Loading...
VAR 91-03Councilman Billings asked if the petitioner ha witted a written request for the item to be tabled or if was by phone. Ms. Dacy stated it was a teleplictfie request. MOTION by Councilwom orgenson to table this item to April 8, 1991 and request a petitioner submit a written request. Seconded by Councilm chneider. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee dec ed the motion carried unanimously. 6. RECEIVE AN ITEM FROM THE APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING OF FEBRUARY 19, 1991: A. VARIANCE REQUEST, VAR #91-03, BY DAN SZYKULSKI, TO REDUCE THE REAR YARD SETBACK FROM 30 FEET TO 21 FEET; TO REDUCE THE SETBACK OF AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE FROM THE REAR AND SIDE LOT LINES FROM 3 FEET TO 1 FOOT; TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF AN ADDITION AND THE EXISTENCE OF A STORAGE SHED ON LOT 1. BLOCK 2, RICK CREEK TERRACE PLAT 6. THE SAME BEING 6860 MADISON STREET N.E.: Councilman Billings stated that he understands the petitioner requested this variance be withdrawn. MOTION by Councilman Billings to table this item to April 8, 1991 pending a written request by the petitioner. Seconded by Councilman Fitzpatrick. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. 7. MARCH 13, 1991: A. SET PUBLIC HEARING FOR APRIL 8. 1991, FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT P.S. #91-01, BY MILESTONE HOTEL INVESTMENTS, INC., TO REPLAT PART OF LOTS 1 2 3 4 AND 5 AUDITOR'S SUBDIVISION NO. 153 TO BE DESCRIBED AS LOTS 1 AND 2 B 1 SKYWOOD MALL ADDITION GENERALLY LOCATED AT 5201 5275 CENTRAL AVENUE N.E. MOTION by Councilman Billings to t the public hearing on this plat for April 8, 1991. Seconde y Councilman Fitzpatrick. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, yor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. B. Ms. Dac , Community Development Director, stated that the property int gorgion is the Skywood Mall Shopping Center and is zoned C-3. Sh stated that the purpose of the lot split is to subdivide the Mr. Grocott stated that the schools have different levels with a minimum of 150 hours concentrating on practical items such as strokes, business, ethics, anatomy, physiology, and cl anliness. He stated that if a person desires a higher level, su as sports massage, there is a longer training period and more ho rs required. He stated that some levels require as much as 650 hours of training. Mr. Grocott stated that most cities have had a prioblem in keeping out the "sleazy" elements, and they certainlynt to help in that area. Councilman Schneider asked if there aresgfne cities that do not permit therapeutic massage. Mr. Grocott stated that some permit 't with very restrictive ordinances. He stated that probabl Bloomington is the most restrictive, and due to the high fees, it would be impossible for a therapeutic massage therapist to w rk in that city. Councilman Billings stated that as it is now written permits chiropractors, and nurses. , Mr. Hill stated that was correEt. understands that the ordinance 5Lssage by doctors, surgeons, Councilman Billings asked i it would be a safe conclusion that through this proposed amen ent, the City is relaxing the standards and providing a larger number of places where massage could take place and, at the same ti e, reducing the amount of revenue for the City since there is no cense fee involved. Mr. Hill stated one c uld speculate that the City is taking this position. He stated hat he does not know of anyone, at this time, who falls under thi ordinance, and the City really is not making money from the or finance being in effect. He stated that the ordinance is keepjA1those the City intended to keep out, and the therapeutic sage group is not operating in the City because they felt they could not comply with the ordinance as it now stands. MOTION by Co ncilwoman Jorgenson to waive the reading and approve the ordina ce upon first reading. Seconded by Councilman Schneider. Upon a voice vote, Councilwoman Jorgenson, Councilman Schneider Councilman Fitzpatrick, and Mayor Nee voted in favor of the moti Councilman Billings voted against the motion. 