VAR 06.77OFFICIAL NOTICE
CITY OF FRIDLEY
PUBLIC HEARING
BEFORE THE
APPEALS 'COMMISSION
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Appeals Commission of the
City of Fridley will meet in the Council Chamber of the City
Hall at 6431 University Avenue Northeast at 7:30 P.M. on Tuesday,
June 14, 1977 to consider the following matter:
A request for a variance of Section 205.053,
4, B, Fridley City Code, to,reduce the 10 foot
requirement on the living area side of the house
to 5 feet, to allow the enclosure of an existing
porch, on Lot 22, Block 3, Melody Manor Addition,
the same being 7381 Lyric Lane N.E., Fridley,
Minnesota. (Request by Maynard Frisk, 7381 Lyric
Lane N.E., Fridley, Minnesota 55432).
Anyone who desires to be heard with reference to the above
matter will be heard at this meeting.
VIRGINIA SCHNABEL
CHAIRWOMAN
APPEALS COMMISSION
Note: The Appeals Commission will have the final action on this
request, unless there are objections from surrounding
neighbors, City staff, or the petitioner does not agree
with the Commission's decision. If any of these events occur,
the request will continue to the City Council through the
Planning Commission.
City of Fridley
AT THE TOP OF THE TWINS
6
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIV.
r PROTECTIVE INSPECTION SEC.
r
�4 CITY HALL FRIDLEY - 55432
L 612-560-3450
SUBJRCT -
APPLICATION TO �6ARD
OF APPEALS
NUMBER
910-F23
REV,
1
DATE
3/21/75
PAGE
1
OF
2
APPROVED BY
800
Name Address
�► 7387 4 ri
Phone
7rr6p� 66
Legal ILot
Description
No.
C2 _
Block No,
,3/0
Tract dr Addn.
Li M 12M rqV1
Variance Request(s); including statCd hardships tach plato survey of property
showing building, variances, etc., 'w a u-able) �� o �� h 3 �� 8
T eu v �� i �e e st w� e 1..e ae �t o s r ,.�� e �r e e e d
•
am &!s S e- nitc L L s1 L!h e# k 0- �'_ u
I)!: p n bl IC
___
Lj I�LQ 5i►Smw,eV' lWd0 a- /t��lLr V�bCJ�tn1
� oV�
Dat
Meetin6 Date
Yee"Receip4p
00
No.
Signature
2�6-4924 ar.
=74
Comments & Recommendations by
the Board of Appeals
6
City Council Action and Date
.. . ;ice, •
\� 1 ' ';; �.. .':: Vii.••' a!•
en, • -7
City of Fridley .
AT THE TOP OF THE TWINS
SUBJECT
APPLICATION TO
BOARD OF APPEALS
t�
-------- COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIV.
r t PROTECTIVE INSPECTION SEC.
t t
t ••'t CITY HALL FRIOLEY 55432
� •'-'�' ,`3 512-550-3450
(Staff Report)
NUMBER
910-F23
REV.
1
DATE
3/21/75
PAGE OF
2 2
APPROVED BY
800
Staff Comments
Board members notified of meeting by .. /® 7 -2
List members,
date notified, and "Yes" or "No" for plans to attend hearing.
Plan
Name
Date To .Attend
Pearso making appeal and the following property owners having
property within
200
feet notified:
By Whom
Name Date
Phone or Mail'
Notified
Mr,. ,& Mrs. A. K. Parlour -7381 Tempo Terrace N.E.
Mr. & Mrs. Walter Sabol-7371 Tempo Terrace N.E.
'
Mr. $ Mrs. Theodore Kueppers-7361 Tempo Terrace N.E.
Mr. & Mrs. Howard Schultz -7351 Tempo Terrace N.E.
Donna J. McBrian-7398 Tempo Terrace N.E.
John Glick -7309 Tempo Terrace N.E.
Candido F Laura Zanoni-7380 Tempo Terrace N.E.
Mr. $ Mrs. Willard Nelson -7370 Tempo Terrace N.E.
Mr. & Mrs. Wilbert Tozer -7360 Tempo Terrace N.E.
