VAR 02-04a
0 oq�
STATE OF MINNESOTA ) APPEALS COMMISSION
PROCEEDINGS VARIANCE
COUNTY OF ANOKA )
CITY OF FRIDLEY )
In the Matter of: VAR#02-04-
Owner: Jon V. Jackels and Debra J. Jackels
The above entitled matter came before the Appeals Commission of the City of Fridley and was heard on the
27' day of February, 2002, on a petition for a variance pursuant to the City of Fridley's Zoning Ordinance, for
the following described property:
To reduce the required rear yard setback from 25 feet to 15 feet to allow
the construction of a screened porch with a workshop below the porch on
Lot 28, Auditor's Subdivision No. 129, generally located at 1479 73%2 Avenue NE
IT IS ORDERED that a variance be granted as upon the following conditions or reasons:
Approved with stipulations. See Appeals Commission minutes dated
February 27, 2002.
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
COUNTY OF ANOKA )
CITY OF FRIDLEY )
OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
I, Debra A. Skogen, City Clerk for the City of Fridley, with and in for said City of Fridley, do hereby certify that I
have compared the foregoing copy and Order granting a variance with the original record thereof preserved in
my office, and have found the same to be a correct and true transcript of the whole thereof.
A
IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, I have hereunto subscribed my hand at the City of Fridley, Minnesota, in the
County of Anoka on the 19'bt, day of ' ITIalL,A , 2002.
DRAFTED BY:
City of Fridley
6431 University Avenue N.E.
Fridley, MN 55432 Debra A. Skoge , City CI
�y a�q r n��• .
Variances are valid for a period of one year following approval and shall be considered void if not used within
that period.
CITY OF FRIDLEY
APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING
FEBRUARY 27, 2002
CALL TO ORDER:
Chairperson Kuechle called the February 27, 2002, Appeals Commission meeting to order at
7:30 p.m.
ROLL CALL:
Members Present: Larry Kuechle, Ken Vos, Gary Zinter
Members Absent: Blaine Jones, Sue Jackson
Others Present: Stacy Stromberg, Planner
Jon and Debra Jackels, 1479 73'2 Avenue NE
APPROVE THE FEBRUARY 13. 2002. APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES:
MOTION by Dr. Vos, seconded by Mr. Zinter, to approve the February 13, 2002, Appeals
Commission meeting minutes as presented.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KUECHLE DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
PUBLIC HEARING: VARIANCE REQUEST, VAR #02-04, BY JON V. JACKELS:
Per Section 205.07.03.D.(3).(a) of the Fridley Zoning Code, to reduce the required rear
yard setback from 25 feet to 15 feet to allow the construction of a screened porch with a
workshop located below the porch on Lot 28, Auditor's Subdivision No. 129, generally
located at 1479 73%2 Avenue NE.
MOTION by Dr. Vos, seconded by Mr. Zinter, to waive the reading and open the public hearing.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KUECHLE DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED AND THE PUBLIC HEARING OPENED AT 7:34 P.M.
Ms. Stromberg stated the petitioners are requesting a variance to reduce the required rear yard
setback from 25 feet to 15 feet to allow the construction of a screened porch with a workshop
below the porch at their residence at 1479 73%2 Avenue
Ms. Stromberg stated that this property is part of a lot split that was granted in 1984. The
original lot located at 1482 Onondaga St. was split to allow this single family lot. There are
characteristics about this lot that are atypical to a standard Fridley lot. Those characteristics are
where the lot was split, the stipulated front and rear setbacks, and the 27 -foot street easement
off 73%2 Avenue. The original lot was 301 feet by 110 feet. Instead of splitting it in half, the
newly created lot was split to 121 by 110 feet. This provided over the minimum lot area required
for a single family lot, but it limited the area for the new house to be built. When the lot split was
granted, the stipulated front yard setback was 44 feet and the required rear setback was 25 feet.
Ms. Stromberg stated that City code requires that if the front yard setback of neighboring homes
is greater than the minimum front yard setback which in 1982 would have been 35 feet, the
setback of a new structure can be six feet more or less of the average depth of the adjacent
APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING, FEBRUARY 27, 2002 PAGE 2
structures. In no case shall it be less than the required front yard setback. City code also states
that if one of the adjacent properties is vacant, the assumed setback (35 feet at the time) will be
the minimum front yard setback requirement. The home to the east of the petitioners' property
is set back at 65 feet, and the lot to the west is vacant The average of the two setbacks is 50
feet, and, minus 6 feet, is 44 feet for the minimum setback that was stipulated on this lot. Based
on these code requirements, a front yard setback of 44 feet was determined. After the front
yard setback of 44 feet was determined, the rear yard setback was stipulated at 25 feet leaving
only 25 feet for the new home to be constructed.
