Loading...
VAR 05.82CITY DF FRIDLEY, SUBJECT VARIANCES 6431 UNIVERSITY AVE. NE. • FRIDLEY, MN. 55432 calla) 5713450 ADDRESS I I f A V E N DATE y l 6 —Fl— APPEALS FZAPPEALS COMMISSION: APPROVED L/ DISAPPROVED DATE v NO. CITY COUNCIL REVIEW: REQUIRED: YES CITY COUNCIL: APPROVED DISAPPROVED DATE NO. STIPULATIOVNS; Z/, 2� _ . � Z& dry , -y�-`'''� �-�-r � NAME LA M r> FEE 4o6•©0 RECEIPT No.��` LOT NO. BLOCK NO. TRACT OR ADDITION LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Z ?J' At AIL b AIX VARIANCE REQUEST(S): (Attach plat or survey of property showing building, variances, etc., where applicable) 'Spim lkr&10 V4K-IpNC6 rtZ f AA4(.N XLST,, 4AfLft4"6 Q.uEs l t5 14?IPE4k") 176T P,Ae c: Ally� List specific hardship(s) which requires the variance(s): T*6 �AV-ftu t 0e 1'u z: USS T -4 APp&f- l y IrAE F,­CsT Loe-A p A Fox, f A Wi 1 t•1 Rmom AD Io 1 Tt oP1 fYLc m p QES 1.6 N IPow T of U 16 w . No A.bai?IoN To -ME T.t-Arl.. aF -Ma tAAtN 11>oPI OP TuIE Kba';c wom'-`0 C tzcATL. j 114f t y 1ST Q- 4 mLIP , Occlna s E Of 1-96 S VI�,i -.,4` 'DCF p Housc on -Mvy 120' TJX p 1,a% `"As ptplo l riohJ wouz w ar�n gAve -V BULL 25 -nm WALe_dU- PK A u elE' off- DATE' j5l�' 6 '.Y 2 SIGNATURE ADDRESS _ _� C � — e.l h� tau ' J ' TELEPHONE NO 511 "MI 2 VARIANCES FOR CITY USE ONLY Board members notified of meeting by List ruembers, ' date notified, and "Yes" or. "Noll for plans to attend hearing. Plan Name Date' I To Attend Plemel Person making.appeai an notified:. - ng property owners having property within 200 feet Name _ - Date By Whom Phone or Mail Notified M/M Kennet__R;_ Kadin -nr)l Rpaia in rr. F- 5/14/82 MAIL N.H. M/M Jens -W. Jensen 6156 -Stinson N.E. ' M/M Doo Y. Shin 6136 Stinson N.E. M/M Duane C..Retzer 6130 -Stinson N.E. M/M James C.-Sovada-6116 Stinson N.E. M/M Frank S. W M M Frederick T. Wppk-. 6Q44 McKinley N -F - MIM Paul D Jahnke 6054 MrKinlpg N_F_ M/M Gerald L. Keller 6064 McKinley N.E. !M/M John H. Livingston 6060 Stinson _ M/M John M. Sell 6070. Stinson N.E. ` -M/M Ralph E, III Stouffer 6065 McKinley -E. _ M/M.Costa Nichols 6055.McKinley N.E. Lance G B unpn 6046 Mr Ki of py N _ F _ _MIM M/M Jack B. Mugan 6155 Briardale Court N.E. M%M Donald J. -David 6l4,5_51iardalp Cnur-t__. N-F- — M/M Larry L. Poundstone 6135 Briardale Court _/M Gordon C Fischer M/M David P..Lang 6140 Briardale Court N.E. • —M/K Douglas C. Harris M/M Dennis L. Behymer 6131 Benjamin N.E. M/M Earl W.-HepdriCks 1611 61st Avenue-N.E. M/M Clarence F. Jr. Cassell 1621 61st Ave. N.E. \ M/M Breet._WW. Hart 1631 61st, Avp -N F M/M Grover A. Cleveland 1641 61st Avenue N.E. M/M Lee E. Tech. 1651 61st Avenue N.E,.-_ CITY OF FRIDLEY 6431 UNIVERSITY AVENUE N.E., FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA 55432 TELEPHONE ( 612)571-3450 May 14, 1982 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING :e is hereby given that the Appeals Commission of the City of Fridley conduct a Public Hearing in the City Council Chambers at 6431 University le Northeast at 7:30 p.m. on Tuesday, May 25 1982 in regard to the )wing matter: Consideration of a variance request, pursuant to Chapter 205 of the Fridley City Code, to reduce the side yard setback on the living side of a dwelling from the required 10 feet to 5 feet, to allow the construction of a family room behind the existing garage on Lot 27, Block 3, Briardale Addition, the same being 1641 61st Avenue N.E. Notice is hereby given that all persons having an interest therein will be given the 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. CITY OP FRIMLGY. SUBJECT f MINNESOTA C®[1/ MISSM-I6M APPLICATION ION REV§F-Vv r Ueporlrncnl/Umsiom1iutnoer 1 tiev r': qj Approved by U01e .. a3 F=ILE NO/ ADDRESS FILE - COMPLETE REVIEW CHECKLIST 5��►����c� v �� c��� r� 0.-1 { l0 �- \ lL ► S �- RETURN TOPLANNING - DUE CLOPS COMMENTS M 571 WE I till r fl' 0 v lead plana.ag ,�/!