VAR 91-35CIiYOF
FRIDLEY
FRIDLEY MUNICIPAL CENTER • 6431 UNIVERSITY AVE. N.E. FRIDLEY, MN 55432 • (612) 571-3450 • FAX (612) 571-1287
CITY COUNCIL
ACTION TAKEN NOTICE
February 3, 1992
Rolche' Partnership
Cheryl and Rollie Stinski
3647 McKinley Street N.E.
Minneapolis, MN 55418
Dear Mr. and Mrs. Stinski:
On January 27, 1992, the Fridley City Council officially approved
your request for a variance, VAR #91-35, to reduce the front yard
setback from 35 feet to 25.5 feet; and to reduce the side yard
setback from 10 feet to 5 feet, to allow the construction of a
parking lot for an adjaent use, on Lots 3 through 7, Block 4,
Lyndale Builder's 6th Addition, the same being 910-950 Lynde Drive
N.E.
1. The petitioners shall submit a drainage plan to the
Engineering Department for approval.
2. Six inch concrete curbing shall be installed along the entire
perimeter of the parking area.
3. A landscaping plan in compliance with the Code shall be
submitted and approved by staff. The plan shall include a
three foot berm and trees 50 feet on center along Lynde Drive.
4. The petitioners shall construct dumpster enclosures for the
apartment buildings.
5. The petitioners shall submit a striping and signage plan for
approval by staff.
6. The petitioners shall apply for and receive approval from the
Rice Creek Watershed District.
7. Variance request, VAR #91-35, shall be approved.
Rolche Partnership VAR Request
February 3, 1992
Page 2
8. A signed copy of the lease or rental agreement between the
owner of the apartment complex and the petitioners shall be
submitted for the City staff's approval.
If you have any questions regarding the above action, please call
th y Plapxfi-hg Department at 571-3450.
y"
Barbara Dacy, AICP
Community Development Director
BD/dn
. Lynde Investment Co.
Please review the above, sign the statement below and return one
copy to the City of Fri ey P nning Department by February 17,
1992.
Concur -with action taken
Councilman Schneider. Upon a ce vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee
declared the motion carrieclAnanimously.
8. RECEIVE ITEMS FROM THIS At'KARL,b W.;UMMJL001Vn rur+i�a.v
DECEMBER 10, 1991:
A. VARIANCE REQUEST VAR #91-35, BY ROLCHE PARTNERSHIP. TO REDUCE
THE FRONT YARD SETBACK FROM 35 FEET TO 21.5 FEET; TO REDUCE
THE SIDE YARD SETBACK FROM 10 FEET TO 5 FEET, TO ALLOW THE
CONSTRUCTION OF A PARKING LOT FOR AN ADJACENT USE ON LOTS 3
THROUGH 7. ]BLOCK 4 LYNDALE BUILDERS 6TH ADDITION, THE SAME
BEING 910-950 LYNDE DRIVE N.E.:
The Council discussed this variance request in conjunction with the
request for the Special Use Permit for this parcel (Item 7-A).
MOTION by Councilman Schneider to grant Variance Request,
VAR #91-35, to reduce the front yard setback from 35 feet to
25.5 feet and to reduce the side yard setback from 10 feet to
5 feet, with the following stipulations: (1) The petitioners
shall submit a drainage plan to the Engineering Department for
approval; (2) Six inch concrete curbing shall be installed along
the entire perimeter of the parking area; (3) A landscaping plan
in compliance with the code shall be submitted and approved by
staff. The plan shall include a three foot berm and trees 50 feet
on center along Lynde Drive; (4) The petitioners shall construct
dumpster enclosures for the apartment buildings; (5) The
petitioners shall submit a striping and signage plan for approval
by staff; (6) The petitioners shall apply for and receive approval
from the Rice Creek Watershed District; and (7) a signed copy of
the lease or rental agreement between the owner of the apartment
complex and the petitioners shall be submitted for the staff's
approval. Seconded by Councilwoman Jorgenson. Upon a voice vote,
all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously.
B.
Ms. Dacy, Community Development 0
request from Embers Restaurant for
of a free standing sign from 80
She stated that the sign curr t
square feet and has been in este
Lrect , stated that this is a
a riance to increase the size
are feet to 120 square feet.
Ly on the property is 350-400
ice since 1959.
Ms. Dacy stated that t e are four tests which must be met in
order to grant a var' nce. Staff has reviewed these, and finds
there are no unusu aspects of this property that would enable
this parcel to h e a variance, as compared to other properties in
the immediate ea. She stated that while a 120 square foot sign
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF'JANUARY 27, 1992 PAGE 7
Mr. Stinski stated that he thought all he needed was perm' sion
from the apartment complex owner to park on this property, t now
finds he would have to install concrete curbing, p vide a
landscaping and drainage plan, construct dumpster a losures,
submit a striping plan, and apply for and receive approv 1 from the
Rice Creek Watershed District.
Councilman Schneider stated that if Mr. Stinski i in agreement
with the stipulations, he would tend to favor pproval of the
request. He felt that -possibly the length of a parking stalls
should be reduced in order to provide more g een space to the
north.
Ms. Dacy stated that the original plan sub^ ted provided parking
stalls with an -18 foot depth and a 24 foot sle width. She stated
that through the Appeals Commission pross, the petitioner was
advised to submit a revised plan, and ere was discussion on a
one-way traffic pattern on the sit She stated that the
petitioner has provided a revised pla , and if there is a one-way
traffic pattern only an 18 foot wide isle is needed. She stated
that the ordinance provides that th parking stall can be 18 feet
deep if it abuts a curb.
Councilwoman Jorgenson stated thc# there is a need for more parking
in the area. She statedthat s e had no problem with the depth of
the parking stalls abutting curb being 18 feet, but signage
should be provided to indic e a one-way traffic pattern. She
stated she has some concerrythat there may be some vandalism in
this parking lot. She st9lted that she would like to maintain a
25.5 foot setback.
MOTION by Councilman chneider to grant Special Use Permit,
SP #91-15, with the f lowing stipulations: (1) The petitioners
shall submit a drain ge plan to the Engineering Department for
approval; (2) Six i h concrete curbing shall be installed along
the entire perimet of the parking area; (3) A.landscaping plan
in compliance wit the code shall be submitted and approved by
staff. The plan all include a three foot berm and trees 50 feet
on center along ynde Drive; (4) The petitioners shall construct
dumpster encl ures for the apartment buildings; (5) The
petitioners s 11 submit a striping and signage plan for approval
by staff; (6 The petitioners shall apply for and receive approval
from the R' a Creek Watershed District; (7) Variance request,
VAR #91-35 shall be approved; and (8) a signed copy of the lease
or rental greement between the owner of the apartment complex and
the peti oners shall be submitted for the City staff's approval.
Seconde by Councilwoman Jorgenson. Upon a voice vote, all voting
aye, M or Nee declared the motion carried unanimously.
ft by Councilwoman Jorgenson to receive the minutes of the
ing Commission Meeting of January 8, 1992. Seconded by
C] Community Development Department
PLANN3NG DIVISION
City of Fridley
DATE: January 21, 1992 4p
TO: William Burns, City Manager.,'
FROM: Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director
Michele McPherson, Planning Assistant
SUBJECT: Variance Request, VAR #91-35, by Rolche'
Investments, 910-950 Lynde Drive N.E.
Attached please find the above referenced staff report for the
variances in conjunction with the special use permit request to
allow a parking lot in the R-3, General Multiple Family Dwelling
district, for an adjacent use. On December 10, 1991, the Appeals
Commission reviewed the following variances:
1. To reduce the front yard setback from 35 feet to 15 feet
2. To reduce the side yard setback from 10 feet to 5 feet
3. To reduce the width of a two-way driving aisle from 25
feet to 24 feet
4. To reduce a length of a parking stall from 20 feet to 18
feet
The Appeals Commission voted to recommend to the City Council
denial of the variance to reduce the front yard setback but voted
to recommend approval of the remaining three variances.
