Loading...
VAR 05.77MARY IS LOOKING FOR MINUTES TO SEE IF VARIANCE GRANTED FOR ORIGINAL CITY OF FRIO�.BY, StiBJECT� M!lVrvBsoTA I COMMISSION APPLICATION -_-.... REVIEW ......... _ Department/Uivislo►n Number t ev ags Apptawed by Die Planning 10 COIMPLHTE REVILW CHI=CKL IST F B t�/.sa®Oaess$ .._... FlLta -27CA"M.__._ �arlance 5-27-77 COMMISIMTS m Darrel, RLTL=N TO P:-AIVNIN© ouia CA -M 90-66th-WaY. N.E CA -M Nv. �- s a' r . Dic :3 e t C9i H SUBJECT ®ionFrial�ey r E TOP HE APPLICATION TO BOARD OF APPEALS • __ COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIV. PROTECTIVE INSPECTION SEC. CITY HALL FRIDLEY 55432 �'�� ,•� NUMBERREV. DATE PAGE OF APPROVED BY """ 6`12-560-3450910-F23 1 3/21/75 1 2 800 Name Address Phone. � ha�d Ica C Legal Lot No. Block No. Tract or Addn. Description e r Variance Request(s); including stated hards ips (attach plat or survey of property showing building, variances, etc., where applicable) QiflL V 640 V V(tWC O/J 2 l 2L�-( �iy& Cir Qc le e'is Lo 7- -Fe -on iti'16 F-LEii o /o. r2, Ef b ALLOW fiba iw) To AK= e cl tO R ®h 4 la6� L Ai q Q c-� o� '94 1 glAle4 , is� �.he �s®�/3r©`►-� aQ� %�� G�'s7e L Date S o2 71-7 T Meeting Date Fee Receipt NO. Signature C) Comments & Recommendations by the Board of Appeals City gotm fl. Action and Date a � - <...8 '�L.sW t 4� t '. RS kla� t S`.'. v v - _:. EM1 i era ,• r .t,,, "'.^�-- YteaP A�E'1'�'...Rtk 'rh N I"J di 1 r • i � �1 � � 7 . e '•J •. et x 6 1 rl `Xi `}; 't .'A �, C.. 3 Y' *oat, Yr" a .. t, _ 1 ... So3 -.5 ^.� yy , v {. pA ` sE,: %^+.yt •ah `�f'' '1�.i1-b i.T �, 'i :i�-"-v'. a' �`•��. :YG'3'` o-.. •Y - " - _ L�4 w _Y ( ._. _^!1.' j_ 'Aja-:;' ?.:�',,,<i i;• ``•i �'4 � atr • ., ,, ' ,;;, _ t �� _ 1 T 1 tt � '7 r . r i «fir: ?'? ` t rs i.: i .i.• }( r,.: e;1 _�; li i i.., ... .. ,•• , . :�' �iy• • - .. .,i.? 1.C' inr: . .., � � is�i p' .7.A ti.i .i ,V'.� .. '' t' ..... ! ., G .,..r L'. �+i. .. !. '`,fi ,:tiv, �,�•,r P..;ald 1. IL' 1 IP i f r � - - � ,r •• -'`tet" ,•r,rs� .�'�'ld �? :72d 4 a � ••, . ,,, � �r ;. r # ..i} � 311 qZ •�. i' ' <r - jii*;_ "'3:�.rr r'1, i'ty' � �' ' ... << , . _.'Yi!d i. • � � [�rlaftw F r � . � , i JIMCity z,. of Fridley AT THE TOP OF THE TWINS SUBJECT APPLICATION TO BOARD OF APPEALS r' r I COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIV. PROTECTIVE INSPECTION SEC. (Staff Report) = CITY HALL FRIDLEY 55432 612-560-3450 NUMBER 910—F23 REV. 1 DATE 3/21/75 - PAGE OFAPPROVED 2 2 BY 800 Staff Comments Board members notified of meeting by el 1,4 % % List members, date notified, and "Yes" or "No" for plans to attend hearing. Plan Name Date To Attend Pearson making appeal and the following property owners having property within 200 feet notified: By Whom Name - Date Phone or Mail Notified _ Mr. & Mrs. William Johnson-75 Rice Creek Way N.E. 3 7 Mr. & Mrs. Allen Bergquist-77 Rice Creek Way N.E. _ Me. & Mrs. Otto Westenfield-81 Rice Creek Way N.E. Mr. & Mrs. Frederick Halverson-85 Rice Creek Way N.E. Mr. & Mrs. Richard Silverstein-6675 East River Road " Mr. & Mrs. William Kasinkus-80 Rice Creek Way N.E. Mr. & Mrs. James Witkowski-84 Rice CreeoC Way N.E. — Mr. & Mrs. John Swingdorf-90 Rice Creek Way N.E. Mr. & Mrs. David Bender-91 66th Way NE _ Mr. & Mrs. Mark Hyland-81 66th Way N.E. Mr. & Mrs. Gary Irene-71 66th Way N.E. _ Mr. & Mrs. Michel Bourne-65 66th Way NE. Mr. & Mrs. John Mehall-80 66th Way N.E. Mr. & Mrs. Roger Nowrocki-90 66th Way N.E. —'Mr. & Mrs. Richard Reiersgord-6660 Hickory St. N.E. Mr. & Mrs. Eugene German-6640 Hickory St..N.E. —Mr. & Mrs. Donald Johnson-6600 Hickory St. N.E. Richard A. Larson-6580 Hickory St. N.E. —Mr. & Mrs. Andres Johanson-6560 Hickory Street N.E. Mr. & Mrs. George Game-6551 East River Road N.E. Mr. & Mrs. Allen Erickson-6551 East River Road N.E. Mr. & Mrs. Jeffrey Schneck-6601 East River Road NE. Charles E. Johanson-580 69th Avenue N.E. Mr. 8 Mrs. Eupene Anderson-6661 East River Road N_F_ � _. t �„ .� t �„ .� .'iY �Il.�� cl n� C 't 0 .