Loading...
VAR 08.70.. APPLICATION TO THE BOARD OF APPEALS AND Ci'Y COUKIL FOR SPECIAL USE PERMIT, VARIANCE IN REQUIREM N S Oir CERTAI .ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF FRIME'Y (Applicant to complete items 1, 2, 3) 1. Name and Address of Applicant 6,0- 041 sza - 94 6 x4'.217(®) .2. Legal Description of Property (also general locaticn, such srt"nortT.- esst corner of 64th Avenue and 5th Streett° or 6415 fifth Street") 3. Describe the variance requested. (Att'ach Flat or SLIrvWy of pfoperty showing location of proposed building, ate., atop adjoining proparries and ownership within 200' of said property.) iL- (r � e--- 4. Commnts by administrative official denying original request for busldinS pewit or other permit. (To be completed by admin!arrattva officiAl. Appropriate ordinances and section of ordinances to be cited,) l - 2 - S. Notice of Hearing appeared in Official Newspaper an the following dates t (must be at least once 10 days before meeting -- copy of notice to b@ attached). 6. Board Members notified of meting by • (List Members, Date Notified, and "Yes" or IINdIjfor plans to attend hearing). a NNaama a LISA —to Attend %t 7. Person making appeal sad the following property amers'havi g property within 2001 notified: By Photo Notified by same Date ori_ (reit iiaal, )/) Q_ w 1 LU 1 1,345? 19P 1�a F of (� m nJ a h�n , - /399- 6, $I fte Following oard Members and interested parties were present at the Hearing t BOARD M BZR3 3 - OTHER PARTIES: DAME ADDRESS 9. Opinions and recommendations by BOARD OF APPEALS; ,y /I 1 n J,70,0 . • o OJ1.4 a�-i�A� , (-A o1 0:� kc nl a � s 10. For Above Recommendations Against•Recommendations 11.4ction by City Council and Date; X _ � .o i.lin a • %i /� �i 1� err 1. THE MIMUTES OF THE BOARD OF APPEALS MEETING OF AUGUST 25, 1970 The meeting was called to order by Chairman Minish at 7:30 P.M, MEMBERS PRESENT: Minish, Ahonen, Drigans, O'Bannon, Sondheimer OTHERS PRESENT: Al Bagstad-Building Official MOTION by Ahonen to approve the minutes of the August 11, 1970 meeting as written. Seconded by Sondheimer. Upon a voice vote, there being no nays, the motion carried unanimously. Chairman Minish reported to the Board the action taken by the Council on the August 11, 1970 Board of Appeals items. Mr. Johnson was present to present his request. Mr. Johnson stated he has been trying to sell this land for about 2 years. He now has a prospective buyer for this lot, Mr. Allan Mattson, but the sale depend® on whether a 4 plea can be constructed on the lot. Mr. Mattson does own other 4 pleas in the immediate area. Mr. Johnson continued that this lot is now enclosed by three roads for which he had to dedicate land. Because of these dedications, the land area is now not sufficient to most the present Code requirement for land area for a 4 plea. He stated he had paid for sewer and water, paving and storm sewer and he pays around 000.00 in assessments on this lot and he just- .can't afford to maintain this lot any longer as he is retired and was a home that he has to maintain. Mr. Drigans asked if he had talked to any of the surrounding property owners. Mr. Johnson said that he had and two of them, Mr. Fragale and Mr. Bogner, had told him they would appear in his behalf at this meeting but apparantly had not been able to attend. Mr. Mattson stated that this lot is bigger than his other lots that house 4 plans and he has had no problems with them. Mr. O'Bannon asked if there was sufficient room for parking. Mr.•Mattson answered that there was•and he added that since he owns the adjacent 4 pleas if there is any problem with the parking he was sure he could work it out. 2. The Minutes of the Board of Appeals Meeting of August 25, 1970 pago 2 Mr. Mattson said the lot is not very good for anything but a multiple dwelling as the lot is surrounded by multiples. Br. Drigans asked how soon the construction would start if the variance was approved. Mr. Mattson answered about January of 1971. MOTION by O'Bannon to close the public hearing. Seconded by Drigans. Upon a voice vote, there being no nays, the motion carried unanimously. INION by Ahonen to recommend to the City Council approval of this request for the following reasons: 1. The lot is in keeping with the surrounding area as the lot is adjoining three other lots of smaller area that have 4 plexs on them. 2. A multiple is the only logical development of the land. 3. The reduction of land area of this lot was caused by the dedication for streets. 