As a result of the Appeals Commission action, the petitioner
revised the request to reduce the number of variances to the
following:
1. To reduce the front yard setback from 35 feet to 21.5
feet
2. To reduce the side yard setback from 10 feet to 5 feet
VAR #91-35, Rolche' Investments
January 21, 1992
Page 2
Staff recommends that the City Council deny the variance request
as staff's interpretation is that the intent of the ordinance to
allow parking lots for adjacent uses within the R-3 district is for
vacant parcels. The Code also requires that adequate off-street
parking be provided for all vehicles concerned with any particular
use on a particular lot. However, if the City Council concurs with
the Appeals Commission's recommendation, staff recommends that the
following stipulations be conditions of approval:
1. The petitioner shall submit a drainage plan to the
Engineering Department for approval.
2. Six-inch concrete curbing shall be installed along the
entire perimeter of the parking area.
3. A landscaping plan in compliance with the Code shall be
submitted and approved by staff. The plan shall include
a 3 foot berm and trees 50 feet on center along Lynde
Drive.
4.
5.
6.
MM:ls
M-92-40
The petitioners shall construct dumpster enclosures for
the apartment buildings.
The petitioners shall submit a striping plan for approval
by staff.
The petitioners shall apply for and receive approval from
the Rice Creek Watershed District.
AW
CINOF
FRIDLEY
REQUEST
PERMIT NUMBER
APPLICANT
PROPOSED REQUEST
LOCATION
SITE DATA
SIZE
DENSITY
PRESENT ZONING
ADJACENT LAND USES
& ZONING
UTILITIES
PARK DEDICATION
ANALYSIS
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
STAFF REPORT
APPEALS DATE Decenber 10, 1991
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE
CITY COUNCIL DATE January 27, 1992
CONFORMANCE TO
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
COMPATIBILITY WITH
ADJACENT USES & ZONING
ENVIRONMENTAL
CONSIDERATIONS
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
APPEALS RECOMMENDATION
PLANNING COMMISSION
RECOMMENDATION
VAR #91-35
Rolche Investments
See Public Hearing Notice
910-950 Lynde Drive
AUTHOR WIS
R-3, General Multiple Dwelling
R-3, General Multiple Dwelling, to the N, E, & SE;
CR -1, General Office District, to the S
Denial
See staff report
Staff Report
VAR #91-35, 910-950 Lynde Drive (Rolche Partnership)
Page 2
A. STATED HARDSHIP:
See letter dated December 5, 1991.
B: ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF REVIEW:
Request
The petitioners request that four variances be granted:
1. To reduce the front yard setback from 35 feet to 15 feet.
2. To reduce the side yard setback from 10 feet to 5 feet.
3. To reduce the width of a two-way driving aisle from 25
feet to 24 feet.
4. To reduce the length of a parking stall from 20 feet to
18 feet.
If granted, the variances would allow construction of a
parking lot for an adjacent use on Lots 3-7, Block 4, Lyndale
Builders 6th Addition, the same being 910 and 950 Lynde Drive.
The petitioners have also applied for a special use permit as
required by Section 205.09.01.0 of the Fridley City Code to
allow a parking lot for an adjacent use in the R-3, General
Multiple Family Dwelling District.
Site
The subject parcel is located at the intersection of Hillwind
Road and Lynde Drive. The adjacent use is the Hillwind Office
building located at 941 Hillwind Road. The subject parcel is
zoned R-3, General Multiple Family Dwelling. There is CR -1,
General Office District, zoning to the south.
Analysis
Section 205.09.01.C.(6).(a) requires a minimum front yard
setback of 35 feet and a minimum side yard setback of 10 feet
for automobile parking lots for off-street parking spaces for
any use on adjacent land.
Public purpose served by this requirement is to limit visual
encroachment into neighboring sight lines and to allow for
aesthetically pleasing open areas adjacent to public right-
of-ways.
�]A
Staff Report
VAR #91-35, 910-950 Lynde Drive (Rolche Partnership)
Page 3
Section 205.09.05.D.(4).(b) requires a minimum parking aisle
width of 25 feet for two-way traffic.
Public purpose served by this requirement is to provide
adequate space to safely maneuver vehicles.
Section 205.03.55 requires a parking stall size of 10 feet in
width and 20 feet in length.
Public purpose served by this requirement is to provide
adequate room between vehicles and driving aisles.
Background
The petitioners received a rezoning from R-3, General Multiple
Family Dwelling, to CR -1, General Office District, in 1988.
The petitioner also received a variance to reduce the side
yard setback from 15 feet to 5 feet along the common property
line between the subject parcel and the Hillwind Office
parcel. The petitioner was required to provide 93 off street
parking stalls based on the 1 per 250 sq. ft. office ratio in
the Zoning Code. The site plan does provide the required 93
stalls.
As a condition of approval, the petitioner was required to
file restrictive covenants against the property (see Action
Taken Letter dated September 19, 1988, Attachment A). One of
the restrictive covenants stated that "the property owner
warrants that all tenants, visitors, or occupants of any
building constructed on the premises will not park in the
street while using or visiting the building. Further the
owner will take any and all steps which are necessary so as
to ensure that there is not any on -street parking". The
petitioner has one tenant, Burnet Realty, which is currently
violating the restrictive covenants. As is stated on the
petitioner's hardship letter dated December 5, 1991, the
tenant conducts weekly tours from the center; therefore, the
petitioner is requesting the variances to resolve the parking
problem.
Intent of the Ordinance
Section 205.09.01.C.(6) allows as a special use parking for
an adjacent use on property zoned R-3, General Multiple Family
Dwelling. The Code was probably intended for a vacant parcel
rather than sharing parking between differing uses. In this
instance, the petitioner is proposing to share the parking
lot of an adjacent apartment complex.
m
Staff Report
VAR x#91-35, 910-950 Lynde Drive (Rolche Partnership)
Page 4
The petitioner is proposing to expand the apartment complexes'
parking lot in order to gain additional spaces. The expansion
of the parking area necessitates the variance application.
The existing parking lot provides approximately 20 spaces for
the apartment complexes (see existing site plan). The
petitioner is proposing to expand the parking area to provide
42 parking stalls. In reviewing the proposed plan, the
striping is such that it cannot meet the code required 25 foot
driving aisle and 20 foot space. Practically, it could
function but in order to meet the Code, it would have to be
striped in such a way to facilitate one-way traffic and
prevent parkers from using the parking lot as if it has two-
way driving aisles. By expanding the parking area, the
petitioner will actually be bringing the parking area up to
code. The parking area is shared by two 11 unit, one -bedroom
apartment buildings. As required by, Code, the parking area
should provide 33 spaces for the tenants. It is currently
short 13 spaces. The net effect is that the petitioner gains
9 additional spaces to be shared between the two uses.
While the petitioner does not have any other alternatives, the
Code clearly states in Section 205.16.05.D.(7) that:
"Adequate off-street parking spaces shall be required for all
vehicles concerned with any use of the lot." This would
require that all cars associated with any tenant in the
Hillwind Office Center building to park within the office
center parking lot. The petitioner should work with
individual tenants to resolve the parking problem in another
manner other than expanding the apartment complexes' parking
area.
Recommendation and Stipulations
As the intent of the ordinance to allow parking for adjacent
use within the R-3 district is for vacant parcels and as the
Code requires that adequate off-street parking be provided for
all vehicles concerned with any use on a particular lot, staff
recommends that the Appeals Commission recommend denial of the
variance request to the City Council. However, if the
Commission recommends approval of the variance, staff
recommends the following stipulations:
1. The petitioner shall submit a drainage plan to the
Engineering Department for approval.
2. Six-inch concrete curbing shall be installed along
the entire perimeter of the parking area.
