Loading...
VAR 95-05:STATS OF MINNESOTA ) TTY COUNCIL PROCEEDINGS COUNTY OF ANOKA ) VARIANCE CITY OF FRIDLEY ) In the Matter of: a variance, VAR #95-05 12522113 Owner: Stephen Hosch and Ann M. Reich The above entitled matter came before the City Council of the City of Fridley and was heard on the 10th day of April , 19 95 , on a petition for a variance pursuant to the City of Fridley's Zoning Ordinance, for the following described property: To reduce the setback of an addition to an attached single car garage from 4 feet to 3 feet on Lot 8, Block 2, Rice Creek Plaza South Addition, generally located at 6570 - 2nd Street N.E. 1y -3o- �1--'X3. OG:)q Uc--- IT IS ORDERED that a variance be granted as upon the following conditions or reasons: Approval with one stipulation. See City Council meeting minutes of April 10, 1995. STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF ANOKA ) CITY OF FRIDLEY ) OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK I, William A. Champa, City Clerk for the City of Fridley, with and in for said City of Fridley, do hereby certify that I have compared the foregoing copy and Order granting a variance with the original record thereof preserved in my office, and have found the same to be a correct and true transcript of the whole thereof. IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, I have hereunto subscribed my hand at the City of FrL ley, Minnesota, in the County of Anoka on the /6-7W day of / 1 a V� A , 19.1 b DRAFTED BY: City of Fridley 6431 University Avenue N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 j William A. Champa, Cityf Clerk (.SEAL) Variances are valid for a period of one year following approval and shAll considered void if not used within that period. r FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF APRIL 10, 1995 PAGE 6 (� Mr. Flora stated that the ordinance could specify t at the residents would be notified of the costs prior to the contract being awarded each year, and the City could give them number of days to respond regarding the costs: No persons in the audience spoke regarding theeation of this special taxing district for the Harris Pond tre went program. MOTION by Councilman Schneider to close, e public hearing. Seconded by Councilwoman Bolkcom. Upon a'voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee_ declared the motion car ed unanimously and the public hearing closed at 9:37 p.m. NEW BUSINESS: 15. MARCH 14, 1995• A. MOTION by Councilor Billings to concur with the unanimous recommendation of he Appeals Commission and grant Variance Request, VAR #95- 3, with the following stipulations: (1) the variance shall r ain in effect until: (a) the signs are altered in any way exc t for routine maintenance, and change of messages which makes t signs less in compliance with the chapter than it was before a alteration; (b) the supporting structure of the signs is placed or remodeled; (c) the face of the signs is replaced remodeled; (d) the signs become dilapidated or damaged, and the cost of bringing them into compliance is more,,than 50 percen of the value of said signs, at which time all of the signs and eir structures must be removed; and (e) notwithstanding (a) abo ,the name of the business being changed on the signs. S onded by Councilwoman Jorgenson. Upon a voice vote, all voting e, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. 16. RECEIVE AND ITEM FROM THE APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING OF MARCH 28, 1995: VARIANCE REQUEST VAR #95-05 BY STEPHEN HOSCH TO REDUCT THE SETBACK OF AN ADDITION TO AN ATTACHED SINGLE CAR GARAGE FROM 4 FEET TO 3 FEET, GENERALLY LOCATED AT 6570 SECODN STREET N.E. (WARD 1): Mr. Hickok, Planning Coordinator, stated that this is a request to allow a nine foot addition to a single garage and a setback three feet from the property line. He stated that the property owner to the north opposes this variance. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF APRIL 10, 1995- PAGE 7 Mr. Hickok stated that the Appeals Commission voted two to one to recommend approval. He stated one of the concerns was the overhang. He stated that this has been reviewed -by the Fire. Departmerit, a- fire wall should -be- constructed; and the overhang not - extend more than twelve inches. Councilman Billings stated that in the mid to late 1986's; the ordinance was changed to allow less than a five foot setback under certain circumstances. He asked what. conditions had to be met for the garage to be lees than five feet from the property line. Mr. Hickok reviewed the conditions as outlined in the code. Councilman Billings stated that the ordinance was intended to allow the structures to be within eight feet. Ms. Dacy, Community Development Director, stated that staff's interpretation was that a variance was needed from four feet to three feet. Councilman Billings asked if the driveway would be expanded. Mr. Hosch, the petitioner, stated that the driveway is already wide enough to accommodate two cars and would not be expanded. He stated that was the main concern of the neighbor to the.north, as this person is planning to sell her home and was concerned if a future addition would be permitted onto the garage of her home. He stated that there would be space for at least a ten foot addition on his neighbor's property. He stated that the Appeals Commission member who voted against the variance had the same concern, but the survey was not available at the time of the Appeals Commission meeting. Hopefully, it addresses that concern, as there is space to add to the garage. MOTION by Councilman Billings to grant Variance Request, VAR #95•-05, with the following stipulation: (1) the north wall of the addition shall be one hour fire rated with no openings and the overhang shall not exceed twelve inches. Seconded by Councilwoman Jorgenson. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. 17. Mr. Hickok, Planning Coordin or, stated that this addendum relates to the Recycle Minnesota esources lease pertaining to plastics. He stated the addendum tates that effective April 1, 1995, the City shall pay the pe pound fee to recycle necked plastic bottles on behalf of the ers of the site. He stated that all other aspects of the lease shall remain unchanged. Receipt # U /U U ❑ Certified Copy DaterTimet )TOO C Tax Liens/Releases Doc. Order of / ❑ Multi -Co Doc Tax Pd ✓ by, ltecordability: ❑Transfer New ❑ Dew Filing Feast _� �� ❑ Division ❑ GAC Def. Delqs: Pins: ❑ Status ❑ Spec. DOCUMENTNO. 1252243.0 ABSTRACT ANOKA COUNTY UMINNESMENT WAS FILED OTA N THIS OFFICE I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE WITHIN FOR RECORD ON NOV 19 9 6 AND WAS DULY RECORDED. AT 5: 00 PM $19.50 PAID. FEES AND TAXES IN THE AMOUNT OF RECEIPT N0. 