AF-V - 46436_
_
UTYOF
FRtDLEY
FRIDLEY MUNICIPAL CENTER • 6431 UNNERSITYAVE. N.E. FRIDLEY, MN 55432 •(612) 571-3450 • FAX (612) 571-1287
APPEALS COMMISSION
ACTION TAKEN NOTICE
William and Belinda Lamusga
195 Hugo Street N.E.
Fridley, MN 55432
Dear Mr. and Mrs. Lamusga:
October 10, 1997
On October 8, 1997, the Fridley Appeals Commission officially approved your request
for a variance, VAR #97-17, to reduce the side yard setback of an accessory structure
from 17.5 feet to 6.5 feet to allow the construction of a 10 foot by 14 foot shed on Lots 42-
44, Block A, Riverview Heights, the same being 195 Hugo Street N.E. with the following
stipulation:
1. If the structure is damaged or is removed, the variance becomes null and void.
You have one year from the date of the Appeals Commission action to initiate
construction. If you cannot begin construction in time, you must submit a letter
requesting an extension at least three weeks prior to the expiration date.
If you have any questions regarding the above action, please call me at 572-3593.
Sincerely,
�c� ���
G ,(� �.
Michele McPherson
Planning Assistant
MM:Is
Please review the above, sign below, and returri the original to the City of Fridley
Planning Department by October 24, 1997.
�
�-��i / .�-
• .
/"'� '"�
CIT � OF FRIDLEY PROJECT �UMMARY
DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST:
The petitioner, Warren Lamusga, requests that a variance be granted to reduce the side yard
setback from a street right-of-way for an accessory structure from 17.5 to 6.5 feet. If
approved, the petitioner proposes to construct a 10 foot by 14 foot detached metal shed in the
rear yard.
STATED HARDSHIP: See attached statement.
SUMMARY OF ISSUES:
Section 205.07.03.D.(2).(c).((1)) of the Fridley Zoning Code requires that the side yard
setback on the street side of a comer lot shall not be less than 17.5 feet.
Public purpose served by this requirement is to maintain a higher degree of tra�c visibility and
to reduce the "line of sight" encroachment into the neighbor's front yard.
The subject property is located in the northwest comer of the intersection of Hugo Street and
Hugo Street: The dwelling is located 10 feet from the curb line of the north/south extension of
Hugo Street. This portion of Hugo Street was constructed in 1972, 15 years after the
construction of the dwelling. The City's records are unclear as to the unde�ying land
description at the time this portion of Hugo Street was constructed. It appears, however, that
this section of Hugo Street was dedicated at the time Swanson Terrace, an adjacent
subdivision, was platted (1972). The petitioner states that the proposed location has the least
impact on his and other yards. There is no "line of sightn encroachment as the rear yards abut
each other (see aerial photo).
A similar variance was previously granted to .5 feet for a detached garage at 6601 Lucia Lane.
The proposed structure will be screened from adjacent properties by an existing chain link
fence with slats.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION TO THE APPEALS COMMISSION:
As the request is within previously granted variance requests, staff has no recommendation for
the Appeals Commission.
�
Project Summary
VAR #97-f17, 195 Hugo Street
Page 2
PROJECT DETAILS
Petition For:
Location of
Property:
�
A variance to reduce the setback of an accessory struc#ure from
17.5 feet to 6.5 feet
195 Hugo Street
Legal Description
of Properly: Lots 44-44, Block A, Riverview Heights
Size:
Topography:
Existing
Vegetation:
Existing
Zoning/Platting:
Availability
of Municipal
Utilities:
Vehicular
Access:
Pedestrian
Access:
Engineering
Issues:
9,588 square feet
Flat
Typical suburban; sod, trees, shrubs
R-1, Single Family; Riverview Heights 1922
Connected
Hugo Street
N/A
None
Comprehensive The Zoning & Comprehensive Plans are consistent in this
Planning Issues: location.
Public Hearing
Comments: To be taken
�.
Project Summary
VAR #97-f17, 195 Hugo Street
Page 3
WEST:
SOUTH:
EAST:
NORTH:
ADJACENT SITES:
Zoning: R-1, Single Family
Zoning: R-1, Single Family
Zoning: R-1, Single Family
Zoning: R-2, Single Family
Site Planning
Issues:
REQUEST:
�.
Land Use: Residential
Land Use: Residential
Land Use: Residential
Land Use: Residential
The petitioner, Warren Lamusga, requests that a variance be granted to reduce the
side yard setback from a street right-of-way for an accessory structure from 17.5 to 6.5
feet. If approved, the petitioner proposes to construct a 10 foot by 14 foot detached
metal shed in the rear yard.
SITE DESCRIPTION/HISTORY:
The subject property is located in the northwest comer of the intersection of Hugo
Street and Hugo Street. Hugo Street runs in an east/west direction; however, at this
location, it has a short (200 foot) north/south extension connecting it to Ironton Street to
the north. The dwelling (measuring 28 feet by 34 feet) was constructed in 1957, along
with a breezeway and attached garage. In 1960, the breezeway and garage were
reconstructed. The east/west portion of Hugo Street was constructed in 1967, and the
north/south extension was constructed in 1972. The right-of-way for the north/south
section of Hugo Street appears to have been dedicated as part of.Swanson Terrace to
the east which was also platted in 1972.
The neighbor to the north has a shed in a similar position. This shed is less than 100
square feet in area and did not require a permit. It is, however, nonconforming due to
its location.
ANALYSIS
Code Section
Section 205.07.03.D.(2).(c).((1)) of the Fridley Zoning Code requires that the side yard
setback on the street side of a comer lot shall not be less than 17.5 feet.
,
� ^,
Project Summary
VAR #97-f17, 195 Hugo Street
Page 4
Public purpose served by this requirement is to maintain a higher degree of traffic
visibility and to reduce the "line of sight" encroachment into the neighbor's front yard..