Staff Report
VAR #91-35, 910-950 Lynde Drive (Rolche Partnership)
Page 5
3. A landscaping plan in compliance with the Code shall
be submitted and approved by staff. The plan shall
include a 3 foot berm and trees 50 feet on center
along Lynde Drive.
4. The petitioners shall construct dumpster enclosures
for the apartment buildings.
5. The petitioners shall submit a striping plan for
approval by staff.
6. The petitioners shall apply for and receive approval
from the Rice Creek Watershed District.
Appeals Commission Action
The Appeals Commission voted unanimously to recommend denial
of the variance to reduce the front yard setback from 35 feet
to 15 feet. The Commission voted to recommend approval of the
remaining three variances with the stipulations recommended
by staff.
Revised Plan
As a result of the Appeals Commission action, the petitioner
revised the plan to force traffic in a one-way direction.
This can work, however, the stalls are not striped at an angle
to facilitate the traffic circulation. Appropriate signage
may be necessary.
City Council Recommendation
Staff recommends that the City Council deny the variance
request as the Code clearly requires each lot to provide
adequate parking for all uses associated with the lot.
lr
CITY OF FRIDLEY
APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING, DECEMBER 10, 1991
CALL TO ORDER•
Vice -Chairperson Kuechle called the December 10, 1991, Appeals
Commission meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.
ROLL CALL:
Members Present: Larry Kuechle, Cathy Smith, Carol Beaulieu
Members Absent: Diane Savage, Kenneth Vos
Others Present: Michele McPherson, Planning Assistant
R. A. Stinski, Rolche Partnership,
3647 McKinley NE, Minneapolis
Henry Kristal, Embers Restaurants,
5400 Central Avenue, Fridley, MN
Charles Lien, Sign Systems
APPROVAL OF NOVEMBER 26 199 APPEALS COMMISSION MINUTES:
OTION by Ms. Smith, seconded by Ms. Beaulieu, to approve the
November 12, 1991, Appeals Commission minutes as written.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, VICE -CHAIRPERSON KUECHLE
DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
1. CONSIDERATION OF VARIANCE REQUEST, VAR #91-35 BY ROLCHE
PARTNERSHIP•
Per Section 205.09.01.C.(6).(a) of the Fridley City Code, to
reduce the front yard setback from 35 feet to 15 feet and to
reduce the side yard setback from 10 feet to 5 feet;
Per Section 205.09.05.D.(4).(b) of the Fridley City Code, to
reduce the width of a two-way driving aisle from 25 feet to
24 feet;
Per Section 205.03.55 of the Fridley City Code, to reduce the
length of a parking stall from 20 feet to 18 feet;
To allow the construction of a parking lot for an adjacent
use, on Lots 5-7, Block 4, Lyndale Builders 6th Addition (910
Lynde Drive N.E.) and Lots 3-5, Block 4, Lyndale Builders 6th
Addition (950 Lynde Drive N.E.).
APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING, NOVEMBER 26, 1991 PAGE 2
OTION by Ms. Beaulieu, seconded by Ms. Smith, to waive the reading
of the public hearing notice and open the public hearing.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, VICE -CHAIRPERSON RUECHLE
DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AT 7:32
P.M.
Ms. McPherson stated the first variance request is for 910 and 950
Lynde Drive. They are located at the intersection of Lynde Drive
and Hillwind Road. The variance request is one of two requests
which have been filed by the petitioner. The Code also requires
a special use permit to allow a parking lot for an adjacent use in
an R-3, General Multiple Family Dwelling, district. The subject
parcel is zoned R-3. There is CR -1, General Office, zoning to the
south, and additional R-3; General`Multiple Family, zoning to the
north.
Ms. McPherson stated the petitioners own the Hillwind Office
Building located at 941 Hillwind Road. The variances will allow
the expansion of an existing parking lot of the apartment
buildings. The petitioners are requesting four variances: to
reduce the front setback from 35 feet to 15 feet for the portion
on Lynde Drive, to reduce the side yard setback from 10 feet to 5
feet along the common property line on the south, to reduce the
driving lane from 25 feet to 24 feet, and to reduce the length of
a parking stall from 20 feet to 18 feet.
Ms. McPherson stated that in 188, the City Council approved a
rezoning request to rezone the parcel to the south of the subject
parcel from R-3, General Multiple Dwelling, to CR -1, General Office
District. At that time, the petitioners also received a variance
to reduce the side yard setback along the north property line from
15 feet to 5 feet. When the building was proposed, the Code
required 93 off street parking stalls based on the 1 to 250 office
ratio in the Zoning Code. The site plan does provide this
standard. Also, as a condition of approval, the petitioners were
required to file a restrictive covenant against the property. One
of the restrictive covenants stated: "The property owner warrants
that all tenants, visitors or occupants of any building constructed
on the premises will not park in the street while using or visiting
the building. Further, the owner will take any and all steps which
are necessary so as to insure that there is not. any on -street
parking."
Ms. McPherson stated the purpose for this variance request is to
resolve a problem caused by a tenant in the office building, Burnet
Realty, who is currently violating the restrictive covenant. As
stated in the petitioners' hardship letter dated December 5, 1991,
this particular tenant conducts weekly tours from the center;
therefore, the petitioners are requesting the variances to resolve
this parking problem.
APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING, NOVEMBER 26, 1991 PAGE 3
Ms. McPherson stated the intent of the ordinance allows as a
special use, parking for adjacent uses on property which is zoned
R-3, General Multiple Family Dwelling, and the petitioners have
applied for a special use permit to meet this requirement. Staff's
interpretation is that this particular section of the Code is
probably intended for vacant parcels rather than the sharing of
parking between two used. In this particular instance, the
petitioners are proposing that the parking lot of the apartments
be shared with the office tenants.
Ms. McPherson stated the existing parking area provides 20 spaces
for the apartment complexes. The petitioners are proposing to
expand the parking area to approximately 42 parking stalls. The
petitioners' plan does not meet the 20 -foot long space requirement
nor the 25 -foot driving aisle requirement. It could function if
striped for one-way traffic and to prevent drivers from using the
parking lot as if it had two-way driving aisles.
Ms. McPherson stated that by expanding the. parking area, the
petitioner will be bringing the parking area up to today's Code.
The parking area is shared by two 11 -unit one -bedroom apartment
buildings; and, based on the ratio in the Code, 33 parking spaces
should.be provided on site for tenants. The parking area is short
approximately 13 parking spaces. The net effect is that the
petitioners gain nine additional spaces to be shared between the
two uses. While the petitioners do not have any other
alternatives, the Code does state that: "Adequate off-street
parking spaces shall be required for all vehicles concerned with
any use of the lot." This would require that all cars associated
with any tenant in the office building be parked in the office
center parking lot'. The petitioners should work with individual
tenants to resolve parking problems that may occur, other than
expanding the complexes parking area.
Ms. McPherson stated staff recommends that the Commission recommend
denial of the variance to the City Council as it is the intent of
the ordinance to allow parking for adjacent uses within the R-3
district is for vacant parcels, and as the Code does require that
each parcel provide adequate off-street parking for all vehicles
concerned with any use of a particular lot. If the Commission does
recommend approval of the request, staff recommends the following
stipulations:
1. The petitioner shall submit a drainage plan to the
Engineering Department for approval.
2. Six-inch concrete curbing shall be installed along the
entire perimeter of the parking area.
APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING, NOVEMBER 26, 1991 PAGE 4
3. A landscaping plan in compliance with the Code shall be
submitted an approved by staff. The plan shall include
a three foot berm and trees 50 feet on center along Lynde
Drive.
4. The petitioners shall construct dumpster enclosures for
the apartment buildings.
5. The petitioners shall submit a striping plan for approval
by staff.
6. The petitioners shall apply for and receive approval from
the Rice Creek Watershed District.
