HomeMy WebLinkAbout2000-002 - 5308 & 5316 Twin Lake Blvd FULL PACKETCity of Brooklyn Center
D0r Planning Commission Application
Date Received Application No. a 0 LI)
Please Print Clearly or Ty"
Address/Street Location of Property S 3o b' j 5-3/6 E-c- S rt %4), G a Z 14,
Legal Description of Property
CC4CLC� M e. ri- f- -�n �
4 L.4 C ,ac s
Cu�c�c..,;
Owner �a7 Sc�.�.G�(�
Alo
Phone No.-535-Y;v4X (Sc-C_C_401^)
Address
5-3k,
Fes - La tcr--
I (v 4.
Applicant ScU_ M t- Phone No.
Address
Type of Request
❑ Rezoning
of Request:
Subdivision Approval
Other:
t
ED Variance
i
❑ Special Use Permit
❑ Site & Building Plan Approval
aY" L
Application Fee $ /QO Oa Receipt No. & Ro6 6)/4 (4
The applicant requests processing of this application and agrees to pay to the City of Brooklyn Center,
within fifteen (15) days after mailing or delivery of the billing statement, the actual costs incurred by the
City for Engineering, Planning and Legal expenses reasonably and necessarily required by the City for the
processing of the application. Such costs will be in addition to the application fee described herein.
Withdrawal of the application will not relieve the applicant ovj��0.
bliga�'on to pay costs incurred prior to
withdrawal. //It
a7 scite-'A., i%// ��
Applicant (Please Print) L., 0 Applicant's Signature
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
Dates of P. C. Consideration: .3 - /6 _D b
Approved V Denied
following conditions:
this Al day of U J� r, 20 subject to the
CITY COUNCIL ACTION
Dates of Council Consideration: ..3 - ok % • o o
Approved V Denied
amendment:
Chairman
this 11±hday of 4,0 TcK 20 OO , with the following
Revised 6-99
Application Filed on 3-1-00
City Council Action Should Be
Taken by 4-30-00 (60 Days)
Planning Commission Information Sheet
Application No. 2000-002
Applicant: Jay Scheffler and Adolph & Doris Smietana
Location: 5308 and 5316 East Twin Lake Boulevard
Request: Variance (Subdivision by Metes and Bounds)
The applicants, Jay Scheffler (5308 East Twin Lake Boulevard) and Adolph and Doris Smietana
(5316 East Twin Lake Boulevard), are requesting a variance to allow a subdivision of land by
metes and bounds description rather than by a formal plat. The purpose of the division is to
relocate the common property line between the two properties.
The properties in question are 5308 East Twin Lake Boulevard (Lot 10, Malcolm's Lakeview
Addition) owned by Mr. Scheffler and 5316 East Twin Lake Boulevard (Lot 11, Malcolm's
Lakeview Addition) owned by the Smietanas. They are zoned R-1 and are located on the east
side of East Twin Lake Boulevard, just northerly of 53rd Avenue and are surrounded by other
single family residential properties. The intention is to divide off a triangular portion along the
south side of the Smietana property, using a metes and bounds description, so that it can be
conveyed and combined with the Scheffler property. Section 15-104 of the city ordinances
requires division of lands to be done through a formal plat or registered land survey unless the
City Council, by variance, allows otherwise.
The applicants have submitted a survey of the two properties showing the triangular shaped
parcel to be conveyed. It is 14.5 ft. wide along the East Twin Lake Boulevard right of way and
would be approximately 596 sq. ft. in area. The division would make the south property line of
the Smietana property (north property line of the Scheffler property) 82.24 ft. deep. The survey
shows that the division would not create any setback encroachments nor would it create any lot
deficiencies if approved. The loss of 596 sq. ft. from 5316 East Twin Lake Boulevard would
leave it with a new lot area of 9,507 sq. ft. Minimum lot requirements in the R-1 zone for
interior lots are 75 ft. in width and 9,500 sq. ft. in area. Currently, 5308 East Twin Lake
Boulevard is deficient in area and, according to the information provided, the additional land
would make it approximately 9,507 sq. ft. in area also. The transfer would make it a
"conforming" lot. Both lots are deficient in minimum lot depth of 110 ft. 5308 East Twin Lake
Boulevard has a lot depth of 102.2 ft. at the south property line and would be 82.24 ft. at the new
northerly property line while 5316 East Twin Lake Boulevard has a lot depth of 80.36 ft. at the
north property line.
3-16-00
Page 1
The applicants have submitted a letter with their variance application indicating that
Mr. Scheffler wishes to purchase a small piece of land from the Smietanas. They have had an
unrecorded agreement for a number of years for Mr. Scheffler to use a portion of the Smietana
property. The Smietanas are planning to sell their home in the near future and Mr. Scheffler is
concerned that new owners may not grant him the same use of the property that he experiences
now. The letter indicates that the purpose of the conveyance will allow Mr. Scheffler the
continued use and enjoyment of this property and will not create a new lot. They indicate that
the granting of the variance will relieve the parties of the burdensome time and expense of going
through the entire formal platting process. They also note that they believe granting of the
variance will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to any other property in the
area and note that the Smietana property will still meet city ordinance standards. They also
indicate that they are aware that the City has also granted similar variance requests in the past.
