The URL can be used to link to this page

LS67-05 CITY OF FRIDLEY TYPE OF REQUEST MINNESOTA Rezoning PLANNING AND ZONING FORM Special Use Permit Number #67-05 Variance APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE (Signed below) ROBERT D. D eGARDNER X Lot Splits L .3 2010 - 17th Avenue North Address Minneapolis, Minnesota 55411 Approval of Pre- Telephone Number 529-3584 liminary Plat Approval of Final PROPERTY OWNER'S SIGNATURE (Signed below) VERA JOHNSON Plat 825 Howard Street, Winona, Minnesota Streets or Alley-.., Address Vacations represented locally by Mr. Ronald J. Werner Telephone Number_ attorney 335-7725 X Other Ordinance Waiver and approval of new residential 5Z5 construction on split lots Street Location of Property 522 Kimball Street, Fridley Legal Description of Property Lots 52, 53, and 54, Block E, Riverview Heights Present Zoning Classification Residential Existing Use of the Property Residential _v Proposed Zoning Classification, Special Use, Variance or other request Request lot split on specials and ordinance waiver for building on affected lots Describe briefly the Type of Use and the Improvement Proposed Home constfuction Acreage of Property Has the Present Applicant Previously Sought to Rezone, Plat, Obtain a Lot Split, Obtain a Variance or Special Use Permit on the Subject Site or Part of It? When? What was Requested Fee Enclosed $ Date Filed Date of Hearing .,^: . ,._ ' ♦ {.. i �� S' .. _ • ..i7 -...� _�. .. �) _ .. - .. . �. .. •.� Ali .. �, � .. r �; � _ ., .,.. ..:� .. , :. .y.,. �.. ,. .,; .. PLANNING AND ZONING FORM PACE 2 Number#67-05 The undersigned understands that: (a) A list of all residents and owners of pro- perty within 300 feet must be attached to this application. (b) This application must be signed by all owners of the property, or an explanation given why this is not the case. (c) Responsibility for any defect in the pro- ceedings t4su;.Ling from the failure to list the names and !�jddresses of all residents and property owners of property within 300 feet of the property in question, belongs to the undersi-ned. Residents and Nners of Property within 300 keet: PERSONS ADDRESS Not Applicable A sketch of proposed property and structure must be draun on the back of this form or attached, showing the following: 1. North Direction 2. Location of Proposed Structure on lot. 3. Dimensions of property, proposed structure, and front and side set-backs. 4. Street Nacres 5. Location and use of adjacent existing buildings (within 300 feet) . The undersigned hereby declares that all the f t and representations stated in this application are true and correct. DATE �k�^�i %� SIGNATURE (APPLIC ) � oY ak oti �t ak � 4e dF Approved Denied By the 2oard of lAppes3s Subject to the Following Conditions: date Approved Denied by the Planning Commission on Subject to the Following Conditions: date Approved Denied by the Council on Subject to the Following Conditions: date Form PC 100 r - 560-3450 Ytat ANOKA COUNTY 6431 UNIVERSITY AVENUE NE FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA 55421 April 13, 1967 Mr. Ronald J. Werner Attorney at Law Suite 500-B Produce Bank Building 100 North 7th Street Minneapolis, Minnesota 55403 Re: Lot Split - Vera F. Johnson Dear Mr. Werner: I am enclosing herewith the correct description for Parcel Numbers 925, 1150 and 1120. Apparently these are the only three Parcel Numbers now used for this property. Very truly yours, n _ C. Main C. Brunsell MCB:sh J r CORRECT DESCRIPTION (PER COUNTY AND MR. HERMANNIS DEPT.) Parcel 925 -- Lots 15, 16 (old Parcel 930) , 17 Cold par4;e_1. 935), and S. 101 of Lots 52, 53 (old parcel 1115) , and 54 (old parcel 1120), Block E, River View Heights Add'n Parcel 1115 -- Lots 52 & 53, Except. S. 101 Parcel 1120 -- Lot 54, Except S. 10, suoha�_nSr .r� sou bu7 '.)Nl `V N11I33N19N3 Nb9 m 9ns Aiap- —y saN ata h9 pa`ianuns sd puo/p!as-un ao pun'pr o; Paq,,nnp a�vgc ay/�6 saircpunoq AW� `ian.ins D�v uo��D fuasa✓day paj�puD 9&q D S/ !;/1#1VW ��,f�a� A / °7 -7-,',OW `S-�"�'ua S-P-s{oy,f°//d 6-6 w r t N GN I ILI- I o �. Al ,Z ;03 ,�a1�.Ztss �O a;1e'�i3t�aa� sVOo dndns 3 siaou'Su3 9909-0Ixaff l"1X-WNiy 'O N I J N W A A N I J N 3 6u,/sal s,!os Z E sgor�oauui`y fu/ian✓ns PW7 3N 59s y.N SL89 k 6.� Land Planningcfa4 ff r(l &rm 6875-Hi9hnoy ;GS NE. Land Surveying Minniea�nlis 37. sons rstlny ENGINEERING, INC. Minnesota CMI&""klPol SUnsef 4 6066 EnEngineers Sur vectors certificate of sutve OZ ,c�erf ,R fe 9 � 1 1 • / /1 3 s I A L1 r` •( gu � _ Al Q> ler fx'ir�r'�iehf ffei f��`s /y r�� Har-ffi �'sf rl e/ Ae ,S FW10 asAr/41 4?0 fee l herby cerhty that tb1s rs a true and carred representation o/'a survey 'the boundaries qP& abort ohscr►W lwd,and 4"Ae location oral/buildings,thereon,and all risible encroachments,�`ony.{iaw or on said/and. As surveyed�(me doy A.9l9' SUB UR8AN EN6/NEE2I1V6, INC. 1179ineers E Surteyors 6 r Lond Plonnlny 6875-Nl9hnoy ;G5 WE. Lard Surwry MmneeoPOfu 32, Soils rst/,ry ENGINEERING, INC. Minncsofo Civ/!6-Afunicipal SUnsef d-6066 Eny ffwermy Engineers Sur vectors --- cettifica�te of survey -f or tit ` a S"A E J 34 v neu4rF5 !ROM y J z A/'�;� 0l`- 5"l, f/or` -E a,-7, 117a P-7, 0,r` Za/s - S"� V1,fa �3, 4fla-CA Z; /hereby cerfiry fhaf flys ,s a five and correct represedallon o�a survey �'} boundaries V'& abort d5c, ed arid,end oi'#jr loco inn a�'a!l buddinys,ffxiron,&7d all risible auroachmenfs,iCony,,fi-arn or on said land. As -surveyed by me Itus fh cby SUBURBAN ENGINEERING, INC. �r Ln!neer.s E SSur'rego-rs fond Planing bars-N�hrvoy 'SCS NE. Land Surveying MinneapJls 32, Soils Testiny ENGINEERING, INC. f'inxsota Civil&A4unicipal Slln�ef 4-6066 fn�ir�eermc� Engineers Sur ve ors certificate of surve Ad� 5r >/ T o _ DE'NOTF_ S ,K?IN 1 ill SET �(,��1,L�. Z�ow y t� C L ' Ilr�e aJ -6.5 (--— -- 9 99 7' J Lars 5 l Cy A//of�of�. .,s-�- crf;a�.S'6', ,�;��•�" a,�:� �hwl`prx,P->'`�f Lc!