Loading...
VAR 98-24FRIDLEY MUNICIPAL CENTER • 6431 UNIVERSITY AVE. N.E. FRIDLEY, MN 55432 • (612) 571-3450 • FAX (612) 571-1287 APPEALS COMMISSION ACTION TAKEN NOTICE Daniel Butterfield 2301 Milwaukee Avenue Minneapolis, MN 55404 Dear Mr. Butterfield: September 18, 1998 On August 26, 1998, the Fridley Appeals Commission officially approved your request for a variance, VAR #98-24, to increase the lot coverage by the main building and accessory building from 25% to 26.7% to allow the construction of a new 900 square foot garage on all of Lots 7 and 8, and the part of Lot 9, lying North of the South 30 feet thereof, Block 10, Hyde Park, generally located at 5924 2Y2 Street with the following stipulations: 1. The garage shall be used for tenant and landlord use only. 2. The garage shall meet all the setbacks and performance standards of the S-1, Hyde Park, zoning district. 3. A hard surface driveway shall be provided within one year of the issuance of the building permit. You have one year from the date of the Appeals Commission action to initiate construction. If you cannot begin construction during this 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 572-3599. Sinc ely, �IV 4� co Hicko Planning Coordinator SH:ls Please review the above action, sign below, and return the original to the City of Fridley Planning Department by September 30, 1998. Ak M Y/7j Concur with action t en. APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING, AUGUST 26, 1998 UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL THE MOTION CARRIED AND Ms. Beaulieu stated she has no impact on the neighborhood or 1 She would vote in favor of the rE PAGE 7 G AYE, CHAIRPERSON KUECHLE DECLARED PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 8:00 P.M. with the request. This will not have a negative It looks like it will look good and be more useful. Ms. Mau agreed. It sounds as though1he She did not see a problem. It has no n g; Dr. Vos stated the staff report indicates h the request. Ms. Wiger stated that neighbor lives acro. Mr. Kuechle concurred as well. He thougl there no house behind there. Dr. Vos asked that if the petitioner tried to extension would they be allowed? neighbor most affected has no problem with it. itive impact. received a letter from a neighbor in favor of the street. the impact will be minimal especially since Mr. Hickok stated they could have a deck -10 roof over it, they could only have two feet. Dr. Vos stated it would be impossible to meet porch. to the correct setback, how much of an into the rear setback dimension. With a setback unless they have a two -foot MOTION by Ms. Beaulieu, seconded by Ms. Wig4 ,to recommend approval of Variance Request, VAR #98-23, by David and Marcia r, to reduce the rear yard setback from 31.25 feet to 19 feet to allow the construction of a attached three -season porch on Lot 10, Block 1, Brookview Terrace, 2nd Addition, gen rally located at 901 Rice Creek Terrace, with the following stipulations: 1. The porch shall match the architectural desin of the principal structure. 2. The proposed porch shall meet the standard of the Uniform Building Code. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KUECHLE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 3. PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDERATION OF A VARIANCE REQUEST #98-24 Per Section 205.21.05.C'of the Fridley Zoning Code, to increase the lot coverage by the main building and accessory building from 25% to 26.7% to allow the construction of anew 900 square foot garage on all of Lots 7 and 8, and the part of Lot 9 lying North of the South 30 feet thereof, Block 10, Hyde Park, generally located at 5924 2 1/2 Street. MOTION by Ms. Mau, seconded by Mr. Jones, to waive the reading of the public hearing notice and to open the public hearing. APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING, AUGUST 26, 1998 PAGE 8 UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KUECHLE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AT 8:03 P.M. Mr. Hickok stated the request is to allow a variance to increase the lot coverage from 25% to 26.68% at 5924 2 1/2 Street. The petitioner would like to build a 30 foot x 30 foot or 900 square foot enclosed garage on the south side of an existing apartment building. The property has a site dimension of 90 feet by 130.52 feet or 11,748 square feet. The existing apartment building is 71.33 feet x 31.33 feet or 11,748 square feet and the proposed garage would be 900 square feet. This would result in a 26.68% lot coverage. Mr. Hickok stated the property is zoned S-1, Hyde Park. The Hyde Park neighborhood is a mix of single family, two family, and multi -family. In this case, this is a multi -family apartment complex. Mr. Hickok