SP 81-01w
PLANNING COMMSSION MEETING, MARCH 4, 1981 PAGE 3
EOTIOR BY MS. HUGHES, SECONDED BY MR. OQUIST, TO RECOMMEND TO CI COUNCIL THE
APPROV OF SPECIAL USE PERMIT, SP #80-13, BY WALTER J. MILLS PER SECTION
205.051, , A, TO ALLOW AN EXISTING ACCE Y BUILDING 14 BY 20 FT. TO BE
MOVED TO T REAR OF THE PROPERTY ANDZE USED R A ST O GE SHED, AND A NEW
DETACHED GAR , 24 FT. BY 30 FT 0 BE CONSTRUC LOT 8, REVISED AUDITOR'S
SUBDIVISION NO. 1, THE SAME NG 945 MISSISSIPPI ET N.E., WITH THE
STIPULATION THAT E EXIS G STORAGE SHED BE ED TO T REAR OF THE LOT BY
THE TIME THE NEW GA IS COMPLETED.
UPON A VOICE V , ALL VO G AYE, CHAT HARRIS DECLARED THE MOTI RIED
UNANIMOUSL
Mr arris stated this item woul go to City Council on March 16.
1 2. PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDERATION OF A REQUEST FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT,
)( SP #81-01, BY PAUL GAYDOS AND DAVID MENKEN: Per Section 205.053, 3, D, to
allow a single family dwelling to be converted to a two family dwelling,
located on Lots 2 and 3, Block 1, Berlin Addition, the same being 4042 Main
Street N.E.
MOTION BY MR. OQUIST, SECONDED BY MR. SVANDA, TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON
SP #81-01 BY PAUL GAYDOS AND DAVID MENKEN.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRMAN HARRIS DECLARED THE PUBLIC HEARING
OPEN AT 7:58 P.M.
Mr. Boardman stated this is a request to convert a present single family structure
into a two-family structure. This property is located on Main Street in the
southern end of Fridley. Across the street is Columbia Heights. He stated that
the general make-up of the neighborhood is single family except for a triplex
and a duplex located at 4030 and 4022 Main St. N.E.
Mr. Boardman stated that, according to the Zoning Code, this conversion would
be an allowed use with a special use permit. He stated the petitioners, Mr. Gaydos
and Mr. Menken were in the audience.
Mr. Harris asked if the petitioners wished to make a statement.
Mr. Gaydos stated this is a Capp split-level home constructed in 1966. It has
1,040 sq. ft. on each floor, and*to convert it, all that is needed is to convert
the laundry room to a kitchen on the lower floor. There are. already two
separate entrances.
Ms. Bertrans stated she is the present owner. This house was constructed as a
single family home, and they have completely finished off both floors. Both
upstairs and downstairs have two bedrooms and a bath. It is just a matter of
converting the storage and laundry room into a kitchen and closing off the wall
area to the downstairs.
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MARCH 4, 1981 PAGE 4
Mr. Harris asked if they planned to split the utilities and have separate meters
for electrical and gas.
Mr. Gaydos stated they planned to do that.
Mr. Boardman stated he had no problem with the planned conversion. His main
concern was whether they want this kind of conversion done in this location or
whether they want to maintain it as a single family home.
Ms. Schnabel asked if the petitioners planned to live in it themselves or if they
planned to rent it out.
Mr. Gaydos stated they both plan to live in one level and rent out the other
lvel. He stated that houses today are so cost prohibitive that buying this
house and converting it to two living areas is a saviour for them, because they
can rent out the lower level until such a time as, hopefully, they can each
reside in a level. Otherwise, they would. not be able to buy a home for a number
of years and would have to live in apartments. _
Ms. Schnabel asked why the special use permit, rather than rezoning?
Mr. Boardman stated that both alternatives are given to the petitioners, but
Staff generally recommends a special use permit, primarily because the City
doesn't necessarily want that type of rezoning in that area. The special use
permit retains the R-1 zoning in a single family zone and gives more flexibility,
if the house should burn down, of granting another special use permit for another
duplex or maintain it as a single family home. If it was rezoned to R-2, then
anything could be built there.
Mr. Anthony Pikus, 4036 Main St. N.E., stated he is opposed to this conversion.
He stated the house was built for single family use. He stated he is very
unhappy with the triplex at 4030 Main St., but it was there when they bought
their home. He would not like to see another double occupancy home go in to
the north of them, as they would have the only single family home up to 4050
Main St.
Ms. Rosella Pikus stated that even though the new owners say they will live in
it, that doesn't mean they couldn't sell the house in a year, and then they
would have a big problem.
