The URL can be used to link to this page

VAR 88-04PROPERTY INFORMATION PROPERTY ADDRESS LEGAL DESCRIPTION: VARIAh*E REQUEST FORM VARIANCE # VARIANCE FEE -60.&A RECEIPT # D8,1 01 SCHEDULED APPEALS MEETING DATE 23 LOT 3 BLOCK TRACT/ADDITION 0 -he eet'Left 0,74T 7�+cr PRESENT ZONING —fie r-lw 417-® Z VARIANCE REQUEST(S): Attach a plat or survey of the property showing building, variance(s), where applicable. Section of the Code: List specific hardship(s) which require the variance(s): 04)e .5 Taffy %70077 : S f#,,9e aP4mi k -P /)--A V Ry1 F'eiwT 11'4fz 4Aye five GtJOc�Oal �:��i�/ Cao uTi �/✓� o or&4'ii�A hvmar o u j?lm e, fool ######flf## #0000#ll## FEE OWNER INFORMATION NAME (please print) 3e- re °C`� 13urh� a 0 PHONE �7q� ADDRESS SIGNATURE Note to 0 �-'It, DATE #k8.f.roc ssl'.ih####### PETITIONER INFORMATION NAME (please print) -:5� AS AA—'04PHONE ADDRESS SIGNATURE DATE APPEALS COMKISSION: APPROVED DENIED DATE ."A CITY COUNCIL: APPROVED DENIED DATE STIPULATIONS: CITY OF FRIDLEY- . 6431 UNIVERSITY AV f X. FRIDLEY, MN 56432 (612) 671-3460 PROPERTY INFORMATION PROPERTY ADDRESS LEGAL DESCRIPTION: VARIAh*E REQUEST FORM VARIANCE # VARIANCE FEE -60.&A RECEIPT # D8,1 01 SCHEDULED APPEALS MEETING DATE 23 LOT 3 BLOCK TRACT/ADDITION 0 -he eet'Left 0,74T 7�+cr PRESENT ZONING —fie r-lw 417-® Z VARIANCE REQUEST(S): Attach a plat or survey of the property showing building, variance(s), where applicable. Section of the Code: List specific hardship(s) which require the variance(s): 04)e .5 Taffy %70077 : S f#,,9e aP4mi k -P /)--A V Ry1 F'eiwT 11'4fz 4Aye five GtJOc�Oal �:��i�/ Cao uTi �/✓� o or&4'ii�A hvmar o u j?lm e, fool ######flf## #0000#ll## FEE OWNER INFORMATION NAME (please print) 3e- re °C`� 13urh� a 0 PHONE �7q� ADDRESS SIGNATURE Note to 0 �-'It, DATE #k8.f.roc ssl'.ih####### PETITIONER INFORMATION NAME (please print) -:5� AS AA—'04PHONE ADDRESS SIGNATURE DATE APPEALS COMKISSION: APPROVED DENIED DATE ."A CITY COUNCIL: APPROVED DENIED DATE STIPULATIONS: VARIANCES 5. VARIANCES A. Appeals Commission. The City Council created an Appeals C mdssion to serve as the ' board of appeals and adjustment, and to exercise all the authority and perform all functions of said board pursuant to Minnesota Statute Sections 462.351 to 462.364 and operate according to the Fridley City Code. B. Petition By Owner. (1) Appeals from Decisions on Code Enforcement: At any time within thirty (30) days, any property owner who feels aggrieved by an alleged error in any order, requirement, decision or determination made by an administrative off icer in the enforcement of this Chapter which affects the owner's property, may appeal to the Appeals Commission by filing a written appeal with the City. The appeal shall fully state the order appealed from, a facts of the matter and the mailing address of the owner. (2) Request for Variances from Zoning Chapter Provisions: A property owner may appeal the strict application of the provisions of this Chapter where there are practical difficulties or particular hardships preventing the strict application of the regulations of this Chapter. An application for a variance shall be filed with the City and shall practiscalte the exceptional difficulties claimed asta bass for ions and eapvarieciar and ance P C. Recommendations By Appeals Coamission. Within thirty (30) days after filing an appeal from an administrative order or determination, or request for variance from City Code provisions the Appeals Commission shall hold a public hearing thereon and shall hear such persons as want to be heard. Notice of such hearing shall be mailed not less than ten (10) days before the date of hearing to the person or persons who file the appeals, and to all adjacent property owners within a 200 foot distance of the requested variance location. Within a reasonable time, after the hearing, the Appeals Commission shall make its recommendations or approvals subject to conditions of the Fridley City Code and forward a copy of such recormnendation or approval to the City Council through the Planning CormlmLission. D. Variances In R-1 Zoning. (1) In areas zoned i-1 (One Family Dwelling District), the Appeals Commission has the authority to grant final approval of variances when all of 'the following conditions are met: (a) There is unanimous agreement of the Appeals Conmission. (b) The staff concurs with the recommendations of the Appeals Commission. (c) The general public attending the meeting or responding to the notice of public hearing have no objection. (d) The petitioner is in agreement with the recommendation. • (2) Iften the above conditions are not met, the variance request must be reviewed by the Planning Commission with final approval by the City Council. E. Record Of Action Taken. 