stated the petitioner, in his hardship statement, indicated he is proposing the garage to serve as a garage and storage area for seven tenants living in the apartment building. According to code, property structures may cover up to 25% of the property. At this time, the apartment building covers 19% of the property allowing 6% for new construction or 701.5 square feet. He is proposing a garage of 900 square feet to meet the needs of the tenants. This would cover approximately 26.7% of the property which is 1.7% over the limit according to code. Mr. Hickok stated the City has granted similar variances in the past. Therefore, staff has no recommendation regarding this request. Mr. Hickok stated, according to the drawing provided by the petitioner, the garage would be placed 25 feet from the apartment building and 5 feet from the side lot line. The garage would be constructed with 8 feet to the eave line and 13 feet to the ridge line which meets code requirements. Mr. Hickok reviewed the aerial map of the neighborhood. Ms. Mau asked if staff had received any comments from the apartment building next to this building. Mr. Hickok stated staff has not had a response from any residents in the neighborhood. Mr. Jones asked if the residents in the apartments were notified as well as the owners. Mr. Hickok stated the property owners are notified. Residents within the buildings are not notified. Dr. Vos asked what the side yard setback would be for the proposed garage. Mr. Hickok stated the proposed garage would meet the five foot requirement from the side lot line dimension. The petitioner is keeping some yard and daylight between the buildings and putting the garage so it is no closer than 5 feet to the side lot line. APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING, AUGUST 26, 1998 PAGE 9 Dr. Vos stated 25 feet between the building and the garage plus 30 feet for the garage plus the 5 foot side setback equals 60 feet. The drawing indicates there is 50 feet from the building to the side property line. Mr. Kuechle asked if there is a code in place to make sure that these garages are rented only to the residents of that complex. In other words, these garages cannot become rental storage. Mr. Hickok stated he is not aware of a code section that would come into play here. In a new apartment complex, there is a need for adequate parking and storage on site. What he hears from property owners of rental apartment units, those with garages are far more attractive and can produce more rent. He would hope that this means they are providing the units for tenants. He believed this is the intent of the petitioner. Mr. Kuechle asked if there is any way they could be assured that this happens. Mr. Hickok stated a variance is discretionary. If the Commission feels that this is appropriate, they could make it a stipulation. Ms. Beaulieu asked how many parking units this will be. Mr. Hickok stated it will provide enough for 7 parking spaces and, some storage space. Mr. Jones asked how the tenants would gain access. Mr. Hickok stated he believed the garage opening would be along 2 1/2 Street. Mr. Butterfield stated the garage entrance will be on the back side toward the alley. On that side will be a 16 -foot wide overhead door. On the side facing the building will be an access door. Beside that, this particular apartment building could use a caretaker, and he has identified a tenant to take those responsibilities including the lawn care and cleaning. In addition, he has plans in the next year or so to replace window sills and do roof repair, etc. This garage will provide storage for the tenants and provide space for some tools and equipment that the caretaker will utilize. As far as the current storage available for the tenants, they have a very small closet which is very typical for an apartment of that size. The apartments are small one -bedrooms so the combination of storage and small apartment does not allow for additional storage. Hence, the need for the garage. Mr. Jones asked if the garage was primarily for storage or for parking vehicles. Mr. Butterfield stated it is for both. He wants to provide storage for the tenants because there is not enough space in the apartments. In addition, there will be space for two vehicles to go in and out on a daily basis. During the analysis, he did not anticipate more than two tenants using a garage for vehicles. It would be for storing furniture, etc. The structure is for dual purpose. Mr. Hickok stated he would like to verify the dimensions. Dr. Vos had a good point. With the 5 -foot side yard setback and 30 -foot garage, they would be looking at a 15 -foot separation between the apartment complex and the garage. APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING, AUGUST 