VAR 09.89r~ CITY OF FRIDL.CnY, SUBJECT
MINNESOTA COMMISSION APPLICATION
REW@F-W
1 orime t/Uro on. 1ef1jumulieu j rn9ti Approved by Dofe.`I
We the undersigned do not want the variance changed for the yard setback from
35 feet to 31 feet for 4795 3rd st N.E.
.1
All houses fro o e city mats on 3rd street are set back tot a orre t
variance.
z AI
i - s
Wo
7-3;>
�3
"i-03 -»
City of Fri(]]( -,yr
AT THE TOP OF THE TWINS
4,-�-__ COMMUNITY. DEVELOPMENT DIV.
PROTECTIVE INSPECTION SEC.
`-"-1 CITY HALL FRIDLEY • 55432
612 -MO -3A!iO
SUBJECT '
APPLICATION TO BOARD OF APPEALS
NUMBER
910-F23
REV.
1
DATE
3/21/75
PAGE OF
.1 2
APPROVED BY
800
Name�
kokp f ea /
�ddrW/ess -.5'RPhone
Legal
Description
Lot No.
30
Block No.
00
or Addn.
pl/h®goA
Variance Request(s); including stated hardships (attach plat
showing building, variances, etc., where applicable)
or survey of property
Date
Meeting �Date
Fee
Receipt No.
Signa
Comments & Recommendations by 4V
the Board of Appeals
a
s
City Council Action and Date
C-99
0-115 ORDINANCE #677 8/5/70
IFor the vacation of a 60 foot right of way for a street described as follows:
That pert of 48th Avenue N.E. between 3rd Street N.E. and Unive Fsity Avenue
N.E., that ties adjacent to and South of Lot 16, Block 1, Plymouth Addition,
and adjacent to and North of Lot 30, Block 8, Plymouth Addition,
All lying in the South Half of Section 26, T-30, R-24, City of Fridley,
County of Anoka, Minnesota.
Be and is hereby vacated except that the City of Fridley retains easements
for drainage and utility purposes on the South 45 feet of the North 55 feet
over the street herein described and vacated.
IN
The said Vacation has been made in conformance with Minnesota Statutes and
pursuant to Section 12.07 of the City Charter and Appendix C of the City Code
shall be so amended.
0-116 ORDINANCE #686 10/2/78
For the vacation of an easement described as follows:
The 10 foot utility easement between Lots 24 and 25, BLock 2, Meadowmoor
Terrace,
ALL lying in the North HaLf of Section 12, T-30, R-24, City of Fridley,
County of Anoka, Minnesota.
Be and is hereby vacated.
The said Vacation has been made in conformance with Minnesota Statutes and
pursuant to Section 12.07 of the City Charter and Appendix C of the City Code
shall be so amended.
0-117 ORDINANCE #689 12/4/7
For the vacation of streets and aLLeys as described as follows:
County Road "R", Lakeshore Avenue, Railroad Avenue, Oxford Road, and aLL the
eL Lays in Blocks 1, 2 and 3, in that porta on of Mi l l Company I a Addi ti on to
Fridley Park, Lying in Hillcrest Addition,
All located in the South Half of Section 10, T-30, R-24, City of Fridley,
County of Anoka, Minnesota.
Be and is hereby vacated.
The said Vacation has been made in conformance with Minnesota Statutes and
pursuant to Section 12.07 of the City Charter and Appendix C of the City Code
shall be so amended.
City of F THE TWINS
'• AT THE TOP OF THE TWINS
susitcr
APPLICATION TO BOARD OF APPEALS
s,
- - _____ COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIV.
L PROTECTIVE INSPECTION SEC.
1 !
1 i 0---1 CITY HALL FRIDLEY 55432
,`J 612-560.3450
(Staff Report)
NUMNER
910-F23
REV.
1
DATE
3/21/75
PAGE OF
2 2
APPROVED by
Soo
Staff Comments
Board members notified of meeting by
;7 y List members,
date notified, and "Yes" or "No" for plans to
attend hearing. Plan
Name
Date To Attend
Pearson making appeal and the following property
owners having
property within
200
feet notified:
By Whom
Name
Date
Phone or Mail
Notified
City of Columbia Heights
q
1-1
590 -40th Avenue N.E.