The petitioner is proposing to construct a detached metal shed measuring 10 feet by 14
feet. The proposed shed will be located behind a 6 foot tall chain link fence with slats.
The petitioner is not proposing to use the structure for the storage of vehicles. The
structure will be used for the storage of lawn care equipment and miscellaneous smaller
items. -
The subject parcel is unique in the fact that the dwelling is located 10 feet from the curb
line of Hugo Street. It is unclear from the City's records as to the disposition and
approval for the north/south extension of Hugo Street. If located on an interior lot, the
proposed structure would meet the setback requirements. The rear yard of the dwelling
to the north abuts the rear yard of the subject property. There is no "front yard line of
sight" impact. The proposed structure will be screened from adjacent properties by a
fence and lilac shrubs. The petitioner has chosen this location so as not to block the
continuous view into the adjacent neighbor's yard to the west and also to not affect the
landscaping in the rear yard.
A similar variance was granted to .5 feet to allow the reconstruction of a detached
garage at 6601 Lucia Lane.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION TO THE APPEALS COMMISSION:
As the request is within previously granted variances, staff has no recommendation for
the Appeals Commission.
i"�
,�
APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING, OCTOBER 8,1997 PAGE 3
Ms. Beaulieu stated the encroach�
are not asking to expand the gara�
conforming that they want to redo.
condition. She would consider a s
destroyed, the variance would cea
conforming.
ient is an existing condition. It is interesting that they
e which is nonconforming. It is the house part which is
She would be in favor because it is a pre-existing
� ulation that, if the house was ever completely
� to exist and a new structure would have to be
Ms. Mau agreed because of the fact t at they are not encroaching further than the
garage. She would like to see a stipul tion that� if any further development on that
property takes place should anything h ppens to that dwelling, it would become
conforming.
Mr. Kuechle asked if adding this stipu
Ms. McPherson stated that assuming the
request, it would be a stipulation which is
against the property and would follow to f
needing to go to the Cit�r Council unless ;
would confuse the issue.
:als Commission moves to approve the
idition of approval. It would be recorded
owners. It would not affect the petitioner
me voted against the request.
OM TION by Ms. Beaulieu, seconded by Ms. ` au, to recommend approval of Variance
Request, VAR #97-16, by Rex Ramsdell, to re uce the side yard setback of an attached
garage from 5 feet to 2 feet to allow the const ction of a 20 foot by 26 foot addition to a
dwelling on Lots 18-19, Block 7, Spring Brook rk, the same being 409 Longfellow
Street, with the following stipulation:
1. If the buildings on the property are
will cease to exist.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE,
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
completely destroyed, the variance
KUECHLE DECLARED
2. PUBLIC HEARING• CONSIDERATION OF VARIANCE REQUEST VAR #97-17
BY WARREN & BELINDA LAMUSGA:
Per Section 205.07.03.D.(2).(c).((1)) of the Fridley Zoning Code, to reduce the side
yard setback of an accessory structure from 17.5 feet to 6.5 feet to allow the
construction of a 10 foot by 14 foot shed on Lots 42-44, Block A, Riverview
Heights Addition, the same being 195 Hugo Street.
MOTION by Ms. Mau, seconded by Ms. Beaulieu, to waive the reading of the public
hearing notice and to open the public hearing. �
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KUECHLE DECLARED
THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AT 7:45 P.M.
Ms. McPherson stated the petitioner is requesting a variance to reduce the side yard
setback for an accessory structure from 17.5 feet to 6.5 feet. This request is on a comer
lot. If the variance is approved, the petitioner would located a 10 foot x 14 foot detached
shed in the year the yard.
Ms. McPherson stated the subject property is located at the comer of Hugo and Hugo
Streets. This property is located in the northwest comer of the city east of East River
Road. Hugo Street actually has a bend changing direction from east/west to north/ south.
�\ �
APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING, OCTOBER 8,1997 PAGE 4
The subject property is Iocated in the comer where the street makes this bend. The
property is zoned R-1, Single Family, as are all the surrounding properties. Currently
located on the property is a 28 foot x 34 foot dwelling, a 12 foot x 14 foot breezeway, and
a 22 foot x 24 foot attached garage. The petitioner is proposing to.add a 10 foot x 14 foot
detached shed in the northeast portion of the property.
Ms. McPherson stated the existing dwelling is located 10 feet from the property line
adjacent to the westerly line of the north/south extension of Hugo Street. That portion of
Hugo Street was constructed in 1972, some 15 years after the dwelling was constructed.
The record is somewhat unclear as to how the right-of-way was acquired for this portion
of Hugo Street. The petfioners dwelling and property are located in the Riverview
Heights plat which was platted in the late 1800's or early 1900's. The north/south
extension of Hugo Street was platted in 1972 as part of the adjacent Swanson Terrace
development to the east. It is unusual that the city only acquired a 40-foot right-of-way for
the extension of Hugo Street and that Hugo Street did not continue to the west to connect
to Ashton Avenue.
Ms. McPherson stated the public purpose served by the section of the code referred to is
to maintain a higher degree of traffic visibility and to reduce the line of sight encroachment
into the neighbor's front yard. In this particular location, there are no line of sight impacts
due to the fact that the property to the north does not face Hugo Street but faces north to
Ironton Street. There are two rear yards adjacent to each other. The property across the
street to the east might have a line of sight impact; however, there is a six-foot tall chain
link fence with slats that is in the rear yard of the subject property which would provide
screening for the proposed structure. The structure does not exceed seven feet in height.
Ms. McPherson stated the City granted a similar variance down to 0.5 feet for a detached
double garage at 6601 Lucia Lane. This petitioner is requesting a variance down to 6.5
feet. As this is within previously granted variances, staff has no recommendation for the
Appeals Commission. As the structure is not large enough to store vehicles, staff has no
typically recommended stipulations such as providing a hard surFace driveway.
Ms. Mau asked if the road had curb and gutter.
Ms. McPherson stated, yes.
Ms. Mau asked if the street width was 40 feet.
