VAR 96-19C11YOF
FRIDLEY
FRIDLEY MUNICIPAL CENTER • 6431 UNIVERSITY AVE. N.E. FRIDLEY, MN 55432 • (612) 571-3450 • FAX (612) 571-12217
CITY COUNCIL
ACTION TAKEN NOTICE
September 3, 1996
Carl and Margaret Christenson
1327 - 66th Avenue N.E.
Fridley, MN 55432
Dear Mr. and Mrs. Christenson:
On August 26,_ 1996, the Fridley City Council officially approved your request for a
variance, VAR #96-19, to increase the height of a fence in the side yard from seven
feet to eight feet three inches, on Lot 7, Dennis Addition, generally located at 1327
66th Avenue N.E.
This variance is contingent upon one stipulation:
1. The variance is valid only for the life of the fence and if the fence is ever
damaged or removed to greater than 50 percent of its value, a new variance
shall be applied for an approved.
You have one year from the date of City Council action to initiate construction. If you
cannot begin construction in time, ':a must submit a letter requesting an extension at
least thfee weeks prior to the expiration date.
If you have any questions regarding the above action, please call me at 572-3590.
Sincerely,
Barbara Dacy, AICP
Community Development Director
BD/dw
Please review the above, sign the statement below and return one copy to the City of
Fridley Planning Department by September 17, 1996.
Concur with action taken.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF AUGUST 26, 1996 PAGE 15
Mr. Schrader stated that theywish to recoup some of the
financial losses for the assess is by having the roadway
restored. He thanked Council for eir time.
4. VARIANCE REQUEST, VAR #96-19, BY CARL AND MARGARET
CHRISTENSON, TO INCREASE THE HEIGHT OF A FENCE IN THE SIDE
YARD FROM 7 FEET TO 8 FEET 3 INCHES, GENERALLY LOCATED AT 1327
66TH AVENUE N.E. (WARD 2):
Councilman Schneider stated that he has no problem with the
variance. Letters were also received from adjacent property owners
in favor of this variance.
MOTION by Councilman Schneider to grant Variance Request, VAR
#96-19, with the following stipulation: (1) that the variance is
valid only for the life of the fence, and if the fence is ever
damaged or removed to greater than fifty percent of its value, a
new variance shall be applied for and approved. Seconded by
Councilman Billings. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee
declared the motion carried unanimously.
5. VARIANCE REQUEST, VAR #96-20, BY MURPHY WAREHOUSE, TO ALLOW A
SIGN PAINTED DIRECTLY ON A BUILDING, GENERALLY LOCATED AT 4850
MAIN STREET N.E. (WARD 3): i
Councilwoman Bolkcom stated that she is not against the s' but
she wanted the petitioner to know there are neighborhoo concerns
about the traffic and trucks. She asked that the pet' oner.notify
the operators of the delivery trucks to use 57t venue and not
53rd Avenue.
Mr. Richard Murphy, the petitioner, spa d that he heard the
discussion earlier as it related to. Depot. It is not their
intent to be a nuisance to the neighb hood. He has gone out of
the way to bring tax revenue to th City, and he does everything
possible to lessen the impact of industrial building. He said
he would talk to the delivery rsons, as there is an area where
the trucks can pull off Main reet and onto their property so as
not to cause the neighbors a trouble.
Councilwoman Bolkcom st ed that Murphy Warehouse has very nice
buildings. It is a go d business for the City, but it also has to
represent the people ho live in that neighborhood.
MOTION by Councxlwoman Bolkcom to grant Variance Request, VAR
#96-20 with t e following stipulations: (1) approval of this
variance pre udes the petitioner from installing a free-standing
sign; and (2) the petitioner shall maintain the sign in an
attractiv manner. Seconded by Councilwoman Jorgenson. Upon a
voice v te, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried
unani ously_
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF AUGUST 26, 1996 PAGE 16
8. ESTABLISH A PUBLIC HEARING FOR SEPTEMBER 16, 1996, FOR THE
SALE OF EXCESS PROPERTY LOCATED AT 61ST AVENUE AND 7TH STREE
(WARD 1):
MOTION by Councilman Billings to table this item. Secon d by
Councilwoman Jorgenson. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye Mayor
Nee declared the motion carried unanimously.
12. LICENSES:
MOTION by Councilman Billings to approve the license as submitted
and as on file in the License Clerk's office, with e exception of
the auction license for Michael Servetus Unit rian Society.
Seconded by Councilman Schneider. Upon a voice vote, all voting
aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unani ously.
MOTION by Councilman Billings to concur wit the issuance of an
auction license for Michael Servetus Unitar'an Society. Seconded
by Councilwoman Jorgenson.
Councilman Billings stated that this au ion is an annual event.
Every year he receives telephone c lls from people -in the
neighborhood about parking on the str is or .blocking driveways so.
residents cannot have anyone at thei home on Labor Day. In the
opinion of people in the neighbo ood, it is almost a public
nuisance.
Councilwoman Jorgenson stated
resolve this issue with the ne
Councilwoman Bolkcom felt
traffic control.
t she felt the church needed to
orhood.
t there needed to be a means for
Councilman Billings stated that he would strongly encourage that a
letter be sent to the chu h saying that they need to apply in late
June or early July for e license. If there are questions that
need to be addressed, ere is adequate time to come before the
Council. He asked tha staff contact the church and advise them of
the discussion this e ning.