� i� Item #4 June 14, 1977 ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF REPORT 90 N.E. 66th Way A. PUBLIC PURPOSE SERVED BY REQUIREMENT: Section 205.053, 4, B (5a) corner lot side yard setback of 17.5 feet for living area of structure. Public purpose served by this section of the Code is to maintain a higher degree of traffic visibility and reduce the line of sight encroachment into the neighbors front yard. B. STATED HARDSHIP: They need to add on additional eating and family area and the existing house is 10.13 feet from side lot line. C. ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF REVIEW: The proposed addition to the rear of the garage is to line up with the existing garage wall on the side street. At the time of the original construction, the side yard setbacks were less restrictive than the 17.5 feet required by present Code. The addition wall will be 24.63 feet frcm the back of the curbing. 45.251 ZONING The standards established herein serve, among the other purposes of this Ordi- YARDS, . LOT SIZE nance, to provide to each structure located on any land, a building site suitable to its OPEN SPACE particular needs as well as adequate areas of open space between such structure And R E Q U I R E M E N T S any adjacent building, all as is deemed suitable or appropriate to each such building or structure and their respective uses. It is, also, deemed a purpose herein, to pro- vide standards which encourage uses of land and the erection of buildings and struc- tures thereon in areas which are open, unplatted or without any substantial number of buildings located therein, as are of a type, size, style and design as are deemed to meet currently at all times the needs of the City and its inhabitants for the purposes of residence,. commercial use or industrial enterprises; and, also, to enable an owne.r nevertheless, to make a reasonable use of a parcel of land or structure thereon, which is or was a part of subdivision or plat of land recorded or approved prior to the enact- ment of this ordinance and is therefore, smaller or different in type, size, style or de- sign from that otherwise required herein, (Ref. 165) 45.23. R-1 and R-2 Districts: Two side yards are required, each with a width of SIDE YARD not less than ten (10) feet, REQUIREMENTS a, Where a house is built without an attached garage on lots up to 60 feet wide, a minimum side -lot requirement shall be necessary of 10 feet on one side and 13 feet on the other side so that there would be access to the rear yard for a possible detached garage at some future date. b. Where a house is built without an attached garage on lots more than 60 feet wide, a minimum side -lot requirement shall be necessary of 10 feet on one side and 18 feet on the other side so that a future attached garage 13 feet wide could be built without a side-ldt variance. (Ref. 265) 45.231. R-3 Districts: Same as in R-1 Districts, provided that 1 additional foot of width of each side yard is required for each 4 feet; or portion thereof, of building height in excess of 35 feet. 45.232. C-1 or C-2, M-1 and M-2 Districts: Two side yards are required for a building containing any dwelling units. One side yard is required on the side of any other lot which side adjoins any R-1, R-2, R-3 or C -3S District. None are required, otherwise. The width of each side yard shall be not less than 12 percent of the lot width, with not less than 6 feet permitted or more than 12 feet required. 45.24. The side yard width on a street side, of a corner lot shall be not less than SIDE YARD EXCEPTIONS 1/2 the distance of the front yard depth regpirement for the lot to the rear thereof when said lot to the rear thereof has frontage along aside street, and -in such case no accessory building on said corner lot shall be closer to said side street than the dis- tance of the front yard depth requirement for the lot to the rear thereof; provided, however, that this regulation ,shall not be so interpreted as to reduce the buildable width of a corner lot to less than 25 feet, nor to prohibit the erection of an accessory building where compliance with this regulation cannot reasonably be had. The side yard on the side of a private garage, attached to a dwelling at one side, may be re- duced to not less than 5 feet, provided the height of the building on that side is not more than 15 feet. 45.25, REAR YARDS REQUIRED. REAR YARD S R-1 and R-2 Districts: A rear yard with a depth of not less than 25 per cent of the FRIDLEY lot depth is required, with not less than 25 feet permitted or more than 40 feet required BOARD OF APPEALS for a dwelling, and not less than 30 feet permitted or more than 75 feet required for any other kind of main building. EXHIBIT No�(C-`_ 45.251, R-3 Districts: Same as in -R-1 and R-2 Districts, provided that 1 addition- ` q al foot of depth of rear yard is required for each 2 feet or portion thereof, of buildingMEETING DATE !