Loading...
VAR 05.81CITY OF FRIDLUY, SUBJECT MINNESOTA COMMISS1,C)RI APPLICATION ueporl("nq,�ion, �tturnuer �tiev proved by u —wt COMPLETE REVIEW CHECKLIST RETURNTOPLANNING 3 L A A 5MA VIAas r NO �5D ss FIL ATE DUE TIS COMMENTS 710 7y -. — o -, 7 VARIANCES FOR CITY USE ONLY Hoard members notified of meeting by—.�t�na nom,. ig�?List members, ~ o date notifieds and "Yes" or "No" for plans to attend hearing. Plan Gabel Name 6-9ate To Attend 81 Plemel Barna Gerou Hippen ` ' - Person making appeal and the following property owners having property within 200 feet notified: � Name ,ate a Pho r�M it By Whom Nut' ied � M/M William Sandin-201 45th Avenue N.E. 55421 W� M/M Gareth Iverson -4519 2nd Street N.E. 55421 M/M Edwin Hoglund - 4531 2nd Street N.E. 55421 M/M Wallace Neuman -4543 2nd Street N.E. 55421 i M/M Frank Kozlak- 4512 2nd Street N.E. 55421 M/M Bruce Nedegaard-111 45th Avenue N.E. 55421 M/M Thomas Stenehjem-101 45th Avenue N.E. 55421 M/M Robert Keisling -4513 Main Street N.E. 55421 M/M Ronald Stromberg-4523 Main Street N.E. 55421 Bruce J. Herrick - 4551 Main Street N.E. 55421 M/M John Vachuska-4930 Madison Street N.E. Mpls 55 21 i 1 I Michael J. Woytasek-2223 4th Street N.E. Mpls 554'8 M/M Roger Frakie-4544 2nd Street N.E. 55421 M/M Greg Miller -4520 2nd Street N.E. 55421 M/M Norman Roseth-4532 2nd Street N.E. 55421 Ruth M. Evans - 4528 2nd Street N.E. 55421 Jay A. Norgaard -4526 2nd Street N.E. 55421 M/M Iwan Ficenko-4524 2nd Street N.E. 55421 a a weights e ights590 40th Avenue N.E. 590 _.CQI um i a Hei nhtc Mp_ 1 - _---. CITY OF FRIDLEY 6431 UNIVERSITY AVENUE N.E., FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA 55432 TELEPHONE ( 612)571.3450 May 29, 1981 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING hereby given that the Appeals Commission of the luct a public hearing in the City Council Chambers sue Northeast at 7:30 P.M. on Tuesday, June 9 illowing matter: City of Fridley at 6431 Univer- !. :1.9,81,, in regard Consideration of a request for variances pursuant to Chapter 205 of the Fridley City Code, to reduce the front yard setback from the-requ.ired 35 feet to 25 feet, to allow a 14' by 23' oval swimming pool to be in line with the front of the house, and to allow the placement of a 6 foot fence to be 19 feet from the front property line instead of the 4 foot maximum height allowed in the front yard so they can meet the fencing requirements for a swimming pool, all located on Lot 2, Block 3, Rearrangement of Blocks 13, 14 and 15, Plymouth Addition, the same being 111 -45th Avenue N.E. Notice is hereby given that all persons having an interest therein will be given an opportunity to be heard at the above time and place. PATRICIA GABEL CHAIRWOMAN APPEALS COMMISSION Note: The Appeals Commission will have the final action on this request, unless there are objections from surrounding neighbors, the City Staff,.or the petitioner does not agree with the Commission's decision. If any of these events occur, the request will continue to the City Council through the Planning Commission with only a recommendation from the Appeals Commission. Item #2, June 9, 1931 ADMINTSTPATIVE: STAFF RLPORT 111 - 45t1i Avenue N.E. A. PUBLIC PURPOSE SERVED BY REQUIRE:MEMT: Section 205.053, 4A, requires a front yard setback of not less than 35 feet. Public purpose served by this requirement is to allow for off-street parking without encroaching on the public right of way and also for aesthetic consideration to reduce the "building line of sight" encroachment into the neighbor's front yard. Section 205.154, 3, paragraph 2, requires,a fence or wall to be not more than 4 feet high within the limits of the front yard. Public purpose served by this requirement is to reduce visual pollution in the front yard, and to maintain a higher degree of traffic visibility and to reduce the "line of sight" encroachment into the neighbbr's front yard. B. STATED HARDSHIP: "Due to the fact that our house is sitting on the lot facing the side yard and not the front of the lot, it has created a narrow rear yard and necessitates a variance so the pool can be installed properly." C. A 94INISTRATIVE STAFF REVIEW: A variance was approved on June 12, 1979 for a house addition to be constructed 25 feet from the front property line (2nd Street). The applicant now proposes to install a swimming pool in line with this addition, and between the dwelling unit and the inside side lot line, making it