Mr. & Mrs. David Tucker -7350 TempoTerrace N.E.
Mr. $ Mrs. James Lawrence -7340 Tempo Terrace N.E.
Mr. F Mrs. Edward Gmitro-7351 Lyric Lane N.E.
Mr. $ Mrs. Donald Gilbert -7361 Lyric Lane N.E.
Mr. $ Mrs. Thomas Truax -7371 Lyric Lane N.E.
Mr. F Mrs. Maynard Frisk -7381 Lyric Lane N.E.
Mr. & Mrs. Jack Weems -7391 Lyric Lane N.E.
Mr. $ Mrs. Ronald Randall -7399 Lyric Lane N.E.
Audrey Wallis -7401 Lyric Lane N.E.
Mr. $ Mrs. C. L. Kuivanen-7398 Lyric Lane N.E.
Mr. $ Mrs. Vernon Franzen -7390 Lyric Lane N.E.
Mr. & Mrs. Frank Valley, Jr., 7380 Lyric Lane N.E.
Mr. & Mrs. Wilbur Erti-7370 Lyric Lane N.E.
Mr. & Mrs. Lawrence Nieregarten-7360 Lyric Lane N.E
Item #2 June 14, 1977
ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF REPORT
7381 Lyric Lane N.E.
A. PUBLIC PURPOSE SERVED BY REQUIREMENT:
Section 205.053, 4, (b,l) requiring a 10 foot side yard setback for
living area in an R-1 zone.
Public purpose served by this section of the Code is to maintain a
minimum of 20 feet between living areas in adjacent structures and
15 feet between garages and living areas in adjacent structures to
reduce exposure to conflagration of fire. Also to allow for
aesthetically pleasing open areas around residential structures.
B. STATED HARDSHIP:
They would like to enlarge the existing screened and glassed porch,
which is now only useable in the summer, into a family room for year
round use.
C. ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF REVIEW:
The porch in question is located in the rear of an existing attached
garage. Converting it into a year round living space would mean
that 15.4 feet would separate it from the living area of the house
to the north. The rear yard appears to be accessible for fire
fighting purposes. The proposed addition design seems to fit
architecturally better than moving it an additional 5 feet and
losing convertible porch space.
�\ M
.`rJMM �.'
i
s
��� i �'ti±P qFt• _ tlM
-
k�� f '�r J"'� 5: ; tom' T2;' ,'"rX 4�` "k,
s
�A fr`sr s`�i�",'- ..k x fix$ `>,.��,' "�' .F a•--• �' 's 42s' .'' t E� s &.Ya` ''- r ':--`sz'L"' ;...' �,F ds'St- ",
'�• x,` 3%„ a . -: Y.k �; � i � "`� t x �-a.l,r X -a ,�. r -. :x.�. r -�v �-� ' � `
m i {- shirt
jjj 1 ,r' .y
•�� r - � �*,_ r , � p � `1���-� Via. �y�a �'�� :��y,`�
o
- � � M1 - ;fes ' " � 'v1'- •-�.
t�
4Y•tiy _ /.s►�.. R,/�,��� tc Y S'lt?4y
FRIDLEY'
.3t3aR? ;tJF'-Af'ALS;
���
AT
i�€ET1NG DAT
.F --t 1:,6t x•t , i 's ��.' t Alf
lot
NOS;
07
i/
yyy
�� ^r4. � -y C 1 ���cgll s� p kP .. • w�flj� t/yyr/ �� � '�9��
1, �•1�� aWd q, eg� Y if �; w�YV' .. • �.y M
law* - Y 7+I�T �;
�— � gr„ - W-rt^^,.t 4J�f011'� 1Va
P*dw Noe
�. •.,,� ai sf 71 �{�'" 4 4� ss 'F y '-.�;iW'.;?i -r» �i. r _,.$� 4"Kt
+�" �'�' .v�j�+�.3� a• �' '�A�j"'� J�,Y� i...5 l &� r i -� Y'r 'x ` � z "_ h [ � rp4,, � ' ��¢
:'2m'
FRIMW .