UPON A ROLL CALL OTE TAKEN ON THE ABOVE MOTION, Councilwoman
Jorgenson, Council an Schneider, Councilwoman Bolkcom and Mayor Nee
voted in favor o the motion. Councilman Billings voted against
the motion. May r Nee declared the motion carried.
21B. APPOINTM2�TT: CITY EMPLOYEE:
Mr. Burns, ity Manager, stated that he is pleased to recommend
Eric Hahn or appointment as Interpretive Specialist at Springbrook
Nature Ce ter. Eric has a Bachelor of Science degree in biology
from In ana University and a teaching license in science from the
Univer ty of Minnesota. He worked �at the Minnesota Zoo as an
interpretive guide and was recently employed as a Naturalist for
the Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board where he taught and
conducted interpretive tours. He also has experience as a master
r
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF AUGUST 26, 1996 PAGE 2
2. ORDINANCE NO. 1073 UNDER SECTION 1207 OF THE CITY CHARTER TO
VACATE STREETS AND ALLEYS AND TO AMEND APPENDIX C OF T CITY
CODE (INDUSTRIAL EQUITIES, 73RD AVENUE AND NORTHC DRIVE)
( WARD 1) :
Mr. Burns, City Manager, stated that this ordice provides a
corrected legal description of the Ind trial Equities
easement vacation.
WAIVED THE SECOND READING AND ADOPTED, /ORDINANCE NO. 1073 ON
SECOND READING AND ORDERED PUBLICATION'.
NEW BUSINESS:
3. VARIANCE REQUEST, VAR #96-0, BY THE CITY OF FRIDLEY, TO
REDUCE THE FRONT YARD SETB CK FROM 35 FEET TO 25 FEET, AND TO
REDUCE THE SIDE YARD SETBACK ON A CORNER LOT FROM 35 FEET TO
30 FEET, ALL IN ORDER,/ -TO ALLOW THE EXPANSION OF AN EXISTING
WELLHOUSE, GENERALLY OCATED AT 7345 HIGHWAY 65 (WARD 2):
Mr. Burns, City anager, stated that at the time construction
began on the ltration plant for Well No. 12, the City was
unaware that he Existing well was a non -conforming structure.
The City s proceeded with construction with the knowledge
that the new facility will be no closer to Highway 65 (25
feet) t an the existing well house. The side yard variance of
five et is a variance for the existing well house.
ITEM WAS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA AND PLACED ON
REGULAR AGENDA.
4. VARIANCE REQUEST, VAR #96-19, BY CARL . AND MARGARET
CHRISTENSON, TO INCREASE THE HEIGHT OF A FENCE IN THE SIDE
-YARD FROM 7 FEET TO 8 FEET 3 INCHES, GENERALLY LOCATED AT 1327
66TH AVENUE N.E. (WARD 2):
Mr. Burns, City Manager, stated that this variance request is
related to a physical hardship of the owner. There were no
objections from two of the three adjoining neighbors. Staff
ana the Appeals Commission recommend approval with the
stipulations that the petitioner submit a letter attesting to
the agreement of the third property owner and that the
variance runs with the life 'of the fence.
THIS ITEM WAS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA AND PLACED ON
THE REGULAR. AGENDA.
5. VARIANCE REQUEST, VAR 06-20, BY MURPHYiEHOUSE, TO ALLOW A
SIGN PAINTED DIRECTLY ON A BUILDING, ERALLY LOCATED AT 4850
MAIN STREET N.E. (WARD 3):
Mr. Burns, City Manager, ated that this is a request to
allow a sign to be pai ed directly on a newly constructed
warehouse. There wou be very limited visual impact on the
1327 - 66th Avenue N.E. Fence Height Variance
DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST:
Carl & Margaret Christenson are requesting that a variance be granted to increase the height of a privacy
fence in the side yard from 7 feet to 8 feet 3 inches. The request is for a fence on the property line at
1327 - 66th Avenue.
SUMMARY OF ISSUES:
Section 205.04.06.A(6) of the Fridley Zoning Code requires that a fence bordering side and rear lot lines
shall be no more than 7 feet in height in any residential district. Public purpose served by this requirement
is to prevent negative impacts such as limited light and view caused by tall fences and in order to maintain
aesthetic appeal of residential areas.
The petitioners have submitted a unique hardship in that Dr. Christenson suffers from a neurological
condition which prohibits the wearing of clothes or receiving any form of physical contact. The petitioners
constructed a higher fence to provide appropriate privacy and eliminate sight lines from the adjacent
property to the west. The height of the fence was observed by the Building Official upon final inspection
of an addition to the dwelling.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND APPEALS COMA41SSION ACTION:
The hardship stated is due to the physical hardship of the property owner as opposed to the property.
Staff originally recommended that the Appeals Commission deny the request to increase the height of the
fence from 7 feet to 8 feet 3 inches. Regardless of the Commission's action, staff recommended the
following stipulation: 1. Per Section 213.05 of the City Code, the petitioner shall submit a letter in
writing that the adjacent property owner agrees to the location of the fence.