also 25 feet from the front property line. All swimming pools in the City -are required to have a minimum of a 6 foot fence surrounding them to prevent entrance to the pool by children. If the front yard setback is approved for the pool, the fence requirement must also be approved for safety -purposes. Item #2, June 9, 1981 ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF REPORT 111 - 45th Avenue N.E. A. PUBLIC PURPOSE SERVED BY REQUIREMENT: Section 205.053, 4A, requires a front yard setback of not less than 35 feet. Public purpose served by this requirement is to allow for off-street parking without encroaching on the public right of way and also for aesthetic consideration to reduce the "building line of sight" encroachment into the neighbor's front yard. Section 205.154, 3, paragraph 2, requires, a fence or wall to be not more than 4 feet high within the limits of the front yard. Public purpose served by this requirement is to reduce visual pollution in the front yard, and to maintain a higher degree of traffic visibility and to reduce the "line of sight" encroachment into the neighbbr's-front yard. B. STATED HARDSHIP: "Due to the fact that our house is sitting on the lot facing the side yard and not the front of the lot, it has created a narrow rear yard and necessitates a variance so the pool can be installed properly." C. ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF REVIEW: A variance was approved on June 12, 1979 for a house addition to be constructed 25 feet from the front property line (2nd Street). The applicant now proposes to install a swimming pool in line with this addition, and between the dwelling unit and the inside side lot line, making it also 25 feet from the front property line. All swimming pools in the City are required to have a minimum of a 6 foot fence surrounding them to prevent entrance to the pool by children. If the front yard setback is approved for the pool, the fence requirement must also be approved for safety -purposes. Coram is - June 9, 1981 3 - - - - t MOTION by Mr. Happen, seconded by Mr. Barna, to approve the variance requeso ck from the required 25 feet to 10 feet, to allow reduce the rear yard setba the construction of a 16 ft. b 26and tatreducceaddition the side hyard setback forsaing structure, along with a deck, gfrom the required 25 feet to 17.5 feet, garage which opens on the side street, all located on Lot 8, Block 4, Memory Manor 3rd which is already existing, Fridley, MN 55432. UPON A Addition, the same being 7381 Memory Lane N.E., THE MOTION CARRIED VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRWOMAN GABEL DECLARED UNANTMOUSLY. 2 . REQUEST FOR VARIANCES PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 205 OF THE FRIDLEY CITY CODE, TO REDUCE THE FRONT YARD SETBACKFROM THE REQUIRED 35 FEET ick 25 F��._TO5NT OF TE FliO ALLOW A 14 FT. BY 23 FT. OVAL SWIMNIITGOF 6yFOOT LINE B WI�H19HFOOT FROM THE HOUSE AND TO ALLOW THE PLACEMEN 4 FOOT t�IAXIMUM HEIGHT ALLOWED IN THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE INSTEAD OF THEFO THE FRONT YARD 50 THEY CAN MEET] THE FENC NGREQUIREMENTSEM F KR13 , SWIMMING 1 AND nnnr AT.T. MC_ATED ON LOT 2 , �''� _ _ _ .._ , ..r.axi� nt F. fReauest by Bruce Nedegaara, MOTION by Mrs. Gerou, seconded by Mr. Barna, to open the RED Tc�hpUBLLIC UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRWOMAN UPON DECLARED HEARING AT 7:48 P.M. Mrs. Claudia Nedegaard, 111 -45th Avenue N.E., was present. Chairwoman Gabel read the Staff Reports 71T3i1ItlISTPATIVE STAFF Itla'ORT 111 — 77 45t1i Avenue N.E. A. PUnI.IC PURPOSE SERVED BY REQUIRE14I NT: Section 205.053, 4A, requires a front yard setback of not less than 35 feet. Public purpose served 11 by this requirement is to allow for off-street parking without encroaching on the public right of way and also for aesthetic consideration to reduce the "building line of sight" encroachment into the neighbor's front yard. Section 205.154, 3, paragraph 2, requires a fence or wall to be not more than 4 feet high within the limits of the front yard. Public purpose served by this requirement is to reduce visual pollution in the front yard, and to maintain a higher degree of traffic visibility and*to reduce the "line of sight" encroachment into the neighbbr's front yard. 3. STATED HARDSHIP: "Due to the fact that our house is sitting on the lot facing the side yard and not the front of the lot, it has createda narrow rear yard and