Mr. Donald Archer, 4057 Main St. N.E., stated he is also opposed to the conver-
sion. When one conversion starts, pretty soon there will be more, and the single
family area will be gone. He does not want the problem they have from the
triplex coming into the neighborhood.
Mr. George Steiskal, 4050 Main St. N.E., stated he would have no objection if
the house is owner -occupied.
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MARCH 4, 1981 PAGE 5
Mr. Gaydos stated he could understand the neighbors' concern if this was a
small single family residence that would require knocking out walls, etc. Even
with a single family home, an owner can have non -homestead and rent it out.
and guarantee nothing as far as tenants. He stated the neighbors' complaints
about 4030 Main St. are probably well justified. He stated economics is the
reason they are proposing this conversion.
Mr. Menken stated they both realize the neighborhood and how attractive the
home itself is. He is very impressed with the quality of the home and appreciated
the hard efforts of the owners to keep it so nice. He stated he is very excited
about living in this house for a number of years.
Ms. Pikus stated she has nothing against Mr. Gaydos and Mr. Menken, but if the
house is ever rented out, they would have rental on both sides of them.
MOTION BY MS. HUGHES, SECONDED BY MS. SCHNABEL, TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON
SP #81-01 BY PAUL GAYDOS AND DAVID MENKEN.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRMAN HARRIS DECLARED THE PUBLIC HEARING
CLOSED AT 8:26 P.M.
Ms. Hughes stated that, in terms of what they want to see in the future when the
new owners might sell, what is the best way to maintain the house? She wondered
what the advantages of split entry homes are to the City of Fridley. It was
obvious what advantages split entry homes have for the owners. Apparently, five
unrelated people can live together in that house and share the bedrooms and treat
it as two differentsunits without sealing off the Wo levels physically. The
City would have that kind of operation if these two people wanted to buy the
house and recruit more roomers. She stated the advantage to keeping that home
single family is that in the future, it would be a house suitable for a large
family --something needed periodically in this community. On the other hand, if
the Planning Commission granted the special use permit, and the owners do seal
off the two floors, they have permanently changed that home to a duplex regardless
of the zoning.
Ms. Hughes stated this is a problem this community is going to be seeing more
and more of, and what does the Planning Commission feel is the best approach?
Mr. Svanda stated that by locking a door or putting up some sheetrock to divide
the two floors, he did not see the permanence described by Ms. Hughes.
Mr. Oquist stated it is a nice large house, but would it be affordable to a large
family?
Ms. Schnabel stated that if the special use permit is granted and the house is
divided, if the house is sold in the future, a family could still buy it as a
single family home and all they would have to do is unlock the door or tear out
the sheetrock.
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MARCH 4, 1981 PAGE 6
Mr. Harris stated he could understand the neighbors' concerns about the upkeep,
loud noises, and all the rest of the things that happen with multiple dwellings.
However, how are people going to be able to afford a house otherwise and where
are these people going to live?
Ms. Hughes stated she was more in favor of handling these through special use
permits, than letting them happen without taking official notice.
MOTION BY MR. SVANDA, SECONDED BY MR. OQUI5T, TO RECOMMEND TO THE CITY COUNCIL
THE APPROVAL OF SPECIAL USE PERMIT, SP #81-01, BY PAUL GAYDOS AND DAVID MENKEN:
PER SECTION 205.053, 3, D, TO ALLOW A SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING TO BE CONVERTED TO
A TWO FAMILY DWELLING, LOCATED ON LOTS 2 AND 3, BLOCK 1, BERLIN ADDITION, THE
SAME BEING 4042 MAIN STREET N.E., WITH THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS:
1. THAT THE NEW OWNERS WORK WITH THE FIRE MARSHALL ON THE APPROPRIATE
EXITS FOR THE UNITS;
2. THAT THE NEW OWNERS OBTAIN THE PROPER PERMITS TO CONSTRUCT THE
DOWNSTAIRS KITCHEN AREA.
Mr. Harris stated that because this home is being converted into a.double, it
would also fall under the residential Housing Maintenance Code.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRMAN HARRIS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY.
Mr. Harris stated this would go to City Council on March 16.
3. PUBLIC HEARING: ONSIDERATION OF A PROPOSED NOIS ORDINANCE
blic hearing o en.
MOTION MR. OQUI T, SECONDED MR. 5VANDA, TO CEIVE INTO E RECORD MEMO
DATED MAR H 2, 19 1, FROM VIRGIL RRICK TO BILL D BLON RE: PROP ED NO E
ORDINANCE.
UPON A VOICE E, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIR HAR 5 DECLARED THE NOT D CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY.
