� feet of Lot 28, Au itor's Sub ivision No.129, to make a new building
site at 1501 73 1/2 Avenue N.E.
Mr, Robinson stated this lot was located between Onondaga St. and 73rd Ave.,
just west of the 73Z Ave. cul de sac. The 7ot is quite 7arge, 34,000 sq, ft.
The proposed new lot wculd be to the south and would be 13,500 sq. ft.
Mr. Robinson stated there are several very large lots that have the potential
of being split off in the future. For that reas�n, there is the potential
that 7� cou7d go throuqh and end in another cul de sac.
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, JUNE 20 1984 PAGE 3
Mr. Robinson stated there were quite a few pretty basic stipulations that
wouid go with the lot split.
Mr. Robinson stated that at this time, the Planning Cortmission could either
approve the lot split with stipulations, or they could hold an informal
public hearing and invite the neighbors to the west to see if they were
interested in splitting their lots as well, possibly putting the street in,
and getting this all done at one time. That would be better than having
the owner of the new lot put in a driveway to the cul de sac on 73; and
then have to reirave the driveway in the future if the street was put in.
Mr. Robinson stated another consideration was the front yard setback. The
exisitn house to the east is set back 65 ft. from what would be this lots's
right of way, due to the cul de sac. If they were to tak an avera9e of this
lot and a possible future lot to the west of the proposed split, assuming a 35 ft.
setback to the west, the average would be 50 ft. With an allowed deviation of
6 feet, the minimum setback for the proposed lot would be 44 ft. The rear yard
would be 25 feet. The proposed right of way is 25 ft. and this leaves 27 ft.
for a structure, which is a reasona6le structure.
Mr. Robinson stated 5taff would recomnend the following stipulations:
1. Provide 25 ft, street easement for possible future use
2. Concrete curb work on 73Z to be done by City's contractor at
owner's expense
3, Petitioner to provide dri�eway to street
4. Driveway to be removed at no cost to the City in the event the
street goes through
5. Signed park fee agreement of $750
6, Sp1it to be registered at the County prior to issuance of a
building permit, or before October 15, 1984.
7. Front yard setback of 44 ft.
8. Rear yar.d setback of 25 ft.
Mr. Robinson stated this seemed like a good opportunity to look at the
possible future development of that whole area. Perhaps the Planning Corrmission
should hold an informal public hearinq and table the lo! snlit at this time.
Ms. Schnabel asked Mr. Nanson if he had talked to his neighbors about
the possibility of their splitting their lots.
Mr. Hanson stated he has talked to the neighbor who owns Lot 26� and he
was not opposed to the idea. Ne stated there is a new owner of Lot 24 so
he did not know the plans of the new owner.
Ms. Schnabel stated that if the petitioner was not in a real hurry with
the lot split, the Planning Conrnission could table this until their July 18th
meeting. This would give the City the opportunity to contact all the owners
of these lots to see if they are interested in splitting also, and invite
them to an informal public hearing at the next meeting. She stated this
would certainly be to the petitioner's advantage.
Mr. Hanson stated he had no problem with having this tabled until the
Planning Camnission's July 18th meeting.
PLANNIN6 COMMISSION MEETING, JUNE 20 1984 PAGE 4
MOTION BY MR. KONDRICK, SECONDED BY MR. SABA, TO TABLE LOT SPLIT REQUEST,
L.S. H84-08, BY A�N McCLUSKY IN ORDER TO NOLD AN INFORMRL PUBLIC HEARING
WITH THE NEIGHBORS ON JULY I8� 1984.
UPON A vO2CE�VOTE� ALL VOSING AYE� CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLnRED THE MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
3. RECEIUE JUNE 12, 1984; APPEALS COMMISSIDN MINUTES:
MOTION BY MS. GABEL, SECONDED BY MR. NIEL5EN, TO RECEIVE THE JUNE I2� Z984,
APPEALS COMMI5520N MINUTE5.
Ms. Gabel stated she would like the Planning Commission to discuss public
hearings on lot splits. She was referring to the recent lot split requested
by John Hitchcock on the corner of Mississippi St. and Oakley Drive. She
stated once the neighbors were notified through the Appeals public hearing
process, they came to the meeting en masse. The neighbors were definitely
opposed to that lot split. She stated the Appeals Comnission voted
unanimously to deny the request for variances. They felt the variances
were created by the lot split, and that there was no hardship.
Mr. Robinson stated he has discussed this with Mr. Qureshi, and it was
Mr. Qurestai's suggestion that whene��er the Planning Comnission feels a
public hearing is necessary or helpful, they can table the discussion and
notify the neighbors and have an informal public hearing, like wi�at was
done at this meeting.
Ms. Gabel stated she did not agree with that. Based on the fact that the
City is �s built up as it is, she felt they are going to have more and more
lot split requests, and it is going to be more and more controversial. She
felt that the neighbors who are affected have the right to be notified.
She felt very strongly about this.
Mr. Oquist stated his question would be: Why would they not want to have
public hearings for lot splits?
Mr. Saba stated he agreed with Ms. Gabel. They are going to be getting
more lot split requests, they are going to be more and more complicated,
and they are going to affect more and more people down the 1ine.
UPQN A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTZNG AYE� CHASRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE MOTION
CRRRIED UNANIMOUSLY. �
Ms. Schnabel asked if Staff could prepare some type of proposal for a
change in the ordinance by the July 18th meeting. This could be used as
a starting point for discussion,
Mr. Robinson stated he could do that. Ne stated he would like to discuss
this with Dave Newman, City Attorney, and he would like to find out what
neighboring comnunities are doing.
PLANNING COFA�]ISSION MEETING JUNE 20 1984 PAGE 5
ADJOURNMENT:
MOTIQN BY MR. KONDRICK, SECONDED BY MR. SABR� TO ADJOURN THE MEETING. UPON A
v02CE VOT&� ALL I�OTING AYE� CHAIRWOMAIJ SCHNABEL DECLRRED THE JUNE 20, 1984,
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETINC ADJUURNED AT 8:25 P.M.
Res ectfully su itted,
vJ�-�=
Ly e Saba
Recording Secretary