Ms. Stromberg stated that the property is without a dedicated public right-of-way and was
allowed to exist with a 27 -foot street easement along the front of the lot to gain street access.
When this decision was made, it was thought that all the lots on 73`d Avenue would be split, a
road would be needed, and it would eventually go all the way through to Hayes Street or end in
a cul-de-sac. The current Engineering staff have stated that the only possibility of a 73Y2
Avenue road extension would be to have it connect through to Hayes Street. If this were to
happen, it would have to be approved by all affected homeowners along Onondaga Street, 73`d
Avenue, and the homeowners along Hayes Street. Since the lot split in 1984, a new apartment
building was built at 1461 73`d Avenue, and its storm pond is located in this area, and'
homeowners along Onondaga Street have constructed accessory structures in their rear yards
that would limit their ability to have enough lot area to split their lots. The apartment building at
1441 73`d Avenue has a garage that would be located directly alongside the road if it were to be
extended.
Ms. Stromberg stated that the lot split granted in 1984 predetermined a set of standards for this
property. Due to the lot split, the property has received a variance to 25 feet from the lot line
instead of 30 that would have been required. The petitioners' existing deck encroaches ten feet
into the rear yard setback. Decks are allowed by code to encroach into the setback because
while they are structures, they are open and are not imposing to neighboring properties. Once a
structure is enclosed, it can be more obtrusive and can obstruct sight lines and provide less
space. It also becomes living area and needs to meet the rear yard setback requirements.
Ms. Stromberg stated the petitioner's hardship summary states:
"The proposed addition will not maintain the 25 -foot rear yard setback. This is a request to
modify the rear yard setback to 15 feet. The request is based on the following hardships:
Building the addition in this location would allow us to use the current door existing on
the rear of the house.
The only other location allowed within the stipulated setbacks is on the west end of the
house where we have bedrooms and no exterior exit.
Placement on the west side would contribute to changing the character of the
neighborhood.
o All of the homes with porches have them on the back.
o The screened porch would be visible from the street.
o It would make our house 80 feet long."
Ms. Stromberg stated staff has no recommendations as this request is within previously granted
dimensions. A similar variance was granted in 2000 at 8191 Ruth Circle where the rear yard
setback was reduced from 25 feet to 15 feet. If the Appeals Commission recommends approval
of the variance, staff recommends the following stipulations:
1. The petitioner must obtain all necessary building permits prior to construction
,f
. . t APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING, FEBRUARY 27, 2002 PAGE 3
2. The addition shall be architecturally compatible with the existing home and finished
with the same siding and color scheme.
3. No deck, stairs, or other appurtenances shall extend any closer than 15 feet to the
rear yard property line
4. The addition shall not be allowed to have a shed roof. The roof shall have a pitch to
match the existing structure. The roof shall be perpendicular to the existing
structure's ridge line and shall have a gabled end.
Mr. Kuechle asked how far back the house behind the petitioner is from the property line.
Ms. Stromberg stated that house is located 44 feet back from the petitioners' rear yard lot line.
Mr. Zinter asked if the house, the way it is now, would be allowed to be built according to current
codes.
Ms. Stromberg stated that it probably would not have been. Current City staff probably would
not have allowed the street easement.
Mr. Kuechle asked if the lot split was from the one to the north.
Ms. Stromberg stated that was correct.
Dr. Vos asked if there was a road to that house only.
Ms. Stromberg stated that was correct.
Mr. Jackels stated that this was a complete report.
Dr. Vos asked about the neighbor where the lot split came off from to the north. Have they
talked with the neighbor?
Mr. Jackels stated they have not.
Ms. Jackels stated she does not think it will affect anyone.
Dr. Vos asked who owned the tree line in the back.
Ms. Jackels stated that the neighbors own it.
Mr. Kuechle asked if staff looked at the alternative to construction on the side.
Ms. Stromberg stated that staff looked at construction on the west side of the house. It would
not have needed a variance, but there is no access there. All the bedrooms are located on this
side of the house.
MOTION by Dr. Vos, seconded by Mr. Zinter, to close the public hearing.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KUECHLE DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED AND THE PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 7:45 P.M.
Dr. Vos stated it is a unique lot, and there seemed to be hardship because it is set back from a
non -existing road. He would vote for the variance request to go no further than the existing
deck.
1,
APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING, FEBRUARY 27, 2002 PAGE 4 '
Mr. Zinter stated it is a reasonable appeal and he would vote for it also.