96080510 EDWARD M. TRESKA ANOKA COUNTY PROPERTY TAX ADMINISTRATOR(RECORDER/REGISTRAR OF TITLES BY DKD DEPUTY PROPERTY TAXADMINISTRATOR/RECORDER/REGISTRAR OF TITLE FRIDLEY MUNICIPAL CENTER • 6431 UNIVERSITY AVE. N.E. FRIDLEY, MN 55432 • (612) 571-3450 • FAX (612) 571-1287 CITY COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN NOTICE April 13, 1995 Stephen Hosch 6570 - 2nd Street NE Fridley, MN 55432 Dear Mr. Hosch: On April 10, 1995, the Fridley City Council officially approved your request for a variance, VAR #95-05, to reduce the setback of an addition to an attached single car garage from 4 feet to 3 feet, on Lot 8, Block 2, Rice Creek Plaza South Addition, generally located at 6570 - 2nd Street N.E., with the following stipulation: 1. The north wall of the addition shall be one hour fire rated with no openings. The overhang shall not exceed 12 inches. You have one year from the date of City Council action to initiate construction. If you cannot begin construction in time, you must submit a letter requesting an extension at least three weeks prior to the expiration date. If you have any questions regarding the above action, please call me at 57p�590. S i;icer¢ly ulai LUV, AlVr Community Developme t 4 BD/dw Please review the above, sign the statement below and return one copy to the City of Fridley Planning Department by April 27, 1995. Concur with action taken. EM 6570 2ND STREET SIDE YARD SETBACK VARIANCE DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: The petffioner requests a variance to reduce the side yard setback for an attached accessory structure from 4 feet down to 3 feet. If approved, the variance request would allow construction of a 9 foot addition on to an existing attached 12 foot by 30 foot single car garage. This request is common in the community as a number of dwellings with attached single car garages exist in Fridley. The code, in fact, was changed to accommodate these expansions. The adjacent property owner to the north has written a letter opposing the variance request. The neighbor is concerned with drainage and lack of snow storage. Alternatives: 1. Construct an addition of 8 feet without a variance. 2. Construct a detached second accessory structure in the rear yard. RECOMMENDED ACTION: If the Council approves the request, staff recommends the following stipulation: 1. The north wall of the addition shall be one hour fire rated with no openings. The overhang shall not exceed 12'. APPEALS COMMSSION ACTION: The Appeals Commission voted 2:1 to recommend approval of the request to the City Council, with the stipulation noted above. 1601 66570 2ND S'.i.LET SIDE YARD SETBACK VARL .CE REPORT PROJECT DETAILS Petition For: Variance request to reduce the sideyard setback for an attached garage from 4' to 3' Location of Property: 6570 - 2nd Street Legal Description of Property: Lot 8, Block 2, Rice Creek Plaza. South Addition Size: 80 x 136.28 Topography: Urban, but sloping from east to west Existing Vegetation: Sod, trees, typical suburban Existing Zoning/Platting: R-1, Single Family Dwelling Availability of Municipal Utilities: Connected Vehicular Access: 2nd Street Pedestrian Access: N/A Engineering Issues: N/A Site Planning Issues: DEVELOPMENT SITE Section 205.04.B.(2).(b) requires a setback of 4 feet for an addition to an existing attached single car garage. The public purpose served by this requirement is to allow the expansion of single car garages while maintaining a minimum distance between structures. This assists in limiting crowding conditions in a residential district. 2 16.02 r ' The petitioner is requesting a variai.,„, to reduce the side yard setback for tined garage from 4 feet to 3 feet. Located on the subject parcel is a single family dwelling unit with an attached single car garage. The structure was constructed in 1958. To the rear of the garage is a screened in porch. The property has a topographic change from east to west, such that the lower level of the dwelling unit is a walk -out. Located on either side of the subject parcel are single family dwelling units. The petitioner purposes a 9 foot addition to the existing single car garage. Located on the property to the north is a single family dwelling unit with an attached single car garage facing the proposed addition. Located along the common property line is a variety of vegetation. The code permits an expansion of an attached single car garage down to 3 feet if the following conditions are met: 1. The house on the adjacent lot is located 10 feet from the lot line. 2. A two car garage on the adjacent lot is located 5 feet from the lot line. The petitioner could construct an 8 foot addition without a variance request. The property owner to the north has written the attached letter opposing the variance request. The neighbor, in her letter, points out that the petitioner has the option constructing a detached second accessory structure in the rear yard. This option is viable for the petitioner, it would require the petitioner to apply for a special use permit. The variance is within previously granted variances. If the Appeals Commission chooses to approve the request, staff recommends the following stipulations: 1. Petitioner shall provide an expanded hardsurface driveway by October 1, 1995. 2. The north wall of the addition shall be one hour fire rated with no openings. The overhang shall not exceed 12". ADJACENT SITES WEST: Zoning: R-3, General Multiple Family Use: Multiple Family SOUTH: Zoning: R-1, Single Family Use: Single Family EAST: Zoning: R-1, Single Family Use: Single Family NORTH: Zoning: R-1, Single Family Use: Single Family Comprehensive Planning Issues: None Public Comments: Letter received from neighbor to the north, 6700 - 2nd Street, expressing opposition to the request. As a result of the Appeals Commission discussion, staff re -reviewed the site survey for 6700 - 2nd Street (attached). From the survey, it appears that the property owner could construct a 10 foot addition to their garage without a variance. 16.03 FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF APRIL -10.. .-199-5 PAGE.. 5 ..: Mr. Flora, Public Works Director, stated .that the City reeeived petitions from the residents around Harris Pond.for a treatment program -of the pond..- He stated that they also. requested the .treatment be on.an pngoing basis. MOTION by Councilman Schneider to receive petitions for the Harr Pond weed treatk0ant/phosphorus reduction fiom the' Fri eji residents, Petition No. 3-1995, and Petition No. 4-1495 fro the .New Brighton residents. Seconded by Councilwoman Bolkcom. Upon a voice 'vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. Mayor Nee stated that this treatment program would a on a cost sharing basis with the property owners contributing ifty percent of the cost and the City contributing the other fi ty percent. Mayor Nee asked if there is a way the City coul discontinue this treatment program if they wished to do so at s e future date. He stated that it seems the petition allows fo the property owners to discontinue the treatment program by a p tition of at least 51 percent of the property owners. Mr. Burns stated that he assumes thety could discontinue the treatment at any time. Councilman Schneider stated that he nderstands what is being done is to create a special taxing dist ct so that the City can charge those costs for the treatment of/Harris Pond and is not guaran- teeing that the City would shay in the cost forever. Mr. Herrick, City Attorney, tated that Council is creating the district to allow the Cit authority to tax for this treatment program. He stated that t petition does not include any language that would bind the City o continue with this program. He stated that the property owne can request that the program be discon- tinued by a petition o 51 percent of the property owners. He felt that this request is not binding on this or future Councils but would be at their d'scretion. Mr. Herrick ques oned if the cost to the property owners would be added to their axes or if they would be billed separately. Mr. Flora st ted that, currently, the property owners are billed by the Cit for their share of the cost. Mr. Herr,&ck felt that these details should be expanded in the ordina e. He asked what would happen if someone did not pay. Mr. Pribyl, Finance Director, stated that it would probably be handled in the same manner as those who do not comply with the weed ordinance; that is, they would be certified to the County for payment with the taxes. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL -MEETING OF APRIL 10 1995 PAGE.6 Mr. Flora stated that the. ordinance could specify- t the residents would be notified of the costs prior to contract being awarded each year, and the City could give m a number of days to respond regarding the. -costs. No persons in the audience spoke re ing the creation of this special taxing district for the kis Pond treatment program. MOTION by Councilman neider to close the public hearing. Seconded by Counci an Bolkcom. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Ne e-clared the motion carried unanimously and the public he 'ng closed at 9:37 p.m. 15. RECEIVE AN ITEM FROM THE APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING OF MARCH 14. 1995: � A. MOTION by Councilman Billings to co cur with the unanimous recommendation of the Appeals Co ssion and grant Variance Request, VAR #95-03, with the fo owing stipulations: (1) the variance shall remain in effect ntil: (a) the signs are altered in any way except for routin aintenance, and change of messages which makes the signs les n compliance with the chapter than it was before the alterat' n; (b) the supporting structure of the signs is replaced o remodeled; (c) the face of the signs is replaced or remode d; (d) the signs become dilapidated or damaged, and the cost o bringing them into compliance is more than 50 percent of th value of said signs, at which time all of the signs and their s ctures must be removed; and (e) notwithstanding (a) above, t e name of the business being changed on the 'signs. Secon by Councilwoman Jorgenson. Upon a voice vote, all voting ay Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. 16. RECEIVE AND ITEM FROM THE APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING OF MARCH 28, 1995: VARIANCE REQUEST, VAR #95-05, BY STEPHEN HOSCH, TO REDUCT THE SETBACK OF AN ADDITION TO AN ATTACHED SINGLE CAR GARAGE FROM 4 FEET TO 3 FEET, GENERALLY LOCATED AT 6570 SECODN STREET N.E. (WARD 1) : Mr. Hickok, Planning Coordinator, stated that this is a request to allow a nine foot addition to a single garage and a setback three feet from the property line. He stated that the property owner to the north opposes this variance. FRIDLEY_CITY, COUNCIL MEETING, OF APRIL 10, 1995 PAGE 7 Mr. Hickok.stated that the:Appeals Commission voted two to one to recommend approval. He stated one of the concerns was the overhang. He stated that this has been reviewed by the. Fire Department, a f ire wal, l - should be `constructed; and the - overhang not extend more than twelve inches. Councilman Billings stated' that' in the mid to late 19801s, the ordinance was changed to allow less than a five foot setback under certain circumstances. He asked what conditions had to be met for the garage to be lees than five feet from the property line. Mr. Hickok reviewed the conditions as outlined in the code. Councilman Billings stated that the ordinance was intended to allow the structures to be within eight feet. Ms. Dacy, Community Development Director, stated that staff's interpretation was that a variance was needed from four feet to three feet. Councilman Billings asked if the driveway would be expanded. Mr. Hosch, the petitioner, stated that the driveway is already wide enough to accommodate two cars and would not be expanded. He stated that was the main concern of the neighbor to the north, as this person is planning to sell her home and was concerned if a future addition would be permitted onto the garage of her home. He stated that there would be space for at least a ten foot addition on his neighbor's property. He stated that the Appeals Commission member who voted against the variance had the same concern, but the survey was not available at the time of the Appeals Commission meeting. Hopefully, it addresses that concern, as there is space to add to the garage. MOTION by Councilman Billings to grant Variance Request, VAR #95-05, with the following stipulation: (1) the north wall of the addition shall be one hour fire rated with no openings and the overhang shall not exceed twelve inches. Seconded by Councilwoman Jorgenson. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. 17. APPROVE ADDENDUM TO THE LEASE AGREEMENT BETWEEN HE CITY OF FRIDLEY AND RECYCLE MINNESOTA RESOURCES INC.; Mr. Hickok, Planning Coordinator, stated that is addendum relates to the Recycle Minnesota Resources lease aining to plastics. He stated the addendum states that effe ive April 1, 1995, the City shall pay the per pound fee to rec le necked plastic bottles on behalf of the users of the site He stated that all other aspects of the lease shall remain changed. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF APRIL 10 1995 PAGE 8 MOTION by Councilman Schneider to approve the addendu o the lease. agreement between the City and Recycle Minnesota sources, Inc. Seconded by Councilwoman Jorgenson. Uponn-a voice ote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried una mously. 18. INFORMAL STATUS REPORTS: Mr. Burns, City Manager, stated that he ad informally after this meeting. eTheya as tion on the relocation of the lore; Quality and Energy Commission'mmend Minnesota Resources site; and ew o brook Creek/Locke Lake. ADJOURNMENT: three items to discuss follows: (1) informa- (2) the Environmental ation on the Recycle f a concept for Stony - MOTION by Councilwoman rgenson to adjourn the meeting. Seconded by Councilman Schneid Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the mot' n carried unanimously and the Regular Meeting of the Fridley C' y Council of April 10, 1995 adjourned at 9:55 p.m. Respectfully sy6mitted, Carole H dad William J. Nee Secreta)ey to the City Council Mayor APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING MARCH 28 1995 PAGE 4 UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, VICE -CHAIRPERSON KUE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PUBLIC HEARING CLO D AT 7:53 P.M. MOTION by Dr. Vos, seconded by Ms. Smith, to acce into the public record the March 24, 1994, letter from M . Emil Menard regarding this request. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, VICE- RPERSON KUECHLE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Dr. Vos stated the request is for a fr nt yard setback encroachment. His experience is tha , if you are going to do that and ask for a variance, there st be a hardship whether it be the lay of the front yard, a c er lot or something to say that this is the only way we can ake a two car garage or an expansion. The first public p ose is to allow parking, which the petitioner still may have The second purpose is the line of site encroachment into the ighbor's front yard. This request is to go 10 feet forward a the neighbor to the south has a bedroom. If there was no other option except to go out the front, he would approve a request, but he was not going to vote for the request. Ms. Smith agreed. S e sympathizes with the petitioner and realizes it makes s nee. In driving down that street, all the houses line up on oth sides of the street. She would have a difficult time ayp roving this variance request and then not approving if of ers on the street came in with a similar request. Mr. Kuechle cZncurred. MOTIO/by Vos, seconded by Ms. Smith, to recommend denial of Variauest, VAR #95-04, by Michael Panning, to reduce the frontetback from 35 feet to 28.4 feet to allow an addition to a on Lot 14, Block 8, Christie Addition, generally locat351 Quincy Street N.E., Fridley, Minnesota. A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, VICE -CHAIRPERSON KUECHLE RED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. k1s. McPherson stated the variance request would be considered by the City Council on April 10. 