26, 1998 PAGE 10 Mr. Butterfield stated he believed this is correct. The previous owner -indicated the property line went out to the curb. He used that dimension but what staff is saying sounds correct. Mr. Kuechle stated this meant that the spacing between the apartment building and the garage would be 15 feet rather than 25 feet. Mr. Butterfield stated this is the first time this was brought to his attention. He believed that the 25 feet between the apartment complex and the garage should stay. The dimension between the far end of the garage and the property line should be reduced if that meets the code guidelines for construction. Mr. Jones asked which dimension would be reduced. Mr. Butterfield stated the property line on the illustration should be moved closer to the garage which provides a more accurate depiction of the property. The remaining measurements are accurate. Dr. Vos stated that according to the survey in the staff report, it appears there is about 49 feet between the lot line and the building. With a 30 -foot garage and a 5 -foot setback, that leaves 14 feet from the building. Mr. Butterfield stated the only reason they are trying to put the garage 25 feet away from the building is to save the parking spaces. This is satisfactory as well. Dr. Vos asked if the tenants can come in from 2 1/2 Street to park. Mr. Butterfield stated, yes. Dr. Vos asked if 14 feet is enough room for a car to get through. Mr. Butterfield stated there is grass from the alley to 21/2 Street. They cannot drive from 2 1/2 Street to the garage. It would require a separate entrance. MOTION by Ms. Beaulieu, seconded by Dr. Vos, to close the public hearing. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KUECHLE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 8:20 P.M. Ms. Beaulieu stated she thought they were going to have to be prepared to grant the same request for the other apartment buildings if they want a garage. She saw the need. It is too bad the garage would not be big enough to house all the cars. She had no problem with the request. Mr. Kuechle agreed. The amount of the request is fairly small. He would like to see two stipulations: 1. - The garage shall be for tenant use only. 2. The garage shall meet all setback requirements. APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING, AUGUST 26, 1998 PAGE 11 Mr. Jones asked if there was a setback requirement for space between the buildings. Mr. Hickok stated, yes. The fire code requires that, if the space is less than six feet, they could not have windows or doors facing -in that direction and would require a fire wall. Mr. Jones asked staff to show the location of the garage on the aerial photograph. Dr. Vos asked that with the other buildings 10 feet and the garage 5 feet away from the lot line, there should be 15 feet between the structures. Mr. Jones asked if there will be an additional hard surface driveway in that area as well. Mr. Hickok stated, yes. Mr. Jones asked that when looking at the lot coverage, is that just looking at the buildings? Mr. Hickok stated, yes. Dr. Vos stated staff had mentioned earlier that if other apartment buildings are looking at this, he would rather see the storage be inside the garage rather than have outside storage even if it is somewhat over the requirements rather than a lot filled with cars. He would vote in favor of the request. Dr. Vos asked if the first stipulation would include the owner. Mr. Kuechle stated it would certainly include the caretaker and the owner as well because he owns the equipment. Ms. Beaulieu suggest this stipulation read "... for tenant use and maintenance equipment only." Mr. Kuechle stated the idea is that this not be rented out to someone else for storage space. MOTION by Mr. Kuechle, seconded by Ms. Beaulieu, to recommend approval of Variance Request, VAR #98-24, by Daniel Butterfield, to increase the lot coverage by the main building and accessory building from 25% to 26.7% to allow the construction of a new 900 square foot garage on all of Lots 7 and 8, and the part of Lot 9 lying North of the South 30 feet thereof, Block 10, Hyde Park, generally located at 5924 2 1/2 Street, with the following stipulations: 1. The garage shall be for tenant use and maintenance equipment only. 2. The garage shall meet all setback requirements. 3. The garage shall have a hard surface driveway. APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING, AUGUST 26, 1998 PAGE 12 UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KUECHLE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. El Per Section 205.18.06.G.