Nathan Geurts,4110 Blaisdell Ave. Mpls 55409
_
Ms. Stella Dalos,4815 3rd St.
. M/M Alvin Hans,4827 3rd St. N.E.
Arvilla Lepinski,4839 3rd St.
T
- M/M Mathew Szczech-4820 3rd St.
M/M Warren Thomas,4808 3rd St.
- Gordon Hedlund, 1255 Pike Lake Drive
New Brighton, Mn 55112
- Rachael & Jeffrey Kubal ,4780 3rd St.
M/M Stanley Thorson -4768 3rd St.
- Ruth Partyka-4756 3rd St.
M/M Joseph Novak, 4769 2 1/2 St.
- Lavena Cota,4781 2 1/2 St. N.E.
Joan Haugen, 4751 3rd St.
- M/M Cecil Schlader, 4763 3rd St.
M/M Stanley Thorson -4775 3rd St.
- M/M Joseph Sinigaglio, 4715 3rd St.
M/M Robert F. Carl, 4831 31st Avenue South
M.,1.• Mn C.C.a17
.N . .... -- .. .
CITY* OF FRIDLEY
6431 UNIVERSITY AVENUE N.E., FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA 55432
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
Notice is hereby given that the
will conduct a public hearing in
Avenue Northeast at 7:30 P.M. on
following:
TELEPHONE ( 812)571-3450
September 7, 1979
Appeals Commission of the City of 'Fridley
the City Council Chambers at 6431 University
Tuesday, September 18,,,l979; in regard .to..the
Request for a variance pursuant to Chapter 205
of the Fridley City Code, to reduce the front
yard setback from the required 35 feet to 31 feet,
so that a large tree can be laved during the
construction of a new dwelling, located on Lot
30, Block 8, Plymouth Addition, together with
Half of vacated 48th Avenue N.E. and all vacated
alley lying adjacent to said Lot 30, the same
being 4795 3rd Street N.E.
Notice is hereby give that all persons having an interest therein will be
given an opportunity to be heard at the above time and place.
VIRGINIA SCHNABEL
CHAIRWOMAN
APU.AL$ CQ1,9MI$$.IQN
Note; The. Appeals CommissiQn will have the final action on this request,
unlesa there are objections from surrounding neighb.ors, the City Staff, or
the petitioner does not agree with. the Commission's decision. If any of
these events occur, the request will continue to the City Council through
the Planning Commission with only a recommendation from the Appeals Com,nission.
Item #6 September 18, 1979
ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF REPORT
4795 3rd Street N.E.
A. PUBLIC PURPOSE SERVED BY REQUIREMENT:
Section 205.053, 4A, requires a front yard setback 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.
B. STATED HARDSHIP:
`(mould like to save a big Chinese Elm tree."
C. ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF REVIEW:
This house is to be located on a 38.12 foot lot and a 30 foot vacated street
with an easement retained over the northerly 25 feet of the vacated street,
making the placement of the house limited. They have positioned the house
to avoid cutting down a big Chinese Elm tree and also to take advantage of
the street curbing that is existing to avoid the expense of a curb cut.
The house to the south is set at 34.3 feet (verified) from the front property
line and the house to the north is set at or about the 35 foot setback (per
the aerial photograph).
Item #6 September 18, 1979
ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF REPORT
4795'3rd Street N.E.
A. PUBLIC PURPOSE SERVED BY REQUIREMENT:
Section 205.053, 4A, requires a front yard setback 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.
B. STATED HARDSHIP:
'Would like to save a big Chinese Elm tree-"
C. ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF REVIEW:
This house is to be located on a 38.12 foot lot and a 30 foot vacated street
with an easement retained over the northerly 25 feet of the vacated street,
making the placement of the house limited. They have positioned th.e house
to avoid cutting down a big Chinese Elm tree and also to take advantage of
the street curbing that is existing to avoid the expense of a curb cut.
The house to the south is set at 34.3 feet (verified) from the front property
line and the housa to the north is set at or about the 35 foot setback (per
the aerial photograph).
r
APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING, SEPTEMBER 18,_1979 PAGE 14
she.felt very strongly about this, by putting these people through something that
was unecessary. She did not think Council could arrive at an easier or better solution.