Ms. Smith stated the staff report states the parking area should
provide 33 spaces. Before that, it would have to be striped in
such a way for one-way traffic. Can it be striped, not require a
variance, and still get spaces?
Ms. McPherson stated the existing parking lot does not meet the
required number of parking spaces for the apartment buildings.
Staff has a concern in the fact that there is evidence that 24 -foot
wide driving aisles can function as two-way driving aisles.
Because of the way the parking lot is proposed, it would make more
sense from a functional standpoint to direct traffic in a one-way
pattern. As it is, the parking lot could function with a 24 -foot
driving aisle, but the Code requires 25 -foot aisles for two-way
driving. The petitioner does have the option to narrow the parking
area and narrow the aisles to 18 feet. Two variances could then
potentially be eliminated, i.e., the variance for the driving aisle
width and the length of the parking stalls.
Ms. Smith asked if the Hillwind Office Center has just enough
parking spaces to meet Code.
Ms. McPherson stated, yes, they have enough spaces just to meet
Code requirements.
Mr. Kuechle asked if there were any complaints about the parking
from neighbors.
Ms. McPherson stated staff has not received any complaints.
Ms. Smith asked if customers were parking on the street now.
Ms. McPherson stated at some times there are cars parked along
Hillwind Road. The City has not verified whether these cars are
actually associated with businesses at the office building.
Mr. Kuechle asked Mr. Stinski to explain the hardship.
Uk
APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING. NOVEMBER 26, 1991 PAGE 5
Mr. Stinski stated the restrictive covenant they are now violating
is that they do not park on the street. The building has too much
parking at certain times of the week, just when Burnet has tours,
usually on Tuesday. They leave cars in the parking lot, but when
other visitors come in, there is sometimes no parking. He does not
know how big Burnet plans to get. He is looking for additional
parking for in the future, if needed. The neighbor is very nice
and has said there is no reason why they can't share some parking.
The apartment parking area is quite small. Mr. Stinski stated he
has never seen over 7-10 cars at the most. This is an ideal area.
In the building behind the office building, there are many cars and
he will not do anything with them. Mr. Stinski stated he can
upgrade the parking lot, bring it up to Code, and benefit both
properties, the community, and the area. The parking lot would
look better than it does at this time. The apartment buildings are
25 years old, and he did not think there has been anything done to
them for a long time.
Mr. Stinski stated he is asking for variances which will not hurt
anyone and will improve the area. None of the covenants have been
violated. He is talking about 25 feet for driveways. He has seen
24 foot driving aisles in other areas and there is no problem. He
did not know how many spaces he will need. The current apartment
parking lot may be grandfathered in because of the age of the
buildings.
Ms. McPherson stated Code requires apartment buildings to have 1
1/2 stalls. for the first bedroom and adds 1/2 stall for each
additional bedroom. She did not check back to see if they were
approved for a shortage of spaces or to see if the Code
requirements had changed.
Mr. Stinski stated all units in the apartment buildings are one
bedroom units. City staff has requested concrete curbing. This
may be unfair because the streets are bituminous and he is being
asked for concrete. He is asking to share some parking spaces with
the neighbors, and it is not worth a lot of money to do this. It
will be an improvement for this building.
Mr. Kuechle asked how he would gain access to this lot.
Mr. Stinski stated an access will be made through what is now a
fence.
Mr. Kuechle asked if he would lose the parking spaces that are
there now.
Mr. Stinski stated he would make it so they would not lose any
parking spaces.
FE
APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING. NOVEMBER 26. 1991 PAGE 6
Mr. Kuechle asked, if the striping is now at.10 feet, what would
be gained by going to 9.5 feet?
Mr. Stinski stated he did not know. He did not know what the
traffic flow would be. * It is very difficult to say how many people
will come in at one time. It varies. The only time there is a
problem is when the realtor is conducting tours.
Ms. Smith asked if there are alternatives that could be pursued
that would prevent requesting so many variances.
Mr. Stinski stated, if Code requires 33 spaces, that is only 9
extra parking spaces. That is not a great deal of space. The
parking lot is a mess now. He is trying to clean it up.
Ms. Beaulieu asked Mr. Stinski about the stipulations.
Mr. Kuechle stated the first stipulation requires that a drainage
plan be submitted to the Engineering Department for approval.
Mr. Stinski asked what is meant by that.
Mr. Kuechle stated this indicates where the storm water run-off
will go.
Mr. Stinski stated his biggest concern is the concrete curbing.
It is very expensive.
Mr. Stinski questioned the requirement for landscaping. He did not
know what landscaping would cost. He would have to see if it is
feasible to do this.
Ms. McPherson stated the Code requires parking areas to be screened
from the right-of-ways or, in this case, Lynde Drive. This area
would now need to be screened.
Mr. Stinski stated there is nothing there now and thought it would
look silly to do this.
Mr. Stinski stated the dumpsters would be screened and the striping
is no problem. He asked what would be required from the Rice Creek
Watershed District.
Ms. McPherson stated the Watershed District reviews the plan to see
that the water drains properly. This is in conjunction with the
drainage plan.
Mr. Stinski asked who does the drainage plan.
Ms. McPherson stated this is usually done by the surveyor. The
Engineering Department will want to know how much water will be
APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING. NOVEMBER 26, 1991 PAGE 7
generated by , the expanded parking area and where the water will go.
Ms. Smith stated, on the side yard where the requested reduction
is from 10 feet to 5 feet, there is a chain link fence. Is there
parking right up to the fence?
Mr. Stinski stated, yes.
Mr. Kuechle asked if there is a curb now.
Mr. Stinski stated there is no curb at all.
Mr. Kuechle asked how many spaces are needed.
Mr. Stinski stated he did not know. That is the problem. If there
were 10 to 12 spaces available, he would use them.
Ms. Smith asked if he would do this if only three or four spaces
were available.
Mr. Stinski stated he would not do it for three or four spaces.
The owner of the apartment building has consented to this proposal.
MOTION by Ms. Smith, seconded by Ms. Beaulieu, to close the public
hearing.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, VICE -CHAIRPERSON RUECHLE
DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 8:00
P.M.
Ms. Smith stated she agreed there is a hardship, but she is
reluctant to approve all four variances. It seems as though there
could be another plan that would not require so many variances.
She thought the plan could be redone to work within the Code more
closely. She didn't doubt the current owners of both properties
would work together, but properties change hands and the next
person will then have a parking lot that does not meet Code.
Ms. Beaulieu stated that overall it is a good idea to share space
that is not needed by another building. If the plan could have
been laid out so it was one-way driving aisle, two variances would
be eliminated. She was surprised that an alternative plan had not
been submitted. She agreed the idea is a good one, but to require
four variances seems too much.
Mr. Kuechle stated he could go along with some of the requests.
His biggest problem is with the request for the front yard setback
reduction from 35 feet to 15 feet. There is not much green space
in that area and it is a fairly crowded area, and there is no
longer any space for snow that is taken off the lot. If the front
yard setback is reduced, unless snow will be hauled away, there
F1
APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING, NOVEMBER 26, 1991 PAGE 8
will be problems. He would recommend denial of that portion. He
could see voting for a side yard setback from 10 feet to 5 feet
because it is up against a fence. Reducing the two-way driving
aisle to 24 feet is acceptable as would be the length of the
parking stall from 20 feet to 18 feet. But, he would vote for
denial of 35 feet to 15 feet.
Ms. Smith commended the petitioner for trying to find a way to work
with neighbors but she is reluctant to vote for approval the way
the lot is laid out now. There should be a way to do this without
requiring so many variances.
Mr. Kuechle asked the number of square feet for the apartment
parking lot.
Ms. McPherson stated the parking lot is approximately 170 long by
102 feet wide, or about 17,000 sq. ft.
Mr. Stinski stated the staff report stated that the side yard is
only 15 feet, but there is still about 35 feet to the street.