5. Mayor Nee stated he understands that the petitioner has requested this item be tabled indefinitely. Community Development Department PLANNING DIVISION City of Fridley DATE: February 27, 1991 0. TO: William Burns, City Manager A, nn�;° FROM: Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director Michele McPherson, Planning Assistant SUBJECT: Variance Request, VAR #91-03, by Dan Szykulski On February 19, 1991, the Appeals Commission voted unanimously to recommend denial of the variance request to the City Council. Staff recommends that the Council concur with the Appeals Commission action. MM:ls t ® STAFF REP06 APPEALS DATE February 19, 1991 CITYOF PLANNING COMMISSION DATE FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL DATE: arch 25, 1991 AUTHOR M/1 -S REQUEST PERMIT NUMBER APPLICANT PROPOSED REQUEST LOCATION 6860 Madison St. SITE DATA SIZE DENSITY PRESENT ZONING ADJACENT LAND USES & ZONING UTILITIES PARK DEDICATION ANALYSIS FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS CONFORMANCE TO COMPREHENSIVE PLAN COMPATIBILITY WITH ADJACENT USES & ZONING ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS STAFF RECOMMENDATION APPEALS RECOMMENDATION PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION VAR #91-03 Dan Szykulski To reduce the rear yard setback from 30 ft. to 21 ft. To reduce the setback of an accessory building from the rear and side lot lines from 3 ft. to 1 ft. 10,700 sq. ft. R-1, Single Family Dwelling R=1, Single Family Dwelling Yes Yes Denial Denial 6A EC. /4, T. 30, R. 2 4 1 �;, 13 StC.r+ �7 (ED VAR #91-03 Dan Szykulski (ED 13 14 ROLAND W. A COUNTY SUI TMS IS A CO4- THEY APPEAR OFFICES AFFEC THIS DRAWING REFERENCE PUR TY IS NOT RES ACCURACIES 53 RroO�"m A� (" Or✓Hl / &3B0J 2' ss LOCATION MAP Ito e7- 3 e VAR #91-03 Dan Szykulski Ali 2t llli,lJ �� �jy� It W AV V' r^2 6C ZONING MAP Staff Report VAR #91-03, 6860 Madison Street N.E. Page 2 A. STATED HARDSHIP: "While remodeling house, I would like to add a 4 season porch closer to property line than allowed. Need to know for bid from building and to go ahead with architect's drawings." B: ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF REVIEW: Request The petitioner is requesting a rear yard variance to allow the construction of a four -season porch and also a reduction in the setback from the rear and side lot lines to allow the existence of an 80 sq. ft. storage shed. The request is for Lot 1, Block 2, Rice Creek Terrace Plat 6, the same being 6860 Madison Street N.E. Site Located on the parcel is a single family dwelling unit with an attached two -car garage. The lot is a corner lot. The property is zoned R-1, Single Family Dwelling Unit, as are the parcels to the north, south, east, and west. The petitioner is proposing to enclose an existing concrete patio and also to construct a four -season porch with decks on either side of it. Analysis Section 205.07.03.D. (3). (a) of the Fridley City Code requires a rear yard setback of not less than 25% of the lot depth with not less than 25 feet permitted or more than 40 feet required for the main building. Public purpose served by this requirement is to provide rear yard space to be used for green areas which enhance the neighborhood. In order to construct the four season porch, the petitioner is requesting a reduction of the rear yard setback from 30 feet to 21 feet. The Code allows accessory uses such as decks to encroach into the required setback by 10 feet. The petitioner could construct a 14 foot by 34 foot unenclosed deck in the area proposed for the four -season porch without requiring a variance. In addition, the petitioner could also expand the house to meet the 17 1/2 foot setback from Washington Street if the petitioner needs additional living area. ♦ � R Staff Report VAR #91-03, 6860 Madison Street N.E. Page 3 Analysis Section 205.04.05.8.1 