(2) ot the Fridley Zoning Code, to allow the construction of a new unscreened loading ck adjacent to the public right-of-way on the west 328 feet of the south 805 feet o the east one-half of the northeast 1/4 of the southeast 1/4, section 03-30-24 Anoka County, Minnesota, subject to easements 4/23/74, generally located at 79 5 Beech Street. MOTION by Mr. Jones, seconded by MMau, to waive the reading of the public hearing notice and to open the public hearing. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING A E, CHAIRPERSON KUECHLE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PUB IC HEARING OPEN AT 8:28 P.M. Mr. Hickok stated the request is to allow co' struction of an overhead door facing the public right-of-way at 7925 Beech Street. �a code requires that all loading docks be located in the rear or side yard and must bescreened with a six-foot minimum solid screening fence so it is not visible from the p blic right-of-way. The First Industrial L.P. property faces Beech Street. Mr. Hickok stated the landscaping between th parking lot and the building is relatively mature. To aid in the screening, typically the pity would ask that, if an overhead door faces the public right-of-way, that there be adds Tonal plantings to compensate for that. In this case, the door is proposed right in front of t e drive aisle access to the building. Typically they would ask for additional screenin so the view of the activity is minimal. Mr. Hickok stated the building has numerous doc doors along the east side of the building. There have been a couple of overhead ock doors added over a period of time that face Beech Street. Staff believes the interpre ation was that, because it is a comer lot and because of the lineal dimension, this is con idered the side yard so these existing doors were approved. Staff however has been wo ing diligently to have overhead doors on the back or sides of the building and have the o ice or street face to not include overhead doors. Recently, the Home Depot had pl ( ned an overhead door facing the public right-of-way where they were asked to put in siding glass doors or some other type of door to allow them to maneuver in and out without he overhead feature on the front of the building. Also with the new multi -tenant building Osborne that has a auto body shop, they also installed glass doors that operate mor like a store front door rather than an overhead door. In this case, another concern is tha this is a critical point of the building. If the purpose is for loading and unloading bu lding materials, this is a critical point as entering or exiting the site. Activities at this poi t would cause some concern. Mr. Hickok stated the City has approved similar variance in the past; therefore, staff has no recommendation concerning this request. Ms. Schatz stated they have a new tenant moving into the building, North Star Associates, that handles millwork. They need a point of to ding and unloading that is at grade level. This is a tenant request. Variance to the Lot Coverage Requirements to Build a Garage at 5924 21/2 Street DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: Daniel C. Butterfield has requested a variance to allow a 26.68%, rather than the 25% maximum allowed under the S-1, Hyde Park performance standards. SUMMARY OF REQUEST: The petitioner has indicated a desire to construct a 30' X 30' (900 s.f.) garage in the side yard, south of his existing apartment building. The petitioner's property has a site dimension of 11,748 s.f., building dimension of 2,234 s.f, and a proposed garage dimension of 900 s.f. The purpose of the lot coverage portion of the Code is to control the relationship between building and land and to keep the land from becoming over -built. HARDSHIP STATEMENT ...I am proposing a construction of a 30' X 30' garage located at 5924 2 1/2 Street. This structure will serve as the garage and storage for the 7 tenants living in the apartment building at 5924 2 1/2 Street. According to the City Code, property structures may cover up to 25% of the property. At this time, the apartment building structure covers 19% of the available property allowing 6% of the property for new construction. This equates to an additional 701.5 square feet. I am proposing a garage construction of .900 square feet to meet the needs of my tenants. This will cover approximately 26.7% of the total property, which is 1.7% over the allowed limit according to the City of Fridley... PREVIOUSLY GRANTED VARIANCES This request is within previously granted variances. In 1990 the City approved a variance to allow 28.6 % lot coverage at 590 Kimball Street. RECOMMENDATION Staff has no recommendation since this variance is within the realm of previously granted variances. *45rc-- 610W 3. Staff Report: VAR #f98-24 5924 2 '/2 Street Page 2 PROJECT DETAILS Petition For: Daniel C. Butterfield has requested