� height in excess of 35 feet. - (12-31-64) 72 OFFICIAL NOTICE CITY OF FRIDLEY PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE APPEALS COMMISSION TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT the Appeals Commission of the City of Fridley will meet in the Council Chamber of the City Hall at 6431 University Avenue Northeast on Tuesday, June 14, 1977 at 7:30 P.M. to consider the following matter: A request for a variance of Section 205.053, 5, a, to reduce the side yard width on a street side of a corner lot from the required 17 1/2 feet to 10.13 feet, to allow an addition to the garage for partial garage and living area, on Lot 10, Block 5, Edgewater Gardens, the same being 90 N.E. 66th Way. (Request by Roger A. Nawrocki, 90 N.E. 66th Way, Fridley, Minnesota 55432). Anyone who desires to be heard with reference to the above matter will be heard at this meeting. VIRGINIA SCHNABEL CHAIRWOMAN APPEALS COMMISSION Note: The Appeals Commission will have the final action on this 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. APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING — JUNE 14, 1977 PAGE 12 MOTION by Mr. Plemel, seconded by Mr. Barna, to close the Public Hearing. Upon a voice vote,all voting aye,the motion carried unanimously. Ms. Gabel said that she felt Mr. Marchant had looked into several alternatives and she also felt that the plan he had would probably be the best for the lot. Mr. Plemel thought it was a nice structure and the situation on the lot would be the most logical. Mr. Barna liked the way Mr• Marchant planned to situate the garage in relationship with the front of the house. MOTION by Ms. Gabel, seconded by Mr• Barna, that the Appeals Commission approve the request for a variance of Section 205.053, 4, C, to reduce the rear yard setback requirement of 25% of the Lot from 34 feet to 27 feet, to allow the construction of a dwelling and garage, on Lot 15, Block 3, Innsbruck North Addition, the same being 1401 North Innsbruck Drive N.E. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. Chairwoman Schnabel indicated that Mr• Marchant was now free to apply for a Building Permit. Chairwoman Schnabel requested that the Staff include an extra copy of the Administrative Report in the folder so that the Commission can give one to the petitioner. 4. REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE OF SECTION 205.0531 51 A, FRIDLEY CITY CODE, TO REDUCE THE SIDE YARD WIDTH ON A STREET SIDE OF A CORNER LOT FROM THE REQUIRED 17 112 FEET TO 10.13 FEET, TO ALLOW AN ADDITION TO THE GARAGE FOR PARTIAL GARAGE AND LIVING AREA, ON LOT 10, BLOCK 5, EDGEWATER GARDENS, THE SAME BEING 90 N.E. 66th WAY. {Request by Roger A. Nawrocki, 90 ,NE 66th Way, Fridley, Minnesota 554321. MOTION by Mr. Plemel, seconded by Mr. Barna, to open the Public Hearing. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING — JUNE 14, 1977 PAGE 11 Chairwoman Schnabel asked Mr. Marchant where the garage entrance would be located. Mr.. Marchant responded that it would be on Matterhorn• Mr. Marchant explained that basically the request was based on aesthetics and the wish to save the trees and also he felt that the, house he planned would fit the lot best as shown on the plans. Chairwoman Schnabel asked Mr• Marchant if he would want the house to face Matterhorn. Mr. Marchant said that he would not basically because if the garage would face North, he would lose the White Oak tree and if the garage faced South he would have the incline problem. There was some discussion on several other options as to how to situate the house on the property, none of which were satisfactory with Mr• Marchant• Mr. Marchant favored the situation of the garage with the