The URL can be used to link to this page

AF-V - 47839�� o a�� `C � �-�h F+. y C h] `C � K F�+• t7 m R+ fD � �C F�-' O NC � (D N . � � z d t� m . b � �r � m � � /`i� � THIS HAS ALREADY BEENrFILED AS DOCUMENT NUMBER 204951 ON 2L26/91_ � e STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF ANOKA CITY OF FRIDLEY � In the Matter of a variance, VAR �F�90-15 Robert P. Franzen ' Owner r � �z�� CITY COONCIL PROCEEDINGS VARIANCE The above entitled matter came before the City Council of the City of Fridley and was heard on the 13th daq of Au�ust , 1 g 90 , on a petition for a variance pursuant to the City of Fridley�s Zonittg Ordinanee, for the following deseribed property: To reduce the front yard setback from 35 feet to 22 feet; to increase the lot coverage from 25 percent to 28.6 percent, all to allow the construction of an addition to the front of the existing home, and to acknowledge the coverage of the existing garage, on Lots 37 and 38, Block E, Riverview Heights, the same being 590 Kimball Street N.E. IT IS ORDERED that a varianee be granted as upon the followir� conditions or reasons: Approval with two stipulations. See City Council meeting minutes of August 13, 1990. STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF ANO�A ) CITY OF FRIDLEX ) OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK I, Shirley A. Haapala, City Clerk for the City of Fridley with and in for said City of Fridley, do hereby certify that I have compared the foregoing copy and Order granting a variance_with the original record thereof preserved in my office, and have found the same to be a correet and true transcript of the whole thereof. IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, I have hereunto subseribed my hand 5�the City of �Fridle , Minnesota, in the County of Anoka on the �, day of Jl�i ( , 19-2Z. - DRAFTED BY: City of Fridley 6�+31 University Avenue N.E. Fridley, NI�1 55432 � �`L� �// r' ��c: �'°s --�'I SHIRLEY A. AAPALA, CIT CLERK _ Variances are valid for a period of one year following approval and �sh-all be �- _ considered void if not used within that period. -� _ (SEAL) �� F'RZDLEY CITY COUNCIL MBETIN�i OF A�GIIBT i3. 1990 _—��QE 15 �MOTION�y Councilman Fitzpatrick to concur witt=the_zecommendation of� the Appeals CommiBS3on and� q ar n� the variance reques�, �iAR �90-15'�. to reduce the front yard setbac7t from 35 feet to 22 feet `"and to increase the lot coverage from 25 percent to 28.6 percent, with the followinq etipulations: (1) a hard eurface driveway Bhall be provided by November 1, 1990; and (2) the 8 x 16 foot etoraqe shed and all construction debris shall be removed from the site by November 1, 1990, or thirty days after the final inspection, whichever comes first. Seconded by Councilwoman Jorqenson. ;�? by Councilman�illings_, to amend the above_motion to separate ;`the question of the __v_ariances�� Seconded by Councilwoman Jorgenson. '-ITpon a voiae vote, all votinq aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. MOTION by Councilman Fitzpatrick to�;gran at portion of variance ;request, AR #90-15 to re uce the front_yard setback from_35_feet,' �'-to.22 feet, � with tiie follow�ng stipulations: ;��j� ;a hard surface �`-d�civeway s-hal l be provided by November 1, 19 9 0; and-�( 3-}-the 8 x 16 foot storage shed and all construction debris shall be-�-e�loved from the site by November 1, 1990, or thirty days after the final inspection, whichever comes first. Seconded by Councilwoman Jorgenson. Upon a voice vote, Councilman Fitzpatrick, Councilwoman Jorgenson, and Mayor Nee voted in favor of the motion. Councilman Billings voted against the motion. Mayor Nee declared the motion carried. ( MOTION by Councilman Fitz�at=ick to grant that portion of variance —r s, 90-15 to increase the_lot coverage_from 25-per�en� --- - - ---- --- ', to 28.6 percent`; with the following stipulations: �i�j a hard � surface driveway shall be provided by November 1, 1990; anT�j-�he 8 x 16 foot storaqe shed and all construction debris sha�-I be removed from the site by November 1, 1990, or thirty days after the final inspection, whichever comes first. Seconded by Councilwoman Jorgenson. Upon a voice vote, Councilman Fitzpatrick, Councilwoman Jorgenson and Mayor Nee voted in favor of the motion. Councilman Billings voted against the motion. Mayor Nee declared the motion carried. MOTION by Councilwoman Jorgenson to receive the minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of July 25, 1990. Seconded by Councilman Fitzpatrick. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. � � �,.., ..� ��a�Tavns.+ vav ],2 BY CORTRO�ORPORATION, TO 7. E�1�1v�.�v�v vr �eu�i.�,,...L. .� • r��v • n �L+Dt+L�1JT TA �NCHERS ROAD N.E.: Councilman Billings stated/ h�ould be comfortable with a one-year extension. � • ' ^ � , MOTION by Councilman Billinqs to amend th above motion by adding � the following stipulation: (3) the e e foot area of the garage � shall not exceed ttie square footage the first floor of the home. Seconded by Councilwoman Jorgens . IIpon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the m on carried unanimously. IIPON A VOICE VOTE ��N THE MAIN MOTION, all voted aye, and Mayor Nee declared motion carried unanimously. C. CONSTRUCTION OF AN ADDITION TO THE FRONT v�' Ttt� L'-�.15'1'1Piv nvra� ,AND TO ACKNOWLEI�E THE COVERAGE OF THE EXISTING GARAGE ON LOTS 37 AND 38 BLOCK E RIVERVIEW HEIGHTS THE SAME BEING 590 RIMBALL STREET N.E.: Ms. Dacy, Planning Coordinator, stated that this is a request for a variance to reduce the front yard setback from 35 feet to 22 feet and for a variance to increase the lot coverage from 25 to 28.6 percent. She stated that a variance was qranted last year for the addition to the front of the home. However, there was an error in the dimensions of the lot depth. She stated that 116 feet was shown on the plan when, in fact, there t�as only 110 feet. Ms. Dacy stated that to further complicate the matter, based on the erroneous lot dimensions, the petitioner increased the size of the garage rather than the size that was oriqinally proposed. � Ms. Dacy stated that the detached garage and the addition is over the 25 percent lot coverage. She stated that the variances are required, therefore, to allow the addition onto the'front of the home by reducing the setback from 35 to 22 feet and increasing the lot coverage