BOARD OF-APPEAM
EXHIBIT Nva
mF.tnm DA -7r 6 r y >
3 - -
-2.01
S445 T 565 1' 0C. data
fivi/ 6m A�i�ripr�J
� Sl�iteJ�-i'0�
bl--- Eny neers Supve ®rs
pop_ PA, - 4
'st $
•I
' FRIDLEY
-BOARD OF APPEALS
• .alp �X{ �lilBIT NMEET Dk
O:
0 7l�
a her and C&'MCart . fofiun �e svrn� al'�Jie a�nies �' J� d�gl' ts�cetia, q�' �'
i%. and �B',rsi say, sed �d.17 a a frr �► a .
�>�rfy Q,ad as 1rm�%1%y is ®rw�ed p�' lb fr �surh a• of�r �r�sf Jtati�►
srdi . IYn d ark
gmednnmummts &''e
l� /mss ar
A/. WMER1AI6,•IAIa .
CITY OF FRIOLAY, SUBJECT..
nmrowl� c3T�a COMMISSION APPLICATION
REVIEW__- _
Ueparr' iv scorn Number ev
age - _ .. .... ._ .. i 8 Approved by
Ft B 1110/. gODFi S FILM OA'iEi
OOMISILETIN 148VIEW CHECKLIST� � � Pz V 7�
IMTURN40. IA1,. 4 fhyta� ous oATl1 __.._._.. .
7
COMMENTS._
_.. ._
om
.T
Dick
Jerrva `
O K (Color TO &w wiff- l poor
.1
r
APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING — JUNE 141 1977 PAGE 6
Mr. Plemel indicated that he would have no objections to
granting a variance down to three feet. He said that
Mr. Buster definitely needed the room and it would be an
addition to the neighborhood.
Mr. Barna wanted it put into the records that the slope
in the back yard would make it impossible to put in a
detached setback garage or it would be economically unfeasible
to put in a detached rear garage.
MOTION by Mr. Barna, seconded by Ms. Gabel, that the
Appeals Commission approve the request for variance of
Section 205.053, 4, {B4}, Fridley City Code, to reduce the
side yard setback adjoining an attached garage from the
required 5 feet to 3 feet, to allow the construction of a
24' X 24' attached garage.with a six foot breezeway, located
on Lots 11 and 12, Block 12, Plymouth Addition, the same
being 4620 2nd Street N.E., Fridley, Minnesota. Upon a voice
vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously.
Chairwoman Schnabel indicated to Mr. Buster that his
request had been approved and that he was free to apply for
his building permit.
2. REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE OF SECTION 205.053, 41 B, TO
REDUCE THE 10 FOOT SETBACK REQUIREMENT ON THE LIVING
AREA SIDE OF THE HOUSE TO 5 FEET, TO ALLOW THE ENCLOSURE
OF AN EXISTING PORCH, ON LOT 221 BLOCK 31 MELODY
MANOR ADDITION, THE SAME BEING 7381 LYRIC LANE N.E•,
FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA• {Request by Maynard Frisk,
7381 Lyric Lane N.E., Fridley, Minnesota 55432.1
MOTION by Mr. Plemel, seconded by Mr. Barna, to open
the Public Hearing. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the
motion carried unanimously.
ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF REPORT
A. PUBLIC PURPOSE SERVED BY REQUIREMENT=
Section 205.053, 4, {b,1} requiring a 10 foot side
yard setback for living area in an R-1 zone.
Public purpose served by this section of the Code is to
maintain a minimum of 20 feet between living areas in
adjacent structures and 15 feet between garages and
living areas in adjacent structures to reduce exposure
to conflagration of fire. Also to allow for aesthetically
pleasing open areas around residential structures.
APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING — JUNE 14, 1977 PAGE 5
Mr• Plemel wanted to know what Mr• Buster, had on the
exterior of his home.
Mr. Buster indicated that he had shakes on the exterior
of the home.
Mr• Plemel wanted to know if he would have the same
type shakes on the exterior of the addition and garage•
Mr• Buster said that he did plan to have the same•
Mr. Barna wanted to know if they were asbestos shakes.