entrance to the side of the home rather than having the garage entrance on the front side of the home• MOTION by Mr• Plemel, seconded by Mr. Barna, that the Appeals Commission receive the letter from Mr. Kenneth Bureau of 5630 West DanuUe Road in which he states that he would not object to Mr. Marchant's proposed house being as close as 25 feet of his West property line. Upon a voice vote, all voting, aye the motion carried and the letter was received. Mr• Plemel asked if the home was being built for Mr. Marchant's private use or would it be sold. Mr. Marchant responded that it would be his own residence. The Appeals Commission reviewed Mr. Marchant's house plans. Mr. Barna expressed that he could see Mr• Marchant's reasoning for not wanting the garage door on the front side of the house. APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING — JUNE 141 1977 PAGE 13 ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF REPORT A- PUBLIC PURPOSE SERVED BY REQUIREMENT: Section 205.053, 4, B {5a} corner lot side yard setback of -17.5 feet for living area of structure. Public purpose served by this section of the Code is to maintain a higher degree of traffic visibility and reduce the line of sight encroachment into the neighbors front yard. B. STATED HARDSHIP: They need to add on additional eating and family area and the existing house is 10.13 feet from side lot line. C• ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF REVIEW: The proposed addition to the rear of the garage is to line up with the existing garage wall on the side street. At the time of the original construction, the side yard setbacks were less restrictive than the 17.5 feet required by present Code. The addition wall will be 24.63 feet from the back of the curbing• Mr. & Mrs. Nawrocki presented a blueprint of their plans to the Appeals Commission. Chairwoman Schnabel asked what direction the Nawrocki's house faced. Mr. Nawrocki said it faced north-northwest• The Commission spent some time examining Mr• Nawrocki's blueprint. be• Mr. Plemel wanted to know how big the addition would Mr• Nawrocki said that the addition would be 12' x 24'• Chairwoman Schnabel wanted to know if there would be a basement under the new addition. Mr. Nawrocki said that there wouldn't be a basement. Chairwoman Schnabel wanted to know if the only door to the ,storage area would be to the outside - Mr. Nawrocki explained that the door to the storage area would be from the outside. He continued to show the Commission where the door would be located going from the present house into the proposed addition. APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING — JUNE 141 1977 PAGE 14 The Commission reviewed the pictures of the property and Mr• & Mrs• Nawrocki showed where the addition would be - Chairwoman Schnabel wanted to know why there was a copy of the Zoning Ordinance — Side Yard Exceptions — included in the material in Mr• Nawrocki's file• Mr• Hol.den explained that the reason for the inclusion of the Side Yard Exceptions of the Zoning Ordinance was because the City had reviewed the reason why the building had gotten built so close to the road in the first place• Chairwoman Schnabel asked if the home had been built prior to the rewriting of the Zoning Codes• Mr• Holden said that it had. Mr. Plemel pointed out that the home would come no closer to the street than it was presently• Mr• Holden explained to the Commission the wording of the previous codes regarding sideyards• He said that the present Code definitely stated the exact number of feet required for a side yard• These Codes were rewritten in 1969• Chairwoman Schnabel indicated that probably most of the homes in that area were built under the former codes• Chairwoman Schnabel established the fact that the Nawrocki's would put a fire wall around the storage area of the addition• She said that there would be no direct opening from the storage area into the living area• She also asked if the Nawrocki's would be matching their present exterior• The Nawrocki's said that the exteriors would all be the same• Chairwoman Schnabel asked if the roof lines would be the same• The Nawrocki's said they would be the same• Ms• Gabel