Mr. Kuechle stated that it looked crowded to him in terms of making it really close. He
understands there are unique conditions. The house is 25 feet wide and the ability to access
anything on the west side is tough. With reluctance, he would concur as it is the best that could
be done on this lot.
MOTION by Dr. Vos, seconded by Mr. Zinter, to recommend approval of VAR #02-04 with the
stipulation as follows:
1. The petitioner must obtain all necessary building permits prior to construction
2. The addition shall be architecturally compatible with the existing home and finished
with the same siding and color scheme.
3. No deck, stairs, or other appurtenances shall extend any closer than 15 feet to the
rear yard property line.
4. The addition shall not be allowed to have a shed roof. The roof shall have a pitch to
match the existing structure. The roof shall be perpendicular to the existing
structure's ridge line and shall have a gable end.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KUECHLE DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
2. UPDATE ON PLANNING COMMISSION & CITY COUNCIL ACTIONS:
Ms. Stromberg stated updated the Commission on past Planning Commission and City Council
actions.
3. OTHER BUSINESS:
Ms. Stromberg stated there are two items for the March 13, 2002, meeting; however, the March
27, 2002, meeting has been canceled.
ADJOURNMENT:
MOTION by Mr. Zinter, seconded by Dr. Vos, to adjourn the meeting.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KUECHLE DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED AND THE FEBRUARY 27, 2002, APPEALS COMMISSION
ADJOURNED AT 7:49 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
Sign L. John66 oU
Recording Secretary
ABSTRACT
Receipt #
Daterrime j� `t
Document Or of
PINs
Recordability
❑ incorrect/No Reference #
❑ Non-standard Document
❑ Certified Copy/
Filing Fees $jag
Copy/Additional Pg Fees $
❑ Tax Lien/Release
❑ Transfer
Well Cert Fees $
❑ Division
❑ Status
❑ Incomplete Form
❑ Missing Attachment
❑ New legal Description
❑ No Legal Description
❑ GAC
❑ Non-existent Legal Description
❑ Deferred Specials
❑ Part(s) Illegible
I QrNo Change
DOCUMENT N0. 1658272.0 ABSTRACT
ANOKA COUNTY MINNESOTA
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE WITHIN INSTRUMENT WAS FILED IN THIS OFFICE
FOR RECORD ON MAR 19 2002
AT 5:00 PM AND WAS DULY RECORDED.
FEES AND TAXES IN THE AMOUNT OF $20.00 PAID.
RECEIPT NO. 2002042803
MAUREEN J. DEVINE
ANOKA COUNTY PROPERTY TAX ADMINISTRATOR/RECORDER/REGISTRAR OF TITLES
RP
BY
DEPUTY PROPERTY TAX ADMINISTRATOR/RECORDER/REGISTRAR OF TITLES
�JA
CfIYOF
FRIDLEY
FRIDLEY MUNICIPAL CENTER - 6431 UNIVERSITY AVE. N.E. FRIDLEY, MN 55432 - (763) 571-3450 - FAX (763) 571-1287
APPEALS COMMISSION
ACTION TAKEN NOTICE
March 5, 2002
Jon and Debra Jackels
1479 731/2 Ave NE
Fridley, MN 55432
Dear Mr. and Mrs. Jackels:
On February 27, 2002, the Fridley Appeals Commission officially approved a request for variance, VAR #02-
04, to reduce the required rear yard setback from 25 feet to 15 feet to allow the construction of a screened porch
with a workshop below the porch on Lot 28, Auditor's Subdivision 129, generally located at 1479 731/2Ave NE,
with the following stipulations:
1. The petitioner must obtain all necessary building permits prior to construction
2. The addition shall be architecturally compatible with the existing home and finished with the same
siding and color scheme.
3. No deck �stairs �or other appurtenances shall extend any closer than 15 feet to the rear yard
property line
4. The addition shall not be allowed to have a shed roof. The roof shall have a pitch to match the
existing structure. The roof shall be perpendicular to the existing structure's ridge line and shall
have a gable end.
You have one year from the date of the Appeals Commission action to initiate construction. If you cannot
begin construction during this time, you must submit a letter requesting an extension at least three weeks prior
to the expiration date.
If you have any questions regarding the above action, please call me at 572-3595.
Sincerely,
StacySt mberg
Planner
Please review the above action, sign below, and return the original to the City of Fridley Planning Department
by March 19, 2002.