„/,,,/ - 63yS N-glrway No 6% N 1. land Sereey.ag�//// M/wwe polls. Sade fest-ay � r7ij Viil��/ e/1��e M-ww 33633 C+vrl 1ng-nrvru-g felephaae y94-0006 Mrnittpol Ing-nve..04V EvalcincerTi & RurvQlynr01 ' 6reo Ca" 613 Mortgage Loan Survey for K14`Ai RKtJ /Y &Icw i�d 75.00 � � N qge f o wood ro"'r W or t 1.0 :I O Wood �- 1 75 05 ST AVENUE N.E. LOT. 28BLOCK 3 BRIARDALE Ano4 u Ownlii _._ •7¢►lo�s .Jro1�1C�a f �,i�iii�� CC1af�'1Cnf That eta teee and correct tep.rsvnU.t.on of o survey of rhe bovndar-es N the land above deet. -►ed andeltie IOcattOt- of all budd-ngs, -f any, the -eon, and all v-s-ble enc,ocschm,nts. of any. from Or on fo-d land fkia burvey vs mode only to connect -on w -Ib a me-tgage loon no.. br-ng ftlattd on Me property aadne Itabtltfy to esteemed 96400109 to the hold•, o1 we% morrgage or any othri -nt-rest acge-red by the reason of buck mortgage If it understood and agreed na rr-onemvr.ts have been plated lee the petpose of establishing 101 haus or boeadary toraves Doted th.s __.._duy at _A O IY— /� SUOURBAN INGINIIAING, INC. L3j/ _ ScaIQ: "= slot 1ngiae'"" ;/ Sutvef' r�- �_ y _». ` bye. L'��.L if• %' •e Item #1, May 25, 1982 ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF REPORT 1641 - 61st Avenue N.E. A. PUBLIC PURPOSE SERVED BY REQUIREMENT: Section 205.053, 4B, requires a minimum side yard of 10 feet adjoining living areas. Public purpose served by this requirement is to maintain a minimum of 20 feet between living area in adjacent structures and 15 feet between garages and living areas in adjacent structures to reduce exposure to conflagration of fire. It is also to allow for aesthetically pleasing open areas around residential structures. B. STATED HARDSHIP: "The recessed area behind the existing garage is the best location for a family room addition from a design point of view. An addition to the rear of the main body of the house would greatly reduce the existing rear yard, because of the existing 34 foot deep house on this 120 foot deep lot. The addition would also have to be a full two story walkout because of the existing grade." C. ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF REVIEW: The existing attached garage is pulled ahead of the back line of the house leaving an approximate 12 foot by 20 foot recess. The proposal is to convert this recess to living area and add a deck onto the back of this addition. This would result in living area being 5 feet fran the side lot line. The adjacent structure is built with the same design, only reversed, which results in the garages and recesses of both structures adjoining the common lot line. If both properties were to convert their recesses into living area, there would be a distance of 10 feet between living areas. If the Board approves this request we have no suggeste&!sti.pulations, however some thought could be given to not installing any windows in the east wall. Item #1, May 25, 1982 ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF REP61RT 1641 - 61st Avenue N.E. A. PUBLIC PURPOSE SERVED BY REQUIREMENT: Section 205.053, 4B, requires a minimum side yard of 10 feet adjoining living areas. Public purpose served by this requirement is to maintain a minimum of 20 feet between living area in adjacent structures and 15 feet between garages and living areas in adjacent structures to reduce exposure to conflagration of fire. It is also to allow for aesthetically pleasing open areas around residential structures. B. STATED HARDSHIP: "The recessed area behind the existing garage is the best location for a family room addition from a design point pf view. An addition to the rear of the main body of the house would greatly reduce the existing rear yard, because of the existing 34 foot deep house on this 120 foot deep lot. The addition would also have to be a full two story walkout because of the existing grade." C. ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF REVIEW: The existing attached garage is pulled ahead of the back line of the house leaving an approximate 12 foot by 20 foot recess. The proposal is to convert this recess to living area and add a deck onto the back of this addition. This would result in living area being 5 feet from the side lot line. The adjacent structure is built with the same design, only reversed, which results in the garages and recesses of both structures adjoining the common lot line. If both properties were to convert their recesses into living area, there would be a distance of 10 feet between living areas. If the Board approves this request we have no suggested stipulations, however some thought could be given to not installing any windows in the east wall. City of Fridley APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING - MAY 259 1982 PAGE 1 CALL M ORDER Chairwoman Gabel called the May 259 1982, Appeals Commission meeting to order at 7x30 p.m. ROLL CALLS Members Presents Patricia Gabel, Alex Barna, Jim Plemal, Jean Garou Members Absents Leslie Coleman Others Presents Kent Hill, City of Fridley Mrs. Cleveland, 1641 61st Avenue N.E., Fridley, NN Mr. Don Pertinen Mr. and Mrs. Donald Nielsen, 115-nj Way N.E., Fridley, MR APPROVE APPEALS COMMISSION MINUmS OF MAY 11, 1982. MOTION by Mr. Barna, seconded by Ms. Gerou, to approve the May 11, 1982, Appeals Commission minutes as written. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRWOMAN GABEL DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 1. MOTION by Ms. Gerou, seconded by Mr. Barna, to open the public hearing. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRWOMAN GABEL DECLARED THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AT 7.28 P.M. ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF REPORT 1641 — 61st Avenue N.E. A. PUBLIC PURPOSE SERVED BY REQUIREMENT: Section 205.053, 4B, requires a minimum side yard of 10 feet adjoining living areas. Public purpose served by this requirement is to maintain a minimum of 20 feet between living area in adjacent structures and 15 feet between garages and living areas in adjacent structures to reduce exposure to conflagration of fire. It is also to allow for aesthetically pleasing open areas around residential structures. APPEALS COW-USION MEETING - MAY 25, 1962 PAGE 2 B. STATED HARDSHIP: "The recessed area behind the existing garage is the best location for a family room addition from a design point cif view. An addition to the rear of the main body of the house would greatly reduce the existing rear yard, because of the existing 34 foot deep house on this 120 foot deep lot. The addition would also have to be a full two story walkout because of the existing grade." C. ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF REVIEW: The existing attached garage is pulled ahead of the back line of the house leaving an approximate 12 foot by 20 foot recess. The proposal is to convert this recess to living area and add a deck onto the back of this addition. This would result in living area being 5 feet from the side lot line. The adjacent structure is built with the same design, only reversed, .which results in the garages and recesses of both structures adjoining the common lot line. If both properties were to convert their recesses into living area, there would be a distance of 10 feet between living areas. If the Board approves this request we have no suggested stipulations, however some thought could be given to not installing any windows in the east wall. Mrs. Cleveland of 1641 61st Avenue N.E., Fridley, was present4 Mr. Hill presented Commission members with an aerial photograph and building blueprints. Mrs. Cleveland explained that they wanted to put a family room on behind the garage, the dinette wall would be moved four feet wit would be iii - Aine with the family room, the garage roof would be angled and a porch and deck would be added to.the rear of the house. The Cleveland's chose adding on to the rear of the house instead of the side to keep the property aesthetically pleasing. In order to comply with the code requirement of 8% of square footage in windows a window will be put in one-half flight up from the family room in the stairway facing east. The porch in back will be a screened, one season porch. Mrs. Cleveland presented to the Commission members letters from three neighbors all of whom Indicated they had no problem with the proposed addition. MOTION by Mr. Plemel, seconded by Ms. Gerou, to receive the letters from the neighbors into the record. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRWOMAN GABEL DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMUSLY, Chairwoman Gabel asked if the east wall would be a fire wall and Mr. Hill indicated that would be a code requirement. Chairwoman Gabel asked if the siding would be the same and when construction would begin. Mrs. Cleveland said the siding would be the same and that construction would begin in mid-June or September depending on when the bids were received. Y APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING - MAY 25....1982 PAGE 14DTION by No. Gercus seconded by Mr. Plemelo to close the public hearing. UPON A VOICE VOTE. ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRWOMAN GABEL DECLARED TME pUBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT ?e50 P.M. Mr. Plemel questioned the hardship and Mrs. Cleveland responded that it was a lack of iiving area. Chairwoman Gabel added that she bad seen the living area and it was, indeed, quite small. Mr. Barna noted that even with the addition the house would not be outsized for that particular area. MOTION by Mr. Barna, seconded by Ms. Gercu, to approve the variance request to reducethe side yard setback on the living side of a dwelling from the required 10 feet to 5 feet,, to allow the construction of a family room behind the existing garage on Lot 27. Block 3p Briardale Addition, the same being 1641 61st Avenue N.E. with the stipulations that the window in the wall adjacent to the neighboring garage be eliminated by utilizing other energy efficient window devices in the north wall of the structure, - a fire wall be installed in the adjoining wall and a fire door exit be installed in the garage. UPON A VOICE VOTE. ALL VOTING AYE. CHAIRWOMAN GABEL DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 2. MOTION by Ms. Gerous seconded by Mr. Plemel, to open the public hearing. UPON A VOICE VOTE. ALL VOTING AYE. CHAIRWOMAN GABEL DECLARED THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AT 7058 P.M. ADMINISTRATIVE.. STAFF F�EPORT • 115 - 7A Way N.E. _ A. PUBLIC PURPOSE SERVED BY REQUIREMENT: Section 205.154, 4, allows uncovered porches and steps to building entrances to extend not more than 10 feet into a required front yard. _ Public purpose served by this requirement is to allow for aesthetic consideration to reduce the building "line of sight" encroachment into the neighbor's front yard. B. STATED HARDSHIP: "Need a front door and need above grade deck to use door." C. ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF REVIEW: The existing dwelling was built in 1956 with a 35 foot front yard setback. In 1976, the City improved 7A Way and 9 feet of this property was taken for street right of way, leaving the existing house 27.9 feet from the front property line. APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING - MAY 25. 1982 PAGE 4 The proposal is to build a'12 foot deck and front step off the front of the dwelling which would leave a 15 foot front yard. The adjacent structures to the east and west are over 100 feet from this addition so this deck should not encroach into their "line of sight". There is an apparent problem over the westerly 10'feet of Lot 32, Auditor` s. Subdivision #77. The City approved the lot split (L.S.