Ms. McPherson stated there may be a wide boulevard in that area.
The setback is measured from the property line.
Mr. Stinski stated there is still about 30 feet from the street.
He also hauls the snow out of the parking lot at the office
building.
MOTION by Ms. Smith to recommend denial of variance request, VAR
#91-35.
MOTION FAILED FOR LACK OF A SECOND.
OTION by Ms. Beaulieu, seconded by Ms. Smith, to recommend to the
City Council in consideration of Variance Request, VAR #91-35, to
deny the request for the front yard setback from 35 feet to 15
feet; and to recommend approval of the requests to reduce the side
yard setback from 10 feet to 5 feet, to reduce the width of a two-
way driving aisle from 25 feet to 24 feet, and to reduce the length
of a parking staff from 20 feet to 18 feet; with the following
stipulations:
1. The petitioners shall submit a drainage plan to the
Engineering Department for approval.
2. Six-inch concrete curbing shall be installed along the
entire perimeter of the parking area.
3. A landscaping plan in compliance with the Code shall be
submitted and approved by staff. The plan shall include
APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING. NOVEMBER 26, 1991 PAGE 9
a 3 foot berm and trees 50 feet on center along Lynde
Drive.
4. The petitioners shall construct dumpster enclosures for
the apartment buildings.
5. The petitioners shall submit a striping plan for approval
by staff.
6. The petitioners shall apply for and receive approval from
the Rice Creek Watershed District.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, VICE -CHAIRPERSON RUECHLE
DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Ms. McPherson stated this variance request will go to City Council
at their second meeting in January 1992.
2.
SYSTEMS:
Per Section 214.11.02 o the Fridley City Code, to increase
the size of a free-stand'ng sign from 80 square feet to 120
square feet, to allow the construction of a new free-standing
sign on Lot 11, Auditor's ubdivision No. 155, the same being
5400 Central Avenue N.E. (mbers Restaurant).
MOTION by Ms. Beaulieu, seconded
hearing.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING
DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND
P.M.
Ms. Smith, to open the public
i, VICE -CHAIRPERSON RUECHLE
PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AT 8:12
Ms. McPherson stated the request for sign variance is to increase
the square footage from 80 to 120 s are feet. The request is
being made by Embers Restaurant loca ed at the intersection of
Highway 65 and 53rd Avenue. The prope y is directly north of the
Total Mart station, and east of Targe and United Stores. The
property is zoned C-3, General Shoppi g Center District, with
additional C-3 properties to the north, outh, east and west.
Ms. McPherson stated the petitioner isroposing to remove the
existing non -conforming sign and replacin it with a sign that is
8 feet by 15 feet. She was unable to find he sign permit for the
original sign but read in memos that he existing sign is
approximately 370'sq. ft. The petitioner,\h wever, has stated the
existing sign is greater than 500 sq. ft.
*14
RoIche' Partnership
3647 McKinley St. N.E., Minneapolis, MN 55418
Telephone (612) 781-3184
December 5, 1991
Ms. Michelle McPherson
Appeal Commission of the
City of Fridley
Fridley Municipal Center
6431 University Avenue N.E.
Fridley, Minnesota 55432
Dear Michelle:
This request is made to the Commission for its consideration of a Variance Request by
Rolche' Partnership. This request is made to allow for overflow parking for the tenants
at the office building known as Hillwind Office Centre.
Although Hillwind has ample parking at the site, there are times when additional parking
is needed to accommodate the visitors to the office building. Burnet Realty conducts
weekly tours of the properties they list which requires salespeople from other Burnet
locations to come to Hillwind Office Centre. They leave their cars at Hillwind for 3 to
4 hours at a time causing a shortage for the other tenants. This occurs during normal
working hours, never on weekends or in the evening.
We are asking your help in relieving this hardship that exists.
We have contacted our neighbor to the north to lease some parking stalls from them to
accommodate us during the overflow parking problem. We have a long term lease,
pending your approval.
Thank you for your attention to this matter.
Respectfully,
lllel�f'cz� -
R. A. Stinski
RAS/jkb
CIVIC CENTER • 6431 UNIVERSITY AVE. N.E. FRIDLEY. MINNESOTA 55432 • PHONE (612) 571-3450
September 19, 1988
Cheryl Stinski
1612 Berne Circle N.E.
Fridley, MN 55432
On September 12, 1988 the Fridley City Council officially approved your request
for a Rezoning, ZOA 488-01, to rezone from R-3, General Multiple Dwelling,
to CR -1, General Office, on part of Lots 2 and 3, Auditor's Subdivision No.
25, the same being 1001 Hillwind Road N.E., with the following stipulations:
1. The vacated house on the rezoned parcel should be removed from the site
prior to the publishing of the rezoning ordinance.
2. The proposed rezoning is for the development as outlined on the attached
site plans and elevations only.
3. The petitioner or her agent agrees to manage the leasing of the office
space in a fashion which would not create a need for.on-street parking.
Should on -street parking result, the City may sign the street as "no
parking" and require that additional stalls be made available or the need
be reduced.
4. Petitioner to work with staff on landscape refinements and have an agreed
upon plan prior to City Council approval.
5. Petitioner to supply a storm drainage plan which meets staff approval
prior to City Council public hearing.
6. Petitioner to supply a performance bond or letter of credit in the amount
of 3% of the construction value prior to issuance of a building permit.
7. That this rezoning is contingent upon the property owner filing
Restrictive Covenants against the subject property providing for the
following:
a. That the property will only be used for the construction of a
building that fully conforms with and complies with those site
plans and elevations which are on file with the office of the
Director of Community Development for the City of Fridley.
Stinski ZOA
September 19, 1988
Page.2
b. That the property owner warrants that all tenants, visitors,
or occupants of any building constructed on the premises will
not park in the street while using or visiting the building.
Further, the owner will take any and all steps which are necessary
so as to ensure that there is not any on -street parking.
8. In the event that a Certificate of Occupancy is not issued on or before
June 1, 1990 by the City for the building described in paragraph 1
above, then this rezoning shall be automatically terminated and the
zoning classification for the property shall revert to the original
zoning classification of R-3, General Multiple Dwelling.
If you have any questions regarding the above action, please call the
Planning Department at 571-3450:
Sincerely,
ohn L. Robertson
Community Development Director
JLR/dn
Please review the noted stipulations, sign the statement below and return one
copy to the City of Fridley Planning Department by September 30, 1988.
Concur with action taken
e COMMISSION APPLICATION REVIEW
FRX SER F" DATE IEE DATE FILE DESCRIPTION VAR #91-35
CI7YOF 63 11-20-91 12-10-91 910-950 Llmde' Drive
FRIDLEY front yard &side yard setbacks
COMPLETE REVIEW CHECKLIST AND RETURN TO PLANNING DEPT.
MICHELE M.�
I
MA K W.
z �
JOHN F.
❑ DARREL C.
LYDE M.
COMMENTS
LF
fid A—�� �
LEON M.
JIM H. III -7t MW
Cv��
CHUCK .JI .1 lllD�-
f v )
Rolche Partnership
3647 McKinley Street N.E.
Minneapolis, MLV 55418
Lynde Investment Company
400 Dakota Avenue south
Golden Valley, MV 55416
Resident Manager
5650 Polk Street N.E.
Fridley, MV 55432
MAILING LIST
VAR #91-35
910-950 LYNDE DRIVE N.E.
Resident Manager
990 Lynde Drive N.E.
Fridley, MV 55432
Robert Shapiro
Lynde Investment Company
9801 Oak Ridge Trail
Hopkins, M 55343
Resident Manager
950 Lynde Drive N.E.
Fridley, YN 55432
�"
Polk St. Investment Group Resident Manager
2901 Metro Drive, #10.5 910 Lynde Drive N.E.
Bloomington, MV 55420 Fridley, MlV 55432
Real Estate 10 Office Building Apartment Management Plus
951 Hillwind Road 4530 Excelsior Boulevard
Fridley, MN 55432 St. Louis Park, MST 55416
Independent Ten.