of the Fridley City Code requires that accessory buildings and structures in the rear yard shall not be any closer than 3 feet from any lot line. Public purpose served by this requirement is to ensure adequate separation between structures. The petitioner has constructed an 8 foot by 10 foot storage shed in the northwest corner of the property. The shed is located 1 foot from the rear and side lot lines. The Code requires that all accessory structures be placed 3 feet from the lot line. In addition, a 6 foot drainage easement runs north/south along the west property line. The shed cannot be constructed within the easement area unless the easement has been vacated. In addition, the Chief Building Official has stated that the walls of the shed shall need to be 1 hour fire rated if they are closer than the required 3 feet. The petitioner can relocate the shed to conform to the City Code requirements as there is adequate area on the lot. Recommendation Staff recommends that the Appeals Commission recommend to the City Council denial of both variances: (1) To reduce the rear yard setback from 30 feet to 21 feet; and (2) to reduce the setback of an accessory structure from the rear and side lot lines from 3 feet to 1 foot, as the petitioner can meet the required setbacks. Appeals Commission Action The Appeals Commission voted unanimously to recommend to City Council denial of the variance request in its entirety. City Council Recommendation Staff recommends that the City Councnil concur with the Appeals Commission action. 6E mvirl =1 I IR =19 B? to—lb# uvn Other (describe) ` EXTE ENVELOPE'THERMAL TRANSMITTANCE Other (describe) F ev4 i/Sy[ PAGE 1 STANDARD WORKSHEET Site Address Amer �,V V�y�,5& Contractor /ZU� C/hZG50�-D.�S Phone "l L Date -5-9 Building Type (check one) � One and Two Family Dwelling I� Other Af'rmbly (Describe type'from Table 3 or Area (A) U -Value U x A show calculations on Page 2 S Ft Average U -Value, (UxA)/(Afrom Line 4 ****** Insulated Area �Y -framing-Area /1 eje-A 6 Sk li hts Type ****** *ter*ank o� C Other describe If Line 2 is greater than Line 3. or Line 5 greater than Line 6. complete the f.0lowfing to determine alternative U -Value for N3 Other describe 1 Totals $ 7 2 Avera a U -Value, (UxA)/(Afrom Line 1 ****** Zl ****** 3 Required U -Value (from text) ****** a 2 ****** insulated Area 0 G 91 Framing Area G U .00/ Windows Type lS�i i c tiJO �. t .y ****** d 10 Area (Line 4) x U -Value (Line 6) x Doors Type O A [ Rim Joist Area i , Bt •— Fireplace Wall a V Foundation Wall above rade 3 0 U d o Foundation Windows, Type If Line 8 is greater than Line 11, alter assemblies as required so Line 8 does not exceed Line 11. Other describe Other (describe) Other (describe) F ev4 i/Sy[ �jZy Z3,Q� 4 __Totals, ****** I� 5 Average U -Value, (UxA)/(Afrom Line 4 ****** O ****** 6 Required U -Value from text ****** *ter*ank If Line 2 is greater than Line 3. or Line 5 greater than Line 6. complete the f.0lowfing to determine alternative U -Value for total exterior envelope. $ 7 Area (Line 1) + Area (Line 4). + .C, 4A -- ---�. -� 1 8 UxA (Line 1) + UXA(Line 4). - + ****** as 9 Area (Line 1) x U -Value (line 3) x ****** d 10 Area (Line 4) x U -Value (Line 6) x 11 "Budget". Line 9 + Line 1041 ****** 0 '' 12 Alternative U -Value, Line 11/Line 7 ****** If Line 8 is greater than Line 11, alter assemblies as required so Line 8 does not exceed Line 11. EXTr'RIOR ENVELOPE STANDARD WORKSHEF i e ,nessse�no -Va ue iateria�decr � aas� l-IcL i crness I R "a 3''' I .,? S/B , s� »o iaoie Lssen5l Th - see Table Enter on Pmna , ,.©2$ �CnQU 1 pr 0 Qg Wye --mP WAP.14 to y`.°.r4l*104' a)f- ("°lr' a- - aiJl �"o �So2 �rrl�I�iQ = �i4� �SLL2 = •j�L — � 001 I �� . -tel : 4'7 441 (1) a S P-oso'L ,,% '9 mar -- ,1 �rz IT ef MIN 40 -tai �� CITY OF FR3DIBY 6431 UNIVERSITY AVENGE j9.E. FRMM, M 55432 Cammmity Development Department (612) 571-3450 VFilwom APPwQsiTICET FORK PROPERTY II 40MCK - site plan required for submittals; see attached I -r Legal description: P ic.,A- Lot 1 Block Tract/Addition ` e C 1 c Current zoning:Square footage/acreage /0, 0 S� Ffi Reason for variance and hardship: �„14.