VAR 04-79Item #3 April 24, 1979
ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF REPORT
6517 McKinley St. N.E.
A. PUBLIC PURPOSE SERVED BY REQUIREMENT:
Section 205.053, 4, (B,1) requiring a lb foot side yard setback for living areas
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
garage and living areas in adjacent structures to reduce exposure to
conflagration of fire and also to allow for aesthetically pleasing open areas
around residential structures.
Section 205.053, 4, A, requiring a front yard setback of 35 feet.
Public purpose served is to allow for off-stteet parking without
encroaching on the public right of way. Also for aesthetic consideration
to reduce the "building line of sight' encroachment in the neighbor's front
yard.
B. STATED HARDSHIP:
I have to add to the house in this way in order to get�a good size bedroom.and
have an entrance to my existing bathroom, and to have a good size family room.
C. ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF REVIEW:
The reason for the front yard variance request is to bring the existing house
into conformance if request is granted.
The side yard variance, if granted, would not reduce the distance between
the Kok home and the neighbor to the North, as the home on the lot to the
North is located further West than the petitioner's is. Therefore if the
Commission grants these two requests we are not recommending any stipulations
to be attached to the approval.
APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING, APRIL 24, 1979 _ _ - PAGE 5
MOTION y Mr. Barna, seconded by Ms. Gabel, to recommend approval of the variance
request,.pursuant to Chapter 205 of the Fridley City. Code, to reduce the minimum
area for a townhouse development from 5"acres to .25 acres, to allow an existing
tri-plex to be sold as three individual townhouses located at 6661 - 6671 - 6681
Main Street N.E. and that the Board of Appeals concurs with the Planning Commission's
recommendation that the land be left as one plat with,the exception of the land
under the building rather than be split into three lots and it be treated as a town-
house development. Further, they should work with the.'City to determine how the
City wants the meters set up and also they work with the. City in developing town-
house association and bylaws.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY.
Ms. Schnabel informed Mr. Nitscheke that the variance was recommended for approval
and suggested he call Dick Sobiech, Public Works Director, and find out when it
will be at Council and if he would need a copy of the association bylaws at that
time. She stated that Council would determine the platting. The Board of Appeals
made the recommendation.that they approve his concept and that they concur with the
recommendation of the Planning Commission, that it not be platted as split lots, but
that they sell the property underneath the building and the rest of the property be
held in common.
Ms. Gabel stated'that she felt that Council should be made aware of the multiple
use on this property.
MOTION by Ms. Gabel, seconded by Mr. Barna, that there is a multiple use existing
on this property and Council should be aware of it and there should either be a
Special Use Permit applied for or the additional use should be ceased within a
reasonable period of time.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING.AYE, CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY.
4. REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE- PURSUANT TO CHAPTER
MOTION by
OF THE FRIDLEY CITY CODE TO
P
Ms. Gabel to.open the public hearing.
UPON A VOICE VOTE,.ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE PUBLIC HEARING
OPEN AT 8:15 P.M.
Ms Schnabel read the Administrative Staff Report as follows;
APPEALS OONflCSSION .ME`ETING, APRIL 244 1979 --- -- PAGE 6
1
'ADMLNISTRAThVE STAFF REPORT
6517 McKinley St. N.E.
A. PUBLIC PURPOSE SERVED BY REQUIREMENT:
Section 205.053, 4, (B,1) requiring a TO foot side yard setback for living areas
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
garage and living ureas in adjacent structures to reduce exposure to
conflagration of fire and also to allow for aesthetically pleasing o:pen'areas
around residential -structures.
-Section 205.053, 4, A, requiring a front yard setback of 35 feet.
Public purpose served is to allovi for off-stf:eet parking without
encroaching on the public right of way. Also for aesthetic consideration
to reduce the "building line of sight' encroachment in the neighbor's front
'yard.
B. STATED HARDSHIP:
I have to add to the house in this way in order to getia.good size bedroom and
have an entrance to my existing bathroom, and to have a good size family room.
C. ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF REVIEW:
The reason for the front yard variance request is to bring the existing house
into conformance if request is granted.
The side yard variance, if granted, would not reduce the distance between
the Kok home and the neighbor to the North, as the home on the lot to the
North is located further West than the petitioner's is. Therefore if the
Commission grants these two requests we are not recommending any stipulations
to be attached. to the approval.
Mr. Kok stated that he had stated that his hardship was to get a good sized bedroom
and family room but should have stated that if the or builder had put home
on the property squarer he wouldn�lt:need a variance.
Ms. Gabel•stated'that he probably did that because the street was curved. She noted
that=the house to the north sits even further forward than Mr. Kok's.
Ms. Schnabel asked if there was an easement on the north side.
Mr. Moravetz stated there was not.
APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING, APRIL 24, 1979 PAGE 7
Ms. Schnabel stated that in terms of where the neighbor's house sits in relation -
'ship, to the survey] he sits a little bit:,;forwaiTd of -Mr., Kok's house. She asked
if that was, a 35 foot setback?
Mr. Moravetz stated it was fairly close to a 35 foot setback. He stated that the
road curves substantially to the west.'
Ms. Gabel stated he was visually more forward because of the way the road --curves.
Ms. Schnabel stated that she didn't think the neighbor's house etas 35 feet back..
Mr. Nloravetz' stated that the files did not have " a surv-eyy "so he wa's nat sure of the
exact "setback. He also stated that the middle of the neighbor's" house would pro-
bably -line up with,the front of Mr. Kok's house. He felt that was a pretty close
apprdkimation. He stated that the addition would not come Any closer to the
neighbor's house than the existing structure does.
Mr. Barna stated that if you swung an are off the southeast corner of the: house
to the north you would probably find that their addition would go farther away from
that are on�that existing corner.
Ms. Schnabel asked if the deck on the survey was currently existing.
Mr. Kok stated it was.
Mr. Plemel stated that the whole thing could be shifted to the south but with the
deck ther& 'it swould be a problem.
Mr. Kok stated that the deck would be coming off.
Mr. Plemel asked if it wouldn't be possible then to shift the whole addition to
the south;..
Mr. Kok stated that would put his kitchen window into his family room. He felt
that appearance wise it wouldn't be too good.
Ms. -'Schnabel -asked Mr. Kok if he planned to do the work himself.
.Mr. Kok stated that all the rough work would be done. by 'a;professional.
Ms.. Schnabel asked what he planned for the exterior.
Mr. Kok stated it would be just like the existing exterior.,..
Ms. Schnabel referred .to the Administrative, -Staff :Report. and .stated that the ;
front year setback was self-explanatory in terms of hardship;;and because the house
was built the way it was.
Ms. Gabel stated that the house looks nice the way it sits.
APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING, APRIL 24... 3,979 - PAGE 8
Ms. Gabel asked Mr. Kok if he.had talked to the people vho.lived in the white
stucco house to the north.
Mr. Kok stated that he was going to do the construction.
Ms. Schnabel asked for comments from the audience regarding this request.
There were no comments.
MOTION by Ms. Gabel, seconded by Mr. Plemel, to close the public hearing.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE PUBLIC HEARING
CLOSED AT 8:25 P.M.
Mr. Plemel stated that he felt this would be a nice addition to the residence and
since it would be no closer to the other structures, he would have no problem.with
it.
MOTION by Mr. Plemel, seconded by Ms. Gabel, to approve the request for a variance
purs�ua,nt to Chapter 205 of the Fridley City Code to reduce the side yard setback from
the minimum requirement of 10 feet to 5.9 feet to allow the construction of a 16
foot by 32 foot addition to the rear of a house at 6517 McKinley Street N.E. An
additional variance is needed because at the time of the construction of the
original house the front yard setback was reduced to 33 feet instead of the required
35 feet. .
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED.
UNANIMOUSLY.
Ms. Schnabel informed Mr. Kok that he was free to apply for a building permit.
Mr. Kok thanked the Commissioners.
5. REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 205 OF THE FRIDLEY CITY CODE, TO
son,
MOTION by Mr. Barna, seconded by Mr. Plemel, to open the public hearing.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYEj9 CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE PUBLIC HEARING
OPEN AT 8:27 P.M.
Ms. Schnabel read the Administrative Staff Report as follows:
i
CITY OF FRIDLEY
8431 UNIVERSITY AVENUE N.E., FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA 55432
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
Notice is hereby given that the
will conduct a public hearing in
Avenue Northeast at 7:30 P.M. on
following:
TELEPHONE ( 612)571-3450
April 13, 1979
Appeals Commission of the City of Fridley
the City Council Chambers at 6431 University
Tuesday, April 24, 1979, in regard to the
Request for a variance pursuant to Chapter 205 of the
Fridley City Code to reduce the side yard setback from
the minimum requirement of 10 feet to 5.9' to allow the
construction of a 16 foot by 32 foot addition to the
rear of a house at 6517 McKinley Street N.E. An additional
variance is needed because at the time of the construction
of the original house the front yard setback wa-s reduced
to 33 feet instead of the required 35 feet.
Notice is hereby give that all persons having an interest therein will be
given an opportunity to be heard at the above time and place.
VIRGINIA SCHNABEL
CHAIRWOMAN
APPEAL$ COMMI-�JqN
Note: The Appeals Commission will have the final action on this request,
unless: there are objections from surrounding neighbors, the 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 with only a recommendation from the Appeals Commission.
MrAT
I
-r-.F4