from 25 to 28.6 percent. Ms. Dacy stated that the Appeals Commiesion recommended approval of both the.variances by a 2 to 1 vote. However, staff recommends denial. Councilman Fitzpatrick stated that the mi�utes reflect that the vote was unanimous for approval of the variances. Ms. Dacy stated that she thought Mr. Voss voted aqainst it, however, she would have to check into it further. Councilman�Fitzpatrick stated that these are variances which, in substance, the Council meant to grant last year. He stated that one resident who abuts this property to the rear did object; however, there are several other residents who reside on Rimball that had no objection to the variances. ^ � � > _ CITYOF F'RIDLEY FRIDLEY MUNICIPAL CENTER • Er�131 UNIVERSITY AVE. N.E. FRIDLEY, MN 55432 •(612) 571-3450 • FAX (612) 571-1287 November 6, 1990 Robert Franzen 590 Kimball Street N.E. Fridley, NIl�T 55432 Subject: Completion of Stipulations for Variance Request, VAR #90-15 Dear Mr. Franzen: Attached �lease find a copy of the action taken notice for your variance, VAR #90-15, which the City Council approved August 13, 1990. A recent inspection of your property revealed that the hardsurface driveway has not been installed, and the storage shed has not been removed. Please comply with the stipulations of the variance. Failure to do so is a misdemeanor. An extension of the time limit will need to be approved by the City Council. I will be reinspecting the property on or about November 16, 1990. Full compliance is expected at that time. If you have any questions or concerns regarding this issue, please call me at 572- 3593. Sincerely, Michele McPherson, BLA Planning Assistant NIl�I/dn C-90-956 r''� , �; �"�, _+� _ };a UTYOF F'RIDLEY FRIDLEY MUNICIPAL CENTER • 6431 UNIVERSITY AVE. N.E. FRIDLEY, MN 55432 •(612) 571-3450 • FAX (612) 571-1287 CITY COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN NOTICE Robert Franzen 590 Kimball Street N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 Dear Mr. Franzen: August 14, 1990 On August 13, 1990, the Fridley City Council officially approved your request for a variance, VAR #90-15, to reduce the front yard setback from 35 feet to 22 feet; to increase the lot coverage from 25 percent to 28.6 percent, to allow the construction of an addition to the front of the existing home and to acknowledge the coverage of the existing garage on Lots 37 and 38, Block E, Riverview Heights, the same being 590 Kimball Street N.E., with the following stipulations: 1. A hard surface driveway shall be provided by November 1, 1990. 2. The 8' x 16' storage shed and all construction debris shall be removed from the site by November 1, 1990, or 30 days after the final inspection, whichever is first. Please contact me as soon as possible regarding the necessity to retain a street easement along Kimball Street N.E. If you have any questions regarding the above action, please call the Planning Department at 571-3450. Sincerely, Barbara Dacy Planning Coordinator BD/dn Please review the noted stipulations, sign the statement below and return one copy to the City of Fridley Planning Department by August 28, 1990. Concur with action taken. / � �� a MOTION by Councilman Billings to amend th above motion by adding � � the following stipulation: (3) the equ e foot area of the garage shall' not exceed the equare footage of e first floor of the home. Seconded by Councilwoman Jorgenson. Upon a voice vote, all votinq aye, Mayor Nee declared the mot carried unanimously. UPON A VOICE VOTE TAI�N THE MAIN MOTION, all voted aye, and Mayor Nee declared the otion carried unanimously. C. VARIANCE VAR �90-15 BY ROBERT FRANZEN TO REDIICE THE FRONT YARD SETBACR FROM 35 FEET TO 22 FEET: TO INCREASE THE LOT COVERAGE FROM 25 PERCENT TO 28.6 PERCENT. TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF AN ADDITION TO THE FRONT OF THE EXISTING HOME �ND TO ACKNOWLEDGE THE COVERAGE OF THE EXISTING GARAGE ON LOTS 37 AND 38 BLOCK E RIVERVIEW HEIGHTS THE SAME BEING 590 KIMBALL STREET N.E.; Ms. Dacy, Planning Coordinator, stated that this is a request for a variance to reduce the front yard setback from 35 feet to 22 feet and for a variance to increase the lot coveraqe from 25 to 28.6 percent. She stated that a variance was granted last year for the addition to the front of the home. However, there was an error in the dimensions of the lot depth. She stated that 116 feet was shown on the plan when, in fact, there was only 110 feet. Ms. Dacy stated that to further complicate the matter, based on the erroneous lot dimensions, the petitioner increased the size of the garage rather than the size that was oriqinally proposed. Ms. Dacy stated that the detached garage and the addition is over the 25 percent lot coverage. She stated that the variances are required, therefore, to allow the addition onto the front of the home by reducing the setback from 35 to 22 feet and increasing the lot coverage from 25 to 28.6 percent. Ms. Dacy stated that the Appeals Commission recommended approval of both the.variances by a 2 to 1 vote. However, staff recommends denial. Councilman Fitzpatrick stated that the minutes reflect that the vote was unanimous for approval of the variances. Ms. Dacy stated that she thought Mr. Voss voted against it, however, she would have to check into it further. Councilman�Fitzpatrick stated that these are variances which, in substance, the Council meant to qrant last year. He stated that one resident who abuts this property to the rear did object; however, there are�several other resideats who reside on Kimball that had no objection to the variances. � � i i�� \ FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL l�ETINO OF 110GQBT 13. 