�Oe cet�.e�e.®an \4.ovSe- Z Wcavlc� tke 1-0 C,, Cj Gi c.! Season ?cfcl, CWser -tu Qrgoty Um- r4,A oakyv¢ ® Nee to `Crow %iC Section of City Code: bUM-er � 7U C) ckeoj W11'i'h 4M�1 fiecz Bfawin 5_® FEE MM 320 ffi max --K 4 k V,4 AA -Se'r i� ACK Fi2z,4 n 7-0 (Cont acct Pardmsers: Fee aamrs must sign this form prior to processing) NAME�� S� vlsk� J �Q flAVR*TWIR: pmm -'�'7/'-(p V < SIGNATUREVa,.�-Y N]AT'E 3 1- �11 NAME J)CA lee AMPEW ` 5r- a a SIGNATURE A HATE /'3 1 Fee: $100.00 _ $ 60.00 for residential prcyperties Permit VAR Receipt # �, d Application received by: a/ I i 9 Sdmduled Appeals Cooaission dater -6 ► �I , 1 L Scheduled City council date: ►.fc I CITY Of FRIDLEY PLAN REVIEW CEECRLIBT Applicants for 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 followings 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 areas of sq. ft. (U) 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 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, width, paving width, existing and proposed median cuts, and inter- sections 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, bikepaths, 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 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 6431 University Avenue N.E. on Tuesday, February 19, 1991, at 7:30 p.m. for the purpose of: Consideration of variance request, VAR #91-03, by Dan Szykulski: Per Section 205.07.03.D. (3) . (a) of the Fridley City Code, to reduce the rear yard setback from 30 feet to 21 feet, and Per Section 205.04.05.B. (1) of the Fridley City Code, to reduce the setback of an accessory structure from the rear and side lot lines from 3 feet to 1 foot, to allow the construction of an addition and the existence of a storage shed on Lot 1, Block 2, Rice Creek Terrace Plat 6, the same being 6860 Madison Street N.E., Fridley, Minnesota, 55432. Any and all persons 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. 6H MAILING LIST FOR VARIANCE # 91--03 City council Marvin Prindle Robert. Johnson C:.ty Manager 6870 Washington Street 6869 Madison Street Fridley, MN 55432 Fridley, MN 55432 Diane Savage Byron Johnson Richard Gierdal 567 Rice Creek Terrace N.E. 6862 Washington Street 6863 Madison Street Fridley, MN 55432 Fridley, MN 55432 Fridley, Mid 55432 Charles Weiser Walter Miskiw E mer Hansen 6876 Madison Street 6861 Washington Street 6857 Madison Street Fridley, MLV 55432 Fridley, MN 55432 Fridley, M 55432 Alan Folie Gerald Fisher Joseph Hrncir 6866 Madison Street 6865 Wash�tcn Street 6851 Madison Street Fridley, NST 55432 Fridley,55432 MST Fridley, M{'d 55432 Lawrence Doth Vernon Bittner Leo Anderson 6873 7th Street 6871 Washington Street 6841 Madison Street Fridley, MN 55432 Fridley, M 55432 Fridley, MN 55432 Gloy Nelson David Skjervold 6871 7th.Street 6875 Washington Street Fridley, MLV 55432 Fridley, M 55432 Harold Kutzke Frank Ferguson 6867 7th.Street 6850 Jefferson Street Fridley, MN 55432 Fridley, M 55432 Joseph_Szykulski. Charles Mykkanen 6860 Madison Street 6840 Jefferson Street Fridley, MN 55432 Fridley, NiV 55432 Maril Will iaAs 6874 Washington Street Fridley, MN 5:5432 61 CITY OF FRIDLEY APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING, FEBRUARY 19, 1991 wwwrwrrrwww�w.�.rr/rww.wrww.�..rww�r�+rrwrrwrrwrwwrrwrrwrwwrwrw�wrrwrwrw1�nrwrw�rwrww CALL TO ORDER: Vice -Chairperson Kuechle called the February 19, 1991, meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. ROLL CALL: Members Present: Larry Kuechle, Ken Vos, Cathy Smith Members Absent: Diane Savage, Carol Beaulieu Others Present: Michele McPherson, Planning Assistant Dan Szykulski, 6860 Madison Street N.E. Maril Williams, 6874 Washington Street N.E. Alan Folie, 6866 Madison Street N.E. Chuck & LaVonne Weiser, 6876 Madison St. N.E. APPROVAL OF FEBRUARY 5 1991, APPEALS COMMISSION MINUTES: NOTION by Ms. Smith, seconded by Dr. Vos, to approve the February 5, 1991, Appeals Commission minutes as written. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, VICE -CHAIRPERSON KUECHLE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. CONSIDERATION OF VARIANCE REQUEST VAR #91-03. BY DAN SZYKULSKI: 1. Per Section 205.07.03.D.(3).(a) of the Fridley City Code, to reduce the rear yard setback from 30 feet to 21 feet; and 2. Per Section 205.04.05.B.(1) of the Fridley City Code, to reduce the setback of an accessory structure from the rear and side lot lines from 3 feet to 1 foot; To allow the construction of an addition and the existence of a storage shed on Lot 1, Block 2, Rice Creek Terrace Plat 6, the same being 6860 Madison Street N.E. MOTION by Dr. Vos, seconded by Ms. Smith, to open the public hearing. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, VICE -CHAIRPERSON KUECHLE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AT 7:32 P.M. 6J PPEALS COMMISSION MEETING. FEBRUARY 19, 1991 PAGE 2 Ms. McPherson stated that the property is located at the northwest corner of Madison Street and Washington Street. The property is zoned R-1, Single Family Dwelling, as are the parcels surrounding it. Ms. McPherson stated that located on the parcel is a single family dwelling unit with an unenclosed patio, a storage shed, and an attached two -car garage. The petitioner is proposing to enclose the existing concrete patio and construct an addition which will consist of a four -season porch in the middle, with two 10 ft. by 14 ft. deck areas on either side of the four -season porch. Ms. McPherson stated the first variance request is to reduce the rear yard setback from 30 feet to 21 feet. This is a corner lot, and the Code determines the front yard to be the shortest of the two frontages, so, in this instance, the garage accesses the side corner of the lot. Ms. McPherson stated the Code does allow accessory structures such as decks, unenclosed stairways, patios, etc., to encroach into the required setback by 10 feet. The petitioner is proposing to construct a four -season porch within the required rear yard, reducing the rear yard setback from 30 feet to 21 feet. Ms. McPherson stated that in lieu of this variance request, staff has proposed either constructing just the unenclosed deck area or, if the petitioner needs more living space, the petitioner has an option to construct an addition up to 17 1/2 feet from the property line on Washington Street. Ms. McPherson stated the second request deals with the shed that exists in the rear corner of the property. As submitted, the petitioner has stated that the shed is 1 foot from both the side and rear lot lines. The Code requires a 3 foot setback between any accessory building and the side or rear lot lines. In reviewing the file, Darrel Clark, Chief Building Official, noted that there is a 6 foot drainage easement which runs along the rear of the property. This should be vacated if the petitioner wishes to leave the shed in this location. Since the shed is only 8 feet by 10 feet, staff is recommending that the petitioner relocate the shed closer to the deck area or to another portion of the yard. Ms. McPherson stated staff is recommending that the Appeals Commission recommend to the City Council denial of both variances. Ms. McPherson stated she did review the adjacent properties in the files. For the property at 6866 Madison Street, the petitioner has indicated that the garage is 1 foot from the property line; however, there is no variance on record in the file. For the property at 6874 Washington Street, the garage is located adjacent to the rear yard of the petitioner's yard, and there is 12 feet 6K PPEALS COMMI88ION MEETING, FEHRIIARY 19, 1991 PAGE 3 from the property line to the side of the garage. In the general vicinity, there are no other variances of this type. Mr. Dan Szykulski stated that he wanted the four -season porch so they can have the outdoor feel without being outside for four seasons of the year. The proposed location seems to be the