necessitates a variance so the pool can be installed properly." APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING, , 1979 - -_ --- PAGE 7 MOTION by Mr. Plemelt seconded by Mr. Kemper.,'to close the Public.Hearing. UPON A VOICE VOTE., ALL VOTING AYE' VICE CHAIRWOMAN GABEL DECLARED THE PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 8:30 P.M. Mr. Plemel stated that the firm had the interest of the neighborhood at heart and it would be a nice building' better than what is there now. Mr. Barna stated that he felt it would be an improvement on the site and would improve the existing traffic situation. Mr. Kemper stated that his only concern was the variance they were acting on was not the one on the public notice. He had no objection to acting on it., but felt Council should be aware that the variance was different and would like W. Herrick to give an opinion on that at the Council meeting. Ms. Gabel stated she had no problem and felt it would be an improvement. She felt it would be better if they knew just what kind of tenant there would be., but that was not possible at this point. MOTION by Mr. Kemper, seconded by Mr. Barna' to recommend to Council approval of the variances as follows: 1)reduce the building setback from the street right- of-way from 35 feet to 15 feet., 2) reduce the parking setback from street right- of-way from 20 feet to 15 feet from the north.property line, 3) to reduce the parking setback from the street right-of-way from 20 feet to 5 feet on the west property linel.and 4) to reduce the parking setback from the street right-of-way from 20 feet to 15 feet on the south property lino to allow the construction of an office building at 5701 University Avenue NE. Council should note that the 4th variance was approved differently than was indicated in the Public Notice. The Public Notice indicated a reduction of the parking setback from 20 feet to 17 feet. Council and Mr. Herrick should act on that change. UPON A VOICE VOTE.. ALL VOTING AYE., VICE CHAIRWOMAN GABEL DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Ms. Gabel stated this would go to Council on July 9th. 3. VARIANCE REQUEST PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 202 OF THE FRIDLEY CITY CODE, TO RE rPur PP()Nrr vnRn RRmRnrY FRnM muF R'FOUFRRn '2q FFFT TO 25 FEET TO ALLOW THE AVENUE NE. (Reauest by Bruce Nedegaard, 111 45th Avenue -AB, r'rialey, mn. ?7'+cL). MOTION by Mr. Kemper., seconded by Mr. Barna., to open the public hearing. UPON A VOICE VOTE; ALL VOTING AYE., VICE CHAIRWOMAN GABEL DECLARED THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AT 8:4o P.M. Ms. Gabel asked W. Nedegaard to come forward and read the Administrative Staff Report as follows: APPEALS COMISSION.. ING, JUNE 1.22 1 9 - PAGE 8 ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF REPORT 111 -45th Avenue N.E. 0 A.: PUBLIC PURPOSE SERVED BY REQUIREMENT: ' Section 205.053, 4A, requires a -front yard setback of not less than 35 feet. Public purpose served by this requirement is to allow for off-street parking without encroaching onto the public right of way and also for aesthetic consideration to reduce the "building line of sight" encroachment into the neighbor's front yard. B. STATED HARDSHIP: "We need additional room for the family as the children get older and require more space." C. ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF REVIEW: This house is located on the corner of 45th Avenue and 2nd Street with the house facing 45th Avenue. •Technically the front yard is on 2nd Street as it is the sh-ortest side of the lot. The garage is exiting onto ' 45th Avenue so there would be no encroachment into the boulevard area for' parking with this addition. The house to the north of this lot is facing 2nd Street and is set back the required 35 feet but there.is approximately 38 feet between the.addition and this structure to avoid reducing the "line of sight". Mr. Nedegaard gave the Commissioners a copy of his plans. He stated that he faced 45th Avenue and would like a 10 foot variance which would make it 25 feet off 2nd Street rather than 35 feet. Ms. Gabel stated that even though Mr. Nedegaard faces 45th Avenue., 2nd Street was considered the front yard because it is the narrow part of the lot. She' noted that it was a nice house and well kept. Mr. Clark stated the house across the street had done the same thing. Ms. Gabel asked if the hedges were on his property? b