Mr. Harris tated\ he had reviewed the whole N 'se Ordinance again./ Orifi problem
he had was/with th definition of "Noise", # the first page.
Ms. Schn el suggest that "excessive and unnecess ry" be inse7necessarA
ed in t e
definiti n of "noise" o read: "Noise me ns any exce sive andsound
not oc rring in the na ral environment/.."
Mr. Tris stated he would \e more comfortable with that xfin/ tion, because
he f It that was really want\they wer trying to accompiis w th this ordinan .
Ms/ Hughes and Mr. Oquist state thVy had no problems with tkt ;definition.
Sound Receiving Unit", #12 in th�Np finitions, was changedlto read: "A person,
nimal life, or property which isVVaf_fected by noise"
REGULAR MEETING OF MARCH 16, 1981
MOTIO by Councilman Schne
Commis ,on Meeting of Feb
Upon a oice vote, all v
unanimou ly.
2 RECEIVING THE MINUTES F T
CONS ID RAT I ON—W LS
PEC A ACCESSO Y BUIL NG MC
' AND A NEW I
Mr. Flora, Pub
district and th
the rear of the
furniture and t,
Mr. Flora stayed th
recommended 9pproval
be moved to he rear
PAGE 3
fiber to receive the minutes of the P1 ning
Geary 25, 1981,. Seconded by Councilm Barnette.
ing aye, Mayot\Nee declared the mot -on ca�ried
ING COMMISSION
rks Director, stated thisyaa
I
licant is proposing to rel
to be used for storage of i
struct a new garage.
Planning commission con idere4
with the stipulation t at the
f the lot by the tim the new
4. 1981:
ty is in an R-1 zoni
an existing garage t
tractor and antique
this request and has
fisting storage she
%arage is completed/.
Councilwom.n Moses aske if there was a thing in the ode which add sses i
the size f the garage comparison wi the size of t e house. Mr. Flora j
accessory wilding a this is
tot size
stated t y have require eVS
within e appropriate li
%
MOTION y Councilwoman Mosnc r with the recommenda ion the
Permit #80-13, wi h e stipulation
Planni g Commission and gri l Use
that he existing storage oved to the rear of the 1 by the time
the ew garage is completended by Councilman BarnettUpon a voice
vot , all voting aye, Mayoclared the motion carriedfu nimously.
Mr. Miller stated he was epresenting his father�nd as ed the
the City
p cedure from this pointora stated he should c"me in to
11 for a building permit.
CONSIDERATION OF A SPECIAL USE PERMIT SP #81-01, TO ALLOW A SINGLE
2 ll FAMILY DWELLING TO BE CONVERTED TO A TWO FAMILY DWELLING, 4042 MAIN
t
STREET BY PAUL GAYDOS AND DAVID MENKEN:
L. I
Mr. Flora, Public Works Director, stated this property is located on Main
Street just in the south boundary of Fridley. He stated the request is to
He
convert a present single family structure into.a two-family structure.
stated owners plan on splitting utilities and having separate meters and
i
they will live on one level and rent out the lower level.
i
Mr. Flora stated the Planning Commission felt the special use permit
if anything happened to the
provides better control by the V ty, since
structure, the zoning would still remain as an R-1 use, instead of having
the property rezoned to R-2.
Mr. Flora stated three persons opposed this request for the special use
in their area.
permit because they felt it was an expansion of the R-2 zoning
Mr. Flora stated, after discussion by the Planning Commission, it was
for a special use permit be approved with the
Y`
recommended the request
following stipulations: (1) That the new owners work with the Fire
Marshall on the appropriate exits for the units; and (2) That the new
to construct the downstairs kitchen area.
owners obtain the proper permits
Councilman Schneider asked if all the homes in this area on Main Street
be able
were to convert to duplexes, if the water and sewer system would
handle the additional capacity. He feet this may be a trend in the future
to
and, if it happened throughout the City, he was concerned if they would have
' i
problems.
I
j
f .-
64
REGULAR MEETING OF MARCH 16, 1981 PAGE 4
Mr. Flora stated it would depend on the location of the main lines, however,
in this particular case, it would be adequate.
Councilman Fitzpatrick stated there is some R-2 zoning in Columbia Heights
south of this location and, to his knowledge, it isn't very close. He
stated the situation is that everything.north of.this residence is R -1 -up
to 43rd, including a number of very fine homes, and everything south of
this location,'except for two proporties, is zoned'R-1. He further stated
properties across the street from this location, even though zoned R-2
in Columbia Heights, are used as R-1.