most suitable. If they were to expand on the Washington Street side to meet code, they have a side door on the Washington Street side with a foyer. They also have a side door on the Madison Street side. So, the four -season porch would be off the foyer, not off the actual living area. Mr. Szykulski stated that the "public purpose" for the code requirement "is to provide rear yard space to be used for green areas which enhance the neighborhood". If the City allows a deck to be built of the same size, it is taking up as much green area as the enclosure. Mr. Szykulski stated the storage shed was built in the spring/summer of 1970 by his father who did not know the code requirement. There is a concrete slab under the shed. The shed could be removed, but there are mature trees in the back yard, and he would be encroaching on the house, although he is encroaching on the neighbor's garage right now. Mr. Kuechle asked if the drainage easement actually functions for drainage. Mr. Szykulski stated that it doesn't. He has lived there 20 years. His property tapers down toward Washington and down toward Madison, and the water drains to both streets. Ms. McPherson stated that unless the drainage runs along the back of the neighboring properties and then to the petitioner's property and out to the street, she did know if it would be necessary to keep the easement. Mr. Kuechle asked if the Commission has to address the shed issue. Ms. McPherson stated the petitioner could file a vacation of the drainage easement, and that would eliminate the fact of the shed being in the easement. When staff processes variances, they look at the entire property and all the accessory structures and that is why the shed is being addressed also. If the Commission recommends approval of the shed variance, they should make a stipulation that the easement be vacated. Dr. Vos asked the petitioner about his hardship. Mr. Szykulski stated there is no real hardship, other than the fact that the proposed addition has to be closer to the lot line; and APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING, FEBRUARY 19, 1991 PAGE 4 there is no other place to add on without making the house look inconsistent with other houses in the neighborhood. Ms. Smith asked Mr. Szykulski what he would do if the Commission recommends denial of the variances. Mr. Szykulski stated he would probably just build the deck. Mr. Alan Folie, 6866 Madison Street N.E., stated he owns the house directly to the north of the petitioner. He just wanted to make sure that the addition will be single story and that the home will stay single family. Mr. Szykulski stated that the addition will be a single story addition, and there is no intention to change the use of the property. Dr. Vos stated that when Mr. Folie looks to the south from his property, he will look into the petitioner's new addition and more structures. Did he have any objection to that? Mr. Folie stated that view is not all that valuable. It is his feeling that whatever Mr. Szykulski does to his house to improve it will increase the value of his home also. It is hard to imagine how the addition will look before it is built. Dr. Vos asked if the petitioner is allowed to build as proposed, would that hinder the ability of the homeowner to the west to expand? Ms. McPherson stated that assuming that both sides of the drainage easement are not vacated, there would be a minimum of 27 feet between the edge of the four -season porch and the neighbor's garage, should the neighbor to the west decide to expand. Mr. Maril Williams, 6874 Washington Street N.E., stated he is the neighbor to the west. The 6 foot easement is not 6 feet on each side. When he rebuilt after the tornado, he asked for a variance; and he was told it was a 3 foot easement on each side for a total of 6 feet. He stated he has had water problems, and that is the reason for the easement. Ms. McPherson stated she would verify that easement before the Council meeting. Mr. Williams stated he