Mr. Nedegaard stated that some of the hedges sat on his property., but they belonged to.his neighbor. They would remain there. Ms. Gabel asked if the big tree would remain? W. Nedegaard stated it would. He also stated that the garage was in the front of the house and it would not look like an addition. Mr. Plemel asked if he was expanding the living area? APPEALS C0141ISSION MEETING, JUNE 12, 1979 - PAGE g Mr. Nedegaard stated he was expanding the size of.two of the bedrooms and adding one. Ms. Gabel asked if he would have a full basement under the addition? W. Nedegaard stated he would. Ms. Gabel noted that the picture indicated there was aline of shurbs and a tree in the neighbors yard' so they would not be able to see the addition at all. So, in terms.of visual encroachmentp there would be none. Mr. Plemel asked if the other houses to the north were at 35 feet? W. Nedegaard stated that the next two were 35 feet$ but from there they were staggered. - Ms. Gabel noted that there would be no problem at the corner with the sight line. She asked about the roof line and the siding. Mr. Nedegaard stated that he would be doing the construction himself and the roof line would tie in with all new roofing and the siding would be the same. There were no comments from the audience. Mr. Barna asked if the people in Columbia Heights were notified. Mr. Clark stated that they sent one notice to the City Hall and it was up to them to notify the neighbors. Ms. Gabel asked if Mr. Nedegaard had talked to the neighbors across the street? Mr. Nedegaard stated he had not. MOTION by Mr. Kemper., seconded by Mr. Plemelj to close the Public Hearing. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE., VICE CHAIRWOMAN GABEL DECLARED THE PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 8:50 P.M. MOTION by Mr. Barna, seconded by Mr. Plemel, to approve the request for varianoe pursuant to Chapter 205 of the Fridley City Code,, to reduce the front yard setback from the required 35 feet to 25 feet to allow the construction of an addition to an existing house at ill 45th Avenue N.E. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, VICE CHAIRWOMAN GABEL DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Ms. Gabel informed the petitioner that he was free to get his Building Permit. 4.. VARIANCE REQUEST PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 205 OF THE FRIDLEY CITY CODE, TO ALLOW OFF-STREET PARKING IN THE FRONT YARD OF A SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING IN R-3 , 4:i L%AA.c j.9 affil. J/TJX/ • APPEALS COMMISSION MEMING, JUNE 12,_2-279 PAGE MOTION by Mr. Barna, seconded by Mr. Kemper., to open the Public Hearing. 4 UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE.9 VICE CHAIRWOMAN GABEL DECLARED THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AT 8:51 P.M. Ms. Gabel asked Mr. Videen to come forward and read the Administrative Staff Report as follows: ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF REPORT, 5614 - 4th Street N.E:" A. PUBLIC PURPOSE SERVED BY REQUIREMENT: Section 205.073, El, requires that no off-street parking shall be located in the required front yard. Public purpose served by this requirement is to reduce visual .pollution in the front yard. B. STATED HARDSHIP: The property has no on-site parking at this time. The property has been sold and FHA -requires that an on-site parking area be provided. C. ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF REVIEW: The structure ori this 40 -foot lot has a front yard setback of approximately 30.feet and the alley in this block was vacated prohibiting off-street parking from the alley. The only feasible way to get the.parking off the street and on to -the property would be to allow parking in the front yard. Mr. Videen showed the Commissioners a copy of a picture taken of the area and pointed out that he had no access to the rear yard. He would like to put a 22 foot by 10 foot driveway along the south property line. What he would like to do is get the curb cut.. He stated there was only 3 feet on each side of his house. Ms. Gabel agreed there was no access to the back yard and noted that the alley was vacated which eliminated access into the back. Another house had a garage which could not be used because of the alley being vacated. Mr. Kemper asked if those people had used that garage? Mr. Videen stated that as far as he knows there has never been a car in that garage.