951 Hillwind Road
Fridley, MN 55432
Harry McKinley
10.10 Lynde Drive N.E.
Fridley, MV 55432
Harry McKinley
P. O. Box 32154
Fridley, MLQ 55432
Ray Wells.
10D0 Lynde. Drive N.E.
Fridley, MV 55432
Resident Manager
5701 HigIway 65 N.E.
Fridley-, MPd 55432
Resident Manager
995 Lynde Drive N.E.
Fridley, MQ 55432
Jesper Jensen
1011 Lynde Drive N.E.
Fridley, MLV 55432
Phan Quan
1001 Lynde Drive N.E.
Fridley, MN 55432
Mailed: 11/27/91
Rolche Partnership
941 Hillwind Road
Fridley, M 55432
Diane Savage
567 Rice Creek Terrace
Fridley, MV 55432
City Council
City Manager
AMENDED
PUBLIC HEARING
BEFORE THE
APPEALS COMMISSION
Notice is hereby given that the Appeals Commission of the City of
Fridley will conduct a Public Hearing at the Fridley Municipal
Center at 64?1 University Avenue N.E. on Tuesday, December 10,
1991, at 7:30'p.m. for the purpose of:
Consideration of variance request, VAR #91-35,
by Rolche Partnership:
Per Section 205.09.01.C.(6).(a) of the Fridley
City Code, to reduce the front yard setback
from 35 feet to 15 feet and to reduce the side
yard setback from 10 feet to 5 feet;
Per Section 205.09.05.D. (4) . (b) of the Fridley
City Code, to reduce the width of a two-way
driving aisle from 25 feet to 24 feet;
Per Section 205.03.55 of the Fridley City Code,
to reduce the length of a parking stall from
20 feet to 18 feet;
To allow the construction of a parking lot for
an adjacent use, on Lots 5-7, Block 4, Lyndale
Builders 6th Addition (910 Lynde Drive N.E.)
and Lots 3-5, Block 4, Lyndale Builders 6th
Addition (950 Lynde Drive N.E.), Fridley,
Minnesota, 55432.
An and all ersons desiring to be heard shall be given the
Y P 9'
opportunity a� the above stated time and place.
DIANE SAVAGE
CHAIRPERSON
APPEALS COMMISSION
Any questionslrelated to this item may be referred to the Fridley
Community Development Department, 571-3450.
A�i
PUBLIC HEARING
BEFORE THE
APPEALS COMMISSION
Notice is hereby given that the Appeals Commission of the City of
Fridley will conduct a Public Hearing at the Fridley Municipal
Center at 643. University Avenue N.E. on Tuesday, December 10,
1991, at 7:30 p.m. for the purpose of:
Consideration of variance request, VAR #91-35,
by Rolche Partnership:
Per Section 205.09.01.C.(6).(a) of the Fridley
City Code, to reduce the front yard setback
from 35 feet to 15 feet and to reduce the side
yard setback from 10 feet to 5 feet, toallow
the construction of a parking lot for an
adja ent use, on Lots. 5-7, Block 4, Lyndale
Buil ers 6th Addition (910 Lynde Drive N.E.)
and Lots 3-51 Block 4, Lyndale Builders 6th
Addition (950 Lynde Drive N.E.), Fridley,
Minnesota, 55432.
Any and all petsons desiring to be heard shall be given the
opportunity at'the above stated time and place.
DIANE SAVAGE
CHAIRPERSON
APPEALS COMMISSION
Any questions related to this item may be referred to the Fridley
Community Development Department, 571-3450.
CITY OF FRIDI EY °
6431 MU MSITY N.E.
FRIDLEY,r MN 554
(612) 571-3450
x•11111 �� � a • a .•• IL-1{ � c:• _ ■I1, D11
- site plan required for submittals; see attached
Address: 910-§50 Lynde Drive
Legal description: 910 Lots 5 through 7, Block 4, Lyndale Builders 6th Addition
950 - Lots 3 through 5j Block 4 Tract/Addition L_yndale Builders 6th Addition
Current zoning:k-3 General Multi pl eSquare footage/acreage
Family Dwelling
Reason for variance and hardship: To allow overflow parking for adjoining property
at 941 Hillwind Road "Hillwind Office Centre"
2o�D`i.DI.G
Section of City Code:
� ,4 "4"
nz amt DOJ.DI . c, (&)UYo : rid vcz
a,6(o o rotes �- ' ems.ow,�l- fk��i
(Contract �ers: Fee ers sign this prior to processing)
NAME Lynde Investment Co.
ADDRESS 400 Dakota Avenue S
NAME Rol c -he' Partnershi p
MtOMIRV
Fee: $10.00
$ 6;.00
DAA71M PHONE 545-0780
DA' PHONE 781-3184
DATE //- z U . 'P /
for residential properties
Permit VAR b�-Receipt # iQ 395
Application received by: ,N(
Scheduled Appe4s Commission date:
Scheduled City Council date:
80
tD'� S
CITY OF FRIDLEY PLAN REVIEW CHECRLIBT
Applicants Por vacations must submit the legal description of the
parcel (easement, street, etc.) to be vacated.
Complete site plans, signed by a registered architect, civil
engineer, landscape architect, or other design professional, to
include the following:
A. General:
1. Name and address of project
2. Legal description (certificate of survey
may be required)
3. Name, address, and telephone number
of applicant,
engineer, and owner of record
4. Date proposed, north arrow, scale, number of sheets, name
of drawer
5. Description of intended use of site,
buildings, and
structures including type of occupancy
and estimated
occupancy load
6. Existing zoning and land use
7. Tabulation box indicating:
(i) Size of parcel in sq. ft.
(ii) Gross floor area of buildings
(iii) Percent of site covered by building
(iv) Percent of site covered by impervious surface
(v) Percent of site covered by green area
(vi) Projected number of employees
(vii) Number of seats if intended use is a restaurant or
place of assembly
(viii) Number of parking spaces required
(ix) Number of parking spaces provided including
handicapped
(x) Height of all buildings and structures and number of
stories
B. Site Plan:
1. Property line dimensions, location of all existing and
proposed structures with distance from boundaries,
distance between structures, building dimensions and
floor elevations
2. Grading and drainage plan showing existing natural
features (topography, wetlands, vegetation, etc.) as well
as proposed grade elevations and sedimentation and storm
water retention ponds. Calculations for storm water
detention/retention areas.
3. All existing and proposed points of egress/ingress
showing widths of property lines, turning radii abutting
rights-of-way with indicated center line, paving width,
existing and proposed median cuts, and intersections of
streets and driveways
4. Vehicular circulation system showing location and
dimensions for all driveways, parking spaces, parking lot
aisles, service roads, loading' areas, fire lanes,
emergency access (if necessary), public and private
streets, alleys, sidewalks, bike paths, direction of
traffic flow, and traffic -control devices
5. Landscaping Plan
6. Location, access, and screening detail of trash
enclosures
7. Location and screening detail of rooftop equipment
8. Building elevations from all directions
9. Utility plan identifying size and direction of existing
water and sewer lines, fire hydrants, distance of
hydrant to proposed building
l
VAR #91-35
Rolche' Investments
S //2 SEC. ,
ary OF
(**3�~
31
w/H
N.+.0 e n � I � (?.�) "- filly) �•hw/ a '" � (L/1 �'- 1 :e a ua .X� �� i �s21 PS 94 b P (s �s:e' fir' rlPa jA, ;� .". M �
I� m,� /a4 0 2 �/ P'. '� ♦ : = _ r$ 'fie ..e :e aP �I}° + �
' C� �) o Ap A �'i �J,g ♦ , I ,
.r aS i
ANE La^• I » ' . ,,.