`-3"� ,c�'/�c�f`'-.E�, ��vc�rv�i�.�f �ycai�hfs /y„7q Nv, f/Swc�sfe@r/f/ of Ike l hereby (ediry that 65 is o kW and correGJ representation Ora survey 4 #)e bvvndaries q`'flee ober- discrlhed(and,and of'llr/ocvtion 001/buildings,ffiereon,ondd/risih/e vxmQchmenfs,!zany,f-an or on said land. As surveyed by me f1n5 --day 00 ,SUB UPS” ENGINEERING, INC. L-n veers E~ Su'reyors , A-1,41 Land Plonn,ny 6875 Al bwoy sG5 NE. Larxt Surveying Minneo�/S 3 Z, Sods resfin9 ENGINEERING, INC. llllncsol,7 Gvil fr Mumclpal SUmef 4-6066 Enyneerr9 Engineers Survegars certifscate of su rve got ,_. -�ll /4 v�q �T9 KIVI r I ► - r1 - at W t 'E o Al , t to „ r e D N. 2�t o 549..; aal 7 14 rj Af/of�of.,r-�'-�' array.5'd'J .�', :.�'�' a,7�r �,fiaf;r��,�-f'o,r,Co/`-..3':� �?/oc�-�� fr/Y�r✓r�s,�� Ala -!`h/d-''es•fer/y e�`1 e ��4`�'1r. c'CvNrY /hereby cerhly' tboi/his is o true and carred replesenfafion o�a survey *'#m bounder;es q'b►e obarr 06cf;w land,end of r'fx/ocpfiorl 001l buildings,Hereon,and ad risible eticrovchmenh,it'ony.fnrn or va said land. As surveyed by me aby A.0/9 SUBURS" ENGINEERING, INC. Lngaeers E- Surveyors I t City of Fridley, Minn. N '9357. BUILDING PERMIT Date: ....._.... 1` Z._-_--......._....__._...---•---•----.._....._ Owner: Builder __North Suburb.*n Elders. Address •------2010.._1h.._..Y ...XQVA..........____..........._ Address _..3218 67th ..'Ve. No. LOCATION OF BUILDING No. ............52$.......... street .....- -Kimball ..................-..............-......-................... .............. Part of Lot ....................................-..................................... _ Lot 4! M__ Block -------..._ ....--•_-- - Riverview Heights - Addition or Sub-Division - ..... --..........._._. SO CornerLot .................._........ Inside Lot . -- -...............-.......... Setback ..__gs...........-........... Sideyard ..........-._.. --_-._................................... Sewer Elevation .......................................-................................................... _--------- ............. ......_............._........-------------- ----------------- DESCRIPTION -DESCRIPTION OF BUILDING To be Used as: ___....__..i2i+t4.l1ID&........ Front -49........_.. Depth ...._ '�1.._ Height .._-'...� .._.. Sq. Ft. �S.... __ Cu. Ft. 19,200 ........_...................._............_....... Front -----__..--•---. Depth _..._.............. Height ......_.............. Sq. Ft. .........._....... Cu. Ft. ........ .-._ Type of Construction FI' I ................................... Est. Cost _ 1 z.2.m..._....................... To be Completed ................................_............ 11M LOV-TION WATIM COCl'TION In consideration of the issuance to me of a permit to construct the building described above, I agree to do the proposed work in accordance with the description above set forth and in compliance with all provisions of ordinances of the city of Fridley. ---�-- In consideration of the payment of a fee of$.....-........?8� Permit is hereby granted to...._.North Suburb:;A - •, ....._...___..._.._._..___ Builders to construct the building or addition as described above. This permit is granted upon the express condition that the person to whom it is granted and his agents, employees and workmen, in all work done in, around and upon said building, or any part thereof, shall conform in all respects to the ordinances of Fridley, Minnesota regarding location, construction, alteration, maintenance, repair and moving of buildings within the city limits and this permit may be revoked at any time upon violation of any of the provisions of said ordinances. Suri= Building Inspector NOTICE: This permit does not cover the construction, installation for wiring, plumbing, pas heating, sewer or water. Be sun to see the Building Inspector for separate permits for these hems. a� 'p�J'Jq'� � i -.. ! yH,N"4 �tf�,�„.•f9^^�� .s ` tit 1�, .�� Y. .a''��.F`�'� r p.x r,`x�� s.i#�'A ,�^" ,�,p�;'{`�•., f `t a n�^�� 're•r y r�A� rf K � .k,i" >YZ ' v3 i' � 1°' •F .NM � b y ' J 7 � 5 as r, � �• t;�'° sv a rr r a � ��•'�,•'� �#.* a �,�°� }. ��.� � ��{T r'k' � ,'tea , -➢r t ;� `* �.,d..� skw,pr^� f r +K' .r s$Y ;zMS �or YA �i ,.n� om �F u t I s � 3 Xd";;��s+�-'y,�h•��" � ; ::� <vk��L ,v.i ober 7 '.$ r :�F't d�,'�'�•a. y'. , r �{ �� x s -. �.,A "c 6T �''�g �• � �� k "�5��i+a�, i*''� 'nom, kg q•{ - '':. .3 L;c . `�'`y n �77' �� o+Mr t,.y .•� �' T I }6 i:. e°'Mk 'Cn^ ` ;F "mac, r ,ar,r �n.• � s '.'�+3. ''�,r'-'fir` `rY x ,} At k�'.f%e w, f rr >r, 3s * a ,t r ik ,,"a T.... .e' •�^. Z, q5i7,4 x �r1p� x #� ; ,t�'R'ek✓ Yi�� w�`t �-6' '_'�+d°' �i. # 2 �. � ' w.d � Vii:� ,rrt�,�'�A �� '�� . wi 3•-, �,,,( dei '.� yc rim i„y$ MW3 as w � fi's t .3 " ¢✓ r " �•� �r.a �+'fi y x't� �` 41�. � }n a� ^zs�f.r 3a a mss. ai' „i.a }ts to r" aa22'uf'• �;��j��,yy � #x Land Planning cg7s Nlyhwriy fC5 vE. Land Survey ny Miniaeopols72, SoilsTesMy ENGINEERING, INC. All"nc-ola Civil b-Municipal SUnsef 4 6066 Enyineerin9 Engineers c Surveyors certiSita,te of surv'e for a±- 00 34 , 3' O 1 ( off lot fDr ' ) Ilk , t G L1f�N � A// or hofs-/✓; /6' end /7, 1 dr�d S3 Q��fh� ,Soaf/f'�asfer/y /5" feel of d Riy�°r�ie� ��i yrhfs. l hereby ceri;ry Phot Nh is a h ue and correct represenfofion era survecy ,,�' bavnderies #('#c oboes o6aybed:and,and locolion ol'all bv;ld�n9s,thereon,and all risible enanachmeals,!foxy,from or as sad land. As surveyed by me e/ ✓Ll�� A.Di9 v'' 7 SUB UR8", ENGINEERING, INC. Ln ineers E- Surveyors i yrs ono° �� Robt. DeGardner L.S. #67-05 . ' L. 52, 53 & 54, B1. E, Riverview Hts. ' .r f o y V .4 7-f X39 a ? o h ...,4 q,s•9+c 9 175- �7. .