2. rursuanz to section--705.-04:05.B.(2).(b).(1) of the Fridley City Code, to reduce the setback of an addition to an attached single car garage from 4 feet to 3 feet, on Lot 8, Block 2, Rice Creek Pla 4outh Addition, generally located at 6570 -2nd Street N.Ej',,.,Frjdler, MN 16.10 APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING, MARCH 28, 1995 PAGE 5 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 7:58 P.M. Ms. McPherson stated the request is located at 6570 - 2nd Street N.E. The property is north of Mississippi Street and northwest behind the Holly Shopping Center. The property is zoned R-1, Single Family Dwelling, and there is additional R-1 zoning on all sides of the subject parcel. Ms. McPherson stated the petitioner is proposing to construct a 9 -foot addition onto an existing 12 foot x 30 foot single car attached garage. There is approximately 12 feet between the existing garage wall and the property line to the north. The code does permit an expansion of an attached single car garage down to 3 feet if the following conditions are met: 1. The house on the adjacent parcel is located 10 feet from the lot line. 2. A two -car garage located on the adjacent lot is located 5 feet from the lot line. Ms. McPherson stated the property to the north is a single family dwelling unit with an attached single car garage which is located more than 5 feet from the lot line. The conditions met by the petitioner's request would permit an addition of 8 feet without a variance. The code would allow the setback to be reduced down to 4 feet as opposed to the typical 5 -foot setback. The property owner to the north submitted a letter objecting to the variance request. The petitioner has an option of constructing an 8 -foot wide addition or pursuing a second accessory structure in the rear yard which would require a special use permit as opposed to a variance request. Ms. McPherson stated this request is within previously granted variances. Staff does not have a recommendation to the Appeals Commission. However, if the Appeals Commission chooses to approve the request, staff recommends the following stipulations: 1. Petitioner shall provide an expanded hard surface driveway by October 1, 1995. 2. The north wall of the addition shall be one hour fire rated with no openings. The overhang shall not exceed 12 inches. Dr. Vos asked how far the single car garage to the north is from the lot line. 16.11 APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING MARCH 28 1995 PAGE 6 Ms. McPherson stated that information was not available in the address file. Dr. Vos stated, as he understands it, the property to the north has a single car garage. If that person wanted to build a double garage, would the granting of this variance preclude them from ever building a two -car garage? If one-person is within 4 feet on one side, there needs to be a certain width for fire. Ms. McPherson stated the code states that typically accessory buildings and structures in side yards are not to be closer than 5 feet; however, single car attached garages may be expanded down to 3 feet if the following conditions are met - the house is located at least 10 feet from the lot line or a double car garage which is located at least 5 feet from the lot line. Granting this variance would eliminate the first option of the property owner to the north which would be 3 feet. Ms. McPherson stated the second set of conditions is that the setback for an addition to an attached single car garage may be reduced to 4 feet from the lot line if the following conditions are met - a single car garage which is at least 4 feet from the common line or a house with a double garage, or a double car garage at least four feet from the lot line. The intent of the code is to maintain a minimum of 8 feet between structures as opposed to what would typically required for today's construction of 10 feet. Dr. Vos stated, if the Appeals Commission grants the variance down to 3 feet, the neighbor to the north cannot build any closer than 5 feet in order to keep the 8 -foot distance. This does have an impact. If both go to 4 feet, neither would be here. Mr. Kuechle stated the 3 -foot distance is at the front corner of the garage. The lot is not square. What is the distance at the back of the garage? Ms. McPherson stated the distance from the lot line at the rear of the garage is approximately 5 feet. Mr. Hosch stated the garage is currently 20 feet deep with a breezeway behind it. They plan to convert the breezeway into a kitchen along with other remodelling. When adding the new bay to the garage, they would like to extend it 30 feet to the back of the house to keep the back wall consistent. If the addition is limited to 8 feet, this would make it very difficult to open the doors. Nine feet would make it more functional to bring cars into the garage. The other issue is the lot. The lot is not square. It is only the first 10 feet or so of the addition that would require a variance. The driveway is already a two -car wide driveway. The construction would be a one-hour fire wall 16.12 APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING, MARCH 28, 1995 PAGE 7 addition. There would be no windows, and the garage would be insulated. The plans already meet the stipulations. Ms. Smith stated she was perplexed as to the letter from the neighbor indicating that you want to widen your driveway more. Mr. Hosch stated he also did not understand. The driveway is more than two cars wide and there is no reason to widen the driveway further. The snow removal or storage would not change. There are a few bushes and a trees there. If there were any issues, those could be removed. There has never been a problem with,snow removal and there would be no change. Dr. Vos stated the petitioner had mentioned something about the breezeway. He asked where the kitchen would be located. Mr. Hosch stated the existing garage has a breezeway. The garage is 20 feet with a 10 -foot breezeway behind it. The addition to the.garage would be one bay 30 feet long. Nine feet would make the garage more functional. He wanted to keep the addition in line with the character of the neighborhood and keep it in line with the existing wall. Dr. Vos asked if 8 feet would not meet what he wants to do. Mr. Hosch stated 8 feet would be very tight. He has full size cars which would make it very tight. With a truck, it would be very difficult to pull ahead. He wanted to make the addition functional for a standard vehicle. Ms. Smith asked the distance from the back of the garage to the property line. Mr. Hosch stated he did not know. He would have to run a tape or find the stakes to find that out. The lot is wider toward the back. Dr. Vos asked where the fire hydrant was located. Mr. Hosch stated the fire hydrant is on his property by the driveway. The driveway will not change or affect the hydrant. Ms. Ylinen stated she was the neighbor to the north. She thought Dr. Vos made a valid point that, if she were to build an addition also., she may not have enough room to do so. She is looking at retirement living down the road. If a young couple were to purchase the property, they would like to do improvements also and it would not be possible. Mr. Kuechle asked the size of the garage on her property. 