Mr. Kemper said they should make a list for City Council so thev can be aware of the
problems and why this commission acted as they did. The two reasons were:
1. The hardships were not well defined and these hardships .may be self-
inflicted, for instance because of the pool position.
2. There have been no homes in MelodyYManor granted front yard variances
and this may set a Precedent.. Council should be aware of this and
decide if they want to start this.
Ms. Schnabel said she wanted to send to Council another item regarding this, but
would discuss it under Other Business.
Mr. Barna gave his opinion on what a hardship isJie felt 9t was a situation that affects
that particular request and if this request will affect the petitioner's life style.
He said in this case there could be some design change, but it could mean losing the
pool or have the addition end right at the pool edge. This was a financial and life
style hardship.
Mr. Kemper said he agreed it was a hardship on properly designing an addition, but
did not feel the City Attorney. was attempting to address that, but if there was a real
need.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, MR. KEMPER AND MR. BARNA VOTING AYE, MS. GABEL AND MS. SCHNABEL'
VOTING NAY, CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE MOTION A TIE.
6. VARIANCE REQUEST PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 205 OF THE-FRIDLEY CITY CODE, TO REDUCE THE
FRONT YARD SETBACK FROM THE REQUIRED 35 FEET TO 31 FEET, SO THAT A LARGE TREE CAN
BE SAVED DURING THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW DWELLING, LOCATED ON LOT 30, BLOCK 8,
PLYMOUTH ADDITION, TOGETHER WITH HALF OF VACATED 48TH AVENUE N.E. AND ALL VACATED
ALLEY LYING ADJACENT TO SAID LOT 30, THE SAME BEING 4795 3RD STREET NE, (Request
by Robert Carl, -4831 31st Avenue South, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55417).
MOTION by Mr. Barna, seconded by Ms. Gabel to open the Public Hearing.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY, PUBLIC HEARING OPENED AT 9:43 P.M.
Chairwoman Schnabel read the staff report:
ADMINISTRATIVE STArr REPORT
4795' 3rd Street N.E.
A. PUBLIC PURPOSE SERVED BY REQUIREMENT:
Section 205.053, 4A,. -requires a front yard setback 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.
APPEALS COMMITTION MEETING, SEPTEMBER 18.1979 PAGE 13
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 9:26 P.M.
s
Mr. Barna said with the curve of the street and the layout of the adjoining homes he
could not imagine wher- the absent objecting neighbor lived, except possibly the one
to the east. He said h could not see where a 6 or 8 foot addition would cut off your
view. He stated he can of see the objection,but there is one.
MOTION by Mr. Barna to r commend to Council approval of the variance request pursuant to
Chapter 205 of the Fridle City Code, to reduce the front yard setback from the required
35 feet to 27.2 feet, to a low an 8 foot by 20 foot addition to an existing attached
garage, so that part of th existing garage can be used for a familyom addition,
Located on Lot 31, Block 4, Melody Manor 4th Addition. /
Mr. Kemper said he would like to discuss it more before they/send it. He wanted to
know if any front yard setbac had been given in Melody Man
Mr. Barna thought perhaps one o two, but was not sure. M Moravetz said none that he
was aware of.
Mr. Kemper pointed out that this w* a well known neigVorhood of several hundred homes
and all have an apparent 35 foot se back without ques on.
Ms. Schnabel said she questioned theetbacks. Thi particular home site sits between
Ballet and Jackson Street on Melody 've. The ho ses between 73rd and Ballet on
Melody seem more irregular in the setba ks. Thi may be only a visual conception due
to the style of the homes.
Mr. Barna said he got a jogging effect goi4 From a 2 -story home to a rambler.
Mr. Kemper said he did not mean to draw a on lusion and place Melody Manor on a
pedestal and not allow variances. /salthi was an important decision, do we want
to start allowing variances here.
Mr. Moravetz brought out the aerial of th' area. The area was complete.when
the photos were taken.
Mr. Kemper asked the board if the was a real h
and if the addition was build or not,,was that a
The commission looked at the erial photos and concurr
the front yards does occur; ut that does not say they
Mr. Kemper said the
Second by Mr. Kemper c
this variance request/.
has done a good job of
the motion made by Mr. Barna to
. It already was a large.home
ip.
a visual jogging affect of
e not 35 feet.
the home.
to Council to approve
Ms. Gable said she/was not firmly convinced there was a hardship\.,, She said she had no
problem with the ariance or setting a precedent allowing varian�'-es here, but with
the fact there Vas no hardship proven.