2be Appeals Catcnission shall provide for a written record of its proceedings which shall include the minutes of its meeting, its findings and the recommendation or approval of each matter heard by it. The finding of fact shall contain the following: (1) The public policy which is served by requirement. ' (2) The practical difficulties or unique circumstance of the property that cause undue hardship in the strict application of the requirement. (3) In reoDn=nding or approving a variance, the Commission and/or Council may impose oonditions to ensure compliance and to protect adjacent properties. F. Action By She City Council. the Council shall at its next regular meeting, of ter receiving the reoommendation of the Appeals Commission, with a policy review by the Planning Ca=*ssion, decide on the action to be taken. G. Lapse Of Variance By Non-use. If work as permitted by a 'variance is not commenced within one year and completed within two years after granting of a variance, then the variance shall become null and void unless a petition for extension of time in which to complete the work has been granted by the City Council. Such extension shall be requested in writing and f iled with the City at least twenty (20) days before the expiration of the original variance. The request for extension shall state facts blowing a good faith attempt to complete the work permitted in the variance. Such petition shall be presented to the appropriate body for review and/or decision. COMRASION APPLICAnOfREVIEW Department Number File Date Meeting Date CITYOF camunity Development u --28-88 4-26-88 FRIDLEY File Address/Description VAR #88-04 COMPLETE REVIEW CHECKLIST Side- 76th Way N.E. RETURN TO PLANNING Side vard and front vard variances JOHN []DARREL CLYDE Roma .. EON IM COMMENTS PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE rME APPEALS COMMISSION Notice is hereby given that the Appeals Commission of the City of Fridley will conduct a Public Hearing in the City Council Chambers at 6431 University Avenue Northeast at 7: 30 p. m on Tuesday, April 26, 1988, for the purpose of: Consideration of a variance request, VAR #88-04, by Jeffrey Buchl i, pursuant to Chapter 205.07.03, D, (2) , of the Fridley City Code to reduce the side yard setback f rom 10 feet to 5 feet; and pursuant to Chapter 205.07.03.D,(1), to reduce the front yard setback from 45 feet to 21 feet to allow the construction of a single family dwelling on Lot 3, Block 1, Oak River Estates, the same being 141 - 7 6th Way N. E. , Fridley, Minnesota, 55432 Any and all persons desiring to be heard shall be given the opportunity at the above stated time and place. ALEX BARNA CHAIRPERSCN APPEALS COMMISSION Note: The Appeals Commission will have the final action on this request, unless there are objections fron 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. Any questions related to this item may be referred to the Fridley Community Development Department, 571-3450. t NAILING LIST VAR #88-04 Jeffrey H. Buchli Jeffrey H. Buchli 84 Rice Creek Way N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 City Council members Mayor Nee City Manager Chairperson of Appeals Commission Robert Hinz 157 - 76th Way N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 Nicka De Grobt 149 - 76th Way N. E. Fridley, MN 55432 Joellen J. Lewis 7262 Kirkwood Lane Maple Grove, MN 55369 Resident `133 - 76th Avenue N.E. Fridley, M 55432 Jerome S. Boedigheimer 117 - 76th Way N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 David W. Olson 119 Rickard Road N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 Joseph L. Halboch 129 Rickard Road N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 Mathew M. Baudek 139 Rickard Road N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 Lawrence R. Addison 150 Rickard Road N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 John A. Pierro 7515 Alden Way N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 ri Philip R. Lind 7501 Alden Way N.E. Fridley, NN 55432 Sandra K. Duebek 108 Rickard Road N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 Ralph S. Petersen 116 Rickard Road N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 D�Joseph A. Flaherty '124 Rickard Road N.E. Fridley, MIN 55432 Harold G. Dahlberg 132 Rickard Road N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 Dennis M. Ottem 140 Rickard Road N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 Rose M. Price 77 - 75th Way N.E. Fridley, M14 55432 Debra J. Hendrickson 91- 75th Way N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 Michael W. Born 105 - 75th Way N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 William J. Witkowski . 