�..,...�.....�... 1 1. _.__ -------- •^ 3tr N_ err r -�. a7AISSISSIPPI i r 90• po. M 6O nz,z e; N3,8y d1 9�z / 7 3 �12I' p cc 7a ' 2s „ 2s 3° 3° ac ¢D 6 �a >�� G,t t SO 3%32? 343 G 377 q3& 99v� +` n ys,3° /0 9 30 " 17ZQ hr ?/ zr as \ /8 �I \I n y u tom•, frZO f9\ ` 2f\j°t DZ�'' 1 Y1 ` t 7D- ,;;��' 9p � 9�A S . 1 4 ti 122 � 3 �\ \12x2,Zd 9 A 174 itiW% 10 15 REV : 3° 2211.8.9 14 '\�Q�y / „ rte• , - - — ,»_ a v �� ' 1 r 9c � � � ''�'•�` �b �i�'o'3��FS , r�o /- _ \ 13J� 0` �3\ �� _ -6•_,_ i -'iT - t t • - .c.. .f•Y ri6•;6 177.2 \c-, ��t� °; , i1 !e1• , ..,+,^', i �� '7 �•. °.. J... ! py �q.�t Q5� � \^t \ `/D;9� �:�'� !3"' � r ^, �,_ o,�, .�3 •y Z °tx 3D ?°4 \ sfl \ � � ` ` � A 3 Z f��\ 3° 'b 'A$39(� 1, , t 11 , 4w �_9r tl e ° �8 L; \,f�� 3 16� i ° ,D `a x� �q 8\Zl•�2G� \ ac !�' qti 190 `•J rr�� 3D jD 3G 37 38 0�/� \3 �, \.-•,-\ \ 5 ob �j •, t � 1� 'P"��,8�� 3f 3 � G 5 q 3 � a '° �' q 4B'A9\ oNt /%'� �• .,�..-r •, �h y, 9•. 3 $3y 41 44 43` \ \._ a 10 ``3° j 3 2 30 30 8 40 - \t � _ \ o, 41 q 6+tIii 30 3 m^, �g`� \ ' I t� Eh. C ° 1y ,3D ` \ 1 0t9 a °s� 443 s 32� ( •, •� ~3o?c 1 133.4 e ,�„ '`,� \ Z f, �\ D�25 s 3" ?-n \"a't C\ S `� t 95 5/ ' y2 0 33 „ d 1 \ 7 6 3° i VIVd 9", 7 1„ zs { •{ =�v�Ip•n� Z`yq-� t n,, „`' ' � 1 rr ;_ , is 0<•� r, L.w, ,r , x;3/ \ ..\,.\.:;y+� �, � ._.11, r" #��i3 , , .r, �,,..,a1 1 ,., , ,tc�r 1 � \_..3D °$ _ �.•;-'�'.'��" 1 \ \ \ \ 'sl • cits -izl ANOKA COUNTY 1 6431 UNIVERSITY AVENUE NE FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA 55-121 To the Anoka County Auditor Dear Sir: hereby request to have the following parcels - Lot 54 Block E. Riverview Heights 57593/1120 Lot 55 " " " 57593/1125 Lot 56 57593/1130 Combined as fol lows: All of Lots 55 & 56 Block E, Riverview Heights and that part of Lot 54, Block E, Riverview Heights lying NWIy of the SEIy 15' thereof DIVIDE The SEIy 15' of Lot 54, Block E, Riverview Heights Yours truly 560=3450 1 �^ 4 ANOKA COUNTY M•'+r 6431 UNIVERSITY AVENUE NE FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA 55421 i- 4 „arch 27, 1067 Vera F. Joh-n---.)n 825 Howard Street t.,jinona, Z innesota 55987 Dear „rs. Johnson: The County has asked us to split the special assoss:,cnts`fGr a portion of Parcels 930, 935, 1115, and 1120, Block river ie:•r freights Addition irhich apparently hes been split off or solr.. • Please be advised that we ca nnOt qp l"Lt any existlno or futuro special assessments on this property .until such tine. as the lot split has been aj,proved by the City Council. The procedure for obtaining a lot split would be to make appl_cation th.rouc-h the cl City vngineer' s Office. Ver-, truly ycurs, alL Finance MCB:df :� 7��.' � n -1 nnka Cou;:t,. • S � RONALD J. WERNER 335-7725 ATTORNEY AT LAW SUITE 300.8 PRODUCE BANK BUILDING 100 NORTH 7TH STREET MINNEAPOLIS. MINN. 55403 August 31, 1967 Mr. Nasim Qureshi City Engineer City of Fridley 6431 University Avenue Fridley, Minnesota Re. Attached Planning and Zoning Form Petition 1. To split lots 52, 53, & 54, Block E, River- view Heights pursuant to Mr. Brunsellts letters of 3-27-67 and 4-13-67 2. Approval of planned new residential con- struction on shortened lots 52, 53, & 54, after said lot split by waiver of ordin- ance requirements due to position of existing home structure built prior to platting affecting said lots. Dear Mr. Qureshi: Attorney James J. Riley, 3107 Penn Avenue N., Minneapolis 529-9657, on behalf of his client contractor Robert D. De Gardner and myself on behalf of my client Vera F. Johnson (original landowner selling to De Gardner) are requesting the above two approvals by the City Council so that the title, tax, special assessment, and construction situations can be completely clarified. The lots in question were successfully placed through Torrens Land Registration proceedings T-1638 in Anoka County District Court, 10th Judicial District with Order and Decree of Regis- tration made and entered on February 6, 1967. Whereupon Anoka County asked the City of Fridley to split the special assessments for said lots (See: copy of Mr. Brunsellts letter of March 27, 1967, attached). Upon conferring with you, I was informed that a survey would be necessary for City Council approval of the lot split. The Torren's Examiner for Anoka County did not require a survey for the Torrents proceedings and we have since procured the necessary surveys (See: attached 3 copies each of four surveys showing the situation as the old pre-plat existing home affects the surrounding lots). In addition, Mr. Riley's client is herewith attaching a plot plan as to the shortened lots 52, 53, and 54, to show generally how he proposes to set the structural residential improvements thereon. Our proposal for lot splits in essence is that the southerly 20 feet of lots 52 and 53 be split off and the southerly 15 feet of lot 54 be split off so that the east-west line will cut through 52 and 53 at the end of the eves of this old pre-plat home at the northern most point of said home, and said line to then drop five feet southerly to cut east-west across lot 54 so that the then shortened lot 54 will be 95 feet long and lots 52 and 53 will be 90 feet long instead of the original 110 feet as platted. r - •l�r 1 .'1 c - — O L:_. J 1 or 'I f_ - II. .G _ a l • Mr. Nasim Qureshi -2- August 31, 1967 Then, of course, comes the problem of obtaining a waiver from the Council on the ordinance requirement that