Councilwoman Moses asked Mr. Gaydos and Mr. Menken if they would live in the
top half and rent out the lower level. Mr. Gaydos stated it looks like it
will have to be that way for at least a year, however, they would like to
eventually have their own unit.
Councilwoman Moses pointed out communities are seeing a lot of people buying
homes jointly and feels this will be a trend where people will combine to
find affordable housing.
Councilman Fitzpatrick stated there were a few references that this was a
large house and lent itself into being divided into two units. He pointed
out it is not a large house, but a small house, however, it does have a
finished basement.
He stated there is 1,000 square feet of living space on one floor and the
finished basement.
Councilman Fitzpatrick stated he agrees with the comment made by Councilwoman
Moses, but the cost of any decent home at all is relatively expensive. He
stated he suspected the cost of this home was not higher than what would be
expected, and perhaps among the lower prices of housing available.
Councilwoman Moses asked if Councilman Fitzpatrick's point is that they
bought the home as a single family residence and should be able to afford
it as a single family home. Councilman Fitzpatrick stated his point is
that it really isn't a large house.
Councilwoman Moses stated this split entry design is very conductive to
conversion. She pointed out it is getting impossible for people to afford
housing, however, if this was approved it would set a precedent.
Mr. Gaydoes asked if the size of the lot wouldn't limit future R-1 property
being converted to R-2. Mr. Flora stated a special use permit can be applied
for in any zone and there is a system for zoning for types of densities.
He stated the question here is if the Council allows a single family dwelling
to be used by two separate families, with a special use permit, versus
rezoning a particular lot to a larger density.
Councilman Schneider stated he is sympathetic to the petitioners, however,
! the problem is roughly the 9,000 other homes in the City where these persons
have purchased homes specifically based on the concept of so much land and
one family per unit. He felt the Council owes protection to the people who
assumed the zoning code would stand and if they bought in an R-1 zoning
district, they would have R-1 housing in that district. He stated he knows
this doesn't address the problem of the housing costs.
Councilwoman Moses stated Fridley is not an area where there is a large
turnover and as people get older, they won't be able to move because there
aren't small enough units or small enough payments Where it would be possible
for them to move. She felt they will be facing the same dilemma and it is
a critical problem everyone is facing.
t
A
REGULAR MEETING OF MARCH 16, 1981
PAGE 5
Councilman Schneider stated he didn't disagree with what Councilwoman
Moses was saying, however, there are thousands of people who will or will
not face this problem at some point. He felt, however, they should have
some security regarding noise, density, traffic, etc. based on the zoning
that was established.
Councilman Fitzpatrick stated several references have been made to the
cost and monthly payments, but pointed out they are being asked to consider
the special use permit and the cost, in his estimation, is not special as
the petitioners aren't purchasing exhorbitant expensive homes that they
would need special consideration. Councilman Fitzpatrick stated his point
is that it isn't a special consideration, as it would apply to every case
in the City.
Mr. Anthony Pikus, 4036 Main Street, didn't feel the house payment should
enter into the request for the special use permit. He felt it comes down
to the point if they can afford to live there, and if they can't, they
probably shouldn't purchase the house. He pointed out when he purchased
his house 15 years ago, he checked into the zoning.
Councilwoman Moses stated she is looking at the total society in terms
of housing. She pointed out, unless you are making $40,000 to $50,000
a year, you would have a hard time moving and making the house payments
at the prices and interest rates today.
Mr. Newman, representing the City Attorney's Office, stated the courts
have held that on a special use permit, if the zoning ordinance require-
ments have been meet, the Council doesn't have the broadest range of discre-
tion. Since this special use permit is the first of its kind to be addressed
by the Council, their position in the future would be based on how this
request is handled.
Councilman Fitzpatrick stated that is the point he is trying to make,
unless the Council is prepared to honor similar requests, they aren't
prepared to honor this one. He stated a special use permit request should
have something specialabout it, and his point is, there is nothing special
about this request. He stated he was sensitive to the issues Councilwoman
Moses raises, but didn't think, or at least, isn't prepared to make that
decision in general.
Councilman Barnette felt this issue would be a good item for the Community
Development Commission to research and review. Councilman Barnette felt,
throughout the country, some moves will have to be made on housing. He
i stated he would like to see some input from the Commission to make some
plans for the City to follow in this area.
Mr. Menken stated both he and Mr. Gaydos are conscientous persons and wanted
to be honest about their plans to separate this home into two units so if
there are any different requirements for taxes, they wanted to pay their
fair share. He stated he can see where there is concern about putting more
i persons in a dwelling unit, but felt this home lent itself well to this
type of conversion.