Ms. Schnabel aid she felt the same way. She thought the addition could be added unto
the rear w' out any problems. She felt the real hardship was with the objections
received from the neighbor and the request by Council people to hear this. She said
APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING, SEPTEMBER 18, 1979 PAGE 15
B. STATED HARDSHIP:
14ould like to save a big ClUnese Elm tree•"
C. ADMINISTRATIVE STArF REVIEW:.
This house is to be located on a 38.12 foot lot and a 30 foot vacated street
with an easement retained over the northerly 25 feet of the vacated street,
making the placement of the house limited. They have positioned tha house
to avoid cutting down a big. Chinese Elm tree and also to take advantage of
the street curbing that is existing to avoid the expense of a curb cut.
The house to the south is set at 34.3 feet (verified) from the front property
line and the hours to the north is set at or about the 35 foot setback (per
the aerial photograph).
Mr. Robert Carl addressed the commission. He said if the garage was put at the normal
front yard setback the tree would be 4 feet into the 2nd stall of the garage. The
garage door would open on to the vacated 48th -Avenue with the driveway coming off of
3rd Street.
Ms. Schnabel asked Mr. Carl if he m uld be building and living in the home.
He said yes. He has put on option on the lot contigent on getting a building permit.
He stated they would be building the garage and basement and placing,a pre -constructed
home, which they have already purchased.
Ms. Schnabel asked if the house could be reversed on the lot. This would allow them
to place in on the lot without losing the tree or needing a variance.
Mr. Carl said then their home would be facing into their neighbors, giving no privacy.
Mr. Kemper asked if the plans►ere available im a mirror image.
Mr. Carl said they have already purchased the home and itwas already built.
Mr. Schnabel said the other problem she has with this request was that every other
house in this area has the garage to the side or rear of the home, not up front like
this one. It does not seem compatible. She said this was a buildable lot and with
this house plan it has been limited. The present curb cut does not have -to be used
either.
Mr. Carl said the only other option was to have the garage door open onto 3rd Street.
That seems less desirable because with this plan they would put windows in with shutters
to dress up the garage.
Ms. Schnabel said they consider this a buildable lot and he has set the limitations by
already purchasing a home to put on it. Any other style home would have worked and
fit into the neighborhood.
Mr. Carl pointed out they are trying to conserve as much of the backyard as possible.
With the trees already located along the property line and adding a patio this
would give a very private area.
APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING, SEPTEMBER 18, 1979 PAGE 16
Ms. Gable said she thought it was a greater hardship to have a house and no place to
put it then it was to have a tree to work around.
Mr. Moravetz pointed that the northerly 25 feet (Mr. Carl questioned if it was 20 or +
25 feet) must not be used for any permanent structures. It may be landscaped.
Mr. Kemper asked if the variance was denied, would they still put the home on this lot.
Mr. Carl said he would still go ahead and purchase the lot, cut down the tree and put
his home on it.
Ms. Schnabel asked if anyone in the audience had comments.
Mr. Stanley Thorson, 4775 3rd Street, came forward.
�Thorson
Mr. presented a petition from the neighbors stating they did not want the
ariance request allowed.
MOTION by Mr. Kemper, seconded by Ms. Gable, to receive Petition.#
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY.
Chairwoman Schnabel read the petition:
"We the undersigned do not want the variance changed for the yard setback from
35 feet to 31 feet for 4795 3rd Street. All homes from 49th Avenue to the City limits
on 3rd Street are setback to the correct footage".
The petition was signed by 23 people.
Mr. Thorson said the petitioner was worried about losing one tree,' but when the survey
was taken for this lot he lost 7. He explained he planted a row of trees and had been
maintaining them for quite a few years and finds out now they are one foot on the lot
next door. He said if the trees are gone (meaning from his side of the property line)
he did not want them there at all. He said if this variance goes through, he will
chop down the trees.
The Commission advised him to get legal advise first before he took such action.
Mr. Thorson also wanted to know why .this lot did not have to be 75 feet like the other
new lots in the City.
Mr. Moravetz said anything latted�after 1965 is required to have 75 foot lots. Anything
plotted before 1965 -and sti l existing was grandfathered in and therefore could be
smaller..