4. There were no objections from any surrounding property owners. Seconded by O'Bannon. Upon a voice vote, there being no nays, the motion carried unanimously. Mr. & Mrs. Wilson were present to present the request. Mr. Wilson stated the variance asked for was actually more than what would be necessary. The measurement of 6.5 feet was only a guess and after measuring the fence, we would need only a 1 foot 4 inch variance. The height of the fence is 4 feet and the retaining wail under the fence would be the height of 2 standard cement blocks or 16 inches. Pictures of the existing fence and lot were shown to the Board. Mr. Wilson said there is a bank along the South side of the lot which causeq water to wash out the area along the present fence. He feels the washing out will be stopped by putting up the 16 inch retaining wall, and will enable them to sod the area along the fence where they were not able to get grass to grow because of the constant erosion. He stated further the retaining wall will M the entire length of the South lot line to allow the fence, that will be placed on top, to be of uniform height. 3. e Minutes of the Board of Appeals Meeting of August 25. 1970 Paae Mrs. William Zaier, 6550 Central Avenue, adjacent property owner, stated she was not opposed to the fence as long as it does not disturb the natural drainage or air circulation. She did want to know if the Wilsons had to get a survey of their lot before they put in the retaining wall. Mr. Bagstad said a survey was not required. Mr. Wilson added the original stakes were found and they will make sure the entire retaining wall and fence are on their property. Mr. Thomas Moore, 6580 Central Avenue, adjacent property owner, stated he has constructed a retaining wall between his property and Mr. Wilson's property and it has worked very well. The retaining wall does not detract from the property and it has served both of them equally well. Mr. Drigans asked how steep the bank was at its highest point. Mrs. ®ilson answered that she was told by someone in City Hall that the highest point was 7 feet. MOTION by Sondheimer to close the public hearing. Seconded by Ahonen. Upon a voice vote, there being no nays, the motion carried unanimously. MOTION by O'Bannon to recommend to the City Council approval of the request to increase the fence height from 4 feet to 5 feet 4 inches for the following - reasons: 1. There is a hardship due to the terrain of the land and the retaining wall is to prevent the land from eroding and ruining his lawn. 2. There were no objections from surrounding property owners. Seconded from Sondheimer. Upon a voice vote, there being no nays, the motion carried unanimously. Mr. Myron Ostlund was present to present the request. A photo of the lot and a sketch of the lot showing the existing house and proposed addition were shown to the Board. The Minutes of the Board of Appeals Meeting of August 25, 1970 Page 4 Mr. Ostlund explained he is adjacent to the back side of the Rice Creek School yard and situated on the dead end of 66th Avenue which has no cul de sac. Mr. Bagstad stated -the reason for the variance is the average front yard setback between the house on the West and the eventuality of a minimal setback on the lot to the East (now owned by the School) is +7.21 and the variance now pr;�cludes any question of legality in the future. Mr. Ostlund stated he would be adding 1O.feet onto the front of the present garage, 8 feet onto the East side of the house and garage, and 8 feet onto the back of the garage to expand the single car garage into a double garage and add a family room. The house will have a T-shape after the additions are _added. A plan of the house was shown to the Board. There is a 2.75 foot wide strip of land between Mr. Oslund's property and the School property that is owned by the State of Minnesota and is legally described as Lot 21, Revised Auditor's Subdivision No. 10. Mr.-Oslund said he had talked to his neighbors but they had no objections to the request. MOTION by Drigans to close the public hearing. Seconded by Ahonen. Upon a voice vote, there being no nays, the motion carried -unanimously. MOTION by Drigans to recommend to the City Council approval of the requests for the following reasons: 1. Mr. Ostlund's home is virtually the last on 66th Avenue and is adjacent to School property so there should be no other -homes built next to him that the additions would interfere with. '2. There were no objections from any of the surrounding property owners. 3. Mr. Ostlund has presented adequate plans for the additions, Seconded by Sondheimer. Upon a voice vote, there being no nays, the motion carried unanimously. 