The Appeals Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval of the request to the City Council
with the stipulation suggested by staff. The petitioner presented information regarding adjacent sight lines,
supporting the need for additional fence height. Testimony from the neighborhood also supported the
request. The Commission also recommended a second stipulation: 2. The variance shall be valid only
for the life of the fence. ff the fence is ever damaged or removed to greater than 50% of its value, a new
variance shall be applied for and approved.
CITY COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Council concur with the Commission's recommendation, subject to the above
two stipulations.
4.01
Staff Report
VAR #96-19, 1327 - 66th Avenue N.E.
Paae 2
PROJECT DETAILS
Petition For. A variance to increase the height of a fence in a residential district from 7 feet to 8 feet 3
inches.
Location
of Property:
1327 - 66th Avenue N.E.
Legal Description
of Property:
Lots 7, Dennis Addition
Size:
31,540 square feet (approx.); .72 acres
Topography:
Mostly flat, sloping to creek
Existing
Vegetation:
Typical suburban; grass, shrubs, sod, trees, etc.
Existing
Zoning/Platting:
R-1, Single Family Residential; Dennis Addition 1954
Availability
of Municipal
Utilities:
Connected
Vehicular
Access: 66th Avenue
Pedestrian
Access: N/A
Engineering
Issues: N/A
Site Planning
Issues:
4.02
5�
Staff Report
VAR #96-19, 1327 - 66th Avenue N.E.
Page 3
DEVELOPMENT SPIE
REQUEST
•
Carl & Margaret Christenson are requesting that a variance be granted to increase the height of a privacy fence in the
side yard from 7 feet to 8 feet 3 inches. The request is for 1327 - 66th Avenue.
SITE DESCRIPTION/ffiSTORY
The subject parcel is located east of the intersection of Central Avenue and 66th Avenue. Located on the subject
property is a single family dwelling unit which was constructed prior to 1968. Several building permits have been
issued since the building's initial construction:
1968 - Construction of a 16 ft. by 22 ft. family room/den addition
1990 - Internal remodeling
1995 - Construction of a 2,391 sq. ft. addition
ANALYSIS
Section 205.04.06.A(6) of the Fridley Zoning Code requires that a fence bordering side and rear lot lines shall be no
more than 7 feet in height in any residential district.
Public purpose served by this requirement is to prevent tall fences in order to maintain the attractiveness of a
residential area.
Dr. Christenson suffers from a unique neurological condition which prohibits physical contact of any kind including
clothing. Dr. Christenson, therefore, completes many activities without the obstruction of clothing. The fence was
constructed on the property line at a height of 8 feet in order to provide maximum privacy for Dr. Christenson and
to eliminate sight lines from the adjacent property to the west. This fence allows Mr. Christenson to be outside
without clothes.
The City has not previously reviewed requests of this nature. Typically, variance requests to increase the height of
the fence are for fences located in the front yard where the maximum height is 4 feet. This variance request is minimal
in nature, 1 foot 3 inches, and does not adversely impact sight lines from adjacent properties as the fence is stepped
and varies in height from 6 feet to 8 feet. Staf, however, does not have adequate information regarding the impact
of adjacent site lines into the property to determine if the variance is warranted due to a physical hardship of the land.
4.03
Staff Report
VAR #96-19, 1327 - 66th Avenue N.E.
Page 4
STAFF RECOMMENDATION TO THE APPEALS CONMMSION:
The hardship stated is due to the physical hardship of the property owner as opposed to the property. While the
request is unusual in nature, staff recommended that the Appeals Commission deny the request to increase the height
of the fence from 7 feet to 8 feet 3 inches. If the petitioner desires to present additional information regarding the
site lines from the adjacent property, staff recommended that the Appeals Commission table the request. Regardless
of the Commission's action staff recommended the following stipulation:
1. Per Section 213.05 of the City Code, the petitioner shall submit a letter in writing that the adjacent
property owner agrees to the location of the fence.
APPEALS COND41SSION ACTION:
The Appeals Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval of the request to the City Council with the
stipulation suggested by staff. The Commission also recommended a second stipulation:
2. The variance shall be valid only for the life of the fence. If the fence is ever damaged or removed to
greater than 50% of its value, a new variance shall be applied for and approved.
CITY COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Council concur with the Commission's recommendation.
ADJACENT SITES
WEST:
Zoning:
R-1, Single Family
Land Use:
Residential
SOUTH:
Zoning:
R-1, Single Family
Land Use:
Residential
EAST:
Zoning:
R-1, Single Family
Land Use:
Residential
NORTH: Zoning: R-1, Single Family Land Use: Residential
Comprehensive
Planning Issues: The Zoning and Comprehensive Plans are consistent in this location.
Public Hearing
Comments: A neighbor spoke in favor of the fence.
4.04
C
•
213.01. DEFINITION
213.ACES_
(Ref. 180)
•
As used herein the term 'fence' means and includes a structure or
partition erected for the purpose of enclosing a piece of land or to
divide apiece of land into distinct portions. The term "fence"
includes an enclosure about a field or any other place, and
especially an enclosing structure of wood, iron or 'other material
intended to prevent intrusion fron without or straying from within.