1990 P!i(�E 15 MOTION by Councilman Fitzpatrick to concur with the recommendation of the Appeals Commission and qrant the variance request, VAR #90-15 to reduce the front yard eetback from 35 feet to 22 feet and to increase the lot coveraqe from 25 percent to 28.6 percent, �ith the following stipulations: (i) a hard surface driveway Bhall be provided by November 1, 1990; and (2) the 8 x 16 foot Btoraqe shed and all construction debris shall be removed from the site by November 1, 1990, or thirty days after the final inspection, whichever comes first. Seconded by Councilwoman Jorgenson. MOTION by Councilman Billings to amend the above motion to separate the question of the variances. Seconded by Councilwoman Jorgenson. IIpon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. MOTION by Councilman Fitzpatrick to grant that portion of variance request, VAR #90-15 to reduce the front yard Betback from 35 feet to 22 feet, with the followinq stipulations: (i) a hard surface driveway shall be provided by November 1, 1990; and (2) the 8 x 16 foot storage shed and all construction debris shall be removed from the site by November l, 1990, or thirty days after the final inspection, whichever comes first. Seconded by Councilwoman Jorgenson. Upon a voice vote, Couricilman Fitzpatrick, Councilwoman Jorgenson, and Mayor Nee voted in favor of the motion. Councilman Billings voted against the motion. Mayor Nee declared the motion carried. MOTION by Councilman Fitzpatrick to grant that portion of variance request, VAR #90-15 to increase the lot coverage from 25 percent to 28.6 percent, with the following stipulations: (1) a hard surface driveway shall be provided by November 1, 1990; and (2) the 8 x 16 foot storage shed and all construction debris shall be removed from the site by November 1, 1990, or thirty days after the final inspection, whichever comes first. Seconded by Councilwoman Jorgenson. Upon a voice vote, Councilman Fitzpatrick, Councilwoman Jorgenson and Mayor Nee voted in favor of the motion. Councilman Billings voted against the motion. Mayor Nee declared the motion carried. . MOTION by Councilwoman Jorgenson to receive the minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of July 25, 1990. Seconded by Councilman Fitzpatrick. IIpon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. � �. XTENSION OF VARIANCE VAR� 9- 2 BY RTRON CORPORATION TO ---- --- __ ...� ..�, i.r.�v w n �L•QnT�'NT T[] �ANCHERS ROAD N.E.: Councilman Billings stated h�would be comfortable with a one-year extension. � � � � � 6Z s STAFF REPORT APPEALS DATE July 24, 1990 CI�TY OF PLAI�NG COMMISSION DATE fRIDLEY CtTY COUNCIL DATE Auqust 13, 1990 aur�+= REQUEST PERMIT NUMBER APPLICANT PROPOSED REQUEST LOCATION SITE DATA SIZE DENSITY PRESEWT ZONWG ADJACENT LAND USES 8� ZONpVG UTIITES PARK DEDICATION ANALYSIS FINANCIAL IMPUCATIONS CONFORMANCE TO COMPREl�NSNE PLAN COMPAT�ILITY WITH ADJACENT I�ES & ZON�IG ENVIRONMENTAL CONSlDERATIONS STAFF RECOMMENDATION APPEALS RECOMMENDATION PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION VAR #90-15 R�bert Franzeri 'lb reduoe the front yard setback frran 35 ft. to 22 ft. and tA increase the allawable lot coverage fr�n 25o to 28.60 590 Kimball Street N.E. 5,500 sq. ft. 1�1, Single F�nily 17welling R-1, Single Family IInvelling to the N, E, S, and W Yes Yes Llen�.a]. APProval � Staff Report VAR #90-15, 590 Kimball Street N.E. Page 2 A. PUBLIC PURPOSE SERVED BY REQUIREMENT: !� Section 205.07.03.D.(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 for aesthetic consideration to reduce the building "line of sight" encroachment into the neighbor's front yard. Section 205.07.03.0 requires that not more than 250 of the area of a lot shall be covered by the main building and all accessory buildings. Public purpose served by this requirement is to eliminate the condition of overcrowding in residential areas. B. STATED HARDSHIP: "On August 25, 1989, I proposed an addition on the front of my house at 590 Kimball Street N.E. applying for VAR #89-21. Going through all the legal steps the City of Fridley requested. In compliance with the stipulations, the City Appeals Commission and City Council granted permission to go ahead with my plans on October 2, 1989. On April 6, 1990, all building permits were picked up and paid for with the sole intent of proceeding without interruption. On July 11, 1990, I was informed by the City of Fridley to stop proceeding with work on my property. I then was informed of some of the errors detected. I would like to explain that the improvements planned for my property were based on the whole aspect of a front room addition. The financial costs cannot be forgotten. Many of the building materials, cabinets, windows, and doors, and concrete have been paid for. I regret any errors that have been made either on my part or the employees of the City of Fridley, but any stoppage of the proposed plans now will hinder the physical improvements promised to the neighborhood." � . � � � 6 BB Staff Report VAR #90-15, 590 Kimball Street N.E. Page 3 C. ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF REVIEW: Request The petitioner, Robert Franzen, is requesting that a variance be granted to increase the allowable lot coverage from 25� to 28� and to reduce the required front yard setback from 35 feet to 22 feet on Lots 37 and 38, Block E, Riverview Heights Addition, the same being 590 ICimball Street N.E. The petitioner applied for a similar front yard variance in 1989 which was approved by the City Council (see attached staff report from the original variance). Site A single family dwelling unit and a 22 ft. by 24 ft. garage are located on the lot. The garage was recently constructed by the petitioner. Analysis The Appeals Commission will need to evaluate two variances: the increased lot coverage and the front yard setback. The increased lot coverage will be analyzed first. Without increasing the lot coverage, the front yard setback cannot be approved. The original variance request by the petitioner proposed a 7 ft. by 27 ft. living room and porch addition which encroached into the front yard and reduced the front yard setback from 35 feet to 29 feet. When applying for the original permit, the petitioner indicated that the lot depth was 116 feet and that the setback from the property line was 29 feet instead of the 22 feet as now indicated by the petitioner. Failing to verify Mr. Franzen's measurements, staff proceeded to calculate the lot coverage for a 5,800 sq. ft. lot instead of the actual lot size of 5,500 sq. ft. With the existing house and the new garage, the lot coverage totals 1,418 sq. ft. which is over the 25% minimum of 1,375 sq. ft. allowed by code. When originally proposed, the variance request included a proposed garage of 18 ft. by 24 ft, which the petitioner applied for August 28, 1989. On April 5, 1990, the petitioner applied for a second building permit which added an additional 4 ft. by 24 ft. to the original garage building permit. In