Mr• Buster didn't know for sure -
Mr • Barna asked if they broke easily• If so, then
the shakes were asbestos.
Mr• Buster agreed that his shakes were asbestos• He
also indicated that he would run the same brick across the
front of the garage as there was on the house•
Chairwoman_ Schnabel asked if Mr• Buster had talked to
his neighbors•
Mr. Buster indicated that he did talk to the neighbors
and there had been no objections•
Ms. Gabel wanted to know where the neighbor's garage
was located•
Mr• Buster said that his garage was on the alleyway•
Mr• Barna asked for verification of the fact that
Mr• Buster hadn't thought of an attached garage due to the
fact that he didn't want to lose the window and didn't want
the additional expense of adding onto his living room•
Mr. Buster indicated that that statement was correct•
MOTION by Ms• Gabel, seconded by Mr• Barna, to close the
Public Hearing. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion
carried unanimously•
Mr• Barna wanted to know if the breezeway was to be
5 112 feet.
Mr. Holden said that it hadn't been decided whether a
half a foot would be taken off the garage or off the breezeway.
APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING — JUNE 14, 1977 PAGE 7
' y
B. STATED HARDSHIP=
They would like to enlarge the existing screened and
glassed porch, which is now only useable in the summer,
into -a family room for year round use.
C• ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF REVIEW:
The porch in question is located in the rear of an
existing attached garage. Converting it into a year
round living space would mean that 15.4 feet would
separate it from the living area of the house to the
north• The rear yard appears to be accessible for fire
fighting purposes. The proposed addition design seems
to fit architecturally better than moving it an
additional five feet and losing convertible porch space•
The Appeals Commission members had a picture of the
house. Mr. Frisk indicated where the proposed addition
would be located. He explained that the present porch was
not useable in the winter time• He wanted to make it into
a family room to use all year•
Mr. Plemel asked if the addition would be flush with the
garage•
Mr. Friske indicated that it would be.
Mr. Holden explained the location of the garage and
the present screen porch and how the family room would
be in relationship to the house and the garage. He also
indicated where the fireplace would be in the proposed
family room.
Mr. Plemel wanted to know where and how the neighbor's
garage was located.
Mr. Holden said that the neighbor's garage sat at a
slight angle from Mr. Frisks.
Mr. Barna said that he thought it looked as though
the neighbor's house was a little forward from Mr. Frisks.
Mr. Frisk indicated that the neighbor being discussed
was with him at the Appeals Commission Meeting.
Chairwoman Schnabel said that they would talk to him.
Chairwoman Schnabel confirmed the fact that Mr. Frisk
would put a solid wall on the North side of the addition
without any openings•
APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING — JUNE 14, 1977 PAGE 8
r
Mr. Holden indicated that it was not a requirement to have' `
the wall be a solid wall.
Mr. Plemel warted to know how far the neighbor's structure
would be from Mr. Frisks.
Mr. Holden said it would be 15.4 feet.
Chairwoman Schnabel wanted to know how soon Mr. Frisk
planned to start construction.
Mr. Frisk indicated that due to an illness in the family
it would probably be early spring before construction would
be started.
Mr. Barna wanted to know if there would be a basement.
Mr. Frisk indicated that there would not be a basement,
but that there would be frost footings under the new addition.
Mr. Plemel indicated that if the variance was granted,
that it would be good for one year from the day it was granted.
Ms. Gabel asked Mr. Frisk how large his family was.
Mr. Frisk said he had a wife and one daughter.
Chairwoman Schnabel said that the tree near the
proposed addition would not have to be removed.
Mr. Jack Weems of 7391 Lyric Lane said that he was the
neighbor North of Mr. Frisk. He said that for 15 years that
anything the Frisk's have done to the property had increased
the value and enhanced the neighborhood and he felt that this
proposed plan was no different than the rest of what he had
done to his property. He said that he was in favor of
Mr. Frisk's proposed addition.
Chairwoman Schnabel wanted to know if the current
garage level was lower than the current porch level.
Mr. Frisk said that it was one step lower.
Chairwoman Schnabel said that the one step lower was
required. It was a safety factor to protect one from fumes.