16.13 APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING, MARCH 28. 1995 PAGE 8 Ms. Ylinen stated her garage is the same as Mr. Hosch's garage. The room to expand is also the same. Dr. Vos asked why the lot line runs at an angle. Ms.. Ylinen stated the lot line is at an angle. There is a hedge put in by the first owners along the property line. That goes from about where the garage starts all the way to the back of the lot. As much as she understands without a survey, that hedge was to have been put on the property line. Dr. Vos stated it looks as though there are other lots that do not have straight lot lines. Ms. Ylinen stated, when she purchased the property, it was described as a pie -shaped lot. Dr. Vos stated, if the lot line would have run as it should, the petitioner would have no difficulty with the garage. Ms. Ylinen stated, as far as she knows, the homes are about the same throughout the neighborhood. The width between the homes seems to be pretty standard when driving through the neighborhood. There are a lot of winding streets so the lots are at odd angles. MOTION by Dr. Vos, seconded by Ms. Smith, 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 8:15 P.M. MOTION by Ms. Smith, seconded by Dr. Vos, to accept into the public record the March 13, 1995, letter from Ms. Jeanette Ylinen regarding this variance request. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, VICE -CHAIRPERSON RUECHLE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Dr. Vos stated he thought this was difficult. The addition would enhance the neighborhood because there would be a two -car garage. It would enhance the property. It seems like a reasonable request. The difficulty he has is that, anytime a variance that one gets impacts the ability of an adjacent property, he has concerns. The decision ham more impact on the neighbor than saying it is too close. If the petitioner is granted the variance, the property owner to the north automatically has to go through special conditions in order to build a two -car garage that will function. He has difficulty in giving a variance to one neighbor but denying to another. One option is to build an 16.14 APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING, MARCH 28, 1995 PAGE 9 addition of 8 feet without a variance. Another option, which he does not recommend, is to build somewhere else on the property. Based on this, he would approve an addition to 8 feet but then the petitioner does not need a variance. Ms. Smith agreed that this is difficult. She would be.inclined to vote for approval. She understands that this leaves the neighbor to the north with some difficult options. She sees a hardship here and sees the property owner could run the addition at an angle which does not make sense. Putting on a one -foot variance still meets the spirit of the code and still leaves an option for the neighbor. Although she had a hard time with the request, she would be inclined to vote for approval. Mr. Kuechle stated he would be inclined to vote for approval. Reducing the setback by one foot does put the neighbor into the position to ask for a variance but it does not preclude them from getting one. They could be denied the variance but, if the Appeals Commission were going to deny this request, the Commission would be doing the same thing. By approving, the Appeals Commission is setting a precedent for the neighbor to the north. The Commission is not denying the person to the north fair use of their property. He realizes that visually this will be tight, but he thought the alternative of putting on less than a 9 -foot addition is also tough. A 21 -foot garage is not excessive. He would be inclined to recommend approval. MOTION by Ms. Smith, seconded by Mr. Kuechle, to recommend approval of Variance Request, VAR #95-05, by Stephen Hosch, to reduce the setback of an addition to an attached single car garage from 4 feet to 3 feet, on Lot 8, Block 2, Rice Creek Plaza South Addition, generally located at 6570 - 2nd Street N.E., Fridley, Minnesota, with the following stipulation: 1. The north wall of the addition shall be one hour fire rated with no openings. The overhand shall not exceed 12 inches. UPON A VOICE VOTE, WITH MS. SMITH AND MR. KUECHLE VOTING AYE AND DR. VOS VOTING NAY, VICE -CHAIRPERSON KUECHLE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED BY MAJORITY VOTE. Ms. McPherson stated this request would be considered by the City Council on April 10. ADJOURNMENT MOTION by Dr. Vos, seconded by Ms. S , to adjourn the meeting. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTIN YE, VICE -CHAIRPERSON XUECHLE DECLARED THE MOTION CARR AND THE MARCH 28, 1995, APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING I�3 .,jsM. 16.15 3-13-95 City of Fridley 6431 University Ave N.E. Fridley, Minnesota 55432 To whom it may concern; I am writing in regards to the request for variance at 6570 N.E. 2nd St. I am not in favor for this variance, and I have not given approval, nor has anyone associated with me given approval on this. The existing side yards between the two homes are quite small, and as you look over the entire neighborhood all the propertybetween the homes is quite limited. I would not have a problem with the double garage built in the back of the lot, but up in front it would be very close. Also, would there be any room for a overhang if he wants this variance? I understand the overhang can not be less than 3 feet from the property line. Furthermore, the driveway would probably have to be widened to accommadate the enlarged garage, and perhaps the removal of 3 bushes that are there now, which would leave very little space between their (widened) driveway, and my already widened driveway. In other words there could be alot of asphalt driveway, with limited space between for snow removal. Fridley has been my home for 31 years, and I have been very proud of this neighborhood. I would like to think I have a voice in envoking my rights and protecting my property. Si rely, eanette Yli n 6700 2nd St. N.E. Fridley, MN. 55432 CC: Steve Hosch 16.04 Cl z ( ! as3o ( t+) as a� s) U? (� a) t21 7 (60){ ) i1 i CQ 4 240 {� is 31 s- )ti (_) 21 203 tGM) 1(:....:...:....: cu --L e Geek Terrace 2nd street N.E. has requested 6760 setback of and addition to an attached single car garage J from 4 feet to 3 feet. t ) R LOCATION (r6)44 { :' {a740 41) t6M ( E, ) ( ) (17) t s { `�) {� (31) 2) t 6M 11) 63 tom) () t ( 43) 27) ( ) tK) �, 2M 6M ( Vii) { fiv t 47 t4) { ) e��e 2W is ( ) smt M 6M ( :+) { 21) GMERAL LOCATION OF 66a THE PROPOSED VARIANCE (� ) 260 669 ova dvq 200 (6 (�) _- 250 {71) (W) (n°) tu) Cl z ( ! as3o ( t+) as a� s) lof c� 6525 (n) 1 i1 i CQ is s- )ti (_) 21 203 1(:....:...:....: cu --L The property owner of 6570 2nd street N.E. has requested a setback variance. The owner would -like to reduce the setback of and addition to an attached single car garage J from 4 feet to 3 feet. R LOCATION MAP 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, March 28, 1995, at 7:30 p.m. for the purpose of: Consideration of variance request, VAR #95- 05, by Stephen Hosch, pursuant to Section 205.04.05.B.