(Ref . 180)
213.02. PRIVATE NUISANCE
Any fence maliciously erected or maintained for the purpose of
annoying the owners or occupants of adjoining property shall be
deemed a private nuisance. Any such owner or occupant injured,
either in his or her comfort or in the enjoyment of his or her
estate by such fence, may have an action of tort for the damage
sustained hereby and may have such nuisance abated.
213.03. PROHIBITION
It shall be unlawful for any person to construct and maintain or
allow to be constructed or maintained upon any property located
within the limits of the City of Fridley any barbed wire fence, or
any fence of metal construction or otherwise, which is charged or
connected with an electrical current in such a manner as to transmit
said current to persons, animals or things which might come in
contact with same.
213.04. IAT LINES
Whenever a fence is or shall be located upon any premises abutting
public property, whether the same be a street, alley, public way or
otherwise, the City may require the owner of the property upon which
a fence now exists or is to be located to establish lot lines upon
said property through the placing of permanent stakes located by a
licensed surveyor and otherwise approved by the Council. In any
case, no survey is necessary and a permit for the same when required
may be issued. on certificate or affidavit of the applicant that he
or she is the owner of the premises upon which such fence lies or is
to be located.
213.05. MCA=
All fences must be located entirely upon the private property of the
person, firm or corporation constructing the same or causing the
fence to be so constructed and erected, except that adjoining
property owners may agree in writing that said fence shall be
located on the division line of their said properties.
4.13
213.05.
DEFINITION
PRIVATE NUISANCE
%F •I• 16 110 M•
IAT LINES
IACATION
213-1
213.07. PENALTIES PENALTIES
Any violation of this Chapter is a misdemeanor and is subject to all
penalties provided for such violations under the provisions of
Chapter 901 of this Code.
4.14 213-2
•
213.07.
213.06. SUBSTANTIAL ODNSMWCTION ASID AB.A7EM Nr
SUBSTANTIAL
Every fence, whensoever and howsoever constructed, shall beAND
ABATEMENT A.
constructed in a substantial manner and of a substantial material,
reasonably suitable for the purpose for which the fence is proposed
to be used. Every fence shall be maintained in a condition of
reasonable repair and shall not by reason of age, decay, accident or
otherwise be allowed to become and remain in a state of disrepair so
as to be or tend to be a nuisance to the injury of the public or any
abutting property. Any fence which is dangerous by reason of its
construction or state of disrepair or is otherwise injurious to
public safety, health or welfare is a nuisance; and any such fence
which has become or tends to be a nuisance shall upon order of a
competent court be repaired or removed as necessary to abate the
nuisance caused or tending to be caused thereby.
213.07. PENALTIES PENALTIES
Any violation of this Chapter is a misdemeanor and is subject to all
penalties provided for such violations under the provisions of
Chapter 901 of this Code.
4.14 213-2
•
•
APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING, AUGUST 14, 1996 PAGE 14
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KUECHLE DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED AND THE PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 8:37 P.M. /
Dr. Vos stated he was surprised there was construction going on. In other cases ere
petitioners are in the process, they are not continuing construction. He did not h e a way
to resolve. The existing is setback at 25 feet and 30 feet. If they move it b , the land
owner to the north has no additional advantage but it is more costly to the He did not
know how to resolve this.
Mr. Kuechle stated he can understand w/effect.
roperty owner d s not like this project.
Yet, the City owns the land and has certts to use it. a did not think they were
using it adversely. If the road existed legt is an iss that must be dealt with but
it is not a part of the variance request. It seat there ' sufficient hardship in that the
building exists already and to ask that the ildin a moved seems out of place and
could harm the property owner even more in ven closer to their property. He did
not see that granting of the variance has ase effect. There does look like there is
an alternative road so that is not issue her. That part is not for this Commission
to decide. He would recommend approvrequest.
Ms. Beaulieu stated there are fisc
considerations but we are not to take that into
consideration for the public. Wh these are fiscal consideration of the City, that is our
pocketbook This is an existi'ng ndition and usually we go along with existing conditions.
The complaint from the nebors seems to be mainly that the road is missing and it
sounds like the City could o that whether adding on to the wellhouse or not. This may be
a legal issue that this C mission cannot deal with. As the request stands, she would go
along with it and re,pdmmend approval.
MOTION by W. Beaulieu, seconded by Dr. Vos, to recommend approval of Variance
Request, VM #96-18, by the City of Fridley, to reduce the front yard setback from 35 feet
to 25 fee Kand to reduce the side yard setback on a comer lot from 35 feet to 30 feet to
allow a expansion of an existing wellhouse on Lots 1, 2, and 3, Block 1, Central View
Ma r, generally located at 7345 Highway 65 N.E.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON DECLARED THE MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
5. PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDERATION OF A VARIANCE REQUEST VAR #96-19
BY CARL & MARGARET CHRISTENSON:
Per Section 205.04.06.A.(6) of the Fridley Zoning Code, to increase the height of
a fence in the rear yard from 7 feet to 10 feet on Lot 7, Dennis Addition, the same
being 1327 - 66th Avenue N.E.
4.20
•
•
APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING, AUGUST 14, 1996 PAGE 15
MOTION by Ms. Beaulieu, seconded by Dr. Vos, to waive the reading of the public hearing
notice and to open the public hearing.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KUECHLE DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED AND THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AT 8:42 P.M.