a variance to allow a 26.68%, rather than the 25 % maximum allowed under the S-1, Hyde Park performance standards. Location: 5924 21/2 Street Legal Description of Property: All of Lots 7,8, and part of 9, lying North of the South 30 feet, thereof, Block 10, Hyde Park Lot Size: 11,747.7 s.f. Topography: Flat, developed surrounding this site Vegetation: Urban Lawn Existing Zoning: S-1, Hyde Park Municipal Utilities: Connected Vehicular Access: 21/2 Street NE Pedestrian Access: NA Engineering Issues: None Comprehensive Planning Issues: Zoning and the Comprehensive Plan are consistent in this location. Public Hearing Comments: To be taken. Site Planning Issues: 2 Staff Report: VAR. #98-24 5924 2 'h Street Page 3 DEVELOPMENT SITE REQUEST Daniel C. Butterfield has requested a variance to allow a 26.68%, rather than the 25% maximum allowed under the S-1, Hyde Park performance standards. HARDSHIP STATEMENT ...I am proposing a construction of a 30' X 30' garage located at 5924 2 1/2 Street. This structure will serve as the garage and storage for the 7 tenants living in the apartment building at 5924 2 1/2 Street. According to the City Code, property structures may cover up to 25% of the property. At this time,' the apartment building structure covers 19% of the available property allowing 6% of the property for new construction. This equates to an additional 701.5 square feet. I am proposing a garage construction of 900 square feet to meet the needs of my tenants. This will cover approximately 26.7% of the total property, which is 1.7% over the allowed limit according to the City of Fridley... SITE DESCRIPTION/HISTORY Hyde Park was platted as a subdivision on November 22,1886. The plat is a series of 40' lots. As the land developed, property owners began to purchase as many lots (or portions thereof) as necessary to accommodate their building needs. The subject parcel consists of 2.25 lots (90'X 130.52`). In 1960, a building permit was issued for a 71.33' X 31.33' apartment building. No garage was built to serve the apartment building. ADJACENT SITES North: Zoning: S-1, Hyde Park East: Zoning: S-1, Hyde Park South: Zoning: S-1, Hyde Park West: Zoning: S-1, Hyde Park ANALYSIS Land Use: Residential Land Use: Residential Land Use: Residential Land Use: Residential Code Section 205.21.5.C., states, not more than twenty-five percent (25%) of the area of a lot shall be covered by the main building and all accessory buildings. Hyde Park is made up of a mix of single and multi -family residential units. Many of the multi -family complexes do not have garages. A garage is a desirable feature for both the 3 Staff Report: VAR #98-24 5924 2 '/2 Street Page 4 tenants and the City. Unfortunately, the number of units in a particular building, may and usually does not coincide with the space available for garages. In this particular case, the garage is not unreasonably sized. However, the land area is not large enough to allow construction without a variance. A modified garage has been discussed, however, with the number of tenants, a smaller garage area would not be practical. PREVIOUSLY GRANTED VARIANCES This request is within previously granted variances. In 1990 the City approved a variance to allow 28.6 % lot coverage at 590 Kimball Street. RECOMMENDATION Staff has no recommendation since this variance is within the realm of previously granted variances. 4 Y � � u, 7i >3.- �.. i � 4. 14 ft. 5924 21/2 Street -- Apartment Building Side View Drawing to scale 5924 2 112 Street -- Apartment Building Drawing to scale 21/2 Street Land is flat except for a 30 25ft degree slope going from this tree to the curb IF b AL ---11 4--10 ft.— �---30 ft. ► 40 ft. I 7� ft. Apartment Building r �t� C) -50 ft. Proposed Garage 20 ft. 30 ft.—► 20. ft. 1 - North— 40 ft. Apartment Building Next Door Overhead garage door will face alley Walk through access door will face Apartment Building. LEGEND Property Line O Tree Building Edges . Alley Apartment Parking Narrative for 5924 2 % Street Fridley, MN 55432 This document serves as a narrative for the property located at 5924 2 '/a street in Fridley, MN. This narrative will describe the proposed garage construction as well as the hard ship incurred in not having this structure available. I am proposing a construction of a 30 x 30 foot garage located at 5924 2 %z street. This structure will serve as a garage and storage utility for the 7 tenants living in the apartment building at 5924 2 %Z street. According to the city code, property structures may cover up to 25% percent of the property. At this time, the apartment building structure covers 19% of the available property allowing 6% of the property for new construction. This equates to an additional 701.5 square feet. I am