SB:ls Concur with action taken
City of Fridley Land Use Application
VAR #02-04 February 27, 2002
GENERAL INFORMATION SPECIAL INFORMATION
Applicant:
Jon and Debra Jackels
1479 73 %2 Avenue NE
Fridley MN 55432
Requested Action:
Variance reducing the rear yard setback.
Existing Zoning:
R-1 (Single Family Residential)
Location:
1479 73 %2 Avenue NE
Size:
13,310 sq. ft. .3 acres
Existing Land Use:
Single Family Home.
Surrounding Land Use & Zoning:
N: Single Family & R-1
E: Single Family & R-1
S: Multiple Family & R-3
W: Single Family & R-1
Comprehensive Plan Conformance:
Consistent with Plan
Zoning Ordinance Conformance:
Section 205.07.03.D (3) ((a)) requires a
rear yard setback of not less than twenty-
five percent (25%) of the lot depth with
not less than twenty-five (25) feet
permitted or more than forty (40) feet
required for the main building.
Zoning History:
1984 — Lot is platted.
1985 — Home, Garage, and Deck are
built.
Legal Description of Property:
Pt. 28, Auditor's Subdivision #129
Public Utilities:
Home is connected.
Transportation:
73 %2 Avenue street easement provides
access to the residence.
Physical Characteristics:
Typical suburban lot and landscaping.
SUMMARY OF PROJECT
The petitioners, Mr. and Mrs. Jackels are seeking to
reduce the required rear yard setback from 25 feet to
15 feet to allow the construction of a screened porch
with a workshop located below the porch.
SUMMARY OF HARDSHIP
"The proposed addition, shown in the attached
drawing, will not maintain the 25 foot rear yard
setback. This is a request to modem the rear yard
setback to 1 S ft. This request is based on the
following hardship:
• Building the addition in this location would
allow us to use the current door existing on the
rear of the house.
• The only other location allowed within the
stipulated setbacks is on the west end of the house
where we have bedrooms and no exterior exit.
■ Placement of the west side would contribute to
changing the character of the neighborhood.
All of the homes with porches have them
on the back.
The screened porch would be visible from
the street.
It would make our house 80 ft. long. "
- Jon and Debra Jackels
SUMMARY OF ANALYSIS
City Staff has no recommendation as this variance is
within previously granted dimensions.
Similar variances granted:
• VAR #00-09 8191 Ruth Circle
Rear yard setback reduced from 25 ft. to 15 ft.
CITY COUNCIL ACTION/ 60 DAY DATE
City Council — March 25, 2002
60 Day — March 25, 2002
(Existing Home)
Staff Report Prepared by: Stacy Stromberg
VAR #02-04
REQUEST
Petitioners, Jon and Debra Jackels, are seeking to reduce the rear yard setback from
25 feet to 15 feet to allow the construction of a screened porch with a workshop located
below the porch at 1479 73 Y2 Avenue.
LOT SPLIT ANALYSIS
The property is zoned R-1 Single family and is accessed by a street easement off 73Y2
Avenue. The existing home, garage, and deck were built in 1985.
Existing Home & Attached Garage
This property is part of a lot split, LS #84-08, that was granted in 1984. The original lot
that is located at 1482 Onondaga Street was split to allow this additional single-family
lot. There are characteristics relating to this lot that are atypical to a standard Fridley
lot. What made this lot so atypical is where the lot was split, the stipulated front yard
and rear yard setbacks and the twenty-seven foot street easement coming off 73 Y2
Avenue.
The Lot Split — The original lot was 301 feet by 110 feet. Instead of splitting the lot
completely in half, which would have left 150 ft. by 110 ft. for each lot, the newly
created lot was split to 121 ft. by 110 ft. While this dimension provides over the
minimum lot area required for a single-family lot, it severely limited the area in which the
new house could be built.
Stipulated Front Yard and Rear Yard Setback — When the lot split was granted it was
stipulated that the front yard setback be 44 feet and the rear yard setback be 25 feet.
City Code requires that if the front yard setback of neighboring homes is greater than
the minimum front yard setback (which in 1984 would have been 35 ft.) then, the
setback for the new structure can be six (6) feet more or less of the average depth of
the adjacent structures. In no case shall it be less than the required front yard setback.
The Code also states that if one of the adjacent properties is vacant, the assumed
setback (35 ft.) will be the minimum front yard setback requirement.
Based on the above City Code requirements, a front yard setback of 44 feet was
determined. The home immediately to the east is setback at 65 feet from the right-of-
way and the lot to the west hasn't been split and is vacant, so the front yard setback of
35 feet was assumed. The average of these two setbacks is 50 feet, when you
add/minus 6 feet, the front yard setback options for this site were 44 feet or 56 feet.