the back property line be 25 feet from the old house. It seems that although that ordinance applies to new construction, what we really have here is an old building built prior to the platting which is really not entitled to such ordinance protection because the hardship as to use of the remainder of the lots upon which this old structure encroaches is such that the owner could not then as a practical matter use or sell the land and it would most likely become a weed infested eyesore ultimately to be let go for back taxes and possibly a source of trouble to the municipality to get rid of pests, weeds, and other obnoxious problems. Therefore, Mr. DeGardner has provided a plot plan outlining his proposed sttu.ctural improvements upon the 75' shortened and irregular lots of 51, 52, and 53, and upon the 75' shortened and irregular lots of 54, 55, & 56, which would be an asset to the com►minity and be the best and highest use for this land without cost to taxpayers or without any real actual disadvantage to esthetics, welfare, or other basic police., sanitation, or ordinance purposes. Of course, once these approvals are met, Mr. De Gardner is willing to quit claim to Vera Johnson any and all rights he may have to the southerly 20 feet of lots 52 and 53, and to the southerly 15 feet of lot 54, in order to facilitate the prompt implementation of these proposals if the City Council will approve. The existing state of the lot lines in the Torrens Office in Anoka County at present were based upon estimates made withou benefit of surveys and these will be corrected by quit claim deeds so soon as the desires of the City Council are known in these matters. You indicated that we should submit what information we have and please feel free to call Mr. Riley or myself if any additional requirements are needed for this presen- tation. Thank you for your kind attention to this matter. Ver ly yours, RONALD J. RJW/s c Enclosures: 1-Letter, Marvin C. Brunsell, March 27, 1967 2-Letter, Marvin C. Brunsell, April 13, 1967 3-Planning and Zoning Form 4-3 copies - survey of Lots 51, 52, and 53 for DeGardner 5-3 copies - survey of Lots 54, 55, and 56 for DeGardner 6-3 copies - survey of Lots 15, 16, and 17 for Vera F. Johnson 7-3 copies - large survey of Lots 15, 16, 17, and 52, 53, & 54 - Vera Johnson 8-Plot plansof proposed structures - by DeGardner September 28, 1967 Mr. Bernhard Suhi 533 Jaxesville Street H.E. Fridley, Minn. 55432 Re: Lot Split Rerpuest L.S. i%-57-05 Daar Mr. Suh 1. The Plmwiz% Comission of the City of Fridley has been requeaated to make a recoumvndutiou to the City Council ou a Lot Split request which directly involvas the property that you are Dnow 0cculyy irag. The Comi,ss ion is very interested in learning what your feelings are with reference to this reques t. One vatter that is of great concerts to the Cm=isx1ou is the savage disposal eystem which serves your house; namely, is the house hooked to the City sager system, and if so, to vet street and if uat, what is the location of the private eyvtom. For there ressous the Planniug Consaissi= requests your att»erndanca at their newt r ettiug to be held at 7x30 P.M. in the City Hall on October 5, 1967. If you cannot attend, would you Please Cost-act re by phone or letter prior to that date at the City Mall (Tel.. 560-3450). Yours very truly, D ARML CLARK EYW,ineeritw .ass istar.t DC t ob i - Planning Con-mission Meetir. September 28 1967 Page 5 Mr. _Dumphy_said the signs would Abe_uniform so as not to disturb the con- ' f_ormity_ of_the_buil.ding. _ Mr. 'Schroeder ysaid the landlord would control the type of sign put up, - .but if the tenant wants a_1_arge__size sign, the landlord_ can say__!'no!!. Chairman Hughes wondered if they could layout some percentage the landlord could use. The person who is leasing the premises always wants a large sign. Mr. Schroeder said it gets to the point where really the landlord is the person who would have the greatest amount to lose to permit a sign which is not in good taste with either himself or the other tenants. Most of the shopping centers are exercising this kind of control. ThePlanning Commission felt only one permanent single free standing sign a.___.... _._. ..__ _ .. ..__.__ _ may be elected in the district adjacent to East River Road to identify_the _-_ -`shopping- center. Chairman•Hughes said the Planning Commission was quite well satisfied on the basis of the specific people with whom they are dealing. Mr. Schroeder said they would be happy to include whatever percentage the Planning Commission would want. - Member Jensen asked, as this comes up for final development approval, will you have. some leases? Mr. Schroeder said the more permanent tenants probably would be secured by lease. MOTION by Myhra, seconded by Ylinen, that the Public Hearing of the Planned Development District, Harold Schroeder (ZOA #66-06) be closed. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. MOTION by Erickson, seconded by Jensen, that the Planning Commission recommend to Council approval�of_ the Planned Development District of. Sprin-brook Park as amended at the meeting of September 28, 1967 and calling_Council I s -- attentionvto the discussions of the changes of the proposals as underlined ,in. minutes. Upon a voicevote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. 