Ms. McPherson stated the street as constructed is approximately 26 feet wide, about six
feet shorter than what is typically required. Any expansion of the street would more than
likely occur to the east due to the fact that the street is only 2.5 feet from the westerly line
of the right-of-way.
Mr. Lamusga stated he looked very hard at trying to relocate the shed. If he places it
anywhere in the yard other than this comer, it is going to affect the layout of the yard. It
will affect the landscaping of the yard. His adjoining neighbors in the other comer have
done a fair amount of landscaping, and putting a shed in that comer would take away
from that. If he puts the shed as requested by the city, it would be in the middle of the
lilac bushes creating more or less a dead area befinreen the shed and the fence and
taking a U-shaped area out of his yard rendering it unusable. There is currently a shed
right behind where he wants to locate his so they would be in line. Also, his neighbor's
garage is right in line with his garage. He would like to put this in line with the other
i"'� �--�.
APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING, OCTOBER 8,1997 PAGE 5
structures. They are not doing anything to change any curves or any visual looks. As
stated, it is chain link fence with slats in it so it is pretty much a privacy fence. The only
thing that will be seen is the upper one foot of the shed. �
Mr. Lamusga stated the shed will not be on a permanent foundation. This would be a
wood structure on top of landscape bricks. It could be moved if needed later. Overall,
this would give him the best usability of his yard and keep the value and usability at a
premium. For the future, they are thinking of putting in a deck area out back. If they put
the shed where suggested and then put in a deck, it narrows that passageway even more
and renders the yard more useless in certain areas.
Mr. Lamusga stated this was done with a lot of thought. They have worked with people
and still feel this would be the best location. It is also closest to the street. He does have
a gate in the fence in that area. Right now, if he wants access to his back yard and has
to put the shed in the other comer, he would have to drive through the back yard to the
other side. He would prefer not to do that. If he is going to put anything in the shed, it is
easier to get in and out through that opening in the fence. Overall, he thought this was
the best location. He is keeping away from the existing fence so they can maintain the
fences.
Ms. Beaulieu stated the petitioner had said the neighbors agree with the placement of the
fence. Did any of the neighbors disagree or have a negative reaction?
Mr. Lamusga stated, no. None of the neighbors he spoke with had any problems w�th the
request. The neighbor behind him whose back yard is adjacent was very much in favor of
putting the shed in line with his shed. The next door neighbor on Hugo Street said that
for the most part it was better. The neighbor across the street stated it would be fine
there because it is behind the fence and would not affect their line of sight. When he
looked at the main reason cited which is the visibility, they will not be affecting that at all
as far as traffic or anything. There is no safety hazard. All of the neighbors are in
agreement that this would be flne.
Mr. Kuechle stated he would like a stipulation that the variance would run with the life of
the building.
Mr. Lamusga stated he would be agreeable to that. -
MOTION by Ms. Beaulieu, seconded by Ms. Mau, to close the public hearing.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KUECHLE DECLARED
THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 7:54 P.M.
Ms. Mau stated that after Iooking at the property, it makes more sense to put the shed
where it is being proposed because it does line up with the neighbor's shed. As long as
the street width is not going to be an issue, she did not see any problem with the
stipulation.
Ms. Beaulieu agreed. If the code is worried about the line of site impact, this will not
cause an impact. There is no reason here to adhere strictly to the code. She be in favor
with the stipulation.
i�
�
APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING, OCTOBER 8,1997 PAGE 6
MOTION by Ms. Beaulieu, seconded by Ms. Mau, to recommend approval of Variance
Request, VAR #97-17, by Warren & Belinda Lamusga, to reduce the side yard setback of
an accessory structure from 17.5 feet to 6.5 feet to allow the construction of a 10 foot by
14 foot shed on Lots 42�4, Block A, Riverview Heights Addition, the same being 195
Hugo Street, with the following stipulation:
The variance will n�n for the life of the accessory structure.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KUECHLE DECLARED
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
3. ��PDATE ON PLANNING COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL ACTIONS:
Ms. McPherson provided an update on Planning Commission and City Council actions.
ADJOURNMENT:
MOT N by Ms. Mau, seconded by Ms. Beaulieu, to adjoum the meeting.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KUECHLE DECLARED
THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE OCTOBER 8,1997, APPEALS COMMISSION
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 7:58 P.M.
Res9ectFully submitted,
% G���..J �
`" La onn Cooper �
Recording Secretary
.i
� � ., . , , . . � � .,� � • ,rr•�ti- , ;
••A;1vF_r ,� CARi'41'i71GHl' i.� 4 i , J , }�t'�I_ ,t-,;v._ � •,. , �
. z� .': � .
ANtJI:-\ ..._.,�.fY S1i12�Ct-i . - ... .
1fEN�iEf+I•1 I.:JU•:iY bUR�CYli _,1.+.�41. �f:> ia•�.
r g_�- r: 7� ' j
o-t�riri[nru�i� �uK�•kr_: t� v ... �� .` . , _... _ �_, .+ti .i C. 'r'. : ,.�,U'rivi- F- I
sa,o su,,_,r u•,K �n�:t r. e-. Ci�:� r_�:.-i�.e.c �;
Ft:.0 �i• - i i . - .�.•.i.'�• q .
$1:.. 7 3-UUi'J . ... .. . . . . .� . �.� _. . �t. �
. ...y•. LICG11.� 7 BY O � .1!J:tP.. _: .!Y _ .I �f.C.t,PG_ir � ,• •
�.t;� r LY""U ii , 1 t Il�'.. �. ' li �.�.. _L`-�;�`:
. L. . ..v..r. ;Y; 1
INU!�tiT?;•�L - JVOIC�.L
Eit.$iNt_3i _ TVPfi�r�AP�ili:At_
cr.r �oTs - r�Arn�c:
�� JaL.-�.c].�a�
r
�/�,�� �r 1.t}. <� ff ,.,' � .� �
.�
�-�111'12:i?Oi'�S ��ft't;li:��i•°
, � r .
i� : �9��. . �
.�...�.. .... ` �.�...-�:�.«....�_.�._.�._I�"' '""
f ;
I ;
�
. � ,
;�. .j ;: �:�
.,
.��. �; ;
i
i ,
� I - �
� .