addition, the petitioner then applied for and received a � �, Staff Report VAR #90-15, 590 Kimball Street N.E. Page 4 �`� permit for an addition to the house of 8 ft. by 20 ft. The proposed addition to the house and garage increases the square footage of building area to 1,578 sq. ft. which increases the lot coverage to 28.6%. By increasing the original garage by approximately 96 sq. ft. , the petitioner increased the lot coverage over that which is allowed by code. Had the petitioner not increased the size of the garage, the new garage plus the existing house would have met the minimum lot coverage requirement of 250 (1,312 sq. ft. ). Adding the 160 sq. ft. addition to the front of the house would increase the lot coverage on a lot that currently does not conform to the minimum standards set forth in the zoning code. The minimum lot area for lots platted prior to 1955 is 7,500 sq. ft. The petitioner's lot area is only 5,500 sq. ft. When originally proposed, staff discussed several alternatives the petitioner could explore to meet the code for the addition to the house other than the front yard (see attached staff report from original variance). The petitioner still has reasonable use of the property if the front yard variance is denied. The variance that was granted in 1989 to reduce the front yard setback from 35 feet to 29 feet brings the property into compliance with the zoning code, as the existing house is only 30 feet from the front property lines. Recommendation Staff recommends that the variance for the increase in lot area be granted only for the garage that was constructed. It is necessary to grant a minor increase for the newly constructed garage in order to bring the property into compliance with the zoning code. As the property does not meet the minimum lot area, increasing the lot coverage has a more significant impact than on a "normal" lot that meets code. The petitioner still has reasonable use of the property without the increased lot coverage and the reduced front yard setback. Therefore, staff recommends denial of both variances. Appeals Commission Action The Appeals Commission voted 2-1 to recommend approval of the request to the City Council. The Appeals Commission also voted to recommend the following stipulations to the City Council: 6CC 0 / � Staff Report VAR #90-15, 590 Kimball Street N.E. Page 5 �� 1. A hard surface driveway shall be provided by November 1, 1990. 2. The 8 ft. x 16 ft. storage shed and all construction debris shall be removed from the site by November 1, 1990, or 30 days after the final inspection, whichever is first. City Council Recommendation Staff recommends that the City Council approve the slight variance to increase the lot coverage from 25 o to 25. 7%. This will bring the property into conformance with the Zoning Code. Staff recommends that the City Council deny the variance requests as presented. The petitioner still has reasonable use of the property if the variances are denied. .r� / � c�nroF F�� DATE: TO: FROM: BIIBJECT: C01� �IUNITY DEVELC��'MENT DEPARTMENT M EMO RAN D UM August 8, 1990 �. William Burns, City Manager,��° Jock Robertson, Community Development Director Barbara Dacy, Planning Coordinator Michele McPherson, Planning Assistant Variance Request, VAR #90-15, by Robert Franzen Attached is the staff report for the variance request by Robert Franzen. The Appeals Commission voted 2-1 to recommend approval of the request to the City Council with the following stipulations: 1. A hard surface driveway shall be provided by November 1, 1990. 2. The 8 ft. x 16 debris shall be 1990, or 30 days comes first. ft. storage shed and all construction removed from the site by November 1, after the final inspection, whichever Staff recommends that the City Council approve only the variance to increase the lot coverage from 25� to 25.7�. This will bring the property into conformance with the Zoning Code. Denial of the remaining two variances will not create an undue hardship for the petitioner. The petitioner has reasonable use of the property. if the variances are denied. NIl�"I :1 s M-90-519 6Y1 � � U�iYOF FRIDLEY DATE: TO: FROM: �PLANNING DNI��:ON MEMOR,ANDUM July 25, 1990 ° Virgil Herrick, City Attorney Barbara Dacy, Planning Coordinator SU&TECT: Robert Franzen Variance, VAR #90-15 Attached is the staff report for a front yard setback variance request from 35 feet to 22 feet, and to increase the allowable lot coverage from 25% to 28.6%. Please review it and render an opinion regarding the City's liability. The City previously approved a front yard variance for the addition onto the subject home on October 2, 1989. At that time, the dimensions of the lot submitted in the site plan indicated six additional feet of lot depth than which actually exists. Although the petitioner submitted the site plan with the incorrect dimensions, neither staff or the Appeals Commission discovered the discrepancy during the review process. The petitioner also contends that he received the lot depth information from a survey on an adjacent lot. It was not a survey, but the homeowner's site t� Given that the City also did not detect the discrepancies until �� after building permits were issued for the addition, is the City lia e if the City Council were to deny the variance requests? This matter will be referred to the City Council on August 13, � a 1990. The Appeals Commission recommended approval of these �� requests at their July 24, 1990 meeting. BD/dn M-90-513 �'�1 CITY OF FRIDLEY � APPEAIS COI�IlKISSION MEETING, JIILY 24, 1990 �rrw.w.rr�w��r�.w,r.rrrw�w�w�rrrrrrw�rww.rw�rw.rrrrrrrrrw�rw�w.w,�rr.rr.rw.rw�w�wrww.w.rr CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Savage called the July 24, 1990, Appeals Commission meeting to order at 7:35 p.m. ROLL CALL: Members Present: Members Absent: Diane Savage, Ren Vos, Cliff Johnson Larry Ruechle, Cathy Smith Others Present: Barbara Dacy, Planning Coordinator . Michele McPherson, Planning Assistant Robert Franzen, 590 Rimball Street N.E. Robert Carlson, 350 Osborne Road N.E. Eileen Branco, 5720 Polk Street N.E. Nancy J. Jorgenson, Councilmember (See attached list) APPROVAL OF JULY 10, 1990, APPEALS COMMISSION MINUTES• MOTION by Mr. Johnson, seconded by Dr. Vos, to approve the July l0, 1990, Appeals Commission minutes as written. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLPiRED '1'HE MOTION CARRIED DNANIMOIISLY. 