2. LOT SPLIT REQUEST: L.S. #67-05, ZOBERT DeGARDNER REPRESENTED BY RONALD J. WERNER, ATTORNEY: Lots 52, 53 and 54, Block E, Riverview Heights. Mr. Werner, representing Mr. DeGardner, Mrs. Viola Johnson and James Riley, attorney, was present and also Mr. DeGardner. Mr. Werner gave a short resume of the problems relating to the requested lot split saying they found several title defects and the matter of title opinion was subject to what a survey would disclose. It became apparent it would- be -necessary to torrens all of the property because of the problems. A torrens petition was initiated in Anoka County and a decree issued on February .6, 1967 at 10:23 A.M. and signed by William T. Johnson, District Judge. This was done without a survey. The torrens examiner did not require a survey. The real estate agent stepped off what they thought was the encroachment and came up with 10 feet. The survey asked for in the contract for deed was requested six months after title. A letter was received from the City of Fridley because the County was asked to split assessments and. had to get a lot split approval. PlanningCommissionMeeting - September 28,. 1967 Page 6 Mr. DeGardner said he had gotten a permit to build a house on Lots 54,55 and 56. Mr. Werner said Mr. Suhl, present occupant of the house in question, has enough land even if the house is off center. Mr. DeGardner added that the lots are 90 feet deep and have 75 feet front- age. The problem is how imich to give on the lot split. The present home is an old two story farm house and it would not be feasible to pay the assessments as is (two frontages, on two streets). Mr. Werner said Mr. Suhl has been put on formal notice by Mr. Riley and himself to protect the contract for deed. At the present time, Mr. Suhl is four months in default. The owner of this property, Mrs. Vera Johnson of Winona, does not have the facilities to invest. She still owns Lots 15, 16 and 17 plus 10 feet on Lots 52 and 53. Mr. DeGardner owns Lots 48, 49 and 50, and part of 51. There is an old garage on Lot 51 which will be removed. This is a lot split request and also a request that Mr. DeGardner be allowed to build on Lots 51, 52 and 53, and to continue construction on Lots 54, 55 and 56. The Engineering Assistant said that in this area, a fifty foot lot can be built one Mr. Werner said they feel the best thing would be to tear down the old house, but it is not desirable at this time. An alternate is to put something beautiful. on Lots 51,52 and 53 and it will become an asset to the community. Mr. DeGardner said if he had to give more than 20 feet, he could not do it and build. Chairman Hughes said that one of the basic reasons for specifying minimum side yard setbacks is to avoid close crowding between structure. In this parti- cular instance, it seems likely that any new structure that is having to con- form, from the standpoint of crowding of the structures, does not offer this problem. Is there a problem presented by water dropping from the eaves? Would clearance have to be provided? The proposed lot line is 2.2 feet from the foundation. Mr. Werner said there were no utility easements along the back lot line. He said he wrote a letter to Mr. Suhl dated August 31, 1967 urging him to retain legal council and attend the proceedings. Mr. Werner asked just where is the drain field and what lots does that drain field effect, if any? Chairman Hughes said if the drain field is not on Mr.. Suhl's property, there is no effect. Mr. Werner said themortgagecompany, which loaned the money, would like to know what is going on and they would want definite approval. Member Erickson said it seems satisfaction has already taken place. It is going to require an approval of a lot split in order to build on that por- - tion -right now. Before I .would vote .for such a lot split, all. parties involved should be contacted.- I do not think the City could be a part of such a lot split without everybody involved. Planning Commission Meeti September 28 1967 Page 7 Member Myhra asked whose responsibility it was to notify all parties con- cerned in a lot split. Chairman Hughes replied that the Planning Commission could not consider the application unless all of the owners involved are parties to the application and he was not sure this was the situation in this request. He suggested the matter be carried over until October 12th and instruct the secretary to send copies of the minutes, along with a letter, indicating when the matter will be discussed again to Mr. Suhl. The letter should urge him to attend the meeting on the 1.2th. r Member Jensen asked if Mr. Werner could verify the location of the sewage disposal facilities. Mr. Werner believed a permanent lot split would be the best solution. Mr. Suhl may have something in mind such as a private five foot easement for the land under the eaves so that a stepladder could be used for painting or repairs of the eaves. Member Erickson asked if there would be a liability on the part of the City if they granted a lot split without Mr. Suhl being at the meeting, and did Mr. DeGardner intend to convey the 20 feet by deed. Mr. DeGardner said on Lot 54 the deed has already been given. MOTION by Erickson, seconded by Ylinen, that the Planning Commission table until October 12th the Lot Split (L.S. #67-05), Robert DeGardner, of Lots 52, 53 and 54, Block E, Riverview Heights and request Mr. Suhl to be notified of the meeting and request his presence at this meeting. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. 