,a. of', e'y.� fL„I 6� 4.. F , •�,aa ` iC` '"? 'P t ,e 3 s $ F I)° ••
- w>�/e ^r •,e:' y..."$v,tl�<i � `�. A " '� la �P�." c �°� �a a :fit e' a�) +lae ,
a ,..LYNDE DRIVE $,,"; •, '° rw� Pay '
!Ttt.,n!n I•hy.
' W r
...I t GG4771 a V
M
1 u_' .v eve, - .,... • a_
Dwv> S 9 = BA (Pnl - � J/ •..a s6_•-J,.aas yl P
i... w,ca ee "2f&-.-♦ U.,. ' BB (gp) . .1B L,. r� _. ._ --__ P$i +N)
b I s ♦ , '=N7) ♦ a
npJ) N7 C4I ;a� � •t �) '�, `,@ r,@, `1, '$' � � .
. 9 a (� 9) �1c1 �v $C ewe Ai) FA pAt lm) • I ^ O �D�/ a ., ° .SIA ;
I 'T,
n...Rj_,._a\-,�r,•n,� „_.i.�.0_�.+:y�i I ,r.. _ ~3 -i. -,_•.a.-- .iFjjjii:•(.'-eI..-' �lI.Ihv---�-----'.,�d•�.J.-w-wr—r --a•7fi•d.-r I e -P� \�,_'_.e _.J.�°
�.+ .fC-._�,-4'�_ --moI'--_-_•i-. �-,°a -- -•— -,(-y ._i�—i— :Q , X—aI—p-••A4
H�SAUDVISION
WIL
"°K,) I�»y-�." (✓i_B,' ° fo~)4ai�° D"�a1mG• _r E'
— '.P_—'S�.♦�s„._2Z•„'>'�^.i@pr �M",'n �^,
aa1)
or
)�z- <(•(.�t^i��e"F,w`6 • W� .r :
"�mYA�O•�,.i"Oicefi•9{nVD`i;'1 Sr� '� ` A�
»1C9
",.i O!•,R» 6
"<U.�•P.. "R
ly••'�eJ »�Ca )�"d
Fra.aL•Q c,lrAit •Ua aALa-#
or
---
,3, — --- — - (w
a?9of T F—) i ;@l,.
CONDO No.39 ------ TS
isr suR CONDO
•_
HERSTA NO0
5 4
tilIc,)7
------------SVIS
y
SUBDIVISION
(9SKYWOOD LANE
8KYWLA �
T
�4@PI
10 RNO. 94e 1J I (3) 64> I:
5-3 RE) AVENUE
O 34
. ,
8C LOCATION MAP
?4V/_�l.J`� .o;
All I'll
• ... < - ����€�: ; � - gip`■
- - �•�•��' �Q�� �i�i��!7tl�lb�l�lll� d
s tee._.... • Qi Q��� imam
.eAe�..e.tt �• � �Lta7 �®
eieiee•ieieieieiei
►i•►♦J�i•+e♦e fi�tr; �%
GGGiiiFip
..."LillUMUR., ':===.... z�
G..nouiu ■
R) ZONING MAP
,3
3t
31
7
I M
VAR 491-35
Rolche' Investments
81 SITE PLAN
VAR #91-35
Rolche' Investments
a I$r 10
1-Zb'LD
M
q . d o. ( I'
-t
Opt
3
I.X OD
-�- - OF
X-4 1
'
ri
.'r. (pY'rj.•�r'.. t'a'r%r.�: ,.. 'u: r J ''.i
EXISTING SITE PLAN
'. u
VAR. #91-35
Rolche' Investments
PEML-�
ori
i
M
1'Ar3
PROPOSED SITE PLAN
4:
c d
0
' }
1"
' i t
Ir• e ,'�•'it.0 y .Sj,
,
•
�.
n.
It
.:.
•,•••
r• ;••
7T7
...--..--rte
PEML-�
ori
i
M
1'Ar3
PROPOSED SITE PLAN
o6b .oti
a 4 -"CN 11 -A:'JQ -y -Z/ 2
VAR 491-35
Rolche' Investments
1�
%n to
C J}�idWPQ t
troulwn .q 30 76p� ^-----
��
REVISED PROPOSED SITE PLAN
ROPERTY ADDRESS -
950 LYNOE OR
LAND DESCRIPTI
Land *r Qate Cd
L FR01
4
V
A
T
4 A
D
J
F U
c S
4 T
TM
J E
4 N
E T
S
ZONING I USE I TAX CODE
E 20 . 22013B
ADJUSTMENT FACTORS T UNIT
oth/Acres LOC•/YR. SPEC. CLASS ADJ. COND. YPE PRICE
SP DISTS. IDATE PRINTED ICLASS I PCS I AREA PARCEL NUMBER
0
711n3/29 2617 3D FR -0-1--P-24 30 1-4 32 004P
AD UNIT
PRICE UNITS VALUE Description LYNDE INVESTIJENT L_
PRLYNDALE BUILDERS 6T"
19740.00 2.019 :39480ADDITION CITY OF FRIDLEY
0 TH PT OF LOT 3 LYING H OF
0 HE E 30.0 FT THEREOFP ALL`.
tl F LOT 4 8 THE F 67.0 FT
0 F LOT 5 SLK 4 LYNDALE
1) UILOERS +STN AODTTION.
0
0 _ _
it -
0
0
Q
0
13 OFF RECORD ITypelDATERecorded
1) Book Page Inst. I Mo. Yr. DI Sales Price
0
0
n
BUILDING PERMIT
SP-BLDS I FEATURES! BLD-ADJSI LNDUNIT
0 0 2.00
)bsv. I Func. I Econ. I%
Phy.
65
22 APARTMENT
Repl. Cost New I Depr.
2'0864
SCALE:
177037 33 00
ELEMENTS
CODE
LAND LAND-ADJ
I INCOME I
ISE
SIZE-ADJ: n5. n0
FOUNDATION-__
39480
B/ FULL---------- n. U
FRAME -----
00
-00
E1 -
.O -XT -FALL
---------------
Class.
Total Base Rate
Units Units
Adj. Rate
ear u� t
Actual I
Age Norm
Depr.
OOF CDV£R ------------------------------
---
P 86
100.0
00
. 'n. n
63 63
28 28
-----------------� -�-
-----
I- 4f +BALL
MKT. INDEX:
----------------------
Description
Rate
Square Feet
Repl. Cost
3
0.0
BAS 100
---
OCA
700.00
11
7700
LIVING
AREA
T
-----------------Q.-
A18 332
924.00
ill
10164-
J
r
T
J
E
Aux=
Base=
11
Total Areas
T
A
I
L
SP DISTS. IDATE PRINTED ICLASS I PCS I AREA PARCEL NUMBER
0
711n3/29 2617 3D FR -0-1--P-24 30 1-4 32 004P
AD UNIT
PRICE UNITS VALUE Description LYNDE INVESTIJENT L_
PRLYNDALE BUILDERS 6T"
19740.00 2.019 :39480ADDITION CITY OF FRIDLEY
0 TH PT OF LOT 3 LYING H OF
0 HE E 30.0 FT THEREOFP ALL`.
tl F LOT 4 8 THE F 67.0 FT
0 F LOT 5 SLK 4 LYNDALE
1) UILOERS +STN AODTTION.
0
0 _ _
it -
0
0
Q
0
13 OFF RECORD ITypelDATERecorded
1) Book Page Inst. I Mo. Yr. DI Sales Price
0
0
n
BUILDING PERMIT
SP-BLDS I FEATURES! BLD-ADJSI LNDUNIT
0 0 2.00
)bsv. I Func. I Econ. I%
Phy.
65
22 APARTMENT
Repl. Cost New I Depr.