The minimum setback of 44 feet was then stipulated for this lot. After the front yard
setback was determined, the rear yard setback was stipulated at 25 feet, leaving only
25 feet for the new home to be located within.
Street Easement — This is one of those rare instances where the property is without a
dedicated pubic right-of-way and was instead allowed to exist with a 27 ft. street
easement along the front of the lot in order to gain street access. This decision was
probably made with the thought that eventually all of the large lots on Onondaga Street
and 73' Avenue would be split and thus a road would be needed and 73 Y2 Avenue
would eventually either go all the way through to Hayes Street or would end in a cul-de-
sac.
The current Engineering Staff has stated that the only possibility of a 73 Y2 Avenue road
extension would be to have it connect though to Hayes Street. If this were to happen, it
would have to be approved by all homeowners along both Onondaga Street, 73`d
Avenue, and the homeowners along Hayes Street that it would affect. Many other
things have also changed since the 1984 lot split that would limit this road expansion.
A new apartment building has been built at 1461 73`d Avenue and its storm pond is
located in the area where the road extension would be located. Some homeowners
along Onondaga Street have constructed accessory structures in their rear yards which
limits their ability to have enough lot area to split their lots and the apartment building
located at 1441 73' Avenue has a garage that is located in the area directly along side
the road if it were to be extended.
It is important to mention that the property itself did have the required 25 feet of
frontage off 73 Y2 Avenue which would have enabled the lot to have access right off of
73'2 Avenue instead of creating this street easement.
VARIANCE ANALYSIS
As stated above the petitioners are seeking a variance to reduce the rear yard setback
from 25 feet to 15 feet to allow the construction of a screened porch with a workshop
located below the porch. The lot split that was granted for this property in 1984,
predetermined a set of standards for the property. Essentially due to the lot split
process this property has already received a variance to be 25 feet from the lot line,
instead of 30 feet, which is what would have been required.
View of Existing Deck
City Code states that decks may not extend more than ten (10) feet into any required
rear yard setback. The petitioner's existing deck encroaches ten feet into the rear yard
setback. Decks and unenclosed porches are allowed by code to encroach into the rear
yard setback; because while they are a structure, they are open and aren't as imposing
to neighboring properties. Once a structure is enclosed, it becomes more intrusive, can
obstruct site lines, and provides less area for adequate open space. When a structure
is enclosed, it also becomes living area and needs to meet the rear yard setback
requirement.
SUMMARY OF HARDSHIP
`The proposed addition, shown in the attached drawing will not maintain the 25 foot rear
yard setback. This is a request to modify the rear yard setback to 15 feet. This request
is based on the following hardship:
• Building the addition in this location would allow us to use the current door
existing on the rear of the house.
• The only other location allowed within the stipulated setbacks is on the west
end of the house where we have bedrooms and no exterior exist.
• Placement on the west would contribute to changing the character of the
neighborhood.
All of the homes with porches have them on the back.
The screened porch would be visible from the street.
It would make our house 80 feet long.
- Jon and Debra Jackels — also see
attached letter from Petitioner's
RECOMMENDATIONS
City Staff has no recommendation, as it's within previously granted dimensions.
• VAR #00-09 8191 Ruth Circle
Rear yard setback reduced from 25 ft. to 15 ft.
STIPULATIONS
Staff recommends that if the variance is granted, the following stipulations be attached.
1. The petitioner shall obtain all necessary building permits prior to construction.
2. The addition shall be architecturally compatible with existing home and finished with
same siding and color scheme.
3. No decks, stairs, or other appurtenances shall extend any closer than 15 feet to the
rear yard property line.
4. The addition shall not be allowed to have a shed roof. The roof shall have a pitch to
match the existing structure. The roof shall be perpendicular to the existing
structures ridge line and should have a gable end.
1479 73 % Avenue NE
Fridley, MN 55432
763-780-8413
January 24, 2002
City of Fridley
6431 University Avenue
Fridley, Mn 55432
To Whom It May Concern:
We would like to replace the existing deck on the back of our house, shown in the
attached photo, with a screened porch and workshop. A variance is needed to allow for
this addition.
Lot 28 was split to allow the construction of the house. The Council's approval to split
the lot in 1984 included the following stipulations:
1. Provide a 27 ft. street easement.
2. Front yard setback of 44 ft.
3. Rear yard setback of 25 ft.
The proposed addition, shown in the attached drawing, will not maintain the 25 ft. rear
yard setback. This is a request to modify the rear yard setback to 15 ft. This request is
based on the following hardships:
• Building the addition in this location would allow us to use the current door exiting
the rear of the house.