4. A REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE OF SECTION 45.053, 4B, SUBPARAGRAPH 3, FRIDLEY_CITY CODE, TO REDUCE THE SIDE YARD SETBACK REQUIREMENT FOR AN ATTACHED GARAGE FROM 5 FEET TO 4 FEET 2 INCHES TO PERMIT THE CONSTRUCTION OF A GARAGE ONTO AN EXISTING DWELLING LOCATED ON LOT 11, BLOCK 2, MELODY MANOR 3RD ADDITION, THE SAME BEING 7424 CONCERTO CURVE N.E., FRIDLEY; MINNESOTA. (REQUEST BY THE SUSSEL COMPANY, 1850 COMO AVENUE, ST. PAUL,. MINNESOTA.) Mr. Roger Ompvedt, representing Sussel Company, was present to present the request. Mr. Ompvedt explained the"request should read from 5 feet to 4.2 feet instead of 4 feet 2 inches. The Minutes of the Board of Appeals Meeting of August 25, 1970 Page 5 A survey and picture of the lot were shown to the Board. Mr. Ompvedt stated the variance is only on the front (Southeast) corner of the garage. The back of the garage is 5.3 feet from the line. There will be 15 feet between structures. MOTION by O'Bannon to close the public hearing. Seconded by Drigans. Upon a voice vote, there being no nays, the motion carried unanimously. MOTION by Ahonen to recommmend to the City Council approval of the variance from 5 -feet to 4.2 feet for the following reasons: 1. The actual variance is only 9a inches on the forward portion of the structure. 2. It is in keeping with the neighborhood. 3. There were no objections from the surrounding property owners. Seconded by Drigans. Upon a voice vote, there being -no nays, the motion carried unanimously. 5. A REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE OF SECTION 45.074, 1, FRIDLEY CITY CODE, TO INCREASE THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT REQUIREMENT FOR A "HIGH RISE" APARTMENT FROM 6 STORIES TO 15 STORIES TO PERMIT THE CONSTRUCTION OF A 104 UNIT "HIGH RISE" APARTMENT TO BE LOCATED ON LOTS 3 AND 4, BLOCK 2, HAYES RIVER LOTS ADDITION, THE SAME BEING 5950 ANNA STREET N.E., FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA. (REQUEST BY N.C.R. CORP., 1811 UNIVERSITY AVENUE N.E., MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55418.) Mr. Emil Novak, representing N.C.R. Corporation, presented the request. Mr. Novak stated he has been working with the property owner, Mr. Harold Panuska, and had also talked with the City Engineer and the Fire Chiefs to make sure that the building will .comply with all the City Codes. He said what they want to do is to build something unique which will have a greater amount of green area. They hope to give the tenants a view and a prestige symbol, and to also ,give the City a prestige symbol. Chairman Minish read a letter from the Fire Prevention Chief which stated "High Rise" buildings do not appreciably add*to the problems of the Fire Department. -- Use of combustibles is very severely restricted. --Additional fire fighting appliances are necessary so the additional height of the structure is of relatively small significance." The City Council has approved the ordering of additional fire fighting equipment. a Chairman Minish stated there had been some questions on whether our Fire Department had the equipment with which to handle a fire in any of the upper stories of this building, and he felt this letter answered those questions. Mr. Novak stated this building will have fire fighting equipment on each floor so the Fire Department would fight any upper story fires from the inside of the building. The Minutes of the -Board of Appeals Meeting of August 25, 1970 Page 6 Mr. Albert Hoffineyer, architect, stated this building is a Type I building which has the longest life span of any building as the structural framework is constructed of steel or iron with masonry. Mr. Novak showed the Board two very preliminary drawings; one of the typical floor plan and one of the site plan. The building will consist of 104 units made up of 56 two bedroom apartments, 40 ora bedroom apartments and 8 three bedroom apartments. The apartments will rent from approximately $200 to $400, the lower rents being for the bottom apartments. Mr. Drigans asked when construction would begin if the building were approved. Mr. Hoffineyer answered in the spring of 1971 and ready for occupancy approximately 18 months later. Mr. Novak added they don't think a high rise is conducive to a large number of children so there should not be any problems with the schools. Mr. Clifford Bakko, apartment owner, stated his main concern was the traffic patterns as there is a problem in this area at the present time and he wants to make sure something is going to be done to correct it. Mr. Novak stated he had been discussing this with the City Engineer and was informed that the construction to correct this problem will hopefully be completed by the middle of 1972. Mr. O'Bannon asked if there were any reports on how this type of building would hold up during a tornado. Mr. Hoffineyer related a situation that happened in one of the Southern states where there had been a tornado and this type of building was almost totally undamaged and all other buildings in the same area fell. MOTION by Sondheimer to close the public hearing. Seconded by Ahonen. Upon a voice vote, there being no nays, the motion carried unanimously. MOTION by Drigans to recommend to the City Council approval of the request for the following reasons: 1. The fire protection is sound. 