had no objection to the variance and addition as proposed by Mr. Szykulski. Mr. Kuechle stated that even if the easement is only 3 feet, the petitioner is still in trouble with the shed. If the City does not approve the variance for the storage shed, isn't that putting a finite lifetime on the shed? However, if the City approves the ,6M PPEALS COMMISSION MEETING, FEBRUARY 19, 1991 PAGE 5 variance, then does that mean that the variance goes with the property and is there forever? Ms. McPherson stated that is correct. Ms. Smith asked if they can put a stipulation on the variance that the variance is for the existing structure only. Ms. McPherson stated she believed the Appeals Commission could recommend that stipulation to the Council. Technically, if the Commission recommends denial on the shed variance, and the Council approves the shed variance, the petitioner should vacate the easement; or at least understand that he is taking a risk by having the shed in the easement. If the City or NSP or anyone else has to do work in the easement, the shed would have to be removed. Dr. Vos stated that according to Mr. Williams, there have been some water problems in that back section of Washington and Madison. If some neighbor believes that shed is causing a water drainage problem and the shed is in violation of the ordinance, that might be grounds for removal of the shed. Ms. McPherson stated if the City grants a variance to allow the shed in the easement, the City, could be partially liable for allowing a structure in the drainage easement. MOTION by Dr. Vos, seconded by Ms. Smith, to close the public hearing. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, VICE -CHAIRPERSON KUECHLE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 8:07 P.M. Dr. Vos stated he believed they should separate the two variances. They are really two entirely different issues. Dr. Vos stated that regarding the four -season porch, the petitioner is going to enclose a fairly large area already --about 20 feet by 20 feet and come out with a deck on the west side. As he understood the Code, usually there has to be hardship regarding the property, the way the house is designed on the lot, or a hardship because there is no other feasible place to put an addition. He did not see a hardship, and he would vote for denial of the four - season porch. Ms. Smith stated she agreed with Dr. Vos. There doesn't seem to be much of a hardship. Mr. Kuechle also agreed. One of the criteria that the Commission uses in granting a variance is that there has to be something unique about the particular piece of property or some special hardship that exists for the property.that doesn't ordinarily exist 6N APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING, FEBRUARY 19, 1991 PAGE 6 in like properties. If that is the case, they haven't identified it; and he would recommend to the City Council denial of this variance request. NOTION by Dr. Vos, seconded by Ms. Smith, to recommend to City Council denial of variance request, VAR #91-03, by Dan Szykulski, per Section 205.07.03.D. (3). (a) of the Fridley City Code, to reduce the rear yard setback from 30 feet to 21 feet, to allow the construction of an addition and the existence of a storage shed on Lot 1, Block 2, Rice Creek Terrace Plat 6, the same being 6860 Madison Street N.E. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KUECHLE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Ms. Smith stated that the second variance request for the storage shed is a difficult one. Normally, she is inclined to recommend approval of a request that brings something existing into compliance; however, since this is a 20 year old storage shed and there are so many problems that could be created by approving the variance, she would have to recommend denial. Dr. Vos stated that if the storage shed is left in its current location, there is liability with the neighbors. There is no easy way to solve this problem. For many years, it was not a