Ms. McPherson stated the request is to increase the height of a fence in the side yard from
7 feet to 8 feet 3 inches. This fence request is unusual in that typically variances are
requested to the height of fences in the front yard as opposed to the side or rear yard.
Also unusual about this request is that the petitioner has submitted a hardship related to
the owner's physical health condition which prohibits wearing clothing or receiving any
form of physical contact due to the resulting pain. Building permits are not required for
fences. This condition was found by the building inspection department during a final
inspection for a substantial addition to the dwelling. Again, the request is for a portion of
the fence.
Ms. McPherson stated the height is not overly excessive from what is required by code.
It does not obstruct the neighbors site lines in terms of the front yard. Staff did not have
enough information about the elevation difference or site line issues from the side yard of
the adjacent property into the subject parcel to determine if the variance is warranted. The
City has not received requests of this nature previously. The petitioner has requested a
hardship related to a physical condition of the owner as opposed to a physical condition
of the site.
Ms. McPherson stated the request is unusual; however, staff recommends denial of the
request as the stated hardship is not due to the physical condition of the land. Staff has
requested that if the petitioner has additional information regarding the site lines, the
Commission table the request for further staff analysis. Staff recommends the following
stipulation:
1. Per Section 213.05 of the City Code, the petitioner shall submit a letter in writing
that the adjacent property owner agrees to the location of the fence.
Dr. Vos stated the staff report states the fence to the east was also 8 feet. Is this a new
fence?
Ms. McPherson stated this is not a new fence. This was noted on the property survey as
existing. The fence is on the property line. She was not sure whose fence it was.
Dr. Vos stated, as he understands, the reason the variance request is from 7 feet to 10 feet
is because staff were not sure of the height.
4.21
APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING, AUGUST 14, 1996 PAGE 16
Ms. McPherson stated that at the time of the notice, staff did not have the exact
dimensions of the fence. At that time, staff over estimated the height. The exact height
as it is built is 8 feet 3 inches and that is what the variance would be granted to.
Mr. Kuechle asked if the variance request would run for the life of the property or for the
life of the fence.
Ms. McPherson stated the variance would run for the life of the property unless the
Commission chose to stipulate otherwise. The variance could be conditioned that, if the
fence were ever destroyed or damaged, any subsequent fence would need to meet the
code requirement or request a new variance.
Ms. Christenson stated she thought the Commission had the background as to why the
request is being made. Her husband's situation is unique and has necessitated them to
create as much privacy as possible. This site allows privacy to the back. They seek
fences to the side also for privacy. Her husband's condition is an extremely rare
neurologic condition that does not allow him to sit, walk, stand or lay for any length of time.
The house is accessible to meat his needs and creates a quality of life for him. The fence
is also necessary for the protection of the neighbors. She provided pictures that show the
direction from the rooms looking into Ms. Addison's property to the west. She has a study
and works there at night. The neighbor to the west has no objections to the fence nor the
neighbor to the east.
Dr. Vos asked if the fence to the east was the same as to the west property line.
Ms. Christenson stated the fence was replaced at approximately the same height. It was
replaced to compliment the fence to the west.
MOTION by Dr. Vos, seconded by Ms. Beaulieu, to receive into the public record a letter
from Betty Ann Addison and a letter from Roger Larson both dated August 12, 1996.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KUECHLE DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Dr. Vos asked if it was fair to say that the fence was not a continuing fence.
Ms. Christenson stated, on the west side, yes.
Mr. Joslin stated, when he first looked at it, the side fence was 8 feet high so he assumed
that was the maximum height. He could not keep the height consistent because the land
is somewhat sloping.
4.22
APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING. AUGUST 14. 1996 PAGE 17
Mr. Kuechle asked, if the Commission put on a stipulation that this variance is to go with
the life of the fence, is that a problem. If the fence needs to be replaced or repaired,
another variance would need to be requested.
Ms. Christenson stated this was acceptable.
Mr. Barsness stated he lived across the street. He talked with the neighbors on his side
of the street and they cannot even see the fence.
MOTION by Dr. Vos, seconded by Ms. Beaulieu, to close the public hearing.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KUECHLE DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED AND THE PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 8:55 P.M.
Dr. Vos stated he was in the neighborhood. Unless you walk the fence all the way back
to Rice Creek, you would never know it was 8 feet. He did not even notice the fence on
the east side was 8 feet. He liked the stipulation that there be a lifetime to the variance
'because it really is not a variance because of the conditions if the site. It is a variance for
the owner. He would vote in favor with the stipulation.
Ms. Beaulieu stated this is a unique hardship for the owners of the property. Although she
has not heard this before, it is understandable. The request is not detrimental and looks
attractive. She would approve with the stipulation.
Mr. Kuechle agreed. The fence is well designed. It does not have a fortress look to it.
MOTION by Dr. Vos, seconded by Ms. Beaulieu, to recommend approval of Variance
Request, VAR #96-19, by Carl and Margaret Christenson to increase the height of a fence
in the rear yard from 7 feet to 8 feet 3 inches on Lot 7, Dennis Addition, the same being
1327 - 66th Avenue N.E., with the following stipulation:
1. If the fence needs to be replaced or repaired, the owner will need to comply with
code requirements or request a variance.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KUECHLE DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Ms. McPherson stated this request would be considered by the City Council on August 26.