2. The traffic situation will be solved at the same time or sooner than the building completion date. 3. When the ordinance governing apartment heights was adopted, he didn't think the City considered that anything higher than 6 stories would ever be built in Fridley. The Minutes of the Board of Appeals Meeting of August 25, 1970 Page 7 4. The building is a Type I building which is constructed with the highest standards. 5. It blends into the area as there are apartments on surrounding properties. 6. It is something special for our community. Seconded by Ahonen. Upon a voice vote, there being no nays, the motion carried unanimously. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned by Chairman Minish at 9:10 P.M. Respectfully submitted, Y��L� v MARY HI1rZ Secretary REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 8, 1970 PAGE 11 The City Hngineer said that this is for a four plex on Mississippi. Place, 1'h® property Is owned by Elmer Johnson,' The recommendation of the Board of Appeals is to approve the request. The property is surrounded by other MV.Itigle family dwellings. He said that when the streets were dedicated, they. did not receive the radii they needed for the turns and suggested that they c9u14 get this at this time. NOTION by Councilman Liebl to concur with the Board of Appeals and grant the request for the variance, subject to the property owner dedicating the necessary radii easements. Seconded by Councilman Sheridan. Upon a voice vote, all voting ayef Mayor Kirkham declared'the motion carried. Councilman Breider asked how much land he was talking of. The City Engineer said that it would only be another 300 square feet. 2. A REQUEST FOR VARIANCE OF SECTION 45.154, 3, FRIDLEY CITY CODE TO INCREASE THE HEIGHT OF A FRONT YARD FENCE FROM 4 FEET TO 6.5 FEET TO PEMIT THE ERECTION OF A FENCE, TO BE PLACED ON TOP OF A RETAINING WALL, ON PART OF LOT 4H AND PART OF.LOT 4I, SECOND REVISED AUDITORIS SUBDIVISION NO. 21, THE SAME BEING 6568 CENTRAL AVENUE N.E., FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA. (REQUEST BY MR. RICHARD WILSON, 6568 CENTRAL AVENUE N.E., .FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA): NOTION by Councilman Sheridan to grant the request fora variance to Mr. Richard 'Wilson. Seconded by Councilman Liebl. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Kirkham declared the motion carried. 2. A REQUEST FOR VARIANCES OF SECTION 45.053, 4B, TO REDUCE THE SIDE YARD _ REQUIREMENT FROM 10 FEET TO 7.1 FEET AND SECTION 45.153, 2, TO DECREASE THE AVERAGE FRONT YARD SETBACK FROM 47.21 FEET TO 43.24 FEET TO PERMIT s THE CONSTRUCTION OF AN ATTACHED TWO CAR GARAGE AND FAMILY ROOM ONTO AN EXISTING DWELLING LOCATED ON THE EAST 83 FEET,FRONT AND REAR, OF LOTS. 6 AND 14, REVISED AUDITOR'S SUBDIVISION NO. 10, THE SAME BEING 1400 66TH AVENUE N.E., FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA. (REQUEST BY MR. MYRON OSTLUND, 1400 66TH AVENUE N.E., FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA): The City Engineer said that this property is adjacent to the school property. He asked if the driveway would be paved. Mr. Ostlund said not as yet, but, it would be when the work is done. 14OTION by Councilman Sheridan to grant the request for variances for Mr. Myron Qstlund. Seconded by Councilman Liebl. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Kirkham .declared the motion carried. 4, A REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE OF SECTION 45.053, 4B, SUBPARAGRAPH 3, FRIDLEY CITY CODE, TO REDUCE THE SIDE YARD SETBACK REQUIREMENT FOR AN ATTACHED GARAGE FROM 5 FEET TO 4.2 FEET TO PERMIT THE CONSTRUCTION OF A GARAGE ONTO AN EXISTING DWELLING LOCATED ON LOT 11, BLOCK 2, MELODY MANOR 3RD ADDITION, THE SAME BEING 7424 CONCERTO CURVE, N.E., FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA. (REQUEST BY THE SUSSEL COMPANY, 1850 COMO AVENUE,ST. PAUL, The City Engineer said that the Board of Appeals has approved of this request, Mayor Kirkham asked how far it was to the neighboring dwelling. A repre sentative from Sussel Company said abqut 151.