_ o . -.
� �
, f � �y 7 �� � ',�� .
�Y•, !±� I
I J' �' ~ � . �
1 �
P'iG•i11l�, � I
���� ' f-_
� :._.i..�..._. _ _
`'ti 1
�: . : � ,���
�. � � ' � �� �
, i . � �
�I_____ � l _ � ;' -- �
. � � ' - -�"`�� -;__.._.._ ___._
. � . ,•J
• }t
�� ��
_ r<... . �
. .. .� t � . . .. . ._'
ti��Tr�:o���!_irr.r� i_;�r,•�
SUtt�CYCRS. �...a.��.•,�.;-.. .; �
!
i I:�•! � _. _ , _ a:
� , � ��")n r'I i,.
�,, � -1-.
i i ' f i
� ' �....� � - .a
... __.._.�.. _..""'_"'__.__... �
...-.. . I
, �; r� : .
1 : - ` �•.
% . `, J
• ; � � � : _ .a.,
� , ;�' �
; ;
�� / j �
; � � �
_ ; �' �
�., I , ,
l.' ��
�l
�,
,.
.w__ � , \,
� ;v �
.�
4 ! , �
./� �
�_ 1. ! �
i �..
--- __ :�._.. __
� I1G:�by eertiYy �":3L ''i.,`7? S 1S �u '�Y'Ll:� 2t^:C! CO�"L'�'�� ,*J.l^°"i, Oi'
a surve � o� Lots �2 43 a t�i �.1 �'�� ' :` 'r:� ��i. ..r ,.�:, .
� �^. * .� .�.i: ,i `�'a_. ,i •-ii�..TLIi,-idJ '.J
� !.t i`i _, ` • n a C: �' .: � �' :1 :. S ` `: -.. . J _. . , • ' � � '
I.. ��. . i • -- � ._ . .. . a .
� • , '.�" �4' � r , . �f �' + � • � ,. .
F-� � / l ' ... � /
4 �
� f ,.
� - /
l
SIGNEG ^ .,._' ' �
, � � C��i.i :"J:�:.'�.�.H�r�ANO U��.�.`i�N
, � - `
/ �
—��_��
� t: .
/"1
DOST. WINDOW TO REMAIN
CERAMIC T1LE � ENTRY
� �
�
< BEDROOM LIVINGROOM
,
EGRESS WINDOW, 5.92
� SQ.FT.CLEAR OPENING
s
�
�
8�-3� EXISTING ROOF TRUSSES TO BE
3�-6� SUPPQRTED ON BEAM W/HANGERS
6'-Ox6'-B° o
BI-FOLD � •
2x6 WALL �' 2-6x6-8 fURNACE �
_ � UTILITYO
0 UWEN o 2-6x6-8
; -�- --------- _ COLUMN-- aO -------- CRO-LAM BEAb1
(�1-� 4 z1�- §°---
jBATHROOM 4,_ , —sxs—a S � D
� �
� 2x6.WALL .
(J 3 POCKET DOOR
,'._`1
NEW 3'-0 x 6'-8° EXIST. GARAGE DOOR
S1EEL EN1RY DOOR TO REMAIN
RO 3'-2-1/2°x6'-10°
3'-Ox6'-8• o
BI-FOLD "�
� � D
� 3-0 x 6-8 I �
DW !
0 2-6x6-8
s'—oXe'—a• M KITCHEN �
BI-FOLD
i 8'-3" "" I� ❑
� O O
' O O
J
)
<
; EGRESS N7NDOW, 5.92
� SQ.FT.CLEAR.OPENING
; BEDROOM DIN�ING/SUNROOM
i
>
t
3046, RO 3'-2-1/8°x4'-9-1/4�
6'-6'
13'-0°
iEMPERED GLASS PoINDOWS
2856-3. RO 8'-5-1/2"x5'-9-1/4'
��u��-�-�
FLOOR PLAN �
- iv
0
0 4'
13'-0°
o °
� �
O
N
� O
� \
< �
a �
io
fh
C'J �
Z �
N �
O
a'
IXISTING 6ARAGE
TO REMAIN AS-IS
CERAMIC TILE HEARTH TO
16° FRONT, 12' SIDE OF F.P.
DIRECT VENT TYPE
GAS FlREPLACE '
GENERAL PLAN NOTES:
1. BEDROOM, UVINGRWM & DIP
2. KITCHEN & UTIUTY ROOMS 1
3. BATHROOM FLOOR TO BE CE
4. ATTIC SCUTTLE TO BE LOCA
5. CRAWL SPACE ACCESS TO B
- t
�
� � i ��'�
_' __--- ------- ------- ----- ----- —� --- -------
� �' .:.Z-2� o �v T. o �v ST �
,
------ -- __------- - --- — � -- - ------ ----- - --------
,� . ; �,
.. � �,
"' — ,ZDD. o - - -
.
� ; � � �,o �� � ��� � --- i
� � .� , �
� �
� � I��_ �� � I � i
._ ; � ��i . i / I ,�� �� ` - I � i � ;
� •`� I � � i �
, � �� �, `5I',,� � �, � .� Q� I
__.� '� �'• ( C � ' `�� I � � I
?l� t� 1�1 i � \`
I i� ::l \\.� � , ` �
I "' C� \ ,
� • � �J � I ; �
�— � � � —�-- � I, a 1 , � I
� ' � t � I� � . ; ti s ?� I I
� � _ � _ � � � ----- �-- � � �
� �S I ,ry � ¢> , '%� � ' ¢O . .5�� 1 �j �
; �, ; I � � 1 .�
. � . ���� ' I /V �O • ' I �
_ � _�, �. _ � ^ I ,
' • n�' o
. , , I I � � ' • . �
� I i � � D// \�'1 I �
� I � �
� � � � • I � i
l,.'