said that by adding the.boulevard into the setback, it wouldn't violate the intent of the Code• Mr• Barna said that it wouldn't interfere with traffic visibility since the addition was to the rear of the present structure• APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING -- JUNE 14, 1977 PAGE 15 a • MOTION by Mr• Barna, seconded by Mr• Plemel to close the Public Hearing• Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously• Chairwoman Schnabel asked if the description of the addition was current, since the description indicated a 24' by 20' addition• She asked if the 20' included the storage area. Mr• Holden said that the description did include the storage area• Mr• Plemel said it appeared to be a nicely planned addition• He felt the petitioner would get more storage area as well as more living space• Mr• Barna felt that the proposed addition wouldn't encroach into the street line -of -sight at all• He said that since the plans show that the roof lines would be matched up as well as the exterior of the addition would be matched to the present structure, he felt that it would look fine• MOTION by Mr• Plemel, seconded by Mr• Barna, that the Appeals Commission approve the request for a variance of Section 205.053151 A, Fridley City Code, to reduce the side yard width on a street side of a corner lot from the required 17 1/2 feet to 10.13 feet, to allow an addition to the garage for partial garage and living area, on Lot 10, Block 5, Edgewater Gardens, the same being 90 N•E• 66th Way• Upon a voice vote, all voting ay*e, the motion carried unanimously• Chairwoman Schnabel indicated that the Nawrocki's were free to apply for a Building Permit• 5• REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE OF SECTION 205.0531 4A, FRIDLEY CITY CODE, TO REDUCE THE REQUIRED FRONT YARD SETBACK FROM 35 FEET TO 28 FEET, TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF A PORCH ADDITION, ON LOT 31 BLOCK 41 EVA ERICKSON RIVER MANOR, THE SAME BEING 6320 RIVERVIEW TERRACE N•E•, FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA• {Request by Allen Baumgartner, 6320 Riverview Terrace N•E•, Fridley, Minnesota 554321. MOTION by Ms• Gabel, seconded by Mr• Plemel, to open the Public Hearing• Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously• APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING — JUNE 141 1977 PAGE 16 ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF REPORT I . A- PUBLIC PURPOSE SERVED BY REQUIREMENT: Section 205.053, 4, A, rei.;uiring a front yard setback of 35 feet. Public purpose served is to allow for off-street parking without encroaching on the public right of way- Also for aesthetic consideration to reduce the "building line of sight^ encroachment into the neighbors front yard. B. STATED HARDSHIP:. The appearance of the house will be greatly improved by this decorative brick front• C• ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF REVIEW: The proposed addition of the front porch is enclosed sufficiently to consider it part of the house structure. The new addition is to match the existing house and enclose the electrical meter for aesthetic purposes• The front lot lines to the north and south are relatively camouflaged by existing trees and shrubs - Mr• Baumgartner showed the Commission his plans along with a picture of his present structure- He indicated that what he wanted to do was cosmetic surgery on the front of his house- He had been wanting to do something for a long time but couldn't figure out exactly what• He indicated that now he knew- He said he wanted to put arches and wrought iron railings along the front of his house, enclosing the present sidewalk that went from the driveway to his front door• Chairwoman Schnabel asked if it would encompass the entire cement walk- Mr- Baumgartner said that basically it would enclose the entire cement walk. There was some discussion regarding the electrical box that was in the center of the front of Mr• Baumgartner's house - Ms• Gabel asked if the proposed arches would be screened in• Mr- Baumgartner indicated that they would be left open — resulting in a Spanish -type look- He said it would be Chicago brick with chocolat mortor-