Mayor Nee stated the problem is once a special use permit is granted for this
type of conversion, a precedent is set and felt something should be included
in the zoning ordinance to permit this in an orderly way to reduce the
negative impact.
Councilman Fitzpatrick stated he appreciated their upfront manner of
( handling this matter, but was going to move for denial as the characteriza-
tion of this area is R-1 and didn't see any overriding reason for making
special exceptions in this case.
MLI
REGULAR MEETING OF MARCH 16, 1981
i
PAGE 6
MOTION by Councilman Fitzpatrick to deny Special Use Permit #81-01 on the
basis it is out of character with the R-1 surroundings of the property.
Seconded by Councilman Schneider.
Councilman Schneider stated he appreciated their honesty, and didn't know
quite how to handle the situation, as he felt it was unfair to deny the
request, but also unfair to the neighborhood to approve it.
Councilwoman Moses stated if it wasn't for the precedent the Council would
be setting, she would vote against the motion. She stated, being in real
estate, she can understand what they are up against and this is a problem
the Council will have to deal with. She stated, based on the comments from
the City Attorney, if this request is approved, the Council will be obligated
to grant the same request to anyone else who applies.
Mr. Gaydos stated they could have proceeded with the rezoning and indicated
their main goal is having two separate units.
Councilman Barnette stated this same argument was made in last Saturday's
paper regarding an area in Kenwood Parkway. He stated he hoped a reasonable
solution could be found that would meet..,with everyone's satisfaction."
UPON A VOICE VOTE TAKEN ON THE ABOVE MOTION, all voted aye, and Mayor Nee
declared the motion carried unanimously.
MOTION by Councilwoman Moses to waive the $175 filing fee. and reimburse the
applicants for Special Use Permit #81-01. Seconded by Councilman Fitzpatrick.
Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried
unanimously.
MOTION by Councilwoman Moses to receive the minutes of the Planning Commission
Meeting of March 4, 1981. Seconded by Councilman Fitzpatrick. Upon a voice
vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimoulsy.
3 RECEIVING THE MINUTES OF THE APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING OF FEBRUARY 10.198L:
3A
Mr. 9
to th
Cri ti
purpo
Mr. Fl
adbpte(
a requ
then o
I
ora, Public Works Director, to
Interim Development Regulat n.
al Area for reduction of the
es �f enclosing a porch for in
�;"a stated staff has also revie
L a Critical Areas Plan, as par
i ment to apply some of there
�/thsiisa reques for a
r the Mississippi River
ired 100 foot setba k to
llation of a solar hearin,
d this request and th
of the Comprehensive
lations within the pl
oc eded to review the public pur ose served by these
&idor
feet for
rea.
ty hasn't
but have
Mr. Flora
irements.
Mr. F/ora tated the Appeals Comoission h also reviewedt is variance
reque t and recommended approval/. \\
MOTI N by Co cilman Fitzpatriok to concur w th the reco
App als Col ion and grant fie variance to a Interim
Re lations fo the htississip i River Corridor riticalj
4, (B-2) to red ce to 70 fee the requirement tat in u
di tricts no str cture or ro d shall be placed n less t
f m the normal h'ghwater m k of the river, and o le s
e blufflines, to allow an existing dwelling to a cl se
eck on Lot 11, B1 k 5, P rson's Craigway Estate co
same being 7806 Ald Way . E. Seconded by Counci oma
� ndlti n of the
Develop_ nt i
,rea, Sec ion G,
an develo ed
an 100 fee
than 40 fee from
part of an isting
d Addition, e
Moses.
61
2
ITY LA= F IDLEY
6431 UNIVERSITY AVENUE N.E., FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA 65432
TELEPHONE ( 812)571-3450
CITY COUNCIL March 20, 1981
ACTION TAKEN NOTICE
I;u25 iin CK��-�or�ti
Paul G. Gaydos
3607 37th Avenue N.E.
Apartment 207
Minneapolis, Mn 55421
On March 16, 1981 the Fridley City Council officially
' a MI00(�i(k► k t)Wdenier- a. -Special �z�;--SP #81-01
with the stipulations listed below:
1. That your fee of $175.00 be returned to you (receipt No. 2062)
cc: David Loren Menken
2200 Midland Grove Road
Unit 307
Roseville, Mn 55113
315- &jjv v,�
w t4 Tiq— 1154' er W5
Sy -11-+
If you have any questions regarding the above action, please call the
Community Development Office at 571-3450.
Sincerely,
'ERROLD L. WAfZMAN
JLBJde c Planner
Please revie%q the noted stipulations, sign the statement below, and return
one copy to the City at Fridley.
4 C'`
ize 7 -
Concur w i o action tat:cr►.