1 _� � � X� � � � I � , '` I 1 � ,
y � i 1 ' �
yu/3 � - , ' �T j , ' � I
`d ., -- < — � � ��p ' ' �
_ � I _ - `� I
— ' ' - i
' ' I � � I , 1 ; i . I . �
� i i ' � ,
, 1 I � � i i " � i j
' � � i ' , C_ I �,1, � I
� � i , �, _ �.j I � �
. - � �, '
t •• ' � i i�� /,, �� � �
i i , � . "' I
� � . i'� � ,^_7 7 E' �:
, " ;�'' � . `� .: � ' Y;� ! , ��./ S;c %%i'4-��,/i /' I
i � ' 1 � , � �
I
� I i 1 , � � / I
� � � ; � � /,20 ^
c7:�
� I � � ------ - ------ = - - S. .�_ � �
=---r--- -- __—=.—__ -- --- � i
; '�` � . ��/ 0. O — 5 � � t
/ � 1
! '�
( t ..
� i �l�'i�' D'F .�W�csolv "T�E%����— I
:-, � �., , - ,
�`- ,; _ . . _ r, , ,
- ,
, . �
, �
� t ' <=-� � �`' � . � � , . �
' I
�"� ,�
CITY OF FRIDLEY PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE
BEFORE THE APPEALS COMMISSION
TO: Property owners within 350 feet of 195 Hugo Street
CASE NUMBER: VAR #97-17 '
APPLICANT: Warren and Belinda Lamusga
PURPOSE: To reduce the side yard setback of an accessory structure from
17.5 feet to 6.5 feet to allow construction of a 10 ft. by 14 ft.
shed .
LOCAT/ON OF �
PROPERTY: 195 Huga Street
LEGAL � •
DESCR/PTION: Lofs 42-44, Block A, Rivenriew Heights
DATE AND TIME OF Appeals Commission M�etir�g:
HEARING: Wednesday, October 8,1997, 7:30 p.m.
� The Appeals Comrr�ission�meetings.are televised live the night
of the meeting on Channel 35.
PLACE OF HEARING: Fridley Municipal Center, City Council Chambers
6431 University:Avenue
HOW TO 1. You� may attend hearings and testify. _
PARTIC/PATE: 2. You may send a letter before the hearing to Scott Hicko.k,
Planning Coordinator, or Michele McPherson, Planning
Assistant, at 6431 University Avenue N.E., Fcidley, MN
55432 or fax at 571-1287.
SPEC/AL Hearing impaired persons planning to attend who need an
ACCOMMODATIONS: interpreter or other persons with disabilities who require
auxiliary aids should contact Roberta Collins at 572-3500 no
later than October 1, 1997.
ANY QUEST/ONS: Contact either Scott Hickok, Planning Coordinator, at 572-3599,
or Michele McPherson, Planning Assistant, at 572-3593.
Mailing Date: September 26, 1997
IRON70N ST NE
�, I
,
ITqRNE 1 J
_ _ . .____--,
� ��
i r-- ;;
- -� � i
ONT9RlE �
� � .. _.,,_ �
�
, ;
�
�.
�
�
tuoosrrE
RlliH qR PE
�
N
_
�
RlliM pR PE
�
a
�
�
Ruth �
C�irc/e
r QI A
U
-
� �.
��� ���:
0 R 1 - One Family Units
� R 2- Two Family lhits
0 R 3- General Muftiple Urrts
� R-4 - Nbbile I-brre Parks
� p�p - Pl2rried lkrt Develapn�ent
� �, -����
� S2 - Redevelopment Distrid
� G1 - Local &uiness
� G2 - General &siness
G3 - Gener'al �ing
� GR1- C�r�eral Office
� �, - �gF,t �ndustrial
� NE2 - Fieavy I rxi�strial
� nn,� - a�a� ���� �,,, ��,a.
� RR - Railroecls
� p - Public Facilities
� Vua,7FR
� PoGHT-0F WAY
M1
VAR 97-17, 195 Hugo Street
A request by Warren Lamusga
to reduoe the side yard setback
from the property line from
17.5 feet to 6.5 feet to allow
oonstruction of a 10'x14' shed
in his backyard.
r
C:hUI"C�l
a.Y ST PE
M
� -
�
�
N
A I
2/26�97 �.
Corrpiled and dra�n�n fi�om official reoords b2sed
Of1 Q�fk'If102 (�D. � 8f1C1 Z�OfYfKj N� E�f�lV�2
date 127/56 together with all arnerid'ing ordrf
ar�oes adop4ed and e#fective as oF 2/17l'97.
The City o# Fridey t�as talcen eve�y effort to pro-
vide the most u�to-date ir�forrrgtion available.
The data presented hene is subjed to diarx,�e.
The City of Fridey will nd be r�esponsible for
� erras or usage aF this doarr�errt.
�
}
/�,
cinr oF Fwo��r
6431 UNNERSITY AVENUE
FRIDLEY, MN 55432
(612) 571-3450
�'.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
VARIANCE APPLICATION FOR:
Residential Commercial/industriai
Address: f �S � �:
Property Identification � mber:
Legal Description: Lot � Block
Tract/Addition
attached
�
Si
Current Zoning: Square
Reason for Variance: �"�_,���
Have you operated usiness in a city which required a business license?
Yes No � If Yes, which city?
If Yes, what type of business?