100 Rickard Road-N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 • , Robert A. Stannard 65 - 75th Way N.E. Fridley,, MN 55432 John L. Stifle 11.9 - 75th [nay N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 • Anthony J. Hogen 133 - 75th Way N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 Beatrice Kryzer 147 - 75th Way N.E. Fridley, MDT 55432 11 VAR #88-04 Mailing List 4-15-88 Page 2 PUBLIC HEARING Fridley Appeals Commission Variance Request VAR # 88-04 To: Appeals Commission of the City of Fridley In reference to the variance request, Var #88-04, by Jeffrey Buckli to allow the construction of a single family dwelling on Lot 3, Block 1, Oak River Estates, address 141 76th Way N.E., Fridley, Minnesota 55432. I the undersign have no objections to the variance request, and recommend approval of the request by your Commission. A6� Approval Signat re �gp�9s 9��' Date Signed • PUBLIC HEARING Fridley Appeals Commission Variance -Request VAR # 88-04 41 To: Appeals Commission of the City of Fridley In reference to the variance request, Var #88-04, by Jeffrey Buckli to allow the construction of a single family dwelling on Lot 3, Block 1, Oak River Estates, address 141 76th Way N.E., Fridley, Minnesota 55432. I the undersign have no objections to the variance request, and recommend approval of the request by your Commission. Approval Signature Address G G� Date Signed Item #Opril 26, .. 5W- -437' 7; -RT 141 - 76th WAY N. E. VAR #88-04 Section 205.07.03. D, (2) , requires a side yard setback of 10 feet between any living area and side property lines. Public purpose served by this requirement is to maintain a minimum of 20 feet between living areas in adjacent structures and 15 feet between garages and living areas in adjacent structures to reduce exposure to conflagration to fire. It is also to allow for aesthetically pleasing open areas around residential structures. Section 205.07.03.%, U), requires a front yard setback of 45 feet (as set by City Council). 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 consderation to reduce the building "line of sight" encroachment into the neighbor's front yard. B. STMW HARESHIP: "One story home (L-shaped rambler) requires a front yard variance for garage and side yard variance for main level floor plan. Variances would maintain continuity of existing homes on block." C. ALIMIN]RTWIVE STAFF REVIM: The home to the west is set back 44 ft.; the home to the east is set back 59 ft. r1he lot is over 175 feet deep; therefore, if the home were placed back at the 45 ft. distance, the rear yard would be in excess of 75 ft. , where only 40 ft. is required. The proposed house is 30 ft. deep and 65 feet long. The resulting area is 1,950 sq. ft. There was a request for a reduced side yard last year, VAR #87-23, which was recommended for denial by the Appeals Commission on June 23, 1987, and approved by the City Council on July 20, 1987. A APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING, APRIL 26, 1988 PAGE 5 Mr. Barna indicated this it ould be before the Planning Commission on May 4th to discuss the rezoning re t, and a public hearing would be held on June 6th before the City Council. 2. CONSIDERATION OF A VARIANCE_ REQUEST, VAR #88-04, BY JEFFREY BUCHLI: Pursuant to Chapter 205.07.03.D,(2), of the Fridley City Code to reduce the required side yard setback from 10 feet to 5 feet; and pursuant to Chapter 205.07.03.D,(1), of the Fridley City Code to reduce the required front yard setback from 45 feet to 21 feet to allow the construction of a single family dwelling on Lot 3, Block 1, Oak River Estates, the same being 141 - 76th Way N.E. MOTION by Mr. Kuechle, seconded by Dr. Vos, to open the public hearing. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BARNA DECLARED THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AT 7:54 P.M. Chairperson Barna read the Administrative Staff Report: ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF REPORT 141 - 76th Way N.E. VAR 488-04 A. PUBLIC PURPOSE SERVED BY REQUIREMENT: Section 205.07.03.D,(2), requires a side yard setback of 10 feet between any living area and side property lines. Public purpose served by this requirement is to maintain a minimum of 20 feet between living areas in adjacent structures and 15 feet between garages and living areas in adjacent structures to reduce exposure to conflagration to fire. It is also to allow aesthetically pleasing open areas around residential structures. Section 205.07.03.D,(1), requires front yard setback of 45 feet (as set by City Council). 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. B. STATED HARDSHIP: "One story home (L-shaped rambler) requires a front yard variance for garage and side yard variance for main level floor plan. Variances would maintain continuity of existing homes on block." C. ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF REVIEW: The home to the west is set back 44 feet; the home to the east is set back 59 feet. The lot is over 175 feet deep; therefore, if the home were placed back at the 45 foot distance, the rear yard would be in excess of 75 feet, where only 40 feet is required. APPEALS COMMISSION WING, APRIL 26, 1988 • PAGE 6 The proposed house is 30 feet deep and 65 feet long. The resulting area is 1,950 square feet. There was a request for a reduced side yard last year, VAR #87-23, which was recommended for denial by the Appeals Commission on June 23, 1987, and approved by the City Council on July 20, 1987. Mr. Clark showed the location of the property on the Location Map and Zoning Map. The property is to the west of East River Road and on the north of 76th Way. Oak River Estates is a relatively