(2).(b).(1) of the Fridley City Code, to reduce the setback of an addition to an attached single car garage from 4 feet to 3 feet, on Lot 8, Block 2, Rice Creek Plaza South Addition, generally located at 6570 - 2nd Street N.E. Fridley, MN 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, 572-3592. Hearing impaired persons planning to attend who need an interpreter or other persons with disabilities who require auxiliary aids should contact Roberta Collins at 572-3500 no later than March 21, 1995. VAR #95-05 MAILING LIST 'MAILED: 3/10/95 Stephen Hosch Diane Savage City Council (6) 6570 - 2nd Street N.E. 567 Rice Creek Terrace N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 Fridley, MN 55432 Jill Marlow Daniel & L.M. Wintersteen Taronis Antonia 6525 Main N.E. 6661 Main N.E. 170 Rice Creek Terrace Fridley, MN 55432 Fridley, MN 55432 Fridley, MN 55432 William & Susan Neumeister Marian Ray & D.M. Rejman Harry & Marvel Case 180 Rice Creek Terrace N.E. 190 Rice Creek Terrace 6730 - 2nd Street Fridley, MN 55432 Fridley, MN 55432 Fridley, MN 55432 Warren & Agnes Rollins Robert D. Fisher Jeanette M. Ylinen 6720 - 2nd Street 6710 - 2nd Street N.E. 6700 - 2nd Street Fridley, MN 55432 Fridley, MN 55432 Fridley, MN 55432 Stephen & Therese Matson Kevin & Barbara Rohan Resident 6560 - 2nd Street 6705 Main N.E. 6711 Main St. Fridley, MN 55432 Fridley, MN 55432 Fridley, MN 55432 Tasks Unlimited Lodges Delbert & R.E. Christen John & Helen Hreha 2429 Nicollet Ave. S. Glenn & Deanna Christen 6731 Main St. N.E. Mpls., MN 55404 6721 Main St. N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 Fridley, MN 55432 Carol A. Makie Emil Huang & Marisa Ai -Yu Bogdan & Teresa Pekala 200 Rice Creek Terrace 6730 Plaza. Curve 6720 Plaza Curve Fridley, MN 55432 Fridley, MN 55432 Fridley, MN 55432 Gary & Rita Pederson Randy & Mary Stoltz William & V.M. Gates 6710 Plaza Curve N.E. 6700 Plaza Curve N.E. 6701 - 2nd St. N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 Fridley, MN 55432 Fridley, MN 55432 Andrew & Catherine Pappas Maureen M. Manion Robert & L.F. Coffey 6711 - 2nd Street N.E. 6721 - 2nd Street N.E. 6731 - 2nd Street N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 Fridley, MN 55432 Fridley, MN 55432 Terrance, & barbara Clint amen & Loretta Gumphrey '!chard & Rebecca Duehn 240 - b7th Ave. N.E. 230 - 67th Ave. N.E. 220 - 67th Ave. Fridley, MN 55432 Fridley, MN. 55432 Fridley, MN 55432 John & Linda Johnstone 210 - 67th Ave. N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 Kathleen Mann 200 - 67th Ave. N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 Richard J. Smith Resident 10000 Kismet Isle 6541 - 2nd Street Chisago City, MN 55013 Fridley, MN 55432 Resident Paul Johnson 6525 - 2nd Street 2891 N. Fairview Ave. Fridley, MN 55432 Roseville, MN 55113 Alphonse & Regina Kllsch Resident 1617 - 4th Street N.E. 6500 - 2nd Street Fridley, MN 55432 Fridley, MN 55432 Resident James Tschida & Debra Buerke 6520 - 2nd Street N.E. 6701 Plaza Curve N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 Fridley, MN 55432 Poitr & Kornela Korczak Resident 6711 Plaza. Curve N.E. 6530 University Ave. N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 Fridley, MN 55432 \'�31 ti 3�� Resident 6551 - 2nd Street Fridley, MN 55432 D. & J. Johnson Progressive Properties 1496 N. Innsbruck Dr. N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 Resident 6530 - 2nd Street Fridley, MN 55432 Gordon & Betty Aspenson 17 Rice Creek Way N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 Hyon & Chun Kang 6501 Main St. N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 Heartland Univ. Commercial 4802 Nicollet Ave. S. Mpls., MN 55409 i � j CITY OF FRIDLEY C FRIDMY foF COMMISSION APPLICATION REVIEW File Number VAR. #95-05 File Date 3/1/95 Meeting Date 3/28/95 File Description: VAR #95-05 Stephen Hosch 6570 - 2nd Street N.E. Complete Review Checklist; Return to The Community Development Department *** Comments *** Barbara Dacy Scott Hickok Michele McPherson * \Ak�f-7, 6- zot-t=Fx-i-reks-on John Flora John Palacio Clyde Moravetz Leon Madsen Dave Sallman Dick Larson ®� l lq !� ' j �1`f IS Kti W Iu.+ Com' CITY OF FRIDLEY 6431 UNIVERSITY AVENUE N.E. FRIDLEY, MN 55432 15 (612) 571-3450 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT VARIANCE APPLICATION FORM PROPERTY INFORMATION - site plan required for submittal; see attached Address: 6.5 70 Z NR V. Property Identification Number (PIN) X 14-30-2 4-J73 3 -- ® 02 2— Legal Legal description: Lot F Block c;L Tract/Addition g/CC CAFCK 81-022 .Z'Ou j4 Current zoning: X—/ /'�T,4c R Square footagelacreage ®®- .79 % 9 Reason for variance and hardship: W6u -.b L o k' V -ro C—*P A"b GAALA CC 3 P6Cr OF Laj- L -.NC- p®4 1WO44C cU.vc�jQA1AZ. 4.41ro ij� Section of City Code:- 4: Have you operated a business in a city which required a business license? Yes No If yes, which city? If yes, what type of business? Was that license ever denied or revoked? Yes No FEE OWNER INFORMATION (as it appears on the property title) (Contract Purchasers: Fee Owners must sign this form prior to processing) NAME_ 7`EPM5W 7% ROS -CR 4461,0 ANAV ---14 AR -IG 40.SC# ADDRESS`� '� � �7 �' /Of C— - — 1 -6 - DAYTIME PHONE 3 3 3` 6,53 3 SIGNATURE, DATE PETITIONER INFORMATION NAMEX7`671/ /-(0SC14 ADDRESS 6670 z�� syaE,57- Nz=- DAYTIME PHONE 3 33— 6 - 3 -3 SIGNATURE DATE - -5 Fee: $100.00 $ 60.00 ¢ems for residential Proverttes Permit VAR # ©< Receipt .# Application received by: Scheduled Appeals Commission date: 3 1;&'7,r Scheduled City Council date: 16.05 CITY OF FRIDLEY PLAN REVIEW CRECRLIBT 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 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 S. 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 r 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 pian identifying size and direction of existing water and sewer lines, fire hydrants, distance of hydrant to proposed building it 0 (2) Accessory buildings and structures in the side -yards shall not be any closer than five (5) feet to any -lot line except in the case of additions to existing, attached single -car garages, where the side yard may be reduced to less than five (5) feet from the property line, provided the expanded garage will be no wider than twenty-two (22) feet. (a) The setback for an addition to an attached single -car garage may be reduced to three (3) feet from the side lot line if the nearest structure on the adjacent lot is: 1) a house located at least ten (10) feet from the lot line; or 2 ) a double -car garage which is located at least f ive (5) feet from the lot line. (3) All exterior walls, of attached garages, less than five (5) feet from the property line, must be constructed of materials approved for one-hour fire resistance on the inside with no unprotected openings allowed. The maximum roof projection is limited to two (2) feet. (Ref. 888) (b) The setback for an addition to an attached single -car garage may be reduced to four (4) feet from the side lot line if the nearest structure on the adjacent lot is: 1) a single -car garage which is a L leus L Luur ( << ) feet from the common lot line; or 2) a house with no garage; or 3) a double -car garage at least four (4) feet from the lot line. (Ref. 888) (3) All exterior walls, of attached garages, less than five (5) feet from the property line, must be constructed of materials approved for one-hour fire resistance on the inside with no unprotected openings allowed. The maximum roof projection is limited to two (2) feet. (Ref. 888) • e Greek Terrace -(EHERAL LOCAMON OF THE PROPOSED VARIANCE VAR #95-05 Stephen Hosch The property owner of 6570 2nd street N.E. has requested a setback variance. The owner would like to reduce the setback of and addition to an attached single car garage from 4 feet to 3 feet. 16.06 LOCATION MAP VAR X695-05 tephen Hosch r i � ENGINEERS AND SURVEYORS `a 1 IEY{NO CCVIt_ itk. �Il41NICtt�At. A1�p1A1E�li1NA '1]� �s �Y x r i, ;iL S" 4 t 7! b jak >•` a .; �3" i� .