1. CONSIDERATION OF VARIANCE REOUEST VAR #90-15 BY ROBERT FRANZEN: Pursuant to Section 205.07.03.D.(1) of the Fridley City Code, to reduce the front yard setback from 35 feet to 23 feet; and pursuant to Section 205.07.03.C. of the Fridley City Code, to increase the lot coverage from 25� to 27%, to allow the construction of an addition to the front of the existing home and to acknowledge the coverage of the existing garage on Lots 37 and 38, Block E, Riverview Heights, the same being 590 Kimball Street N.E. MOTION by Dr. Vos, seconded by Mr. Johnson, to open the public hearing. IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CEAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED Ti� MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOIISLY AND TAE PIIBLIC NF=ARTNG OPEN AT 7:37 P.M. 6EE � !'"\ 6FF Ms. Dacy stated this property is located south of and adjacent to Rimball Street. The property is zoned R-1, Single Family Dwelling, and is surrounded on all sides by R-1 zoning. At the September 19, 1989, meeting, the A recommended approval for a front ppeals Commission heard and construction of an addition to the fro t f the home� Thatl front yard variance (from 35 feet to 29 feetj was approved by the City Council on October 2, 1989. However, during the building permit process, staff discovered an error in the site plan dimension in the lot depth which necessitates the petitioner to reapply for the front yard variance. On the 1989 site plan, a lot depth of 116 feet was indicated; however, that dimension was in error. The platted lots in this area are only 110 feet, not 116 feet. Ms. Dacy stated that although the petitioner submitted this drawing in 1989 indicating these dimensions, he indicated to staff he had received these lot dimensions from the City offices. Unfortunately, these errors were not caught during the staff review process or the public hearing process. Ms. Dacy stated that another complication is that in 1989, the petitioner had indicated the construction of an 18 ft. x 24 ft. garage. A building permit was issued for that garage, because, by right, he had met all the setbacks and the other requirements of the R-1 zone. After the initial permit for the 18 ft. x 24 ft. garage was issued, the petitioner requested another building permit to widen the garage to 22 ft. x 24 ft. Unfortunately, the increased size of the garage, in addition to the reduced dimension of the lot depth, caused an infraction of the maximum lot coverage percentage. The Zoning Code states that no more than 25� of the lot area can be covered by principal and accessory structures. Therefore, with the 528 sq. ft. garage and the existing 8gp sq. ft. house, that resulted in a total lot coverage of 1,418 sq, ft., or 25.7$. If the petitioner had not increased the size of the garage, the new garage plus the existing house would have met the minimum lot coverage requirement of 25� (1,312 sq. ft.). Ms. Dacy stated the petitioner is now re front questing approval of the yard variance to construct the addition onto the front of the existing house as approved in 1989. setback request has to be reheard because he di ensions have changed, and the new issue of the lot coverage maximum is also involved. Ms. Dacy stated staff has to recommend denial of the lot coverage variance. Obviously, staff cannot recommend a further encroachment into the re PProval of a Because the garage is near complet on e staff is r comm ndingethat the Appeals Commission grant a variance for the increase in lot coverage to 25.7� only for the garage and the existing house. This will bring the property into compliance with the Zoning � �' 6GG APPEAIS CO1Kr+IISSION MEETING. JULY 24. 1990 PAGE 3 Code. To permit the addition onto the front of the house would be contrary to the spirit and intent of the Code. Ms. Dacy stated that if the Appeals Commission recommends approval of the lot coverage variance request to allow the addition to the front of the house, the second request that needs to be considered is the front yard setback request from 35 feet to 23 feet. ' Ms. Savage asked if there were any alternatives for an addition onto the existing house. Ms. Dacy stated that as part of the original request, staff had suggested at least three alternatives the petitioner could explore to meet the code for the house other than the front yard. At the September 19, 1989, meeting, the petitioner had cited various reasons why those alternatives were not feasible. Mr. Robert Franzen, 590 Rimball Street N.E., stated that none of the dimensions for his proposed improvements have changed since the variances were approved in 1989. When he applied for a building permit for a larger garage on March 5, 1990, there appeared to be no problems. Since that time he has built the garage and the retaining wall, and then when these discrepancies in lot dimensions were discovered, all his plans have been put on hold for two weeks. Because his plans have been put on hold, he has lost a lot of money. He has building materials ordered for the addition. Errors have been made by City staff and himself; but at this point, there are no other alternatives and he wants to proceed with the addition to the front of his house. Ms. Savage stated that in visiting the site, the other houses along that block appear to conform to the 35 foot front yard setback. With the proposed addition to� the front of the house, Mr. Franzen's house would stick out. Mr. John Ruusisto, 585 Janesville Street N.E., stated he lives directly behind Mr. Franzen. When the front yard variance was approved last year, he had questioned the lot coverage and was assured there was no problem. He stated that there has been a lot of debris during the construction of the petitioner's garage. The garage is not yet completed. There is an erosion problem created by the landscaping that has been done, and the landscaping is shoddy, not quality work. He can understand the improvement to the neighborhood, but the construction materials used by Mr. Franzen are used and not of good quality. One window is_rotting on the bottom. He had taken pictures of Mr. Franzen's property to show the shoddy worl�nanship. He stated he objected to the granting of the variances. He does not feel the proposed construction fits in with the neighborhood. i"1 /"� 6HH APPEAIS COMl�lISSION MEETING. JIILY 24. 