4.23
•
August 12, 1996
Roger Larson
1339 66th Ave. N.E.
Fridley, Mn 55432
To Whom It May Concern:
C7
This letter is in reference to the fence variance that is being
requested by Carl and Margaret Christenson. The Christensons
constructed a fence at a height of 8' rather than 7' between the
west side of my property and the east side of their property. I
have no objections to it being 8' in height.
Sincerely,
Roger Larson
4.15
•
August 12, 1996
Betty Ann Addison
1315 66th Ave. N.E.
Fridley, Mn 55432
To Whom It May Concern:
40
This letter is in reference to the fence variance
requested by Carl and Margaret Christenson. The
question was placed on the boundary line between
my property and the west side of the Christenson
Christensons's are requesting that a variance be
the fence to be at 8" 3" rather than 7'. I have
being at 8' 3".
Sincerely,
Betty Ann Addison
4.16
that is being
fence in
the east side of
property. The
granted to allow
no objects to it
VAR #96-19 •
CARL & M A CHRISTENSON
1327 - 66TH AVENUE NE
CARL & M A CHRISTENSON
1327 66TH AVENUE NE
FRIDLEY MN 55432
ROLAND & BETTY ZACHARIAS
OR RESIDENT
1387 66TH AVENUE NE
FRIDLEY MN 55432
MARK & BRENDAL GRITTNER
OR RESIDENT
1351 66TH AVENUE NE
FRIDLEY MN 55432
GEORGE & ZITA PEEK
OR RESIDENT
6633 CENTRAL AVE NE
FRIDLEY MN 55432
STEVEN & COLLEEN SCHERBER
OR RESIDENT
1376 66TH AVENUE NE
FRIDLEY MN 55432
JON & DIANE PHILLIPS
OR RESIDENT
1361 CREEK PARK LANE
FRIDLEY MN 55432
LEONARD & PATRICIA HARFF
OR RESIDENT
1311 CREEK PARK LANE
FRIDLEY MN 55432
CURTIS BARSNESS OR RESIDENT
6581 CENTRAL AVE NE
FRIDLEY MN 55432
MAILING LIST
JOSEPH & JOAN MENTH
OR RESIDENT
1388 66TH AVENUE NE
FRIDLEY MN 55432
ROBERT & MARY BRIDGEMAN
OR RESIDENT
1375 66TH AVENUE NE
FRIDLEY MN 55432
WALTER & LORI PETERSON
OR RESIDENT
1339 66TH AVENUE NE
FRIDLEY MN 55432
LARUE RIEWE OR RESIDENT
6617 CENTRAL AVE NE
FRIDLEY MN 55432
BRICKNER BUILDERS INC
6260 HIGHWAY 65 NE STE 308
FRIDLEY MN 55432
KENNETH & KATHLEEN LUKE
OR RESIDENT
1341 CREEK PARK LANE
FRIDLEY MN 55432
BONNIE BULTMAN OR RESIDENT
6537 CENTRAL AVE NE
FRIDLEY MN 55432
GRACE LARSON OR RESIDENT
1340 66TH AVENUE NE
FRIDLEY MN 55432
•
ANOKA COUNTY
325 EAST MAIN STREET
ANOKA MN 55303
MAILED 8/2/96
BYRON NYGREN OR RESIDENT
1363 66TH AVENUE NE
FRIDLEY MN 55432
BETTY ANN MECH
OR RESIDENT
1315 66TH AVENUE NE
FRIDLEY MN 55432
THOMAS & CHRISTINE JOHNSON
OR RESIDENT
1379 CREEK PARK LANE
FRIDLEY MN 55432
RONALD & SHIRLEY ENNIS
OR RESIDENT
6601 CENTRAL AVE NE
FRIDLEY MN 55432
ANDREW & SELINA KWONG
OR RESIDENT
1321 CREEK PARK LANE
FRIDLEY MN 55432
JEFFREY & K J HALVORSON
OR RESIDENT
6555 CENTRAL AVE NE
FRIDLEY MN 5543
CHOCK & LAI HUIE
OR RESIDENT
1328 66TH AVENUE NE
FRIDLEY MN 55432
ROBERT & DORA BURDICK BETH DAHLMEIER OR RESIDENT BERNARD & LORALEE KRIENS
OR RESIDENT 1358 66TH AVENUE NE OR RESIDENT
1316 66TH AVENUE NE FRIDLEY MN 55432 1362 66TH AVENUE NE
FRIDLEY MN 55432 FRIDLEY MN 55432
MAILING LIST - PAGE 2 0
VAR #96-19
1327 - 66TH AVENUE NE
•
DEBORAH BURNS OR RESIDENT LARRY KUECHLE CITY COUNCIL
1371 CREEK PARK LANE 202 MERCURCY DRIVE NE
FRIDLEY MN 55342 FRIDLEY MN 55432 CITY MANAGER
•
PUBLIC HEARING
BEFORE THE
APPEALS COMMISSION
C7
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
Wednesday, August 14, 1996, at 7:30 p.m. for the purpose of:
Consideration of variance request, VAR #96-19, by Carl & Margaret
Christenson:
Per Section 205.04.06.A.(6) of the Fridley Zoning Code, to increase the height of
a fence in the rear yard from 7 feet to 10 feet on Lot 7, Dennis Addition, the
same being 1327 - 66th Avenue 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.