proposing a garage construction of 900 square feet to meet the needs of my tenants. This will cover approximately 26.7% percent of the total property, which is 1.7% over the allowed limit according to the city of Fridley. It is my understanding that the other apartment buildings on 2 % street have been grandfathered in such that they are not required to meet this particular city code of 25% property utilization. Considering the state of the other properties, I believe it is appropriate to allow this particular variance. This frame constructed garage will be 13 feet high at the peak with 8 foot walls. It will be constructed utilizing Vinyl maintenance free siding. Its color will be an off-white, matching the white stucco on the apartment building. Enclosed are the site plans and a bid for the construction. Last Modified: 07/15/98 11:44 AM Printed: 07/15/98 11:55 AM CIiYOF FRIDLEY FRIDLEY MUNICIPAL CENTER - 6431 UNIVERSITY AVE. N.E. FRIDLEY, MN 55432 - (612) 571-3450 - FAX (612) 571-1287 July 27, 1998 Daniel Butterfield 2301 Milwaukee Avenue Mpls., MN 55404 Dear Mr. Butterfield: Per Minnesota Statute 15.99, local government units are required to notify land use applicants within 10 days if their land use applications are complete. We received an application for a lot coverage variance on July 17, 1998. This letter serves to inform ,you that your application is not complete. The application needs to be signed by the present property owner. Through my telephone conversations with you, I realize you are diligently trying to contact the current property owner. We will schedule the variance for a hearing at the appropriate Appeals Commission meeting as soon as we receive a completed application. If you have any questions regarding this letter or the process, please feel free to contact me at 572-3593. Sincerely, Paul J. i Planning Assistant PJT:jt C-98-141 5 .,Li l� i'K -.:.. .: '.. aI» .. » •...ia:;" {.5. .. FR .... ... _! '.^. ♦- - .u-- - _ ......v -.rte._......_. ..__. .__ ITY OF f-13-1�+9P 16-:12 PROF FRIDLEY TO 729 P. 02/10 J. n_ CITY OF FRIDLEY 6431 UNIVERSITY AVENUE FRIDLEY, MN SS432 {612} 571-3450 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT VARIANPE APPLICATION FOR: mmerdaVlndustrial _� Residential �Co PROPERTY INFORMATION: - site plan required for submittal, see attached Address: Property Identification Number. �'�, - � L\ - (7c,%% Legal pescription: Lot _ Block_____ TractlAddition �6� 42 Current Zoning: Have you operated a business in a city which required a business license? Yes No tf Yes, which city? If Yes, what type of business? Nk If Was that license ever denied or revoked? Yes No FEE OWNER INFORMATION {as it appears on the property titte} (Contract purchasers' Fee owners must sign this form prior, to processing) NAME: -D"at ge-b AUL)Kt-tib: -WIN DAYTIME PHONE: R?o-SU-7 SICNATURElDAI'E: NAME: & ADDRESS: a&/ 01,f1wawkee DAYTIME PHONE: 7o SIGNATURE/DA Signs Section of City Code. FEES Fee: $100.00 for commercial, industrial, or signs: Fee: $60.00 for residential prop es: ✓ Receipt * Al 3 (o Received By: P� Application Number. VA k -4 ` , Scheduled Appeals Commission Date: Scheduled City Council Date: � � ` �` 10 Day Application Complete Notification Date: � -g � � � 60 Day Date: �' CITY OF FRIDLEY FACSIMILE TRANSMITTAL SHEET TO: Fa FROM: COMPANY: DATE: 7 lz4 V PAX NUMBER: TOTAL NO. OF PAGES INCLUDING COVER: X28 -1W a PHONE NUMBER: SENDER'S PHONE NUMBER: °7 A 5 7a- 35-73 RE: ^� ( SENDERS PAX NLJMEW s70 - /ail 13 URGENT O FOR REVIEW 0 PLEASE COMMENT 0 PLEASE REPLY ❑ PLEASE RECYCLE NOTES/COMMENTSs �"Zv All AY71 /M. 6431 UNIVERSITY AVENUE, NE, FRIDLEY, MN 55432 JUL-20-1998 16:45 FROM CITY OF FR I DLEY TO 7286906 P.02/02 CITY OF FRJDLEY 6431 UNfVERSITY AVENUE FRJDLEY, MN 55432 (612) 571-3450 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT VARIANCE APPLICATION FOR: Residential Commercial/Industrial Suns PROPERTY INFORMATION; - site pian required for submittal, see attached Address:Z ` eFr;d4ssl3 Property Identification Number: Z,3- o _ - -00119 Le®al Descriotion: Lot Block Tjact/Addjion Current Zoning: Reason for Variance: Square footagelacreage: Have you operated a business in a city which required a business license? Yes No If Yes, which city? If Yes, what type of business? Was that license ever denied or revoked? Yes No (Contract purchasers: NAME: -TbOhl / �. ADDRESS: 301 A I DAYTIME PHONE: 4e Fee owners mus` sign this form prior to processing) 8-o3fS SICNATURE/QATE: rlr-f- © AJ Er ✓C -TivFo1zm r! o.1/ LIW �iqP ai7S' on Tres NAME: C C��2rtii$K ADDRESS: i �Z DAYTIME PHONE: i2 --')9R-`167 SI NATUREJDATE: Section of City Code: FEES . Fee: $100.00 for commercial, Industrial, or signs: Fee: $60.00 for residential propert'es: Receipt #: r 3� Received By: PJT Application Number. VAI?