1990 PAGE 4 Mr. Franzen stated he is not done with the garage. His work has been put on hold since July 11, 1990. One of the stipulations put on by the Appeals Commission and City Council was a hard surface driveway, and that will be put in before winter. When he puts in the driveway, he will pour the concrete floor. Also, he miscalculated and ran out of building materials, but those are on order. As far as the landscaping, he has not altered the landscaping. His lot slopes down to Mr. Ruusisto�s yard and the water drains that way. He can do nothing about that. As far as the workmanship, Darrel Clark, the Building Inspector, has had no problem with the worlaaanship. Mr. Jerry LaPlante, 604 Lafayette Street N.E., stated Mr. Franzen is a very friendly and quiet person and has been a nice neighbor. He is trying to improve his property. He did not think any one person should have the right to put a time limit or dictate someone else's construction plans. Not all the errors are Mr. Franzen's fault. Some of the errors were made by the City. He would urge the Commission to grant the variances. Mr. Jim Brown, 560 Kimball Street N.E., stated he has no problem with what Mr. Franzen is doing. The variances should be approved. Ms. Janet Martin, 580 Kimball Street N.E., stated they live next door to Mr. Franzen, and they have no problems with the construction or the proposed addition. In the future, they would like to add onto the front of their house, too. These are very small houses with small living rooms, and in order to enlarge the living room, they have to add onto the front of the house. Regarding Mr. Kuusisto's concern about erosion, all of the drainage from the lots on Kimball Street run down to the Janesville lots. Mr. Duane Montoya, 8270 Broad Avenue N.E., stated he lives on the west side of Mr. Franzen. He stated he is a professional carpenter working in residential home building in the State of Minnesota for several years. He has been helping Mr. Franzen with the construction of the garage, and the workmanship is professional. He stated the standard grade of lumber used by Mr. Franzen is up to grade. As far as the erosion problem, Mr. Franzen has no control over that. He believed Mr. Franzen should be granted the variances. Ms. Ray Olson, 612 Lafayette Street N.E., stated they live across the street from Mr. Franzen. They feel Mr. Franzen is doing the best he can in this situation. They do not have any problem with Mr. Franzen's construction plans. It appears that errors were made on both sides, and he should be granted the variances. She also understood the drainage problems. ia`'� � 6�� APPEAIS COI�IliISSION KEETING. JIILY 24, 1990 PAGE 5 Mr. Phillip Rramme, 572 Kimball Street N.E., stated he lives two houses to the east of Mr. Franzen. He would like to echo what the other neighbors have said. None of the neighbors except one have any problems with Mr. Franzen's construction plans. Ms. Savage stated that the Appeals Commission cannot deal with the issues of erosion and shoddy worlananship. Perhaps those concerns can be brought up at the City Council meeting. The Commission must deal strictly with the variance requests and not how the neighbors like or do not like the construction. MOTION by Dr. Vos, seconded by Mr. Johnson, to close the public hearing. IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED TSE MOTION CARRIED AND T8E PIIBLIC �'AR'�G CIASED AT 8:02 P.M. Dr. Vos stated that at the September 19, 1989, Appeals Commission meeting, of the four members present, three voted in favor of the front yard variance and one voted against the front yard variance. At that meeting, he had expressed concern about the amount of square footage on the lot and that the petitioner's proposal with the addition and the double car garage was really filling up the lot. Because he did not see a hardship, he had voted against the variance. Ms. Savage stated that, whether right or wrong, she had voted in favor of the variance at the September meeting. It is not entirely the petitioner's fault that errors were made in lot dimensions. In all fairness, in order to remain consistent with her decision, she would vote in favor of the front yard variance and lot coverage variance. Ms. Savage stated that in adding to the front of the house, Mr. Franzen�s house will come forward more than it should be. It bothered her that another neighbor is saying they agree to the addition, because they would like to get a similar variance and add on to the front of their house. She stated that is not the way the system works, and there needs to be a proven hardship before a variance is granted. She stated a lot of the houses on Rimball Street can certainly.use improvement. She is glad to see a homeowner making improvements; but she is also concerned about the nonconformity of the front addition to the other houses. Mr. Johnson stated the petitioner is really not to blame for the situation he is in right now. If the proposed construction had been designed properly with the right facts and dimensions, he would not be in this situation. Based on what the Commission did last year in approving the variance, he would aqree with Ms. Savage that they have to vote for approval of this variance. � ��, �iPPEALB COr+II+iI88ION MEETING. JIILY 24, 1990 PAGE 6 Ms. Dacy stated that if the Commissicn is going to consider recommending approval of the variances, there are the issues of the hard surface driveway and the removal of all construction debris and the 8 ft. x 16 ft. shed on the property. MOTION by Mr. Johnson, seconded by Ms. Savage, to recommend to City Council approval of variance request, VAR #90-15, by Robert Franzen, pursuant to Section 205.07.03.D.(1) of the Fridley City Code, to reduce the front yard setback from 35 feet to 23 feet; and pursuant to Section 205.07.03.C. of the Fridley City Code, to increase the lot coverage from 25% to 27�, to allow the construction of an addition to the front of the existing home and to acknowledge the coverage of the existing garage on Lots 37 and 38, Block E, Riverview Heights, the same being 590 Kimball Street N.E., with the following stipulations: 1. 