LARRY KUECHLE
CHAIRPERSON
APPEALS COMMISSION
Any questions related to this item may be referred to the Fridley Community
Development Department, 572-3593.
Hearing-impaired persons planning to attend who need an interpreter or other persons
with disabilities who require auxiliary aids should contact Roberta Collins at 572-3500
no later than August 7, 1996.
D
OFCITY OF FRIDLEY
LEY COMMISSION APPLICATION REVIEW
File Number 43 File Date 7/18/96
Meeting Date.
8/14/96
-----------------------------
Descriiption:
VAR #96-19 - 1327 - 66th Avenue N.E.
fence height
Return to the Community Development Department
Barbara Dacy
Community Development Director
John Flora
Public Works Director
Ed Hervin
City Assessor
Scott Hickok
Planning Coordinator
Ron Julkowski
Chief Building Official
Dick Larson
Fire Marshall
Michele McPherson
Planning Assistant
Dave Sallman
Police Chief
Jon Wilczek
Asst. Public Works Director
APPLICATION REVIEW CHECKU
FILE: Wq&—H L -n 47, 1 qtp
:tiINS
----------------- --
,;..mxmmpp.wm ............ m
ME-
APPLICATION
RECEIVED
DEVELOPMENT
REVIEW COMM
�f�lc
ADDRESS FILE
lq&q /4PY V17V+t eel
REVIEWED
I
LAND USE
FILES?
PETITIONER
CALLED
Srm
vism/mmnNG
AERIAL
PHOTO MADE
MAPS DONE
RF-PoF;rr
WRITTEN
•
n
CITY OF FRIDLEY p
6431 UNIVERSITY AVENUE N.E.
FRIDLEY, MN 55432
(612) 571-3450 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
VARIANCE APPLICATION FORM
PROPERTY INFORMATION - site plan required for submittal; see attached
Address: 1-2.77-7 — 44 Jw 1deYWe,
Property Identification Number (PIN) / 3 � �'
v
Legal description: Lof 7 wi g;s .4 ta �s
Lot Block Tract/Addition
Current zoning: Square footage/acreage
Reason for variance and hardship: 5e -e- Xi & cAe cl o4d4e+L d Uj" &,",I k e,A-e r.
Section of City Code:
Have you operated a business in a city which required a business license?
Yes No If yes, which city?
If yes, what type of business?
Was that license ever denied or revoked? Yes No
FEE OWNER INFORMATION (as it appears on the property title)
(Contract Purchasers: Fee Owners must signPP this form prior to processing)
NAME U3^ L- In,
ADDRESS �` a -W e�,
DAYTIME PHONE
SIGNATURE DATE
PETITIONER INFORMATION
NAME 50-`n e,
ADDRESS
DAYTIME PHONE) 7 -6/ - a(
SIGNATURE DATE '7 / <3 jq
Fee: $100.00 $ 60.00 t,,� for residential pro erties ~~N~~^
Permit VAR # Receipt #a'
Application received by:
Scheduled Appeals Commission date:
Scheduled City Council date:
APPLICATION
DATE
City of Fridley Community Development Variance Process
APPEALS
COMMISSION
DATE
CITY COUNCIL
DECISION
CITY RECORDS
ACTION AT
ANOKA COUNTY
•
•
07/16/96 16:44 FACILITIES ENG 42 -BE -03 4 95711287 N0.764 P001
31W Facilities Engineer
and Real Estate
PO Box 33331
St. NO. MN 55133.3331
612/776 5049
FAX TRANSMITTAL
To:
FAX NUMBER: '7/ - 12
ADDRESS:
FROM: ✓osLIWOP
FAX NUMBER: 612778-6375
PHONE NUMBER: (612)778-
ADDRESS:
DATE: 7- 46 - 9(0
RE
PAGES TO FOLLOW: /
you do not receive all pages.
NOTE:
07/16/96 16:44 FACILITIES ENG 42—GE-03 4 95711287 N0.764 P002
r • •
ROBERT G. JOSLNV AIA ARCHTECT
3001 Marine Circle • Stillwater. Minnesota SM • (612) 0.39-0218
July 16, 1996
Scott Hickock, City Planner
City of Fridley
6431 University Avenue
Fridley, MN 55432•
Re: 1327 66th St. N.E.
Dear Mr. Hickock:
I am the architect for this residential project and I understand that the
fence on the west side of the property is not in compliance with your plan-
ning code -maximum height of 7'.
To give you the background, when we started the project there was an 8' high
fence on the east property line so I assumed that this was the acceptable
height in this area. We designed it to start at 6' and step up to 7' and
then to 8' at a portion of the west side. This was done to give Dr, Chris-
tenson, the owner, maximum visual privacy on that side because of the prox-
imity of the house next door. During the fence -building effort it was
raised even higher when we could see the sight lines to the neighboring
windows.
Dr. Christenson has a rare medical problem that elevates his body temper-
ature so high that he feels most comfortable without clothes. This was the
reason for stepping the fence up to give him the visual privacy. This was
only done on a portion of the fence on the west side and not the entire fence.
