Loading...
AF-V - 46056A ' ; S�B,t�� �/ZO�.�G�� City of Fridley AT T"E ToP oF THE T�'�NS � APPLI CATI ON TO BOARD OF APPEALS r�� � . � � � 4 _ _ COMMUNITY OEVEIOPMENi DIV. . � � V � � PROTECTIVE INSPECTION SEC. ; � 4 � ��""��•� GTY HALL FRIDLE� - 55d32 �+uMUeN HEV. DATE v�GE oa epvHOVEO xr "'•.�• ! 612-560.5150 910-F23 1 3/21/75 l 2 800 Name Address S Phone -_Co �� � j^� c 5 S��S l�Av � .v 7 Legal Lot No. Block No. Tract or Addn. � Description �- r� ,�j .e �✓ e % Variance RequeSt(s); including stated hardships (attach plat or survey of property showing building, variances, etc., where applicable) ��l G�- �� �"Jct, �7J �,�-�i�A� ��a M G� �.-7"L— rP Date Meeting Date Fee Receipt No. Sig ture � `7� /3 � a i s �s ' `-d Comments & Recoi�miendations by the Board of Appeals � City Council Action and Date . ` sua�ccr s c�cy ��f �,r�z��E�y AT THE TOP OF THE TN11NS APPLICATION TO BOARD OF APPEALS f i l � COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIV. �SL3ff Report) � i L ------� r � � �� PHOTECTNEINSPECTfON SEC. � � � �-"1 . CILY MALL � FRIDLEY SSd32 NUMBEH REY. OR1E PP4E OF qFyROVEU BY � '--� � �'� st2-56o-sa5o � 910-F23 1 3/21/.5 2 2 800 Staff Comments Board members notified of ineeting by �"�L "7S List members, date notified, and "Yes" or "No" for plans to attend hearin . Plan ,, � Name - Date To Attend '�» ' l�/ur` �L�'. 5-�?3-95� �/ � I J Y—.3i�1✓'./V : . 1 /�L �/�,J�J'-''. _l � iJ n — �r'z�.-e�. �-_� l�ri /�.��, � a.l u Pearson making appeal and the ollowing property owners having property within 200 feet notified: BY �a� Name Date Phone or Mail Notified ��c C_d.c.�i. - G�L(? C. ri� ��C.c; S-� ) /J)• Ei � . � <, �-, ,1! �l , • �. � - ;: c' � , h cz. , - L, r � �. ,, eti � � fU�-,� - ��L` G�'L.�,� -[� /Jtl'U � Z-<?"Ca�2) - ic/S .7ca-i-Jih.�, . � �. c .1 - � Y-(.k.LO ' %•�J � i il1 L� �. ' S „ - �::,5 -,l��,c.i ��iG�;.(. U1.C° C, ?- �.'z b�� 1.z., �' l� :, � /� � � � �� - ��/S :�u�n,c � LL `.i.0 - L �:, � -(oiGt�� � ? • �r� ' ,t�„ �. �.. 3 OFFICIAL NOTICE CITY OF FRIDLEY PUHLIC HEARING BEFORE THE BOARD OF APPRATC TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT the Board of Appeals of the City of Fridley will meet in the Council Chamber of the City Hall at 7:30 P.M. on Tuesday, May 27, 1975 to consider the following matter: A request for a variance of Section 205.053, 1B, Fridley City Code, to reduce the minimum lot area required, on a lot recorded be£ore Dececnber 29, 1955, from 7500 square feet to 5500 square feet, to allow the construction of a dwelling to be located on Lots 49 and 50, Block T, Riverview Heights, the same being 628 Glencoe Street N.E., Fridley, Minnesota. (Request by Tri-CO Builders, 7555 Van Buren Street N.E., Fridley, Minnesota.) Anyone who desires to be heard with reference to the above matter will be heard at this meeting. �, �-- �°-°~f�- � WILLIAM A. DRIGANS CHAIRMAN BOARD OF APPEALS � _ ' � Page 4 � C ; 7�iIE MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF APPEALS SUBCOMMTTTEE MEETING OF MAY 27, 1975 1? _� , �. '!r Mr, Drigans said that Mr. Miles will have to get a'special use permit because he is in the wrong zoning. Mr. Miles explained that he went into debt for it. The kit cost him about $1100. Mrs. Wahlberg asked Mr. Miles if he was planning to have cement footings. He said that he was thinking of using white rcck. She also asked about drainage. He did not respond. Mrs. Wahlberg asked how Mr. Miles planned to accomu,odate numbers of people as far as the commercial end of this goes. Mrs. Miles explained that they have a large driveway. Mr. Mattson explained that a staff recommendation was that there be nothing sold out of this greenhouse that was not grown there. MOTION by Plemel, seconded by Crowder, to elose the public hearing. Upon a voice vote, there being no nays, the motion carried. The members of the board discussed the fact that there are a number of trees on the lot. This allows Mr. Miles only one general area on which to build his greenhouse and still provide adequate sunlight. They considered the fact that Mr. Miles has spent $1100 already. Mr. Plemel said that the fact that neither of the two neighbors had complained, was a good point in Mr. Miles' favor. Mr. Plemel added that there should be some drainage. There should be some thought given to it. MOTION by Plemel, seconded by Crowder, to recommend approval pending action by the Planning Commission on a special use permit. 3."A RE�UEST £OR A VARTANCE OF SECTION 205.�53, 1B, FRIDLEY CITY CODE. TO ALLOW �-.�..,vLOV,.ri �nn VLJ1 nz ixl-w t5U1LLt;t(S� /SSS VAN BUREN STREET N.E., FRIDLEY MINNESOTA. �� a MOTION by Plem el, seconded by Crowder to open the public heari g. Upon a- voice vote, there being no nays, the motion carried. Jim George, of Tr�.