2. The hard surface driveway must be completed by November 1, 1990. The storage shed must be removed by November 1, 1990, or 30 days after the final inspection on the addition to the front of the house. � OPON A VOICE VOTE, VOS VOTING NAY� CBAIRPERSON BAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED BY A VOTE OF 2-1. Ms . Dacy stated this item will go to the City Council on August 13, 1990. ,� 2. CONSIDERATION OF VARIANCE REOUEST, VAR #90-14. BY ROBERT CARLSON: Pursuant to Section 205.07.03.D.(2).(c).((3)) of the Fridley City Code to`'reduce the side yard setback on a side street from 25 feet t 15 feet to allow the construction of a garage on Lot 1, Bloc 2, Osborne Manor, the same being 350 Osborne Road N.E. MOTION by Mr. Johnson, seconded hearing. IIPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MOTION CARRIED IINANIMOIISLY AND THE Dr. Vos, to open the public :PERSON BAPA�3E DECLARED T8E IC HEARING OPEN AT 8:22. Ms. McPherson stated this property is located at the intersection of 5th Street and Osborne Road in th general vicinity of Unity Hospital. The property is zoned R-1, Single Family Dwelling, as are adjacent parcels to the east, sout , and west. The property to the north is C-2, General Shopping. Ms. McPherson stated the petitioner is p oposing to remove the 16 ft. x 22 ft. garage currently on the sit and to construct a new 26 ft. x 38 ft. garage. She stated she h d contacted Mr. Carlson /�'`, PIIBLIC HEARIN(3 BEFORE THE APPEALS COMMISSION � Notice is hereby given that the Appeals Commission of the City of Fridley will conduct a Public Hearing at the Fridley Municipal Center at 6431 University Avenue N.E. on Tuesday, July 24, 1990, at 7:30 p.m. for the purpose of: Consideration of variance request, VAR #90-15, by Robert Franzen, pursuant to Section 205.07.03.D.(1) of the Fridley City Code, to reduce the front yard setback from 35 feet to 23 feet; and pursuant to 5ection 205.07.03.C. of the Fridley City Code, to increase the lot coverage from 25� to 27%, to allow the construction of an addition to the front of the existing home and to acknowledge the coverage of the existing garage on Lots 37 and 38, Block E, Riverview Heights, the same being 590 Rimball Street N.E., Fridley, Minnesota, 55432. Any and all persons desiring to be heard shall be given the opportunity at the above stated time and place. DIANE SAVAGE CHAIRPERSON APPEALS COMMISSION Any questions related to this item may be referred to the Fridley Community Development Department, 571-3450. � � /7 . . � / � 'i � � I. � / / ��, � �1 � � � C�N QF FRIDLEY COMMISSION APPLICaTION REVIEW � NuMBER FILE DATE MEETING DATE FILE DESCRIPTION �#9o-�s 38 7/12/90 7/�4/90 front yard setback & Lot coverage (See VAR COMPLETE REVIEW CHECKLIST AND RETURN TO PLANNING DEPT. D. ❑ MICHELE M. MARK W �j JOHN F. � � �� (6 ❑ DARREL C. M. 7 �� LEON M. ❑ JIM H. ❑ BOB A. COMMENTS �� r t�' �� '�- I �� '� i f e� x � = z� � .��-�� G�� /G� � r �r��o�� =�Q , l�S.�s' �S f,��s _ � �� , , �, �r , i � � . " .r' � i , ;, , , . . �� , � ,. �� 1�� r � Y � Vi rl�.L.YJ�Z ' I j'� 6431 �TIVEL?BITY AVENI� N.E. FRmIEY, 1�1 55432 Qo�amitp Devalo�metit Deuatdnmit (612) 571-3450 --��.,... _.. ..__� VAR�►,NCB AP�Z(�i1T�T �i PRDPEt�t II�DR�,TI�i - site plan required for su)snittals: see attac3�ed r~~~ Arldr�ss: � � �� /� � Legal description: � .�$� oc� � , ��// L�t Bloak ,l�� Tract/Addition Current zoning: Square footage/acreage Reason for variance and h�*��h;p; ' Section of City Qode: .�.........�.�...a,,.a,............___.....,_,�...�.w. FE3: � II�41DR'F�iTI�T ~~�.�~ (Contract Pu�rhasers: Fee Owners imust sign this form prior to proc�e��sir�g) NAME II� n h�C�' C� �r�,n7. ,n - ��- :r. � � �i,i_ .[ . .. ....._� ,• i �i / % e � ' ' ' .� �u I .� ��• � ��. •� ►. .; 1�1ME AD�S,S oAYmrn�►�: p� SIC�'IURE �� _...,............ � _.......... a. _... �. _.. � _.,. w. _...... �....... w...,.................... _ _., Fee: $100.00 $ 60.00 for residential praperti�s P�ermit VAR # g,eoeplt # Application re�eived by: Sch+eduled Appeals a�en; ��ion date: Sc�duled City C�u�cil date: , s ,�'�: � ° v v .r .r r a o� v a+ o w t cmc o.+� = ecc coa✓o m �� O 61 O M a O 1+/ •��+ � 4�+ m O O �+ "� � 7ia+O I+Y> ia Ci M �+� .°iv°� c�� .°,na°'m �°.°.i o " � � m 0oa'� p��O� O�tM �1+O�V ~ O' mC mA m .,C� o O m �'C..�i C ��M e+� O � � m 8 L "� b� 4� o .+ '� "'� p� C .r 6 b �.�i 4 M • M Q p "� O a M~C �i�o0 C"C�+�1� +C�Im'�'aJL� 'O � C �� {,� � i� > O O ►/ C �V� CO'O„0� •7MC GC4a0�� O� M � 'Ob y� y� � i.�p'�y '� �� O 4 � O.rCi �� M O � M O� �''�O� ��Oo,.Vj �„��,Cm ��om C M ..�i � • W .� � CCab .i�Cl+�i b0i-�i�m,�s�CU W .yqj .�i ..NiaG C�U as+.�+�,� py V Oip �00��N b 'O q O� ..�q aw � c a.� m�� b,� m,d q a�•c p,o o-�+ o�,�,�, o '°° g' w a.ca ..�i w° iL o ca�l�'O m a'�+ � w �'° y � m a."'. �o �7C OO• M�M«�m �� p '� m N O C �N ��0 �~QN�m OIOSC� �q.Va�m� ..ql U 0 y +9i±0 •��.� iyb,; v�"a=+qi m n.��.,'ka.,:s a a �a m caaa '�m�> 4v0py�G �NS0.'k� MC�A�W +Cr m � � �� -- L��C� CMpNy mC0�0 �p100mam.i�.�i t�1 +�i0 ..�i ..Cr y�C m O O 7+ +i 7 1� N� C +3� ai t�+ O C m O� El w ul L O a+ 'O ++ M i0 e o1�om°o oop'a�+.�i .rbo+vc�i t6mm►�+m cQ �cO�� c�Oi : =a�+v .-�i W O��a t�7w o 39 R m 1'ii 1 m >� a m mY a ri m .7 m 5 Z.0 a m ,+ ,r N � v ui �o r co oi N r1 � W a'�i >y m G a a o ° � M W U,y �.�i V � y y 6 O C � rl � � � m � C V n�l {d O� � M LI �0 9 O� % m 4 0 � +i� A m �m ; m 'MO C iL � w M V p � O � A� � M � m � m � p, � M 4 7 41 C N . � b+ O '� 7 w � M n � a � � � H _ _ w � �.�i r �o _ o ----- --=---�� O'O N"� a y C tp � m a w » w m a =+ � � o am+ 01 m 1° � ° oa o� a s w m a a > +' e .y o m'o s� ai o � m � a., � �,o � ►°+ m �7 o e o, w ° c a ° a..� a. a. a, �. ar w a 'O M J�.r > GI m � O'O O � O 'O A i1 1� O 'C1 C � �+ a ~ o �'i � m u m °� � � a m m a�°i e a�+ u u f° 7� e,po °w T~ a w � �o� �o e w A m a�i m 01 � a a w "_ m� rp O d � 'O � � m 0� � t�l �.�i q f�.l V U M "� .i C C '� M i�N i0► m V O .. b O y C.�i C 'O .i M L Y Y � �� IXi M ,y am cy e 3C o q � � •�t � ,.�i O � w� O� +Ci 4�Ui M 0 W 10 C � 0 C. O.'O � cm mw� w o, °m,o ti °c4 � o a o 0 0 0�o w° w wc. .., 00 o v., vc m -+o c a .+ m ow o oa w .•+ w o� �o w w o m a., o w w.+ u a+ y o o ° m p pmm e o ��o 0 om N e o e c c u w w wo ud C m.,� �p •p y la M m>. O N 0! m m Ot a1 � m m•.� ,C M 4 •+ � O C y � m l�.� 3 G� ; C C a�+ N O M 1V+ M O AG � 6 @ C +�i O � �� a W.��1 � .�1 C a M M V O. � J� .-QI N �7 W a a 0~. Z LL 2 2.0 S tll � 08 ��w 6 O� 60+ a��+� m�U +�+ A � M if „i 10 •• O @ O C O W Y U X �0 +i +i «i > � +� +1 ++ % k �� m•.y M Z ai Z m o o � m o w E M � M � v � "+ C � O M O V V v " V °u., m m� m • w i1 .r C 7 17 �r N n + Yf �o r .r U C�+i .r ae occ .c a u ar -+ s ��, _ .