So, we are requesting a VARIANCE from the 7' max. ht. to allow us to keep the
fence as it is built.
Sincerely,
Robert sl'
cc: Margaret Christenson
Ron Danielson
j 4.12
July 10, 1996
Michele McPherson, Planning Assistant
City of Fridley
Fridley Municipal Center
6431 University Ave. N.E.
Fridley, MN 55432
Dear Ms. McPherson;
This letter is concerning your correspondence dated June 28,
1996, concerning certain sections of the privacy fence on our
property at 1327 66th Ave. N.E. Your letter states that sections
of said fence appears to be over the maximum of seven feet
allowed by code.
The reason this fence was built is to related to a rare
neurological disease involving my husband's spinal cord. This
problem has existed since 1976 but it has become increasingly
severe in the last five years. It was manageable until 1991 when
he was forced to retire. The problem is characterized by searing
pain that is aggravated by any type of touch including clothing.
For this reason, we needed a higher fence to obtain appropriate
privacy and eliminate direct sight lines from our neighbor's
windows. It is unfortunate that this variance was not applied
for and obtained before the construction of the fence.
We will be pleased to work with you on this matter and if it will
add clarification, we would be happy to have one of your staff
meet with us. Our telephone number is 574-2620.
We are in the process of filling out the forms you sent us and
will have those in your office before the July 19, 1996,
application deadline.
Sincerely,
a
Margaret Christenson
cc: Appeals Committee
4.10
JUL 17 '96 01:2'71 P 1 HPRONIt_ PAIN • F.2/2
July 3, 1996
RE: Dr. Carl Christenson
386-30-1127
To Whom It May Concern:
�X
ABBOTT
NC)RTHWES T ERI
HOSPITAL
:sister Kenny Institute
: i 1 N MACH VAI
I am writing regarding a code variance on the fencing at 1327 66th Avenue N.E., Fridley,
ZIN 55432. This is the horse of Dr. and Mrs. Carl Christenson.
Dr. Christenson is a patient of mine who has a neurological condition in which pain is
generated by any form of touch, particularly to the slnn of his leg and torso.
Since, due to this problem, he wears as little clothing as possible, privacy becomes a major
issue. Therefore, to prevent sight lines directly into the house, high fences were installed.
These fences also male it possible for hint to go outside.
I add my request for this variance for their privacy fences to exceed the 7 foot minimum.
Sincerely,
Oe
�+
Miles Belgrade, M.D.
Medical Director of Pain Services
Chronic Pain Rehabilitation Program
MB:gsj
4.11
CITYOF
FRIDLEY
FRIDLEY MUNICIPAL CENTER • 6431 UNIVERSITY AVE. N.E. FRIDLEY. MN 55432 • (612) 571-3450 • FAX (612) 571-1287
June 28, 1996
Dr. and Mrs. Carl Christenson
1327 - 66th Avenue N.E.
Fridley, MN 55432
Dear Dr. and Mrs. Christenson:
It has come to our attention through visual inspection that your recently constructed
fence, in some sections, exceeds the maximum of 7 feet permitted by code. While the
fence is well constructed and aesthetically pleasing, it does exceed the code
requirement. In order to correct this violation, one of two things should occur.
1. Reconstruct the fence to meet the 7 foot height requirement; or
2. Apply for and receive a variance from the Appeals Commission and the
City Council to allow the fence to be greater than 7 feet.
have enclosed a copy of a variance application and an Appeals Commission
schedule. The next official application receipt date is July 19, 1996, for the August 14,
1996, Appeals Commission. This is due to the fact that the Appeals Commission will
not have a quorum for the second meeting in July.
If you would like staff to meet with you on site to identify which sections of the fence do
not comply with the code or to discuss the variance process, please feel free to call -me
at 572-3593.
Sincerely,
Michele McPherson
Planning Assistant
MM:ls
C-96-136
VAR #96-19
N VAR #96-19
Carl Christenson
1372 66th Avenue
LOCATION MAP
4.05
07/24/96 13:39
i
i
7�
FACILITIES ENG 42-8E-03 4 95711287
• •
rJ'
VAR l96 -19N0.949
Carl Christenson
A
Sl �. P. -A A�,! I" = 2-o
i HOvE
L
.06 C�
ROBERT JOSLIN AIA ARCHITECT
9001 MARINE CIRCLE • STILLWATER. MINNESOTA SM
(812143H2111
s
•VAR #96-19
Carl Christenson
S4
4.07
VI
z
w
�L
V��
L
07/24/96 13:39 FACILITIES ENG 42-8E-03 4 95711287
1 6 }
VAR #96-19N0.949 P003
• Carl Christenson
P
eoLev + fat-' 94 d
±L
SXR
w/Z/1�P
-4 Jv 4
0
X 4 71v�
X 0, A Aftur
1 x 8 -mo-,
f,X f eoof—
r- ±
4e I
� x 4 P� •A•eev�yD
I x $ abAR.pj
0
/./Own 31,00-
4-1 -qG
�2 LI
n�� SLS
ROBERT JOSLIN AIA ARCHITECT
4.08 3809 MARINE CIRCLE 9 STILLWATER, MINNESOTA 5.5062
181214330218
Vie
I
Pt
420
I