• The only other location allowed within the stipulated setbacks is on the west end
of the house where we have bedrooms and no exterior exit.
• Placement on the west would contribute to changing the character of the
neighborhood.
o All of the homes with porches have them on the back.
o The screened porch would be visible from the street.
o It would make our house 80 ft. long.
Thank you for your consideration.
Respectfully,
Jon & De ra Jackels
Description of the Proposed Addition to 1479 73 % Ave NE in Fridley Minnesota
The proposal is to replace the existing 10 ft x 12 ft elevated deck with a 10 ft x 20 ft
screened porch. The new porch will be the same elevation as the existing deck with an
excavated lower level that is intended for use as a workshop.
Initially the porch will just be screened, however, it will be constructed so windows could
be added making it a three -season porch.
The addition will be constructed of a concrete foundation with concrete block walls and
a concrete floor for the workshop level. The remainder of the addition will be wood
frame.
CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY
For:
HENRY KORMAN
ONONDAGA STREET
N
aor//i /rint o/' Co/ 2B. o
m
EXCEPT/ON
,*,Ih Ave o/' /✓o f/, /BU feel o/ Lo/eB.
RA
N
� �� i9oodwoy, Li-o�naye E'l//,/�f. Easeii�en/ � N
y
MOO
of Lot 2e.
731/2 AVENUE N.E.
Lot 28, AUDITOR'S SUBDIVISICN NO. 129, Anoka County,
Minnesota. Except the north 180.00 feet thereof.
ISCALE1 Inch = X- Feet I o Denotes Iron I Bearings shown are on an assumed dotum.I Job No.E-OrI Book _ Page �
We hereby certify that this is a true and correct representation of a survey of the E. G. RUD 8c SONS, INC.
boundaries of the above described land and of the location of all buildings, if any, LAND SURVEYORS
thereon, and all visible encroachments, if any, from or on said land.
E.G. RUD 8c SONS INC. 9560 Lexington Avenue N.
r1liac 8S _ New Brighton (Lexington), Minnesota
Dated this Z ay of a—. 55112
by Minn. Reg. No.Telephone: 786-5556
9 Q
JAN -24-2002 10:05 FROM CITY OF FRIDLEY
I II
t TO 6512054526 P.02s08
L.S. #84-08, Don Hanson 2 E
New building site at
1501 73 1/2 Avenue N. E.
in
a
i *17.
N
Sc
A
vE
HM -2000 -USA -1 151-0195
YJINDOYdS 9S/98/2GG0/N1°
Scale 1:1094R.�a
1�
C11YoF
FRIDLEY
FRIDLEY MUNICIPAL CENTER - 6431 UNIVERSITY AVE. N.E. FRIDLEY, MN 55432 - (763) 571-3450 - FAX (763) 571-1287
February 4, 2002
Jon and Debra Jackels
1479 73 Y2 Avenue NE
Fridley MN 55432
Dear Mr. and Mrs. Jackels:
Per Minnesota Statute 15.99, local government units are required to notify land use
applicants within 10 working days if their land use applications are complete. We
officially received your application for a variance on January 25, 2002. This letter
serves to inform you that your application is complete.
Your Variance application hearing and discussion will take place at the City of Fridley
Appeals Commission Meeting on February 27, 2002 at 7:30 P.M. in the City Council
Chambers at 6431 University Avenue. If your variance application needs to be
reviewed by the City Council, the meeting will be held on March 25, 2002 at 7:30 in the
City Council Chambers.
If you have any questions regarding this letter or the process, please feel free to contact
me at 763-572-3595.
Sincerely,
ial&tiLt, 9''
Stacy romberg
Planner
C-02-12
CITY OF FRIDLEY
6431 UNIVERSITY AVENUE
FRIDLEY, MN 55432
(763) 572-3592
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
VARIANCE APPLICATION FOR:
A Residential
Commercial/Industrial I I Signs
PROPERTY INFORMATION: (site plan required for submittal, see attached)
Address: IH19 "13`/-s. Aye- lVE-
Property Identification Number:
Legal Description: Lot 2.S Block Tract/Addition
Current Zoning:
Reason for Variance:
Square Footage/acreage:
Have you operated a business in a city which required a business license?
Yes No A If Yes, which City?
If Yes, what type of business?