� F t=f�,r (i X07;%8�^��'�M7#I�.Y},c.�t/�3 ]^ G ':i',�G�Ai�,,a�yl. -�T^ 'v4a M %iiV"t jIVTY�i ,- 5 ,i" F'- S a: F x4 ;._•.k a �§. #?.', +,- '�„.:�} t4 '. ( i0. tk,� �a��� i 'ts � � �.: 1 ifT�tL 7 Ra�sr�•'ia r`� T; �f �� i� " Fk �"'�,� �� �.��-.. �t�'.'li�+it'�,•d? i i ,s2'.wv y `.', �A9:.'-�`-'. i t LTS;O� 'l,kt jr j� {f .'; 1y�g?,.. 1. F_ A JP4SO�y.: � CL -7 I � I g i !tart Yoposed Addition k Existing Porch 5 L -i 1 ; � a v till 4 � i 1 C-li C-4 � of floc% , �ic�. Gr Ply s SOUH7 Add TTO BY CERTIFY 'THAT THIS ^1S ♦# TRUE ANO CORRECTpRE5ENTATLOts OFA SIDRYEY OF -TRE,, {3o11NOAR9>>r$ OE 1�YE OESGR18ED .AND OF THS LOGATtON; 9F l-� . 4Ut1; I",r;, 41� �X'„ ��ER'EON ,'.At1D AC.L V1S��iLE �NCi��A�HW) FROM OR ON SAID LAND. - �� r 1���1EERINCa CO fNG,t , 16.0$ SmITE PLAN VAR #95-05 itephen Hosch Ld 'c'jl z1113 29 > 0, % < Ig 0 7 1 / �k \y \ 9 1 P 4 7 cl J 14 TERRZ 11 6. LQ4 ? F� -41- 7 -6-. 4- 13 F j 81 TH A. 7 cw� 4 1 r 1112 K l- 1; . 1A 66TH. AVENUE N. t I --r--r— CIREEK riFITRAC R 7 1 S 4 g12 Af 8 4p 24 Al 41 -X- LAJ uj zo-- - 2 /-v 1.9 zo 9 0 0 9 7 LL 17 A 51 0_F3 Ac S;p — 751 ►JL 9-* 0 14 7 2 /0 7 /3 1 9 j a 6 .9 w ".2 F3 -9 I �Tl 9 F18 17 , 'a RD 7M I r J.,•I 12f' 12 0 /f 17 16 *21 17 1 z 2 • 1 72 P c" k; 3X i 3 4 4 N.1 DISTRICT LEGEND A-1 ONE FAMILY DWG'S 0 M-1 LIGHT INDUSTRIAL ❑ R-2 TWO FAMILY DWG'S ED M-2 HEAVY INDUSTRIAL St R-3 GEN. MULTIPLE VWG-S PUB PLANNED UNIT DEV. R-4 MOBILE HOME PARK ❑ S-1 HYDE PARK NEIGHBORHOOD El Chu ch P PUBLIC FACILITIES El S-2 REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT M c-1 LOCAL BUSINESS 0-1 CREEK & RIVER PRESERVATION C-2 GENERAL BUSINESS 0-2 CRITICAL AREA C-3 GENERAL SHOPPING C-R I GENERAL OFFICE ❑ VACATED STREETS 16.07 ZONING MAP' IIBM.=1. RS- p.rA`w"w,w,w v * o * * * * 4 0 ON 40 NIP V, 4** 'N A * \,. # IVA 4►* AL Ak & O I P. m,� I FIT. .0 v.: �mm� aao VAR #95-05 itephen Hosch Ld 'c'jl z1113 29 > 0, % < Ig 0 7 1 / �k \y \ 9 1 P 4 7 cl J 14 TERRZ 11 6. LQ4 ? F� -41- 7 -6-. 4- 13 F j 81 TH A. 7 cw� 4 1 r 1112 K l- 1; . 1A 66TH. AVENUE N. t I --r--r— CIREEK riFITRAC R 7 1 S 4 g12 Af 8 4p 24 Al 41 -X- LAJ uj zo-- - 2 /-v 1.9 zo 9 0 0 9 7 LL 17 A 51 0_F3 Ac S;p — 751 ►JL 9-* 0 14 7 2 /0 7 /3 1 9 j a 6 .9 w ".2 F3 -9 I �Tl 9 F18 17 , 'a RD 7M I r J.,•I 12f' 12 0 /f 17 16 *21 17 1 z 2 • 1 72 P c" k; 3X i 3 4 4 N.1 DISTRICT LEGEND A-1 ONE FAMILY DWG'S 0 M-1 LIGHT INDUSTRIAL ❑ R-2 TWO FAMILY DWG'S ED M-2 HEAVY INDUSTRIAL St R-3 GEN. MULTIPLE VWG-S PUB PLANNED UNIT DEV. R-4 MOBILE HOME PARK ❑ S-1 HYDE PARK NEIGHBORHOOD El Chu ch P PUBLIC FACILITIES El S-2 REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT M c-1 LOCAL BUSINESS 0-1 CREEK & RIVER PRESERVATION C-2 GENERAL BUSINESS 0-2 CRITICAL AREA C-3 GENERAL SHOPPING C-R I GENERAL OFFICE ❑ VACATED STREETS 16.07 ZONING MAP' VAR #95-05 "tephen Hosch N4iiNDEaF2qGiNEF-,niNG C®., INC. ENGINEERS AND SUaVENKORS LAND SURVEYwo SOILS TESTING CIVIL &. MUNICIPAL ENOINEERING LANO PLANNING 6418 -SGT" AVENUE N. i` MINNEAPOLIS Tr. MILAN. 1. r KE 7- SG37 I /ZZ i oil Iva }�1 f l"• WE HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS ISA TRUE AND CORRECT REPRESENTATION OF A SURYEY OF THE BOUNDARIES OF THE LAND ABOVE DESCRIBED AND OFTHE LOCATION OF ALL BUILDINGS, IF ANY, THEREON , ANO ALL VISIBLE ENCROACHMENTS, IF ANY, FROM OR ON SND LAND. MINDER ENGINEERING CO., INC. ONTED THIS ONY OF ✓ cs 1 A0.155 % E*161N1e:ERg AND SURVEYORS et1a uv r Et M Air E EE ®r9 w ENGINEERS AND SURVEYORS LArrU 9UQVEY,nr0 SOILS TESTIW3 NAUN ICtPT%L ENGINEERING LP.NO PLANNING 6418-5r.Tw AVENUE iii. M11`INEAPOLi5 2i. MINN. KE 7- 3637 p GA 6 --A G 6 , L- L- Az ® rT I Sad ®fid ! I (WOOL -D CXTE-,sl A -ro W erH 1 M 3 WjL=jFi exp L-0-' L)JVC ogle "EtGMG-O-P— s 1._.I I Ci I a ; ` i = ` 13s 967 ' C\ kq 41 WE HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS 15 A TRUE AND CORRECT REPRESENTATIOAI OF N. SURYEY OF TViE BOUNDARIES OF THE LAND ABOVE DESCRIBED AND OFTHE LOCATION OF ALL BUILDINGS, IF WY, THEREON , AMD ALL VISIBLE ENCROACFIMENTS, IF ANY, FROM OR ON SAID tANO. MINDER ENGINEERING CO., INC. OATED THIS MY OF r A.0.195.� ENGtK�flRS ANDby SURVEYORS IINDEaRWGINIEEnING®J ENGINEERS AND SUaVE.YOR.S aURVEYtNO 401! 8 TSST1t4v A, t'Au :I_'n:m- EtdGiNEEPING LA -N0 PI-xMNING 6418-56-w AVENUE N. 1J'1PvaJEAPULc5 21. °✓; : KE 7— 3G37 i n -'-- J ✓ j •,,�( /L. ? i �. .'._. ...i i� 'e �... th.� �f ::� L-.• �! ���..% % j it 1 LJ a an WE HEREOY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE ANO CORRECT REPRE5ENTATI0M OF A. SURVEY OF THE BOUNDARIES OF THE LAND ABOVE DESCRIBED AND OFTHE LOCATION OF ALL BU O NGS, jr— PAJY, TI-IE.REON , MAD ALL VISIBLE ENCRONCIAMENTS, IF ANY, PROM OR ON SAID LAND. MINDER ENGIN.EECZING CO., INC. ONTED THIS DNYOF_ ��x.0.195'/ ENCytNEERS AND SURv6Y09-5 by, CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY FOR �A0lb'C- -A I -MM CERT I E7 -D%T TH 13 SURVEY. PLAN OR REPORT L.1+�lc Pop- 1400 -ac I, OC f* -T 10 til - N o VAS PRED EPARBY MY OR UDDER MY DIRECT SUMERVISION AND L THAT I Ail A OL Y RIM 1 0LL� WWEYOR li•M l„o GA T l L -N 6! 7tlEy/� MINNESOTA REGISTRATION NO.ZoL?o f' Z 1- S —12, rt �,7 00 30.0, Q >r KURTH SURVEYING. INC. 4002 JEFFERSON ST. N.E. COLUMBIA HEIGHTS. MN. 33421 (812) 788-9789 FAX (612) 788-7802 DATE 4-'A- of 5 SCALE If* i --7-O' 0 a IRON MONUMENT Four -14 3c W Zt 7 SEW �n1 A Xa I tJ 1.. -o -C 8, q4LoGrCZ,Z\C- . C.RI:'C 9`-A;t:,A SD%jr-\ AD -01-T IpN 'AANQKPc cat) rlmt 1—'" -1 N I'A-170- }�� {ylc 3L ()G J5 CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY FOR \1c 1AObc-�A toii14x1p.Yl:lMA-01Z at-ONG.? NDklD\ 1 HEREBY CERTIFY THATAN TH1S SURVEY. PLOR REPORT VAS PREPARM BY YY OR IMM MY DIRECT SLRVERVISION t,t+�ic j=OCL NoJ�ts' t.�CliTtotV -Ajo AND AT 1 AM A OL Y RED ITERED LAM SURVE1fOR ttCER to(-ATI(WI.S e-00TtlTlf� INNE OTA REGISTRATION NO.Zoz?o r� KURTH SURVEYING. INC. 4002 JEFFERSON ST. N.E. COLUMBIA HEIGHTS. W. 33421 (612) 789-9769 FAX (812) 788-7602 DATE 4 - 14� - ° 5 SCALE 1If v: �7-0' RON MONUMENT Fourao 1F1Ki� 6,11 "r rA t3�.�1`� C.RI` G 1_ g t tA:;6 A So yfi-\ Ablo1-C I O N ) 'A N C Y%A C.O.) rA N , 4 9 s w Iy -1/0- �.y btf- 3L, 0(p 50 :Fw F. w , "�- � � N.L. t�'�� �'t� �yhk^x.A.,e�y 1� . sn�,�•ti,,,a tray � y k k 'W. z�� • � �l 1 � 41 Nw] �f� q 1 � � �����t � x"�^ �� Cyt:,+- ani r.• „n:.Y=` ��$� r ffil- oi `+.��-ai e �.F.._ .