Mr. Frisk indicated that the wall between the garage
and the proposed family room had sheet rock on both sides
the family room side and the garage side.
APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING = JUNE 141 1977 PAGE 9
Mr. Barna asked Mr. Holden if a fire door and fire wall
would be required between the family room and garage and
if the room would be heated year round since it would be a
part of the living area•
Mr. Holden said that Mr. Frisk would have to remove the
present paneling and install 5/8^ sheetrock on both sides
of the wall that would be common between the garage and the
family room. He also said that a solid core door or a rated
metal door would have to be installed between the family room
and the garage.
Mr. Frisk requested Mr. Holden to go out to his property
to be sure that he is meeting all the codes•
Mr. Holden said that he would have to have a layout plan
when Mr. Frisk applied for his building permit.
MOTION by Mr• Barna, seconded by Ms. Gabel, to close
the Public Hearing• Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the
motion carried unanimously -
Mr. Barna agreed with t?r• Weems that the proposed plan
would enhance the home and the neighborhood and it would
give additional living space and he would have no objections.
Mr. Plemel said that with the assurance that Mr• Frisk
would work with Mr• Holden, he would have no objections.
MOTION by Mr. Barna, seconded by Ms. Gabel , that
the Appeals Commission approve the request for a variance of
Section 205.053, 4, B, to reduce the 10 foot setback
requirement on the living_ area side of the house to five
feet, to allow the enclosure of an existing porch, on
Lot 22, Block 3, Melody Manor Addition, the same being
7381 Lyric Lane N.E•, Fridley, Minnesota. Upon a voice
vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously.
Chairwoman Schnabel indicated to Mr. Frisk that the
request had been approved and that he was free to -apply
for his building permit {within one year from June 14, 19771.
3• REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE OF SECTION 205.053, 4, C, TO
REDUCE THE REAR YARD SETBACK REQUIREMENT OF 25% OF
THE LOT FROM 34 FEET TO 27 FEET, TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION
OF A DWELLING AND GARAGE, ON LOT 151 BLOCK 31 INNSBRUCK
NORTH ADDITION, THE SAME BEING 1401 NORTH INNSBRUCK.
DRIVE N.E. {Request by Barry J. Marchant, 4366 Arden
View Court, Arden Hills, Minnesota 551121
MOTION by Mr• Plemel, seconded by Mr• Barna, to open''
'the Public Hearing. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the
motion.carried unanimously.
APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING — JUNE 141 1977 PAGE 10
ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF REPORT
A- PUBLIC PURPOSE SERVED BY REQUIREMENT:
Section 205.053, 4, C, requiring a rear yard setback
equal to one fourth 11/41 of the lot depth with a
25 foot minimum.
Public purpose served is to provide desired rear yard
space to be used for green areas which add to the
attractability of the neighborhood.
B. STATED HARDSHIP:
By facing house due west, mature White Oaks and Poplar
would be destroyed or the elevation to the garage
would be too great from North Innsbruck Drive. By
facing the house southwest, on the angle, mature trees
would be destroyed to make garage accessible•
C. ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF REVIEW:
Facing the house to the south means the actual rear yard
is on the north side. The City Code defines the front
yard on a corner lot as the shortest side, therefore,
the west side is the front and the length of the house
protrudes into the "technical" rear yard to the
east. The house to the east faces West Danube Road
and not North Innsbruck Drive. The layout appears to
fit in with the existing neighborhood.
Mr. Marchant showed the Appeals Commission the plans
he had for the construction of a home. He explained to
the Commission his understanding of the City'Code regarding
how to define what is the rear yard of a lot.
Mr. Marchant said that they had examined the possibility
of facing the house due west and explained that the problems
would be the loss of a tree that would end up in front of a
proposed garage door• He felt the way that they propose to
situate the house on the lot would result in the loss of the
fewest number of trees. He went on to explain that to
situate the house facing north the problem would-be an
approximate three foot incline in a 35 foot area• He said
that even though that would face South he felt there would
be a problem with snowpacking and ice forming on the incline.
He explained that the way the plan is proposed there would be
only an approximate 6 inch incline