Was that license ever denied or revoked? Yes No
.�IAII..N.Y/Y..r.V.VIVI./I./.....V.Y.VM.VIV IV/�/.�I.bIV1./../MIS/�V.VMNI./1VIV/.//./.�/A/�VM/V IVA/AI�1/A/NI.//VIV /1//H/11/Y1VIVA/iV../1V A/IV /�/IV.V.�./IVNiV.VN^1.rn.Ib.V
FEE OWNER INFORMATION (as it appears on the property title)
(Contract purchasers: Fee owners must sign this form prior to processing.)
NAME: Jo- V Ao,6Ceks 17e>o�ca J . Jac,1�\s
ADDRESS: 4i � ' Nle -. &Ve-
DAYTIME PHONE: 6\2-?Rco- 8235 SIGNATURE/DAT 1-Z'-200z-
iYN.1//./.V/V.VIVAI../.V/�1/VIVAIIVIVA./AIIVIV.V IV /./.I/1V M1VIV.V.VIV IYIVIY.YIY.V'VA/AI.YI.�/I�1I VAb.i1.V.V.V.V�V.V.V.V1.//V/1/IV.VIV 1\/.V /VI.//Y/V.VA/MA/A/.VIVMIVA/
PETITIONER INFORMATION
NAME: J oT\y 3 cac�F \5
ADDRESS: 14'1 - 91z Ne- NE. CC,C\\*MN 554i2_
DAYTIME PHONE: Co12-2R(p-8235 SIGNATURE/ ATE: -
Section of City Code:
FEES
Fee: $100.00 for commercial, industrial, or igns:
Fee: $60.00 for residential properties: Receipt #:
Application Number: 4,4AA- b
Scheduled Appeals Commission Date: 0 1.2 7 0'a
Scheduled City Council Date: 2, 522 10A
10 Day Application Complete Notification D te: e--1-
60
--1-60 Dav Date: 3 la"s /oIf
Received By:
i'
VARIANCE APPLICATION
SUBMISSION CHECKLIST
The following shall be the minimum submission requirements to the Appeals
Commission. Applications will not be accepted if the following is not submitted:
RESIDENTIAL:
ITEM
SUBMITTED
RECEIVER'S
COMPLETE
REVIEWER'S
INITIALS
INITIALS/DATE
Completed application, with fee
(Application is considered complete if
all blanks are completed, and both fee
X
owner and petitioner have signed)
Scaled site plan of property showing
north arrow, existing and proposed
structures, lot and block number,
X
adjacent street names, and buildings on
adjacent lots within 10 feet of the
common lot lines.
Elevation of building and description of
materials.
Narrative of proposed building.
COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL:
ITEM
SUBMITTED
RECEIVER'S
COMPLETE
REVIEWER'S
INITIALS
INITIALS
Completed application, with fee
(Application is considered complete- if
all blanks are completed; and both fee .
owner and petitioner have signed)
Scaled site plan of property showing
north arrow, existing and proposed
structures, lot and block number,
adjacent street names, and buildings on
adjacent lots within 10 feet of the
common lot lines.
Elevation of building and description of
materials.
Landscape plan for all projects requiring
a parking lot expansion of four (4) or
mores aces.
Grading and drains a plan.
Erosion control plan.
Calculations for stormwater runoff:
CITY OF FRIDLEY PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE
BEFORE THE APPEALS COMMISSION
TO:
Residents within 350 feet of 1479 73Y2 Avenue
CASE NUMBER:
VAR #02-04
APPLICANT:
Jon V. Jackels
1479 73Y2 Avenue
Fridley, MN 55432
Petitioner or representative must be at meeting.
PURPOSE:
To reduce the rear yard setback from 25 feet to 15 feet to
allow the construction of a screened porch with a workshop
located below the porch on Lot 28, Auditor's Subdivision No.
129
LOCATION OF
PROPERTY.
1479 73Y2 Avenue
LEGAL
DESCRIPTION:
Lot 28, Auditor's Subdivision No. 129
DATE AND TIME
Appeals Commission Meeting, Wednesday, February 27,
OF HEARING:
2002, at 7:30 p.m.
The Appeals Commission meetings are televised live the
night of the meeting on Channel 17.
PLACE OF
Fridley Municipal Center, City Council Chambers
HEARING:
6431 University Avenue
HOW TO
1. You may attend hearings and testify.
PARTICIPATE:
2. You may send a letter before the hearing to Paul Bolin,
Planning Coordinator, or Stacy Stromberg, Planner, at
6431 University Avenue N.E., Fridley, MN 55432 or fax at
763-571-1287.
SPECIAL
Hearing impaired persons planning to attend who need an
ACCOMMODATION:
interpreter or other persons with disabilities who require
auxiliary aids should contact Roberta Collins at 763-572-3500
no later than February 20, 2002. (TDD 763-572-3534)
ANY QUESTIONS:
Contact Paul Bolin, Planning Coordinator, at 763-572-3599,
or Stacy Stromberg, Planner, at 763-572-3595.