3. REZONING REQUEST, ZOA #67-10, HENRY LAPIDES: Lots 29 and 30, Block 12, Hyde Park to be rezoned from R-2 to R-3A. Mr. Henry Lapides was present and asked the Planning Commission to refer to the drawing of the proposed apartment unit, and also the drawing showing the structures in the neighborhood. He felt that by putting a nice appearing building on the corner lot, and taking away an old building, they could enhance the neighborhood and still fit in with the rest of the area. In back of the apartment house is University Avenue, there is commercial on 3rd Street on the South end and at 59th Avenue is another commercial piece. This is a mixed area with several types of uses. MOTION by Ylinen, seconded by Myhra, that the Planning Commission set a public hearing date of October 26, 1967 for ZOA #67-10, Henry Lapides, of Lots -29 and 30, Block 12, Hyde Park to be rezoned from R-2 to R-3A. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. RE: ITEM 2, LOT SPLIT REQUEST (L.S. #67-05) : The Planning Commission decided to hold a Special Meeting on Thursday, October 5, 1967 for the purpose of hearing the Lot Split (L.S. #67-05), . Robert DeGardner of Lots 52, 53 and 54, Block E. Riverview Heights instead of the regular meeting of October 12, 1967. 4. BONDING OF CONTRACTORS: The City Attorney Herrick told the Commission he talked with the Rich- field Attorney who stated. that Richfield use Off Street Parking Permit Agreement form and Bonding procedure to everything except single family PLANNING CO1*1ISSION MEETING OCTOBER 5, 1967 PAGE 1 The meeting was called to order at 7:38 P.M. by Chairman Hughes. ROLL CALL: Members Present: Myhra, Jensen, Hughes, Erickson Members Absent: Ylinen Others Present: City Attorney Herrick, Engineering Assistant Clark APPROVE MINUTES OF PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: SEPTEMBER 2.8, 1967 Member Jensen called attention to Page 4 stating second paragraph from the bottom should read "the agreement by the petitioners to restrict signs on the building so that they could not extend above the top of the roof line". Member Erickson asked the following correction by made on Page 6, the first sentence of the last paragraph on the page should read "Member Erickson said it seems that a lot split has already taken place". MOTION by Jensen, seconded by Myhra, that the minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of October 5, 1967 be approved as corrected. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. RECEIVE MINUTES OF BUILDING STANDARDS-DESIGN CONTROL SUBCOMMITTEE MEETING: SEPTEMBER 19, 1967 MOTION by Erickson, seconded by Jensen, that the Planning Commission re- ceive the minutes of the Building Standards-Design Control Subcommittee meeting of September 19, 1967. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. RECEIVE MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF APPEALS MEETING: SEPTEMBER 27, 1967 MOTION by Myhra, seconded by Erickson, that the Planning Commission receive the minutes of the Board of Appeals meeting of September 27, 1967. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. ORDER OF AGENDA: Inasmuch as there were no additions or objections to the order of agenda, the items would be considered as written. 1. CONTINUED LOT SPLIT REQUEST: L.S. YM7105,_ROBERT DeG_ARDNER AND RONALD L. WERNER. ATTORNEY: Lots 52, 53 and 54, Block , iverview Heights. N Those present for this iter.. were Mrs. Vera Johnson, Mrs. Duane H. Anderson, Lucy Wold, Ronald J. Werner and Robert DeGardner. Chairman Hughes explained this lot split was held over because several questions were raised; one being if the present occupant of the house on Lots o 15, 16 and 17 was aware of this request and another being whether the utilities for the house on 15, 16 and 17 were properly located. Planning Commission Meeting - October 5, 1967 Page 2 The house is served by a private system, a septic tank and cesspool. Mrs. Johnson said the distance is about 15 feet from the corner of the porch to the cesspool and the septic tank is close to the house. The measurements were "stepped off". She said, as far as she knew, the septic tank still operates. Engineering Assistant Clark told the Planning Commission he had talked to Mr. Suhl and they were not coining to the meeting tonight as they were moving out and are not interested in the lot split. Mr. Werner said the Suhl's had retained an attorney, Spencer Sokolowski, 556 40th Avenue N.E. , Minneapolis, and that he and Mr. Sokolowski had been. negotiating since last Monday in an attempt to finalize Mr. Suhl's interest and they were hopeful of getting a quit claim deed from him within the next few days. It is possible they may remain as a month to month tenant. Chairman Hughes said he thought the Commission could assume the Suhls are aware of the fact that proceedings are taking place which might affect them and are also aware of the nature. The fact that they are not present, he did not think could be considered the fault of the Commission or petitioners. Mr. Werner asked if the Commission would wish a copy of the quit claim i, deed, but Chairman Hughes did not believe it was important to do that. Mr. Werner asked Mr. DeGardner that, if in the event the cesspool is on Lot 52, would he grant access to repair it. Mr. DeGardner felt it could be stipulated in the deed. Mr. Werner continued,then Mr. DeGardner would not be adverse to the owner repairing the cesspool while it is being used. Since his client desires to sell this property, and since she has no capital to invest, she would have to sell it as is. Mr. Werner, in answer to Member Myhra's question, said the eaves overhang the house by two feet. It was the surveyor's plan that if they took a full 20 feet off the South half of Lots 52 and 53, it would go right past the eaves. In having a full 90 feet in which to build, Mr. DeGardner still could put up an aesthetic structure. which would benefit the community. Member Myhra