Was that license ever denied or revoked? Yes No
���
FEE OWNER INFORMATION (as it appears on the properly title)
(Contract u chasers: Fe er mu sign this form prior to processing)
NAME: °
ADDRESS: �Sr�.mp �s r,�.��'�2, _ -� ��
DAYTIME PHONE: �S� �-f — /�'� . SIGNATURE/DATE _ _ __ ,� __��m_
NAME: �r��/'
ADDRESS: _�
DAYTIME PHONE:
SIGNATURE/DA
Section of City Code:
FEES �
Fee: $100.00 for commercial, industrial, or signs:
Fee: $60.00 for residential properties: ,1C Receipt #: Received By:
Application Number: � � � I7 q�z �
Scheduled Apreals Commission Date: 2 q� �
Scheduled City Council Date: �ro��� Z�,�._O �� �
10 Day Application Complete Notification Date: ��r�r� 2z�9 �� -
60 Day Date:
�,<
�
�
� �,
, �
� � ,
� U
� 0
� �
�
�
� �
O
� ■
� �� "��
� �
LL U
■ ��
�
oa �
�
�
"F../ �
��
U
�
��
J
c
0
�
Q
V
c
m
�
Q
�
�
O
�
C
O �
.� C .
•V N
��
�
�� � _.
� > ;,
U n, �°
0
�Q o
v �
0
�
a�
c �
m c
� O
�U
c
o$
N �
� O
O C >+
U m p
°� E o
C � �
� � N
a
y
r
m R
o�
o�
w�
��
Q�
�
0
m
i �
�
m
J
C
� y '
lQ �
� W
�
O �
� �
Q
m �
> -a -p �
OO y y
Q 1� �
y
C
V1 C -
� -�
�--------------- � �
-� �m�
_ �Q
U �C �
.fl N C
�
a'�i°
�
y C
C � W ,+y_+
� �
'____ - �/i
� V m
.� c Q�a
°�mcm
..�• N� N y E� N�
m =� OC w C Q,aL��
� �Uj+ V C w, Q C� C �• p!
p." � C � � +y+ � C � � �V
� 7 lQ W... ��N C�� m
V Z a»_°,a.�N�Uc�
o �
:.. p
,Q o
Q
m
�
m�
Q�
o�
U°�n
---------- � -Q m
� Q�
�Q�
�
�
�
�/
/
� C1.ii'► ('2 (�l e.s �i� � l�'C�ri a0)�� �c�
�
�� �51�. �-� � s �u�.f � s d� �� �� �
/ � f Y
rca ��° �DCce ���s in � � /cJ�@ � �.��.� ��►
� � P � /
�1�3, y� � �1��� �9, �, v��v,e� ��.� ��s .
�
�� �CcC��'C�i� �C� �ur��/l� Cc�� Cc/�� �l,c�.
�� ��
� �
��;-to �-� � lc� c� u f d � �h � �s �a�e �� .
�� � r
� r
!�� �6� e o� / ��e� � ��� r,v�u l� �h � �n
E � ) �
� �"� �, i�• %✓ CUr�'1 e r' . ��i i S (,�� u �� �2 �c.
, � C�O(` C �01 C� �s 1 � l.c��u �� '�Cc �2 Ccc��c
��� �
; r /'C�n'► 7��'1 �(�/ L C.c� C� �/�'! �Gc G� Gc r� Cc
; I�
� , r �
;'i'`��1 G, � � � /!1 /l 2 / Yl lJ S �C� C �t �C' � �C�
;(I �
�!� / % C. (•c�eS�'_'" � °I �%c � �/� � �c� i�"�ie
�� 5 ,
!:�';1�1.11�1, - � �D ��-v��-�� . Th e n � � h ��r�
,���� 5
;;���.� a�is �'� � wdu l� r� �l� e� �h� f
�., � � , �
!�;;�1� � s l� �c� c,�c�c� f� nv � o �� -�h �.s
� �
',: �' C c� (' n e. �.
i'�� T� � b� � u ��en-� �v�� s
, y .
������, �1. �., cc��r��� c�-� �h, s ln�
�;. ,
�� ���
�����
� �� � f �e� °�"h i� � � � � l rl � �i ��' �
;' �� �
!� c� S��� a nc� c,� v u �� !'ea �` �c ��'���
�� P � r
����.�-�� �«� ��� �� �� �ti � ���
,, !
i4i � �� / � ��
$ � �
�-� �-I� � I�l. — � f�C� T�
i; �� s c� � �� s-% �-h
►� �
�'�j �rc�m �1 i s t ar
{, /
k°4
� ����
�/ I ��
G� Gcn � i n��12 lei �c�
5
� l�� .
%C� e 7�'�l �/ C' (�l (� /� °%��1�'11 �� / 0!?� ...L Cc�C� � �C�
, f / ! ° �
i , ��. -� �� C� -�-h� �S� �� � `�-� /� �
�
�\
�
/
� �l� �. �'e� c�s �o �h� l�l. �. ��c� �.
�' fn �c� - � r f �ra �' �� � ��a� i�t
��s o s .
� � Y �
% ��. s �c ec e �.� `�� `�.� �S h �c� c� n �
�ca vi � c� �l��u �-�� �.�-e_ 1occ�.���
�
�� �l� �. -��n ce. ��
� b�� � � � c��
� �
� .� . s i �c. � �
. °�� Sl��� Wc�c,� I� �
1 � � � � c� r� � �-h �
��
c�. � cJ � n �-h � So �
'rc�n �c�n , l.�� �fl� l � �l�
u rr � n� V ier,� C� ��-� i.�
�� 1n l;n� c�i7�1
n e� h 1��r � sh�c�
�
c����� �� ���
� �e��- o� fh �
J �oc� -�� � rnc� ^ ori �- c��
� b�e. �c��c � efe -
� �'CCt. �u f l.�1 i � �
-�h� l��c� �r��
Y
► `T�h �. �e n c�. �'c� ��. � e c� s �- i s � � `/a '
r � �e� ���� ce o�r�m fh � S�"��� �f' c�r� �
� �, Y
� �� � � �-� ���. �!� �� �o � 1 � �6�
i�i ���.
�. � n�� 6� ����s
. `�
i-h , s c� c� c� � b�
�c9r �'�i� S ���Js
; n �-h � � ��� � ��e.