2'0864
SCALE:
177037 33 00
ELEMENTS
CODE
CONSTRUCTION DETAIL
PPRAISED
VALUE
SIZE-ADJ: n5. n0
FOUNDATION-__
04
B/ FULL---------- n. U
FRAME -----
00
-00
E1 -
.O -XT -FALL
---------------
-IMPS
----------------- n.r)
---------------------
00F TYPE
---------------
OD
CNST
OOF CDV£R ------------------------------
---
-------------------
-------------------
HEATING
00
. 'n. n
39500
LOOS
-----------------� -�-
-----
I- 4f +BALL
04
----------------------
INT TRIM ----
-00
-----------------�---
------_-
FLOORS
-no
0.0
-- -- ------ -
O4!lINCOMP
---
OCA
---------------
- -- --
'>?.O
ASE ADJ -----
DO
_ _ __
ASE ADJ 11 111 n.1)
---------------
-
-----------------Q.-
FRIDLEY LAND
------------------
ZONE ?
KEY NO.
5Q0?74
MAP -56730
CARDS INOF CCO' NT
ARKET 216517
NCO+ME
0
SE
PPRAISED
VALUE
216517
ARCEL
SUMMARY
AND
39480 -
LOGS
177037
-IMPS
0
OTAL
216517
CNST
0
SE
0
RIOR
YEAR VALUE
AND
39500
LOOS
176100
OTAL
215600
SE
0
ROPERTY ADDRESS
a
r
A
D
J
r U
S
T
r
J E
N
T
S
E OR
and By/Date
i
R01 --
'E 20
ADJUST
Imension LOC. / YR. SPE
)e th/Acres
LAND LAND—ADJ
39480
Class Const.Total
Units Units
AP 86 100.0
Description Rate
BAS 100 00.00
r A19 332 .24.00
Aux=
IN
ZONING I USE I TAX CODE SP - DISTS. I DATE PRINTED I CLASS I PCS I AREA PARCEL NUMBER
—720138 20 91/03129 2617 3 F'401 R24-- 3' 24 32 _005(
HENT FACTORS
CLASS ADJ. COND. TYPE PRICE UNITADPRICENIT UNITS VALUE Description LYNDE INVESTMENT 1_0
YNDAL BUILDERS 6TH
94 19740.00 19740.00 2.00 39480 ADDITION CITY OF FRIDLEY"
E I SP-BLDS
I I Actual -Eff I I Depr. I Phy.
63 63 28 28
Feet Repl. Cost MKT. INDEX: IMP. BY
11 7700 IVIMG AREA 22
11 10164
Base= 11
0 OTS 6 9 7 AND TBS PT OF
0 OT 5 LYING W OF TNF E
0 57.0 FT THEREOF. BLK 4
0 YNDALF BUILDER'S 6TH
0 kODITION.
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0 OFF RECORD ITypelDATERecorded
(� Book Pagel Inst. Mo. yr. D Sales Price
0
0
0
BUILDING PERMIT
FEATUR£SI BLD—ADJSI LNDUNIT
Vo
R.G. Repl. Cost New Depr. Repl. Cost Stories Height Rooms Bed Rms Baths # FIX Partywall
65 270864 177037 33 00
DATE SCALE: ELEMENTS CODE CONSTRUCTION DETAIL
APARTMENT
i
0
J
VALUE
r
04
---
1
AND
39480
LOGS
17710137
—DIPS
.
-13
E
Total Areas
T
00
---
A
RTOR YEAR
L
Oo
Aux=
IN
ZONING I USE I TAX CODE SP - DISTS. I DATE PRINTED I CLASS I PCS I AREA PARCEL NUMBER
—720138 20 91/03129 2617 3 F'401 R24-- 3' 24 32 _005(
HENT FACTORS
CLASS ADJ. COND. TYPE PRICE UNITADPRICENIT UNITS VALUE Description LYNDE INVESTMENT 1_0
YNDAL BUILDERS 6TH
94 19740.00 19740.00 2.00 39480 ADDITION CITY OF FRIDLEY"
E I SP-BLDS
I I Actual -Eff I I Depr. I Phy.
63 63 28 28
Feet Repl. Cost MKT. INDEX: IMP. BY
11 7700 IVIMG AREA 22
11 10164
Base= 11
0 OTS 6 9 7 AND TBS PT OF
0 OT 5 LYING W OF TNF E
0 57.0 FT THEREOF. BLK 4
0 YNDALF BUILDER'S 6TH
0 kODITION.
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0 OFF RECORD ITypelDATERecorded
(� Book Pagel Inst. Mo. yr. D Sales Price
0
0
0
BUILDING PERMIT
FEATUR£SI BLD—ADJSI LNDUNIT
Vo
R.G. Repl. Cost New Depr. Repl. Cost Stories Height Rooms Bed Rms Baths # FIX Partywall
65 270864 177037 33 00
DATE SCALE: ELEMENTS CODE CONSTRUCTION DETAIL
APARTMENT
SE
0
IZE—ADJ5.0�?
VALUE
FOUNDATION
---------------
04
---
8/FULL' 0.0
-------------------
AND
39480
LOGS
17710137
—DIPS
WALL _-----
-13
----------------- n. n-
CMST
_flOf T�IPT _-- -
00
---
11. n4
----------------------
RTOR YEAR
ooF c�vER
--E- -----------
Oo
�.0
LOGS
EATING
fN-
-----------------
�?Q
----------------------
0.0
----------------------
SE
_ t1I_I G-------
0-0-
---
-----------
iVT MALL
---------------
Ofd
---
------b-.--n-
tJ.O
----------------------
_NT TRIM -----
�n
-----------------�' �-
66
OWIINCOKP
---------------
00
0.0
_��E
ADJ------
tlASE-------------------
ADJ _1_7---7
---------------
---------------
OR
--- ---- _
------- n -n
FRIDLEY LAND
ZONE -----------
KEY NO.
500213
MAP -56730
CARDS INDFACCOUNT—
APKET 216517
NICOME
0
SE
0
PORAISED
VALUE
216317
ARCEL SUMMARY
AND
39480
LOGS
17710137
—DIPS
0
OTAL
216517
CMST
0
SE
0
RTOR YEAR
VALUE
AND
30500
LOGS
176100
OTAL
215600
SE
0
560 3093
LOT SURVEYS CO., INC. TEL No.560-3093 Dec 24,91 9:49 No.001 P.O;
7
to
t
do
v
a
11
3r#A 13
OCT 16 191 12:00 560 3093 PAGE.001
LOT SURVEYS CO., INC. TEL No.560-3093 - Oct 16,91 12:15 No.003 P.01
' `• ,�
P051 -It" brand fax transmittal memo 7M r ar
pelop
remV
Fax 5i.0• SOq
... .. d � '781-3�-�a �°' 3t:o • tt��.-L-w
0
•' moi,• •• .
Hit
g i
ffFR
LLWIND OFFICE PLAZA
l)LEY, MINNESOTA .,,� �� " .. cell
• .-.2YZ-�i-Pr�cK �5�ucco • !.
w•
4! J.
••f
n t SOD
1 . ,iiil , . , �, •s
�.
!
. , , �.•ia I : i '. . , e • 1.
..2Y2•S-BriG.�.�
:3I ' c
•� i N,ng .'o-) a F^rpialn� �`•; 1 Std
•ti N .r
ti C4.
. »edlo� Ilg� ewew x
m llwsuo4 e usi \� �(! A
- - I P 9 ►IhlBed . � . .
10'8 £00'oN ST:ZT T6'9T 130 £60£-095'ON X31 'ONI ''00 Sd3Asn's 101
3 4
��
d-
100.39Hd 660E 09S 00:21 16, 91 100
I�
b i
A.; '
e
._I— 4 tai^ '4' '
.$•-
18'
77
•�'
�
,,:d
r
------
101.45::
• •
.
•
2Y2.5 - Brt'e h tuGco
:'
+� 3
b
-LzSs•p�$
fc bos
� �L,
•09$
♦w+eve
A