wondered if it would be wise procedure to have this that close, and asked Mr. DeGardner how much could he take off the 90 feet. He answered that he could not give more, but he would be willing to give an easement for that corner for maintenance and repair of the property. Mr. Werner said the house did not face blunt into the lot, but is at a sharp angle -- it is only a short corner. Member Erickson asked for the design of the roof. It was the high pitch type. Because there are gutters on the house, the water did not drop off at the corner. Mr. DeGardner said he did not think the drainage would be a problem as the land slopes east and west. Member Erickson said he would like to comment that if this lot split is granted, he be7.ieved the 20 feet should be 21 feet in order to give room to get around. He did not think that would affect Mr. DeGardner's property. Member Jensen recalled that if the Lot split were approved this evening with the additional foot, the Planning Commission would be directly in conflict Planning Commission Meetings October 5, 1.967 page 3 with the ordinance in regard to the required yard setback of 25 feet or 25% of the depth. Mr. Werner said, referring to his original argument, that when you have an old structure which was there before the platting, the old house is not entitled to the benefits of the present ordinance. The house is 85 years old and the land was platted in 1922. Mr. DeGardner said the depth of the proposed house is 24 feet and there is a 35 foot setback. He would have to allow about $500 less in value but the structure would look presentable. Member Myhra said he felt the Planning Commission had no right to violate an ordinance. Chairman Hughes said that the Planning Commission could recommend variation.- set by the ordinance. The question was raised as to whether it would be feasible to leave the lots the way they are. Member Jensen wondered if it would be feasible moving this old house to another part of the lot. Mr. DeGardner said he had known a feweo le who have p p tried to move an old home onto a new foundation, but it was almost a new home as far as taxes were concerned. A new basement would cost about $2,000, for moving the house $1,000 making $3,000 to be added to the selling price and you would get the same type of buyer. . This is not feasible. It is more of a hardship case to Mrs. Johnson if she can't split the lots. Mrs. Lucy Wold said she felt Mr. DeGardner would be the first one to object and if he feels he can build a new home with the old one there, and sell the new ones, this should be a recommendation for the lot split. Member Myhra said that a lot split is preferable to leaving the land as is . The less of the two evils is the lot split. There should be an easement for access to the roof and another for the maintenance of the cesspool. Mr. DeGardner said he would prefer the wording "easement for the maintenance of the house" as he believed that would be more acceptable to the mortgage com- pany. Mr. Werner asked if they were talking about a 5 foot easement beyond the 20 feet. Chairman Hughes said it occurred to him as far as the recommendations of the Planning Commission are concerned, the minin-um from their viewpoint is indicated by guaranteed access for roof repairs and repair of the cesspool. Member Erickson wondered if the simplest solution would be to relocate the cesspool. Mr. DeGardner said it would better for him to have a five foot easement. MOTION by Myhra, seconded by Erickson that the Planning Commission recom- mend approval of Lot Split Request, L.S. YF67-05, Robert DeGardner of Lots 52, 53, and. 54, Block E, Riverview Heights as requested with the stipulation that an easement be included with Lots 15, - 16 and 17 over the North 5 feet of the South 25 feet of Lots 52 and 53 for the purpose of maintenance of the structure •� Planning Commission Meetilig - October_ 5 _1967 _ Page 4 and the sewage system on Lots 15, 16 and 17 and that the requirement for the rear yard on Lots 15, 16 and 17 be waived. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried. ZONING BULLETIN, BOSTON MASS. : The Chairman instructed the secretary to write for sample copies of the Zoning Bulletin which is "A national report of Supreme Court Decisions in Digested form -- published monthly" by Quinlan Publishing Company, Inc. , 191 High Street, Boston, Mass. 02110. " METROPOLITAN LIBRARY SERVICE AGENCY (TIELSA) : Chairman Hughes said this brochure was for information service only -- no action. 2. PARK IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM: Facts on Fridley Park Land Acquisition and Develop- ment Program. Chairman Hughes explained the Parks & Recreation Commission have been studying the needs of Fridley for parks over a year. The program was proposed by the Parks & Recreation Commission and formally adopted on September 13, 1967. It was agreed to utilize the services of Mr. Edward Braddock, Park Consultant and former Chief Engineer for the Minneapolis Park Board and the Park Director, Paul Brown. The proposal was made to the Fridley City Council at their meeting of September 18, 1967 and Council scheduled a special meeting for September 28, 1967, to discuss it. He felt the Planning Commission has an interest from the standpoint of adequacy of land acquisition, access, streets and utilities to the park areas. He referred to a 1-1000 scale map of the 24 parks, existing and proposed, and stated that there has been no effort to tie down specific acquisitions at this point. He elaborated on the report and explained the different aspects, meanings and answered questions. For