-* -Z Scheduled Appeals Commission Date: Scheduled City Council Date: 10 Day Application Complete Notification Date: l ZT, 77 60 Day Date: _ 8 TOTAL P.02 Jul 1-t *U Uri: qjp wesz rn i.on:szr czxan to P. i a .� ®r.rr �►'.I�»e�+.e A ea. e�+Te.+ +ee9uAlm .♦ ®AO 4J��/ �•`- ®tiMitie.PLi Fil�AGNE �7� VCleAtov • v vWwv v_ • •• •" Gi^w�G/� e '��r•••'•��_��.a.. ��•,-���� Some or tine Nwest%.ars irr lowly i_iva in °x'ye3aiar,t G�t«oeg: f "� W tS I MM I Pduttiiy vwrti�rti anti aJ�+�iaieu CONSTRUCTION CO. ,•`e l Pia • . STATE LICENSE #4238 �' `� ........... I 4301 HiaHwAr 7 MINNEAP01.1% iffii 554% ( moi: 920-SWO a Pier: c -f IFa2 I :4e_®=E�tu�r PURCHASER _ �'I`�llai ADDREss ..� - aP 1 era PHONE 3 62 4 UFFIt'E t. OtLC t!P" tTWRMt?C *�-s vp »rve roc. 2. WALL STUDS: I 2 X 4 " O.C. 'WALL riEidHl ( ) 3. SHEATHING: I�i..I ©S U GREYLIGHT 4. 1=X'tER10R SIDING .r,5, CORNER VINYL WOOD ❑ METAL 6. ROOF STYLE: E ❑ REVERSE ❑ H!P LUSII RAK L21'`'" RAKE ❑ 4" EAVE 12'Eloy_ 7. ROOF PITCH: ❑ OTHER 8. SOFFIT & FACIA: .�� �_l.! WOOD { AI ED BY OWNER) g. RAE SHINGLE/FFLT -._!-09'01 COLOR AND SIZE CH OUSE AS CLOSE AS POSSIBLE. 10• ROOF RAFTS ❑ 2 X 4 FACTOR USS RAFMRS 24" O.C. y � 0 216�RAFrERs 16" O C. ( ) 216 ROOF TIES 11. HEADERS: 65 finriwLc_ 2 x !_ is 13 LAMINATE 12 OVERHEAD nNVfl•_ e•.>�. J �'� JIlafCG. Esc+ttiniviri r[.!��� ❑ iNSULAiti7 LifriiFISUW c y ❑ .a r- cEi (JACKED 13. STEEL SERVICE UOC7R; J 2`8" X 6`8_7 ❑ 3*V' X 6`a" 14. WINDOW: (� ) U RAN_ c U S IDS 15 D IVEWAY 4IZE' r%r. �r►iry , lr=. — Ovivs`�isv: 1 ti. EXCAVATION: ivtoi 20. GROUND PREPARATION: _Wzav ❑ OWNER 21. PERMIT: 22_ CLEAN-UP: 23. SALES TAx 24. GARAGE REMOVAL: 25. CEMENT REMOVAL: U GINNER ❑ OWNER W€STS ❑ OWNER 26. ELECTPArAL:( O..H. LIGHT j { � O.H. RECEPTACLE d ) WALL RECEPI SPOT ❑ MOTION ❑ 3 WAY ❑ OLD '.n!_ _ LiNE 27. El OPENER '"EMOTES 28, LOT SURVEY: ❑ 1 LINE v �r t�J FULL WITH DRAWING M BLOCKS: FRONT l(. 7Q1rC,rIM11�'V11�GconiGC AR �v` -t/t/-,R�— W. r �t�uv varrr j ! l-6 Ud7yf �;► Unless otherwise stated, this contract does not include painting, staining, electrical, gutters, fire pfoufing, watef proo-fi-ig of U"i fill. The Western Construction Company Satisfaction and Performance Guarantee and the Terms and Conditions as set forth on the reverse side hereof, are hereby made a part of this agreement. in consideration thereof the purchaser agrees CASH to pay for services rendered. OR MME $ ;� .'! dont C]rcierrad $ Down Payment $ Balance Due Date - x Purchaset x Purchase4 Sales Representative Official Approval You, the Buyer, may cancel this purchase at any time prior tc midnight of the third business day after the date of this L NOTICE_ SEE OTHER SIDE FOR IMPORTANT INFORMATION I Fiii-135Q. J8v aiarhod iCtice form, an ewpl w 4iJ' 711197 of this right. CITY OF FRIDLEY PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE BEFORE THE APPEALS COMMISSION TO: Property owners within 350 feet of 5924 - 2 YZ Street CASE NUMBER: VAR #98-24 APPLICANT: Daniel Butterfield Petitioner or representative must attend the Appeals Commission meeting. PURPOSE. To increase the lot coverage by the main building and accessory building from 25% to 26.7% to allow the construction of a new 900 square foot garage LOCATION OF PROPERTY. 5924 2 Y2 Street LEGAL All of Lots 7 and 8, and the part of Lot 9, lying North of the DESCRIPTION: South 30 feet thereof, Block 10, Hyde Park DATE AND TIME OF Appeals Commission Meeting: HEARING: Wednesday, August 12, 1998, 7:30 p.m. The Appeals Commission meetings are televised live the night of the meeting on Channel 35. PLACE OF HEARING: Fridley Municipal Center, City Council Chambers, 6431 University Avenue HOW TO 1. You may attend hearings and testify. PARTICIPATE: 2. You may send a letter before the hearing to Scott Hickok, Planning Coordinator, or Paul Tatting, Planning Assistant, at 6431 University Avenue N.E., Fridley, MN 55432, or fax at 571-1287. SPECIAL Hearing impaired persons planning to attend who need an ACCOMMODATIONS: interpreter or other persons with disabilities who require auxiliary aids should contact Roberta Collins at 572-3500 no later than August 5. ANY QUESTIONS: Contact either Scott Hickok, Planning Coordinator, at 572-3599, or Paul Tatting, Planning Assistant, at 572-3593. Mailing Date: July 31, 1998 BJORK RUTH 251 60TH AVE NE FRIDLEY MN 55432 GUIMONT WILLARD C & DORIS J 5980 3RD ST NE FRIDLEY MN 55432 THEIS JAMES L 5957 2ND ST NE FRIDLEY MN 55432 ANDERSON RICK & CHERYL 5948 2 1/2 ST NE FRIDLEY MN 55432 GABEL PATRICIA 5947 2 1/2 ST NE FRIDLEY MN 55432 BROWN T D & MEYER J A 5942 2 1/2 ST NE FRIDLEY MN 55432 ILIFF SCOTT B & DAUM MARLYS 5945 2 1/2 ST NE FRIDLEY MN 55432 CERMAK ERIK J 7700 12TH AVE SO #307 RICHFIELD MN 55423 H R A FRIDLEY CITY OF 6431 UNIVERSITY VE NE FRIDLEY 55432 LUPPINO GREGORY G & DARCY L 6000 2 1/2 ST NE FRIDLEY MN 55432 CHURCHILL HUGH & DARLENE 5955 2 1/2 ST NE FRIDLEY MN 55432 RESIDENT 5980 2ND ST NE #1 FRIDLEY MN 55432 BACHAND JOHN T & SHIRLEY I 5945 2ND ST NE FRIDLEY MN 55432 GLYNN RUTH J 5935 2ND ST NE FRIDLEY MN 55432 MCNURLIN JERRY L & BARBARA 5936 2ND ST NE FRIDLEY' MN 55432 MALIKOWSKI HENRY J 5929 2ND ST NE FRIDLEY MN 55432 HLAVINKA MICHAEL J & B A 5932 2ND ST NE FRIDLEY MN 55432 ELMER SUSAN 5923 2ND ST NE FRIDLEY MN 55432 OSIECKI JUDITH A C/O BETH MILLER 6001 2ND ST NE FRIDLEY MN 55432 KNOTT DALE F & B V 2000 FAIRWAY DR NE MPLS MN 55421 BUSTON J G & BULATAO NELIA 5974 3RD ST NE FRIDLEY MN 55432 HOSMAN ROBERT A & JANE I 281 SYLVAN IN FRIDLEY MN 55432 ECKER ROBERT J & LORETTA R 5940 3RD ST NE FRIDLEY MN 55432 RESIDENT 5961 MAIN ST NE FRIDLEY MN 55432 US WES IN CORP TAX DEPT 6300 S S CUSE WAY SUITE 7 ENGL O CO 80111 KROONE LONDA M 5933 MAIN ST NE FRIDLEY MN 55432 TAMS INC 1160 FIRESIDE DR FRIDLEY MN 55432 ANOKA CTY COMM ACTION PROG HEDLUND GORDON HLAVINKA LILLIAN M 1201 89TH AVE NE #345 1255 PIKE LAKE DR 5923 MAIN ST NE BLAINE MN 55434 NEW BRIGHTON MN 55112 FRIDLEY MN 55432 CURRENT RESIDENT CURRENT RESIDENT CURRENT RESIDENT 5980 2 %2 ST NE 5942 2ND ST NE 5920 3RD ST NE FRIDLEY MN 55432 FRIDLEY MN 55432 FRIDLEY MN 55432 MANAGER CURRR SIDENT Zed' 5924 2 %a ST NE 5925 MAIN T NE ins FRIDLEY MN 55432 FRIDLEY 55432 CURRENT RESIDENT CURRENT RESIDENT 5916 2 %Z ST NE 5923 MAIN ST NE FRIDLEY MN 55432 FRIDLEY MN 55432 CURRENT RESIDENT 5924 2ND ST NE FRIDLEY MN 55432 CURRENT RESIDENT 5908 2 %2 ST NE FRIDLEY MN 55432 CURRENT RESIDENT CURRENT RESIDENT DANIEL BUTTERFIELD 5900 3RD ST NE 59012 %z ST NE 2301 MILWAUKEE AVE FRIDLEY MN 55432 FRIDLEY MN 55432 NDNNEAPOLIS MN 55404 JAROSH DOUGLAS H & JOAN C TAYLOR JANET S ANOKA CTY COMM ACTION PROG 5917 2ND ST NE 5916 2ND ST NE 1201 89TH AVE NE #345 FRIDLEY MN 55432 FRIDLEY MN 55432 BLAINE MN 55434 LA POINTE ALICE M 5909 2ND ST NE FRIDLEY MN 55432 SORUM CUR S & PAMELA C 25103 NOR DR LAGUNA CA 92656 HANSON SHARON F 5910 2ND ST NE FRIDLEY MN 55432 HAGBERG EUGENE V & JEAN A 5881 2ND ST NE FRIDLEY MN 55432 HANSON SHARON F 5910 2ND ST NE FRIDLEY MN 55432 CE ElpK 7700 12 VE APT #307 RICHF D MN 55423 KISH MICHAEL Y 58512 1/2 ST NE FRIDLEY MN 55432 RESIDENT 5900 2 1/2 ST NE FRIDLEY MN 55432 SNYDER RICHARD C & ANN L 5901 2ND ST NE FRIDLEY MN 55432 QUAST DAVID P JR & BOBBI 5852 2 1/2 ST NE FRIDLEY MN 55432 N 2 W AVE NE Z ro N VAR #98-24 5924 21/2 St 59 AVE NE W AVE NE W N IR9�Q R1 -One 0 R2 - Tim Farmy UrAs a R-3 - General Multiple Urits Q RA - Nbbi1e Harte Parks 0 RD Plamed U t Demoprrerd O S-1 - FVb Park Neighborhood 0 S2 - Rg&m*prot Didtrict 0 Cl - Local Business 0 G2 - General &sines C,3 - General Shopping Q CRt-Grad Office Q Ki - Light Irk W2-HeavylydxbW NF3 - Ouodoar lr, Heavy Ind RR - Mdroads P - Public Facilities WATER 0 RIGHT -OF WAY V VAR #98-24, Lot Coverage S AVE NE Petitioner Dw el Butterfield Vice, YAR #98-24 Zoning: S-1, Hyde Park 5924 - 21/2 St NE Z ro CO) PLANNING DIVISION DATE: Monday, July 13, 1998 TO: Dan Butterfield 6W4 ZZ sl --mc FAX: 728-8906 RE: Variance Application PAGES: #10 FROM: Paul J. Tatting, Planning Assistant (612) 572-3593 Q6� FAX: (612) 571-1287 Included with this note are Fridley's Variance application form and the time line schedule for Appeals Commission meetings. The Appeals Commission holds the public hearing for variances. The next application deadline is this Friday, July 17. Applications that are received by this Friday would be heard at the Appeals Commission meeting on August 12. With the application, please include a narrative. The narrative should include a hardship statement and should give details about how the building will be used and how it will look. To grant a variance, a "hardship" needs to be identified. A hardship can be lot size, lot shape, topography of the lot or other physical aspects of the property that the property owner does not have control over. Hardship is further defined in the variance materials. In your case, the city code only allows a lot coverage of 25% by buildings (lot size). The existing apartment building on the lot is a legal permitted use and covers 19% of the lot. To stay within the coverage limits of the code, you are only allow you to build a 701.5 square foot garage (total coverage = 25%). Your hardship statement needs to indicate why you need a garage larger than 701.5 square feet. Also include a site plan that shows how far the building will be set back from property lines. A side view of the building and a description of the building materials should also be indicated. If you have further questions, please call me at 572-3593 or Scott Hickok, Planning Coordinator, at 572-3599. Thank you for your time. 6431 UNIVERSITY AVENUE NE, FRIDLEY, MN 55432