Under the City's Subdivision Ordinance, divisions of land are to be performed by a plat or
registered land survey unless the City Council, by variance, allows otherwise. Section 15-112 of
the Subdivision Ordinance authorizes the Council to grant variances from their regulations, when
in their opinion, undue hardship may result from strict compliance. In making its findings, the
City Council must take into consideration the nature of the proposed use of land, the existing use
of land in the vicinity, the number of persons to reside or work in the proposed subdivision and
the probable affect of the proposed subdivision upon traffic conditions in the vicinity. To grant a
variance, the City Council must find:
1. That there are special circumstances or conditions affecting said property such that
strict application of the provisions of the ordinance would deprive the applicant of the
reasonable use of his/her land.
2. That the variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial
property right of the petitioner.
3. That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public welfare or
injurious to other property in the territory in which said property is situated.
As pointed out in the applicant's letter, it is their contention that to require the formal platting
process for this division is overly expensive, burdensome and unnecessary in that no new legal
lots are being created with the division of land and that their is substantial precedent for granting
similar variances.
We would concur with the applicant's comments and, in this case, we do believe the standards
for variance can be met. Also, there is much precedent for the granting of metes and bounds
division variances in cases such as this. Such variances were quite common prior to 1978. Since
that time, at least six such divisions have been approved through the variance process by the City
Council. The variances that have been granted typically site the right of the property owner to
3-16-00
Page 2
divide his/her property and the hardship of bearing full platting costs to divide the property by
plat. Also, the division of land by metes and bounds have been allowed provided that: 1. No
new buildable lots were created; 2. The underlying land is platted property; and 3. No lot or
setback variances were implied and that all lot area requirements can be met.
In our opinion, the proposed metes and bounds description variance requested by the applicants
appears to meet both the variance standards contained in Section 15-112 of the city ordinances
and also the City's policy regarding the division of land by metes and bounds description.
A public hearing has been scheduled and notices to surrounding property owners have been sent.
RECOMMENDATION
Again, it is believed that the standards for variance and the City's policy regarding subdivisions
by metes and bounds descriptions have been met in this case. Therefore, approval of this
application is recommended noting the above findings and subject to at least the following
conditions:
1. The legal descriptions and survey showing the division of Lot 11, Malcolm's
Lakeview Addition shall be filed with Hennepin County.
2. Once new legal descriptions have been established, the City Assessor is authorized to
allow the combination to Lot 10, Malcolm's Lakeview Addition for tax purposes.
3-16-00
Page 3
-a
A
_
s
x
e
March 1, 2000
Planning Commission City of Brooklyn Center
We the undersigned, are requesting a variance from the
subdivision ordinance requirement to allow a metes and bounds
description for purposes of conveyance. Jay Scheffler wishes
to purchase a small piece of land from Adolph and Doris
Smietana. Through agreement with Mr. & Mrs. Smietana, Mr.
Scheffler has been using this property for several years.
The Smietana's are planning to sell their home in the near
future and Mr. Scheffler is concerned that the new owners may
not grant him the same use. The sole purpose of this
conveyance will be to allow Mr. Scheffler the continued use
and enjoyment of his property and not to create a new lot.
The granting of this variance will relieve the parties of the
burdensome time and expense of going through the entire
platting process. We do not believe that the granting of
this variance will be detrimental to the public welfare or
injurious to any other property in the area as the Smietana's
lot will still meet the city's standards. Since the city has
granted approval from the subdivision ordinance requirement
in the past we are hopeful this variance request will also be
approved. Thank you for your consideration on this matter.
Respectfully,
i
Scheffler
Ado�14Smietana
Doris Smietana
March 1, 2000
We, Adolph and Doris Smietana authorize Jay Scheffler to
speak on our behalf before the Planning Commission and City
Council regarding variance from subdivision requirement to
allow a metes and bounds division of our properties.
Adolph Smietana
Doris Smietana
aitn Xyzo & 4�.;qsioal,izi, _Ync-
PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYORS
AND LAND DEVELOPMENT CONSULTANTS
(612) 4Z1-9126
13621 VINEWOOD LANE DAYTON, MN 55327
REVISED DESCRIPTIONS FOR MR. JAY SCHEFFLER
Lot 10, Malcolm's Lakeview Addition, and that part of Lot 11,
Malcolm's Lakeview Addition described as lying southerly of
the following described line; Beginning at the southeaster"ly.
most corner of said Lot 11; thence northwesterly to a point
on the westerly line of said Lot 11 being 14.50 feet
northerly of the southwesterly most corner of said Lot 1.1,
as measured along said westerly line of said Lot 11 and said
line there terminating.
REVISED DESCRIPTION FOR LOT 11
That part of Lot 11, Malcolm's Lakeview Addition. lying
northerly of the following described line. Beginning at the
southeasterly most corner of said Lot 11; thence
northwesterly to a point on the.westerly line of said Lot 11
being 14.50 feet northerly of the southwesterly most corner
of said Lot 11, as measured along the westerly line of said
Lot 11 and said line there terminating.
The area of Lot 11 as described above is
9,507 Square feet.
I hereby certify that the above Proposed Descriptions were
prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am
a duly Licensed Professional Land Surveyor under the laws of
the St -ate of Minnesota.
y Minnesota License No. 12267
Sf/EE T / cF' z S�EEr�<
gim .5yzo .:::4ssoaiatz4 gtza
PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYORS
AND LAND DEVELOPMENT CONSULTANTS
(612) 421-9126
13621 VINEWOOD LANE DAYTON. MN 55327
� 8�•3�
Irof
�f
� I \
96 a
vi
1
41
L ° �0
m aL.
751
-
�S c z� o 8z
137" ./IC 41
1 L= /¢•Sa
po 01 AW10 /%aeof
l i . -• cr2�� , S t
l
1J0,�
0 O
5S'
1 �r
- K
Sy9 z z-' 44-" / 49
SWE'E' T Z