further details, refer to the report. Chairman Hughes said they estimate 40% to be acquired and 60% are already developed. They feel the people who live in Fridley are paying taxes and deserve to have a park system. The subject of a golf course was brought up, and it was mentioned that from time to time there has been discussion relative to a golf course, private j and public. Chairman Hughes stated the Commission had looked into the Federal Open Space Program, and the Council. took some steps under Open Space Law with no results. The advisability of acquiring property for a golf course with the bond issue for the Parks Program did not seem feasible at this point. Chairman Hughes said the Recreation Commission recommended against the golf course on the basis that the comments they have heard were strongly opposed to it. They thought it was an issue too charged with emotion to be included here. A double ballot was discussed. Chairman Hughes (Chairman of Parks & Recreation Commissi-__, said the Commission's recommendation to Council was without the golf course, but they would not hesitate to back a public golf course if the Council felt it should be included. Member Myhra asked about the possibility of a museum of the Locke home- stead by the City. The status of the Locke IIomestead with Anoka County was to be checked. (Mr. Stevens, County Administrator, stated that the acquisition will be completed by November 1, 3.967.) MOTION by Jensen, seconded by Myhra, that the Planning Commission recom- mend the Fri.dl.ey Park Land Acquisition and Development Program as prepared and presented by the Parks & Recreation Commission relative to the purposes and development of parks facilities . Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the -nti-rinrl iinnniriniicly REGuL&R,/COUNCIL MEETING, OCTOBER 16, 1967 PAGE 4 J The City Attorney said that the Butler Building is presently standing on the property of the Pennsylvania Oil Company, and they would like written assurance that the City will hold them harmless of any accident that might happen while _ the building is on their property. He suggested the Administration contact the City's insurance agent to see whether our present coverage would cover this, and if not then obtain a short term binder in case of any liability while the building is on their property. He said they have no objection to the building remaining there while the foundation is put in, but would like some written assurance regarding this. MOTION by Councilman Samuelson that the Administration direct the Insurance Agency to issue a 30 day binder on the building until it is placed on its foundation. Seconded by Councilman Sheridan. Upon a voice vote, there being no nays, Mayor Kirkham declared the motion carried. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES, OCTOBER 5, 1967: 1. CONTINUED LOT SPLIT REQUEST: L.S. #67-05, ROBERT DEGARDNER AND RONALD L. WERNER, ATTORNEY: LOTS 522 53 AND 54, BLOCK E, RIVERIVEW HEIGHTS: Mayor Kirkham -read the following motion by the Planning Commission: "MOTION by Myhra, seconded by Erickson that the Planning Commission recommend approval of Lot Splti Request, L.S. #67-05, Robert DeGardner of Lots 52, 53, and 54, Block E, Riverview Heights as requested with the stipulation that an easement be included with lots 15, 16 and 17 over the North 5 feet of the South 25 feet of Lots 52 and 53 for the purpose of maintenance of the structure and the sewage system on Lots 15, 16 and 17 and that the requirement for the rear yard on Lots 15, 16 and 17 be waived. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried." The City Attorney explained that this lot split is requested so that all of the house will be on the property. He said that part of the motion is to grant access to allow maintenance of the sewage system, but the City°s policy is to require they hook up to the City's system rather than make repairs when the cesspool is not functioning, and he suggested they delete the words "and sewage system" before concurring with the Planning Commission's motion, so that the only access necessary is for the maintenance of the structrlre. MOTION by Councilman Harris to concur with the Planning Commission and grant approval of. Lot Split Request, L. S. #67-05, for Lots 52, 53, and 54, Block E, Riverview Heights as requested with the stipulation that an easement be included with Lots 15, 16, and 17 over the North 5 feet of the South 15 feet of Lots 52 and 53 ,for the purpose of maintenance of the structure, and that the requirement for the rear yard on Lots 15, 16, and 17 be waived. Seconded by Councilman Samuelson. Upon a voice vote, there being no nays, Mayor Kirkham declared the motion carried. MOTION by Councilman Harris to receive the Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting of October 5, 1967. Councilman Li.ebl asked the City Attorney how the revision of the zoning code was coming along. He said he was particularly interested in the R-1 Section of the code so that it is uniform throughout the whole City and will protect the property owner when he buys his property and builds on it. The City Attorney said that he and the Planning Commission are going through the Code very care- fully section by section, and many hours have been spent on it already. He said they have reviewed about 6 of the. 13 major. sections . Councilman Liebl. said that when they have the rough draft completed on the single family dwelling part of the code, he would like to have a copy so he could talk to the people and see if they can live with it. Mayor Kirkham said that all. of the Council