Mr. Thorson asked why a neighbor of his 10 years ago could not get this street vacated
and now- it was-.
The commission replied they could not answer or give reasons as to what happened 10 years
ago.
Mr. Moravetz said he thought perhaps the feeling of the Council 10 years ago was to keep
something (the now vacated street) in case it was needed. . The feeling now was to
APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING. SEPTEMBER 18, 1979 PAGE_ 17
-give it back and get in on the tax roll.
r
Mr. Thorson said he also received a letter on November 19, 1977 from the City stating
' this lot (38.12 feet) was up for sale. He wanted to know why the lettet. did not state
the street adjoining this lot could be vacated at a later date, thus making a buildable
lot. He also wanted to know how this plan got through with the garage facing 3rd Street.
A year ago the same type of request for the house across the street was denied.
Ms. Schnabel said that was rejected because it was on a 40 feet lot.
Mr. Thorson said he just put a large add-ition on his house and was sorry he did. He
would sell other wise, because he was so disturbed about this mess.
2
Mr. Kemper asked what his main objection was.
Mr. Thorson said because there was a street vacated and he was unaware that at the time
the adjoining lot was put up for sale the street could have been vacated, making a
larger lot.
Mr. Kemper said he would like to point out that Mr. Carl was not part of that vacation.
Mr. Thorson said he realized that and was not blaming him.
Mr.Kemper said they were here to discuss the variance request and asked if he was objecting
against the.variance request or his earlier stated objection.
Mr. Thorson said both.
The petitioner asked what was required to withdraw his variance request.
The commission said he could withdraw at anytime, now or latter.
Mr. Carl withdrew his variance request, saying they would cut down only the Chinese Elm
tree and no more changes would take place.
The Appeals Commission recognized Mr. Carl's withdrawl and informed the audience this
request would go no further. Mr. Carl can build on this lot, so long as he meets all
codes and building requirements.
Mr. Thorson asked if the garage could still be put on 3rd Street.
Ms. Schnabel said yes, as it was a buildable lot.
Mr. Thorson said he was extremely upset about this. It would lower property values by
$10-20,000. His $20,000 addition was money thrown away.
OTHER BUSINESS•
Ms. Schnabel said she would like to refer an item to Council with regards to item #5.
She said the aninimity of an objection was not a desirable factor, and that has placed
a real burden on this board when making a decision. The fact that people can call
and complain to us was hard for the petitioner to accept when they.were not aware of
the calls. She thought perhaps phone calls should not be used when making a decision.
Mr. Moravetz suggested that they could state in the Notice of Public Hearing that any
APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING, SEPTEMBER 18, 1979 PAGE 18
comments on the request must be given in person or writing. He said it was one thing
for staff to get- a phone call and able to check it out, but when a board was required..
to review and make a decision on the spot that puts an extra burden on them. This
would also eliminate any dank . calls. It
Mr. Barna added the letters should be signed.
Ms. Schnabel said this was not the first time she has received phonecalls.
Mr. Kemper asked Mr. Moravetz to get a legal opinion on this.
Ms. Schnabel said this would make it clear to everyone,when getting a phone call on
a request on what to say to the caller. The staff, board members or Council members
could say the notice states comments are to be received this way and only this way.
She said this may still make some people feel intiminated,.which is not right,
but right now no one knows of a better way to handle a request.
Ms. Schnabel said they should ask Council to approve re -wording of the Public Hearing
notice to read: Notice is hereby given that all persons having an interest therein
will be given an opportunity to be heard at the above time and place. All comments
must be given either in person or in writing and_signed.
Mr. Barna thought a "hardship" should be defined better.- What vias a hardship in
Riverview Terrace may not be one in Innsbrook North. He thought each request should
be looked at separately, the life style -for the petitioner would give it a more
unique* quality.
The other members said they were uncomfortable in deciding on what someone'e life
style was or should be. There are too many unknown factors.
ADJOURNMENT:
MOTION by Mr. Barna, seconded by Ms. Gable to adjourn the September 18, 1979, meeting
of the Appeals Commission.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE MEETING ADJOURNED
AT 10:45 PoM.
Respectfully submitted:
ZA
'�/422
aula R. Long, Recordi g Secretary