Mailing Date: February 15, 2002
ALPERT LAWRENCE I BOURGEOIS GERALD V COTE CLIFFORD A
1500 ONONDAGA ST NE 1483 ONONDAGA ST NE 1473 ONONDAGA ST NE
FRIDLEY,MN 55432 FRIDLEY,MN 55432 FRIDLEY,MN 55432
(-ow",--L
CURRENT RESIDENT CURRENT RESIDENT CURRENT RESIDEN
1441 73RD AVE NE 1461 73RD AVE NE 1495 75TH AVE NE
FRIDLEY,MN 55432 FRIDLEY,MN 55432 FRIDLEY,MN 554324"/ j'
EWER CHESTER W JR & ARLENE FAGERWOLD DOUGLAS A FRIDLEY I OF
1565 73RD AVE NE 1505 73RD AVE NE 6, UNIV SITY AVE NE
FRIDLEY,MN 55432 FRIDLEY,MN 55432 FRIDLEY 5432
HACHEY JOHN L & JUDY B HANSON GEORGE A & MARIJANE HJORT HARRIET W
1545 73RD AVE NE 1476 ONONDAGA ST NE 1434 ONONDAGA ST NE
FRIDLEY,MN 55432 FRIDLEY,MN 55432 FRIDLEY,MN 55432
HOESCHEN KENNETH R & K E JACKELS JON V & DEBRA J KALLROOS THOMAS L & SANDRA
1510 73 1/2 AVE NE 1479 73 1/2 AVE NE 1466 ONONDAGA ST NE
FRIDLEY,MN 55432 FRIDLEY,MN 55432 FRIDLEY,MN 55432
KEPULIS ROBERT & EVA KLICK JOYCE ADELE KOROSCHETZ KURT J & TRUDY C
1525 73RD AVE NE 1506 ONONDAGA ST NE 7350 PINETREE LN NE
FRIDLEY,MN 55432 FRIDLEY,MN 55432 FRIDLEY,MN 55432
KRASKA DANIEL & LAUREEN M LARSON LEROY A & MIEKO LUNDAHL KATHRYN K
1488 ONONDAGA ST NE 1503 73 1/2 AVE NE 1535 73RD AVE NE
FRIDLEY,MN 55432 FRIDLEY,MN 55432 FRIDLEY,MN 55432
MURPHY DAREL L & JOANNE NALEPKA STEVEN MICHAEL NELSON RONALD A & PATRICIA
1491 ONONDAGA ST NE 7360 PINETREE LN NE 1487 ONONDAGA PL NE
FRIDLEY,MN 55432 FRIDLEY,MN 55432 FRIDLEY,MN 55432
NORDIN REUBEN T & DONNA E PACKEY JOSEPH A & JILL A O PIETRINI JEROME F & CHERYL
1540 73 1/2 AVE NE 1520 73 1/2 AVE NE 1469 ONONDAGA ST NE
FRIDLEY,MN 55432 FRIDLEY,MN 55432 FRIDLEY,MN 55432
SABA STEVE R SANFORD DAVID & CROWLEY ANGELA SHATTUCK DANIEL & RENAE
1470 ONONDAGA ST NE 1523 73 1/2 AVE NE 1337 MISSISSIPPI
FRIDLEY,MN 55432 FRIDLEY,MN 55432 NEW BRIGHTON,MN 55112
SHATTUCK DAN L & RENAE S SHEREK GERALD J & SUSAN M VAN AUKEN TIMOTHY J
1337 MISSISSIPP 1530 73 1/2 AVE NE 1475 73RD AVE NE
NEW BRIGHTON 55112 FRIDLEY,MN 55432 FRIDLEY,MN 55432
VANAUKEN TIMOTHY J
1485 73RD AVE NE
FRIDLEY,MN 55432
WICKMAN GERALD J & MARTHA J
1494 ONONDAGA ST NE
FRIDLEY,MN 55432
WAZWAZ AIDA
1533 73 1/2 AVE NE
FRIDLEY,MN 55432
YOUNG DAVID A
1482 ONONDAGA PL NE
FRIDLEY,MN 55432
WESTBY JOHN G & VIRGINIA K
1467 ONONDAGA ST NE
FRIDLEY,MN 55432
LEGEND N Sources:
Jon and Debra J a c ke i s A Andover Engineering
Andover GIS
1479 73 1/2 Avenue Anoka County GIS
Map Date: 2/14/02