��:; :.� �� - CITYOF FRtDLEY `�Y11C'��.�.,1,�., FRIDLEY MUNICIPAL CENTER • 6431 UNIVERSITY AVE. N.E. FRIDLEY, MN 55432 •(612) 571-3450 • FAX (612) 571-1287 i"� CITY COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN NOTICE Robert Franzen 590 Kimball Street N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 Dear Mr. Franzen: August 14, 1990 On August 13, 1990, the Fridley City Council officially approved your request for a variance, VAR �90-15, to reduce the front yard setback from 35 feet to 22 feet; to increase the lot coverage from 25 percent to 28.6 percent, to allow the construction of an addition to the front of the existing home and to acknowledge the coverage of the existing garage on Lots 37 and 38, Block E, Riverview Heights, the same being 590 Kimball Street N.E. , with the following stipulations: 1. 2. A hard surface driveway shall be provided by November 1, 1990. The 8' x 16' storage shed and all construction debris shall be removed from the site by November 1, 1990, or 30 days after the final inspection, whichever is first. Please contact me as soon as possible regarding the necessity to retain a street easement along Kimball Street N.E. If you have any questions regarding the above action, please call the Planning Department at 571-3450. , Izl i9/2v �i+.�.� �,c �o-��,� ,.�c, Sincerely, �� I•��1 Barbara Dacy Planning Coordinator BD/dn Please review the noted stipulations, sign the statement below and return one copy to the City of Fridley Planning Department by August 28, 1990. ^ Concur with action taken. NEWQUIST & EKSTRUM, CHARTERED ATTORNEYS AT LAW SUITE 301, FRIDLEY PLAZA OFFICE BUILDING 6401 UNIVERSITY AVENUE N.E. FRIDLEY, MN 55432 1'ELEPHOIVE (612) 571-6870 FAX (612) 571-6884 CARL J. NEWQUIST OF COUNSEL B. WILLIAM EKSTRUM DOUGLAS J. PETERSON Mr. Robert Franzen 590 Kimball Street Fridley, NRi 55432 January 16, 1991 J �a ;�;-'„ � �4;�1� fi'� • ,� I E --� � a � r' RE: Citation No. 567-889 Non-Compliance Dear Mr. Franzen: As Fridley's prosecuting attorney, it was my pleasure to meet you and discuss your problem at your pre-jury trial conference. I am mindful of your good intention to upgrade and improve the condition of your residential property in the City of Fridley. I acknowledge that sometimes even well intentioned plans can go astray. Nevertheless, you remain legally responsible for your property and I respectfully suggest that your continuing non- compliance creates a situation that merits your immediate and serious attention. As indicated in court, the time of year and load restrictions on City streets may prevent construction of the concrete driveway until May 1, 1991. While wea�her and road restrictions may explain your current dilemma, those factors do not explain your failure to carry through with your obligations to install a cement driveway and remove the shed on or before November 1, 1990. While you advised me of some personal difficulties you have experienced, I learned that at no time have you ever contacted either the Fridley City Council or Staff about your situation up to the time of the court hearing. I respectfully suggest that your failure to complete the required improvements by November 1, 1990, coupled with your failure to even contact the City Staff about the difficulties you describe, evidence a lack of good faith on your part. As a further indication of a lack of good faith, I point out the matter of the Mr. Robert Franzen Page Two January 17, 1991 shed. Even if it became impossible for you to complete construction of a concrete driveway, you have no valid reason for your ongoing failure to remove the shed. You indicated to me that you are a carpenter by trade. There is no reason why you have not dismantled the shed and removed the materials from your property. I have no reason to doubt your assertion that you have been attempting to sell the shed. Your inability to sell the shed is a condition that could conceivably last for months or years. Your commitment, upon which the City Council relied in granting your variance, was to remove the sh�d on or before November 1, 1990. Your criminal court case has been continued until March 12, 1991 at 1:30 p.m. aL the Anoka County Courthouse. It is my obligation to represent the City of Fridley to the very best of my ability. What steps I take on March 12, 1991 to protect the interests of the City of Fridley may well depend upon your conduct over the intervening weeks. You must contact the City of Fridley Staff about the condition of your property. Assuming that you can satisfy the City Staff as to why the improvements have not been completed, I believe that you must present a reasonable proposal guaranteeing that the improvements will be completed within an acceptable time. If you believe that the City Staff does not correctly unders��nd the agreement that you reached with the City Council, then I suggest that it is your obligation to approach the City Council about your problem. If you are requesting some change in the requirements imposed upon you by the City Council as conditions of the variance you were granted, then you may certainly need to make a further appearance before the City Council. In any event, I will tell you that one of the first things that I will look to on March 12, 1991 is whether the shed has in fact been removed from your property. I again want to emphasize that regardless of your financial circumstances, as a carpenter, you are certainly capable of dismantling and removing the shed without need to rely upon another party. I am also going to determine whether you have contacted the City Staff and have in good faith discussed not only your current situation but the required solution. The City Council may or may not grant some additional consideration to your situation but it is up to you to initiate that review and consideration. Mr. Robert Franzen Page Three January 16, 1991 While it is my sincere hope that we can avoid the unpleasantness generally associated with a criminal jury trial, it is entirely up to you to demonstrate the good faith compliance that may obviate the need for such a trial. Thank you. Very truly yours, �� Carl J. Newquist CJN:pp cc: Cit of Fridley s. Michelle McPherson Department of Community Development