problem, but now suddenly it is a problem. He would like the Council to make the decision on this, so he would recommend denial. Mr. Kuechle stated he agreed. Even if the Commission recommended approval of the variance request from 3 feet to 1 foot, there is still the problem of the drainage easement. The Commission really doesn't have any right to recommend approval of a variance to place a shed on top of a drainage easement. It is really a moot point, because the drainage easement situation seems to override the shed. He would recommend denial. MOTION by Ms. Smith, seconded by Dr. Vos, to recommend to City Council denial of variance request, VAR #91-03, to per Section 205.04.05.B.(1) of the Fridley City Code, to reduce the setback of an accessory structure from the rear and side lot lines from 3 feet to 1 foot, to allow the construction of an addition and the existence of a storage shed on Lot 1, Block 2, Rice Creek Terrace Plat 6, the same being 6860 Madison Street N.E. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KUECHLE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Ms. McPherson stated this item will go to City Council on March 25, 1991. Dear Property Owner, You recently received a notice regarding a variance request by Dan Szykulski, 6860 Madison Street. Please disregard that notice, as the date was incorrect. Enclosed is the notice with the corrected date. Michele McPherson Planning Assistant ® COMMISSION APPLICATION REVIEW RX NUMBER FlLE DATE MW MIG DATE FILE DESCRIPTION VAR 91_03 GTYOF 08 2/8/91 2/19/91 Dan Szykulski; rear yard variance FRIDLEY COMPLETE REVIEW CHECKLIST AND RETURN TO PLANNING DEPT. B D. -1/10'1 ICHELE M. + O'T 13,47-11 4k -ruA COMMENTS DARREL C. i 1 1 MAXON El BOB A.2-13 I / C, W M) o/ w,• ('m � •� 3 2 • J I-0 7A.. /za c �. s 9 l/:!/• �) ; '4° *�; (18) (, 5 i►D� 412 Gli iso ~ G 6 3g. t hlu 'i� 0 7 ' Ys /9i�,e. ` Qy :A � L w=d � p 6 �R� `�•�� � � b�16 � , /»u G _ o ° /6 N /7 �., /� 4 A �•• �e �e� fe `� ZG �� ! f e ° 1.9G O w ? r �e,•h ,_.,, ,ry PANDORA aZn ° b ,d 1,441) ��; 110 ! n h; �� /2 94 6h �� /oo / /Io R• 1 _:,IBS) "' �s�n) � T'°)•3',°�' �e ° I• � go •` M 2.' •1�I .111 ;��'' � o e .qE `' sa S�r'I `" / � ° 1_y i ` i 0> •y� 5�� 4 p �S�!)3 -+• �/'3Q("� �>.�i^i p 0 R/I)P - �35�Z + h ' ' � //tIo ,r� t�J k,A � N ,� o o b 30) 1 65 N e �S Bal 1F39 a, O ems, � 4+ ° ?J o �Is ♦�,/b a` 6 �s 'p � , . .yam 'J./ � qP /yZ7 •ir,8• Q9 htily {� r{{{{� ' :Y 'O�, ��40 9° � ° ' nw nu r'.° °J� r � ^5 . , o 2 //,,'' tig �°• ^"' e 3 � ryi s--'• �1 r09r � � a ¢ w n \" II m v iS3' i Sf >�•BI IS"" 1,441) ��; 110 17 .I , �r •1�I o e ,� . 9( ° h OVERTON 65 'fa Bal B° 8^ N ke et a, A _ i Sf >�•BI p���,,KENNASTON' �[^ p•,� Y 60 9z ea, sz p Bz /p_ 1y v 4 G x.10<• O >�' /f13V �/¢ 4 D��i �• 15 lV Qs H 'rtl q �`+�•h � a� ,� +� '° BO 6a " Q ,� �� 4 3y � � y� , P+mh O `• ^ 1/ °°° ;��0 a 'r:aY� °` iGa"b) 'lab e• 96ary'�l ,�1 %OV�1% 4 ^ �S 1,t.4��a Y•• a'9 .j•ae•i0r"p •(:. � �� •3y�`' 'yKl �tlr) �Z'1,' �� ;z ° •• ° s � 1i "�10 °'�� .2 � ''�� y •,�;''° '111 �i 1 I !yi 689FH AVE. y.iO � 'I�b • 6�. ^� cA'� � 0m. ¢ 3 � � ti� 7S' js. 73. �� h n qr �J � �i5=* y 1, ,', �y � o ,5 co _— ^ �1L m ♦_ � .� .• pNA� v r. ° 3 i�g 61 .' L �- 80 0 ��. �a .. 9, \ '440 \ �' `�''1 •. it ry{/1 tw 9 6 90CB s .�'' f��] d y JBo /e nLi�7 �!/( �sy. aA!j!/•`l •V•'a ��^ a fig1 p r 6 4/ .3 ,z .6 z w 9�17 (07 P.e/ae �` % o (:� b•••/S: � ,a.^ 6 . Cf) j7 0 11101 f60 17 >LLS37 7111 , �y a, 7.0 '• 7t ioC o y/ 6 11 6.zs 0 f •LZ� `7R QLUC, •b fid° N +, `, 101 N o Iz � N 517 S.�? S1/,� ;. so SSS Sts S lS, 0 7 % `'�i�) d �,, 6� J " {\'`�� 9 ° •, yS:h s9) a� S 73 73 st ° ice. 7. i a /.06 17,16 +ebb h •3.6 hs ,'� i 7S 9! fT ^ 7S 7S lS A� > 7i 7J 71 7l G�6° a`,Y �qs� sa> (0) 'sr) .y) �r�) >e) :W), 40 q�J.� (a�) y) f 00,0),. '1 to /71 U. ' W33 v ... d/lei+ •._. aNen3 wet R F ;0 v O sus L(y/ CNA c�s� PLACE BillSEM D:.r1.icJi1/� 2.� .� N Ol9J a °>L 5 Op .4� OA5 '1�1 , X36 Shed I Deck Patio I to be I enclosed I� Deck CI m -- N t0 W m , CO 01 C m L I Washington Street 1 Scale: 1 "=20'