�
�h e� l� e.sf �c�c�
�
,''�
� 'fi �i;�: ���
�r. � ,
_;::�
"wr
�
�
�
�
ERIDLEY MUNICIPAL CENTER • 6431 UNNERSITY AVE. N.E. FRIDLEY, MN 55432 •(612) 571-3450 • FAX (612) 571-1287
September 17, 1997
_ -�.,
Warren Lamusga
195 Hugo Street
Fridley, MN 55432
Dear Mr. Lamusga:
: ..,, - _
. . . .. ' . .':�TT�.A
Per Minnesota Statute 15.99, local govemment units are required to notify land use
applicants within 1D days if their land use applications are complete. We received an
application for a variance on September 12, 1997. This letter serves to inform you that
your application is complete and that the City of Fridley will be processing your
application in accordance with Chapter 205 of the Fridley City Code. Your application
schedule is as follows:
Appeals Commission October 8, 1997
City Council approval October 27, 1997 (if needed)
If you have any questions regarding this letter or the process, please feel free to contact
me at 572-3593.
.�
Sincerely, 4.,_:..';�-:��� _.
Michele McPherson
Planning Assistant
MM:Is
C-97- 186
�
� VAR 4�97-17, 195 Hugo Street
MUWAHID MARY J& ABDULQADER A BLEGEN FERN
OR CURRENT RESIDENT OR CURRENT RESIDENT
265 IRONTON ST NE 275 IRONTON ST NE
FRIDLEY MN 55432 FRIDLEY MN 55432
SPORRE KENNETH C & LE
OR CURRENT RES
0
YMNO
SPORRE KENNETH C & LE
OR CURRENT RE
0
EYMNO
RKI INCORPORATED
OR CURRENT NT
0
EY MN 0
CARLYLE STEVE TERESA M
OR CURRENT SIDENT
301 IRO ST NE
FRIDL. MN 55432
NELSON BRYAN R& SANDRA L
OR CURRENT RESIDENT
190 IRONTON ST NE
FRIDLEY MN 55432
ARTMAN JEI�TIFER A B& MARK J
OR CURRENT RESIDENT
304 IRONTON ST NE
FRIDLEY MN 55432
SEEGER CHARLES R& JAI�TICE R
OR CURRENT RESIDENT
324 IItONTON ST NE
FRIDLEY MN 55432
SKRANDIES KURT & HII.,DEGARD
OR CURRENT RESIDENT
311 HiTGO ST NE
FRIDLEY MN 55432
SPORRE KENNETH C& LEE ANN
OR CURRENT RESIDENT
295 IRONTON ST NE
FRIDLEY MN 55432
FEIGUM RICHARD J& SHARRON L
OR CURRENT RESIDENT
335 IRONTON ST NE
FRIDLEY NIN 55432
LARSON TROY ALAN
OR CURRENT RESIDENT
311 IRONTON ST NE
FRIDLEY MN 55432
RKI INCORPORATED
OR CURRENT RESIDENT
8251 ASHTON AVE NE
FRIDLEY MN 55432
BERNT DANIEL S& MARTHA E
OR CURRENT RESIDENT
280 IRONTON ST NE
FRIDLEY MN 55432
LOBASH RANDALL & DARLENE
OR CURRENT RESIDENT
314 IRONTON ST NE
FRIDLEY MN 55432
LAMUSGA WARREN M & BELINDA
OR CURRENT RESIDENT
195 HUGO ST NE
FRIDLEY NIN 55432
SKRANDIES KURT & HII..DE
OR CURRENT RESI
0
YMNO
^ Ma.iled: 9/26/97
SPORRE LEEANN M& KENNETH C
OR CURRENT RESIDENT
319 IRONTON ST NE
FRIDLEY MN 55432
SPORRE KENNETH C & LEE
OR CURRENT RESID
0
F� YMNO
SPORRE KENNETH C & LEE
OR CURRENT RES
0
EY MN 0
CARLYLE STEVEN R& TERESA M
OR CURRENT RESIDENT
301 IRONTON ST NE
FRIDLEY MN 55432
BECK JEFFREY R
OR CURRENT RESIDENT
180 IRONTON ST NE
FRIDLEY NIN 55432
KARRICK CHRISTOPHER C& C M
OR CURRENT RESIDENT
290 IRONTON ST NE
FRIDLEY NIN 55432
HALVERSON CHERYL R
OR CURRENT RESIDENT
340 IRONTON ST NE
FRIDLEY MN 55432
RENNERT MICHAEL J& LAVONNE A
OR CURRENT RESIDENT
295 HiJGO ST NE
FRIDLEY MN 55432
SKRANDIES KURT & HII.DE
OR CURRENT RES
0
F YMNO
OFFICER RALPH I& SYRIE Y POSS TERRENCE A& PATRICIA STOLT JUDITH A
OR CURRENT RESIDENT OR CURRENT RESIDENT OR CURRENT RESIDENT
315 HUGO ST NE 321 HUGO ST NE 331 HUGO ST NE
FRIDLEY MN 55432 FRIDLEY MN 55432 � FRIDLEY MN 55432
��AR 4%97-17, 195 Hugo Street
� Mailed: 9/26/97
SECURITY PACIFIC NATL BANK SPORRE CLARENCE & MARGARET FRIDLEY CITY OF
OR CURRENT RESIDENT OR CURRENT RESIDENT OR CURRENT T
341 HUGO ST NE 180 HLJGO ST NE 0
FRIDLEY MN 55432 FRIDLEY 1VIN 55432 EY MN 0
FRIDLEY CITY OF
OR CURRENT ENT
0
LEY MN 0
JAZDZEWSKI D J& BECKLUND S J
OR CURRENT RESIDENT
308 HUGO ST NE
FRIDLEY MN 55432
FRIDLEY CITY OF
OR CURRENT NT
0
EYMNO
SCHACHER WM P& JEAN M
OR CURRENT RESIDENT
8191 RUTH CIR NE
FRIDLEY MN 55432
RKI INC
OR CURRENT NT
0
�I,EY NIN 0
JONES STANLEY C& BARBARA A
OR CURRENT RESIDENT
8151 RUTH CIR NE
FRIDLEY MN 55432
WASSERMAN ALVIN R 8c LISA M
OR CURRENT RESIDENT
340 HiJGO ST NE
FRIDLEY NIN 55432
ZACZKOWSKI RONALD O & JANET
OR CURRENT RESIDENT
314 HUGO ST NE
FRIDLEY MN 55432
HUNA PATRICK J& MARIA A
OR CURRENT RESIDENT
8171 RUTH CIR NE
FRIDLEY MN 55432
MALMBORG MICHAEL A
OR CURRENT RESIDENT
8160 RUTH ST NE
FRIDLEY MN 55432
JAKUBIK JODY J
OR CURRENT RESIDENT
8145 RUTH ST NE
FRIDLEY MN 55432
MCCOLLOW JOHN OWEN & SHARON
OR CURRENT RESIDENT