#73-07) in June, 1973. For some reason the transfer of the 10 feet of land was never -recorded at the County. Therefore we have told Mr. Nielsen that the staff report would be. recommending to the Board that his petition be continued until proper recording has been accomplished. Mr. Nielson does have an attorney working on this at this time. Mr. and Mrs. Nielserr'of 115-nJ Way N.B., Fridley, Minnesotat were present. Mr. Hill provided the Commission members with an aerial photograph. Pursuant to the Staff Report, Mr. Hill indicated that it was his understanding that the property recording was not yet completed. Mr. Nielsen confirmed Mr. Hill's statement, but felt the recording should be completed within the next few days. Chairwoman Gabel indicated that the Nielsen's request could be heard in the interimg however no decision would be made until the legal description of the property is correct. Mr. Nielsen said they would like to put a deck on the front of the house with one small step up and put a door in the front of the house. The door would be put in place of the two large front windows currently in existence;,: They would like to place an open trellis roof over the deck for sun control into the house. There are two exits now, one from the back of the house and the other on the car port side of the dwelling. Chairwoman Gabel asked if any alternatives to a front deck had been explored and if a contractor had been consulted. Mr. Nielsen indicated that he had done the preliminary plans himself. Ms. Gerou asked if they had considered an awning and Mrs. Nielsen said she didn't like them. Mr. Nielsen said they really needed the deck part for the entrance, but the overhang for sun control could be optional. Chairwoman Gabel asked if there existed in Fridley many front decks and Mr. Hill responded that there were very few the majority of decks were side or back. MOTION by Ms. Gerou, seconded by Mr. Plemel, to close the public hearing. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRWOMAN GABEL DECLARED THE PUBLIC DARING CLOSED AT 8,28 P.M. MOTION by Mr. Barna, seconded by Ms. Gerou, to table the request until such time that the property dispute is settled and better plans on the proposed construction could be presented. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRWOMAN GABEL DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANI14OUSLYO OTHER BUSINESS, Discussion of guidelines for variance requests will be discussed at the next meeting. ADJOURNMENTt MOTION by Ms. Gerou, seconded by Mr. Barna, to*adjo=. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRWOMAN GABEL DECLARED THE APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING OF MAY 25, 1982, ADJOURNED AT 8,40 P.K. Pat Von Mosch, Recording Secretary Sfee 2. 9*ech May 181 1982 Appeals Commission City of Fridley 6431 University Avenue N.E. Fridley, Minnesota 55432 RE: Consideration of variance request ,for Lot 27, Block 3, Briardale Addition To Whom It May Concern; My wife, Margo P. Tech, and I have reviewed the remodeling plans of Grover and Cheryl Cleveland. We have no objections to their request to grant a variance to reduce the side yard setback on the living side of their home from the required 10 feet to 5 feet, Sincerely, Lee E. Tech j4v Margo P. Tech 1661 61 at. AenueJU. 8. / $ntdQey. Amesota 6 G 4 2 2 May 24, 1982 Appeals Commission Oity of Fridley 6431 University Avenue N.E. Fridley, Minnesota 55432 RE: Consideration of a variance request for Lot 27, Block 3, Briardale Addition To Whom it May Ooncern: We have reviewed the remodeling plans of Grover and Sheryl Oleveland. We have no objections to their request to obtain a variance to reduce the side yard setback on the living side of their home from the required 10 feet to 5 feet. Sincerely, h S ff er III LaVonne Sto er ��rr r� ^cam £��°G✓ May 25, 1982 Appeals Commission City of Fridley 6431 University Avenue N.E. Fridley, Minnesota 55432 RE: Consideration of a variance request for Lot 27, Block 3, Briardale Addition To Whom It May Concern: We have no objection to the request of Grover and Sheryl Cleveland to obtain a variance to reduce the side yard setback on the living side of their home from the required 10 feet to 5 feet. iW�m A��� • ��3�'tollsr A/iE7-NE-,,