-Co Builders was present to present the request. Mr. George showed the board plans for the proposed structure and explained that this dwelling will be a split entry, a•1'� story building. A number of people from the neighbor3iood came forward to view the plans. One of these people, Mr. Gerald Steinhorst, of 616 Glencoe Street, explained � , ,, Ei OF THE Page 5 OF APPEALS SUBCOMMITTEE MEETING OF MAY 27 13D 197� that this property line is 12 feet from his door. He definitely opposed the idea of having a structure so near his home. It was explained that the variance applied to the size of the house and that all setback requirements wPre being met. Another concerned resident of 600 Glencoe Street explained that he had worked to get this building code established, and he felt that it shou2dn't be changed to meet the needs of certain individuals. Mr. Drigans said that in the case of a landlocked, 50-foot lot such as this, construc- tion of a house on that 50 feet is allowed. Mr. George said that his company had purchased these lots in 1967 and 1968 with the idea that they were building sites. He said that they were told they could build on a 50-foot lot. Another concerned resident felt that this could be a fire hazard. She asked why a code was written for 7500 square feet if it wasn't to be kept. Mr. Drigans exp2ained that there is a grandfather clause which states that construction may take place on a 50-foot lot in certain instances. Mr. Crowder asked what the additional 50 feet of land would add to the total cost. Mr. George said that this would mean an approximate difference of $4500. Mr. Drigans aaked whether this lot was located in the flood plain. Mr. George said that this was a few blocks down. He added that proper drainage would be used. A concerned resident stated that he had had problems with that before in another case. Proper drainage had not been used. MOTION by Wahlberg, seconded by Crowder to close the public hearing. Upon a voice vote, there being no nays, the motion carried. MOTION by Wahlberg, seconded by Plemel, that in view of the hardships expressed by the purchaser of the landlocked p'iece of property, and in view of the fact that he has asked for a permit for a building which meets all other codes, we recommend approval of this variance to allow construction on this piece of progerty. Upon a voice vote, there being no nays, the mction carried. 4. A REQUEST FOR A TIME EXT�i7SI0N ON VARIANCES OF THE FRIDLEY CITY CODE TSAT I-IAD PREVIOUSLY BEEN APPROVED; 1 SECTION 205.074, 3. TO REDUCE THE '. � 5 � r ' � � BfGULAR COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 2, 1975 RECEIVING THE MINUTES OE THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF MAY 21, 1975: 'Ll l � � PAGE Ti MOTION by Councilman Breider to set a public hearing on the request for the vacation SAV N75-02, b,y Loren Smerud for �uly 1S, 1975. Seconded by Councilwoman Kukowski. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. The City Manager said the hearing for this item had been previously set for June 4, and there would be no action necessary. � MOTION by Coucnilman Breider to receive�the minutes of the May 21, 1975 meeting of the Planning C�.mission. Seconded by Coucnilman Starv,�alt. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. THE MINUTES OF TNE � The Public Works Direc{or explained the request to be to construct a dwelting cn a lot recorded before �ecember 1955 and to reduce the minimum snuare feet from 7,5C0 to 5,500. He said the lot is 50 feet wide. Mr. Sobiech said the Board'of Appeals recomnended approval of the request. Mayor N.ee asked if the property is in the flood plan. The Pu61ic Works Director said no, the flood plain is from 250 to �300 feet to the north. Councilman Fitzpatirck said Lhere was some objections voiced by the r�eignboring property owners. He questi�oned if anyone was present at the currer.t meeting to voice any objections. There was no response. MOTION by Councilman Fitzpatrick to approve the request as recommended by the Board of Appeals. Seconded by Councilwoman Kukowski. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. MOTION 6y Councilman Starwalt to receive the portion of the minutes of the Board of Appeals Meeting ofi May 27, 1975. Seconded by Councilman Fitzpatrcik. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. RECEIVING THE'MINUTES �F TNE BUILDII4G STAN�ARDS-6ESIGM CONTROL SUBCOMPfITTEE MEESING OF MAY 2�, 7975: . A NEW BUILDING: LOCATED AT 4500 M,AI The Public Works Director pointed out the area of the proposal to be at 4500 Main Street and said this is the next step in the stage development in the original proposal of 1973. He said the building woutd be concrete and the necessary screening would be�installed. He said chere exists a retaining wall on the east edae of the property. He explained that the Building�Standards Design Control Subcommittee had recomnended approvai of the request. MOTION byCouncilman Ftizpatrick to concur with the recomnendation of the Subcomnittee and grant approval of the construction. Seconded by Councilman Breider. Upon a voice vote, a17 voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. �� i 212 �� REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 2, 1975 ING PAGE 12 15 SOUTH NINTH STREET, PtIh�tlEAPOLIS, f1INNESOTA 55403):� :� ihe Pu61ic 'r.'orks Director expJained ±he request was to build a retait establishment on the corner of 79th and East River Road. He said this would also take some consid- eration of variances. He pointed out that the variances were discussed by the Board of Appeals on Page 7-C of the agenda. The Public Works �i�rector listed the variance� � and said the Board of Appeals had suggested that the last variance be eiiminated. He said the Board of Appeals felt there should be�a 7ittle morelanc�sraning and green area and suggested that the three parking stalis be eliminated. He said the elimination of the three stalls. would not cause a problem. The Public Works Director said the proposal.would compare to the constructionon the corner of Old Central and Rice Creek Road, but this proposal would have more landscaping and green area. He said the Building Standards-Qesign Control Subcommittee had recommended approval with a number of stipialations. He read the stipulations to the Council �and audience. The Public Works Director referred to the letter on Page 7-K of the agenda fran the adjoining property owners Attorney Mr. Ri�chard �. Fudali representing Five Sands Development. He said all of the concerns listed by the adjoining ' property owner had been worked out. The Public Works Director pointed out an additional item that had been discussed�by the staff to be the acquisition of an easement for the proposed signalization of 79th and East River Road. He said NSP has.an easement in theproposed area and they were contacted and said there should 6e no difficulty witfi the mutuai easement. He thought this could be worked out with the property owner and said it would not � run the entire length of the property. � The Pub7ic Works Director indicated that Mr. Dave Nordale was present representing Meridian. Mr. Ken Sporre asked if the entrance proposed for East River Road would be needed. He questioned why the entrance on 79th would not be sufficient and mentioned that there is a prob7em �n gaining access to East River Road at the present time. He suggested that this driveway be eliminated and a stop signal be.installed. Councilman Fitzpatrick asked what the time table would be for the installation of the .' signal on 79th. The City Manager said it-is n0.t in the budget for 1975. Even it it was in the budget, the County would also have to okay this in their budget. He said this would be one or two years at least. . � . ��� Mr. Sporre said he wouldlike a copy of all of the communications concerning the '� proposed signal on this intersection. He said�he would like to meet with the , county Comnissioners and present this information to them. The City Manager said there is no question that the City had submitted a plan�to the � County. He said the Council would have to provide the money in the budget.for hatf of the funding before the County would take any action on this. He said the City had . been in contact with the County and there response was that this is not warranted.. . Mr. Sporre said he would like a copy of the correspondence on what has been said . by the City and the response of the County. H e said he would like to see what the � City h'ad requested of them. He said he did not think the Council should approve the proposed matter of consideration of the construction of the stor•e unti7 some . decision is made on the signals at this intersection. . The City Manager said the staff would provide Mr. Sporre with all of the information '. they they bave. � � � �- Mr. Sporre said he would like a copy of the City's written request and the copy . ' of the answer that was obtained fromT.he County. � �.. The City Manager said the City cannot state their case until they have�provided the � money. Mr. Sporre said the� City would be able to show their interest. The City Manager said yes. Mr. Sporre said the City should tell the County their intentions until � this is provided� in the budget and cantact three commissioners about the plan. �� Councilman Qreider said the Cnunty woulA not 6e able to make any commitment for money until after the 15th of July, after their second computor run. He said this would allow the City some time to reactcnto the budget itein. ffe said this would ailow two to three weeks to get togther onthe matter. � Mr. Sporre repeated his supgestion that the approval of the current request be held I up until-the decision is made on the intersection. He said if there has been any � �. ,�;� ,€ � . 4 , i ,} r� f,4 � � i-� $f � , l f +y D