�.:' ",✓° ". .. jk ._.. is ,"' 'r f , M 'e y� P " A 1 t I�iY1L wJ14 CORNER SEC. 14 ` CONDOM/N/UM-NO oe FRIDLEY MUNICIPAL CENTER • 6431 UNIVERSITY AVE. N.E. FRIDLEY, MN 55432 . (612) 571-34.50 • FAX (612) 571-1287 CITY COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN NOTICE Stephen Hosch 6570 - 2nd Street NE Fridley, MN 55432 Dear Mr. Hosch: April 13, 1995 On April 10, 1995, the Fridley City Council officially approved your request for a variance, VAR #95-05, to reduce the setback of an addition to an attached single car garage from 4 feet to 3 feet, on Lot 8, Block 2, Rice Creek Plaza South Addition, generally located at 6570 - 2nd Street N.E., with the following stipulation: 1. The north wall of the addition shall be one hour fire rated with no openings. The overhang shall not exceed 12 inches. You have one year from the date of City Council action to initiate construction. If you cannot begin construction in time, you must submit a letter requesting an extension at least three weeks prior to the expiration date. If you have any questions regarding the.above action, please call me at 572-3590. Sincerely, Barbara Dacy, AICP Community Development Director BD/dw Please review the above, sign the statement below and return one copy to the City of Fridley Planning Department by April 27, 1995. Concur with action taken. CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY FOR 51 Cyc: 1Ao bc-�- N0-1 t! t y MA-OkE A% -O N Q nik KURTH SURVEYING, INC. 1 I IEREV CERT 1 F7 THAT TH 13 UAYIPLM. PLOR REPORT VAS PREPARED BY YY OR 1.20M WY DIRECT SURVERVISICN L'tN( (=0(Z `>-oo-!,)G LDc A Ttor,4'kto 4002 JEFFERSON ST. N.E. AAO THAT I Ali A DLIY REGI ED L loo SURVEYOR LtOER Lo c. A Tl tx�15 M �n E O&Z- MC, -t �0QT K -' COLUMBIA HEIGHTS. trN . 33421 LAV2 st SOTA. W�=Sj P�D� RTy t<<�L-S. (612) 788-9769 FAX (6123 7e3-7602 i NNE ,OTA REGISTRATION NO.2oz?o SCALEIf# G u I RON MONUMENT ;ou•-- o w �97 00 Z,2 A z.+ C44q 7 s [+o W -4 A Rt= 30.0. p I I I I PL: -9, % LoZOL D Pt,J:hr \ m 1-7,0.0 iy -,i0 -Y i ,• L 'A` 9 l , Rai S$c�o 5�' Set` V�1 t3S,`15 Lar 51 �IAG\{Z, \CIT GRI: G?- 91tA-7--A Sa%jln-\ jtsW0%l top,,,) 'ANOKAc c -O,) r4m, bvc- ': 1 P {p,- 5 D ,x 16.01 r is requesting a variance to reduce the side yard setback for an attache garage from S� �e3 feet. The petition eq g e c --r garage. The Located on the subwas ject parcel is a single family dwelling unit with an attached single a from is a screened in porch The property has a topographic Chang constructed in 1958. To the rear of the garage east to west, such that the lower level of the dwelling unit is a walk -out. Located on either side of the subject parcel are single family dwelling units. single car garage. Located on the property to the north is The petitioner purposes a 9 foot addition to the existing a e facia the proposed addition- Located along the a single family dwelling unit with an attached single car garage g of an attached single car garage down common property line is a variety of vegetation. The code permits an expansion to 3 feet if the following conditions are met: 1. The house on thadjacent adjacent �is �locat� 5 feet from the lot line. � om the lot line. 2. A two car garage w The petitioner could construct an 8 foot addition without a variance request - The property owner to the north has written the attached letter opposing the variance request- The neighbor, in her letter, points out that the petitioner has the option constructing a detached second accessory structure in the rear yard. This option is viable for the petitioner, it would require the petitioner to apply for a special use permit - The variance is within previously granted variances. If the Appeals Commission chooses to approve the request, staff recommends the following stipulations: 1. Petitioner shall provide an expanded hardsurface driveway by October 1, 1995. 2north wall of the addition shall be one hour fire rated with no openrn The overhang shall not exceed 12". ADJACENT SITES WEST: Zoning: R-3, General Multiple Family Use: Multiple Family SOUTH: Zoning: R-1, Single Family Use: Single Family EAST: Zoning: R 1, a Family Single Use: Single Family NORTH: Zoning: R-1, SinP� a Family Use: Single Family Comprehensive Planning Issues: None Publicopposition to the Comments: Letter received from neighbor to the north, 6700 - 2nd Street, expressing PPo request. As a result of the Appeals Commission discussion, staff re -reviewed the could for - 6700 2nd Street (attached). From the survey, it appears that the property owner couon a 10 foot addition to their garage without a variance. 3 16.03 _.___.----�-- 66570 2ND STREET SIDE YARD SETBACK VARL-kNCE REPORT PROJECT DETAILS petition For: Variance request to reduce the sideyard setback for an atta�� g�-2=� from 4 to 3' Location of Property: 6570 - 2nd Street Legal Description of Property: Lot 8, Block 2, Rice Creek Plaza South Addition Ste: 80 x 136.28 Topography: Urban, but sloping from east to west Existing Vegetation: Sod, trees, typical suburban Existing Zoning/Platting: R-1, Single Family Dwelling Availability of Municipal Utilities: Connected Vehicular Access: 2nd Street Pedestrian Access: N/A Engineering Issues: N/A Site Planning Issues: DEVELOPMENT SITE Section 205.04.B.(2).(b) requires a setback of 4 feet for an addition to an wasting amched Si4e c2r gar The public purpose served by this requirement is to allow the expansion of singe car wee ung a minimum distance between. sm-lures. This assists in limiting crowding conditions an a resp ial dict CITY OF FRIDLEY 6431 UNIVERSITY AVENUE N.E. FRIDLEY, MN 55432 RI LEY, 50 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT VARIANCE APPLICATION FORM rR PERTY I F IRMAMMN -site plan required for submittal; see attached Address: � S'�O � �A S?'e�'� i N.� • 3 Property Identification Number (Pll� � /4�--3aa Legal description: �C� c�� �- a 02,0 Dov T ff Tract/Addition G� ` ' ' ` y Lot Block v2 -9 ! A Current zoning: Q-� F �) Square footagelacreage Reason for variance and hardship: wov`y ` "` ` . r . 3 FG -E r of c_07- L -'N A FOR- Section of City Code: '� `>' a� �Y���� t` / � /VJC�E �''„jCrid AL Y1 v �G' A(1 �HEO�s S! 0/J i `� f If Have you operated a business m a city which required a business license? � �� y � Yes No �_ If yes, which city? If yes, what type of business? er denied or revoked? Yes.. No _— was that hcense ev FEE OWNER INFORMATIO (as it appears on the property title) (Contract Purchasers: Fee Owners must sign this form prior to processing) NAME S T / ?' f,( O S NW – K., c `" ADDRESS 7 n � Aflo -C -1 2�7c.Ey'3 —6 53 3 DAYTIME PHONE DATE e/ 9� SIGNATURE , _ � _ � _ PETITIONER INF( RMA_TJIUQA NAME 5:7 _6: V 15�14 0sc-14 ADDRESS 6/4 DAYTIME PHONE 33 3� 3 SIGNATURE _ .,.4 - ? ---9 DATE 3 i 9 Fee: $100.00 $ 60.00 — for residential ro .e Permit VAR # ��— Receipt .# Application received by. Scheduled Appeals Commission date: Scheduled City Council date: 3 9�; 16.05 3-13-95 City of Fridley 6431 University Ave N.E. Fridley, Minnesota 55432 To whom it may concern; I am writing in regards to the request for variance at 6570 N.E. 2nd St. I am not in favor for this variance, and I have not given approval, nor has anyone associated with me given approval on this. The existing side yards between the two homes are quite smbetweend all as you look over the entire neighborhood all the property the homes is quite limited. I would not have a problem with the double garage built in the back of the lot, but up in front it would be very close. Also, would there be any room for a overhang if he t be less than wants this variance? I understand the overhang can no 3 feet from the property line. Furthermore, the driveway woe�haps the ly have to be widened to accommadate the enlarged garage, and p little removal of 3 bushes that are there now, which would leave very space between their t`cou d be driveway, l teofyasphaland t driveway,w ithelimited driveway. In other words hhere space between for snow removal. Fridley has been my home for this neighborhood. I would my rights and protecting my Si rely, eanetteYli n 6700 2nd St. N.E. Fridley, MN. 55432 CC: Steve Hosch 31 years, and I have like to think I have property. 16.®4 been very proud of a voice in envoking