200 HUGO ST NE
FRIDLEY MN 55432
FRIDLEY CITY OF
OR CURRENT � NT
0
EYMNO
PEET ROGER W& GAIL M
OR CURRENT RESIDENT
8181 RUTH CIR NE
FRIDLEY MN 55432
STANIlVIERS JAMES J & CAROLINE
OR CURRENT RESIDENT
8161 RUTH CIR NE
FRIDLEY MN 55432
BURRIS ROBERT A& S K TRUSTEES
OR CURRENT RESIDENT
8160 RUTH CIR NE
FRIDLEY MN 55432
/i''�
�
VARIANCE APPLICATION
SUBMISSION CHECKLIST - -� - -- �-� - `
The following shall be the minimum submission requirements to the Appeals
Commission. Applications will not be accepted if the following is not� submitted:
ITEM
Completed application, with fee
(Application is considered complete if
all blanks are completed, and both fee
owner and petitioner have signed)
Scaled site plan of property showing
north arrow, existing and proposed
structures, lot and block number,
adjacent street names, and buildings on
adjacent lots within 10 feet of the
common lot lines.
Elevation of building and description of
materials.
Narrative of proposed bui�dina.
COMPLETE REVIEWER'S
INITIALS/DATE
� � � ��, ,
_ � �
� �� ��
�����
COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL:
ITEM SUBMITTED RECEIVER'S COMPLETE REVIEWER'S
INITIALS INITIALS
Completed application, with fee
(Application is considered complete if
all blanks are completed� and both fee
owner and etitioner have si ned
Scaled site plan of property showing
north arrow, existing and proposed
structures, lot and block number,
adjacent street names, and buildings on
adjacent lots within 10 feet of the
common lot lines.
Elevation of building and description of
materials.
Landscape plan for all projects requiring
a parking lot expansion of four (4) or
more s aces.
Gradin and draina e lan.
Erosion control lan.
Calculations for stormwater runoff:
r"'�
�
VARIANCE APPLICATION- �
SUBMISSION CHECKLIST� RAGE�Z����°' """""` �° ' " -� " "
ITEN1 � `
a. undeveloped c�d't#ier�=--=--�_- — - - ��
b. existing condition
c. ro osed condition
Calculations for excavation and/or fill.
Utility Map: (If item is nonexistent, note
on plan)
Water: size and type of
a. existing mains
b. existing services
c. proposed services
d. hydrants
e. valves
f. fire services - : �
Sewer: size and type of
a. existing mains
b. existing services
c. proposed services
d. manholes and lampholes
e. elevations (inverts and top of
castings)
Storm: size and type of
a existing mains
b. existing services
c. proposed services . _,
d. manholes and lampholes
e. elevations (inverts and top of
castings
f. existing catch basins
g. proposed catch basins
0
ITEM
Completed app�ication, with fee
(Application is considered complete if
all blanks are completed, and both fee
owner and petitioner have si ned)
Drawing of proposed si n.
Scaled site plan showing location of
sign, or buildin elevation if wap sipn
Written response to Section 214.21.02
of the Siqn Code.
r�rf�
--1 RECEIVER'S
�¢fi �47GPiiiJ
�- � _ _.
�
LAND USE APPLICATION
FILE CHECKLIST
�
� �
Date Created: � � �
File Number.
Summary of Reques
��.��i - �`�
Date Submitted:
Application Deadline:
(Official Receiving Date)
60 Day Action Date: /% �,
�� �� ��v�o �a�.
10 Day eompletion Notice: �'
I, � , understand that while my application was submitted for
(applicant's name) �
review on , the application deadline is: , and the
60 day action window will not begin until I receive a letter stating that my application is
complete.
I also understand that the City may, at any time during the 60 day action window, in
writing, notify me that the process will be extended an additional 60 days.
(signed)
(witnessed by receiver)
Application Found Complete ✓ yes no
Application Completion Notices Mailed: 17 �
Scheduled Planning Commission:
Scheduled Appeals Commission:
Scheduled City Council:
���C�)����
��
.e,,�°�� � "�at .� ' � ,� ' "� � " "° . `'�
� n . s9r M�. . "�
� "� � s x � ,� � � x.p i i .
s� � � � � ar
�,r" *�r � -�.�� ? Ma 9 �
q� � � � � � �� � � � � �� �
`� 1 ��.��, z a �d'�'"�} �et ; A l .� ' f ^,t' �.
� � `' � , « � s� �, � '� �'� � '�
�s ��; � ���� • � "p� • .�+' �,� �� �
f � �.,3 � � ^�. �g� � ". .-- . . � � •# ��°.�.
�-rm�.a�� ,.� , d��'` „T`��r� �'�, e. , _ :i��; . ���..�� �}�; . .�.y '",*;�±� y '�;� -�
, � � ,��-��'� �� .`R
�; -:, � , - � .�.�,.' � � �
`F �` s � -. ` a�
- .�ri
�,t, �,. . .� � � -�� _ � ,
,a
.F: �'
. ��