new plat which was platted 3 or 4 years ago. Because an existing home has been built far back on the lot, the City Council set a longer setback of 45 feet. The Site Plan shows the garage to the front of the proposed home with a 21 -foot setback from the curb. The proposed home is 65 feet wide across the lot with 5 -foot side yard setbacks. Last year another person wanted to build a house on that property with 6 -foot setbacks from the property. The Appeals Commission denied the variance. The Petitioner changed the layout of the proposed home which was then approved by the City Council. However, the petitioner did not build on the site. Mr. Buchli is now requesting a variance to build on the same lot. Mr. Kuechle asked if there was anything else regarding the property that the commission should be aware of. Mr. Clark stated there is a well in question that must be capped, but this does not affect the variance as it is being requested. Mr. Clark stated that this variance covers the front yard, side yard to the east, and side yard to the west. Ms. Savage asked if the house was the same length as that proposed last year. Mr. Clark stated this house is wider measuring 65 feet. Mr. Barna asked Mr. Buchli to explain the hardship. Mr. Buchli stated this is the only property he could buy where he would not be required to have someone else build for him. Mr. Barna asked if Mr. Buchli had considered other plans. Mr. Buchli stated he had .looked at numerous plans, but this plan fit his family's needs in a one-story home. Ms. Savage asked if the home could be moved back. Mr. Buchli felt it would look better if the bodies of the homes were in line. Mr. Barna indicated that the building criteria stated a building is to have a 45 foot setback or take an average of the front yards of houses. The norm is the front of the garage would have to be at the 45 foot distance and the home behind the garage. He asked if Mr. Buchli would still build the home if it were moved back. '6L ,r APPEALS COMMISSION &ING, APRIL 26, 1988 • PAGE 7 Mr. Buchli stated he would still build. Others in the neighborhood � thought it would look okay but others said they did not like it.' The setback is a preference. The house itself is 292 feet deep and 65 feet wide. Mr. Barna indicated that, if the building was shifted back so the garage was at the 45 foot setback, the side yard variance would not be as noticeable as it is now; however, the new home would be behind the house on the west side. Ms. Savage asked if there was any way Mr. Buchli could build a house to suit the purpose without a variance. A hardship must be established, otherwise the commission cannot approve the variance. Mr. Nick DeGroot, resident to the west of the property, indicated the commission had waived the hardship for commercial construction and questioned why the commission could not waive the hardship and say it was good for the neighborhood. He feels there is a hardship. Dr. Vos indicated to Mr. DeGroot that he would view the roof of the proposed home if it were built as presently shown. Mr. DeGroot was not opposed to the house being moved further back. Mr. Sherek stated he wished to clarify that the spirit of the law was needed in the particular situation of the commercial property. This may or may not be the case in this particular situation. Mr. Barna indicated that they were to determine that at this time. It is the commission's desire to consider the economic needs of the neighborhood and try to work out what is possible without a variance. Dr. Vos asked to clarify the measurements on the east side of the property. Mr. Clark indicated there is 5 feet from the building to the property line to the east plus an additional 30 feet from the property line to the house to the east. He added that it would be possible to build a 55 -foot house without a variance. Dr. Vos noted that would mean a loss of 150 square feet of living space. Mr. DeGroot stated that ramblers are no longer found because developers and builders can fit more houses on the property if they build splits and two-story dwellings. Mr. Buchli stated he had purchased the property about two weeks ago contingent upon getting a variance. Mr. Barna received a petition from Rosie and Nick Degroot and a petition from Robert Hinz stated they have no objection to the variance request and recommend its approval. MOTION by Dr. Vos, seconded by Mr. Sherek, to enter the petitions into the minutes. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BARNA DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. APPEALS COMMISSION METING, APRIL 26, 1988 PAGE 8 ' Mr. Barna asked for additional comments from the audience. Mr. Michael Wocjik stated the garage as presently situated would block the view from his residence. The proposed setback is half of what the other houses have. Lot 5 is open. Mr. Clark indicated that the setback for Lot 5 is 45 feet and Lot 4 is 59 feet. The house on Lot 4 was existing at the time the plat was approved. The City Council stipulated the garage be built. If this house were torn down, new construction would likely have a 45 foot setback. Mr. Jerry Boedigheimer also expressed opposition to the variance. He thought the change in front setback would make the neighborhood appear like a jigsaw puzzle and does not think it is right for the street. He also expressed opposition to the side yard request as it would detract from the appearance of other homes. Mr. Wojcik agreed,adding that all houses are wide apart and then having one house placed closely to the next does not look right. Ms. Mary Boedigheimer expressed opposition to the zigzagging effect of the front. It is not consistent with the rest of the neighborhood. She also felt the side variance would detract from the neighborhood. The Code was established for a reason and felt the Code needed to be followed. Mr. Boedigheimer stated there are empty lots which will be built on in the future. Approval of this variance request could set a precedent for future construction. Dr. Vos stated the front variance had been discussed. However, a neighbor had concern about the side yard setback and the neighbor to the west has no objection to the 5 foot setback. Mr. DeGroot had no objection to the 5 foot sideyard setback. His home is 13 feet from the property line and there would be 5 feet from the property line to the proposed home for a total of 18 feet. He did not feel this was close. The distance to the east would be 35 feet between buildings. Mr. Barna asked if Mr. Buchli would like to retrack the request for a front variance of 21 feet. Mr. Buchli stated he was willing to retrack the request for a 21 foot front variance but he would still request the 5 foot side variance on the east and west. Mr. Barna asked for discussion regarding the side yard setback as requested. Mr. Boedigheimer objected to the side yard variance. He feels it affects the neighborhood and that the Code provides for a 10 foot side yard setback for a reason and it should not vary. Mrs. Boedigheimer agreed that the 10 foot side yard should be maintained. 6N APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING, APRIL 26, 1988 PAGE 9 Mr. Sherek stated he had no problem with the setback to the east. The home on Lot 4 is a sufficient distance from the property line. He asked if it would be possible to adjust the house plans on the west side to make it closer to code requirements. Mr. Buchli stated this would take nearly 150 square feet off the home. Mr. Barna suggested changing the home's configuration somewhat to allow for the side yard variance. MOTION by Dr. Vos, seconded by Mr. Sherek, to close the public hearing. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BARNA DECLARED THE PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 8:28 P.M. Mr. Kuechle stated he was inclined to vote no. He was not convinced that a lot 75 feet wide could not have a good quality home built on it. He felt a house plan could be found to fit the lot that the owner would still be happy with. Mr. Sherek felt a house of that size could make the neighborhood appear cramped. The retraction of the front yard setback will help. He had no problem with the side variance to the east but felt the west side was too close. He requested the variance be voted on in parts. Dr. Vos noted the front yard setback had been taken care of. He was not concerned with the variance to the east because the existing house was an adequate distance from .the property line. The variance to the west could have a crowding effect. He also requested the variance be voted on in parts. Mr. Savage stated she would have to vote no. The proposed house is wider than that proposed last year which was not approved. She did not feel a hardship was articulated. It is necessary to work with the statute. This is a nice neighborhood and certainly the neighbors would like to see a nice home built there. However, she did not think the plan met the spirit of the code. The houses are too close together. Mr. Barna stated he was opposed to the variance presented the previous year. Much thought and planning has gone into the lot layout and setbacks for the development. In new developments the developer must build the right size homes without a variance. A house can be build on the lot without a variance. The petitioner can find a plan he could live with for that lot. Mr. Buchli can appeal to the City Council. Mr. Barna indicated that the variance to reduce the front yard setback of 45 feet to 21 feet had been withdrawn. The Commission will vote on the request for the side yard setback to the east of 5 feet reduced from 10 feet and the request for a side yard setback to the west of 5 feet, reduced from 10 feet. 40 APPEALS COMMISSION &ING, APRIL 26, 1988 • PAGE 10 3. MOTION by Mr. Sherek, seconded by Dr. Vos, to recommend to the City Council approval of the variance request of a side yard setback to the east from 10 feet to 5 feet. UPON A VOICE VOTE, SHEREK AND VOS VOTING AYE, KUECHLE, SAVAGE AND BARNA VOTING NAY, CHAIRPERSON BARNA DECLARED THE MOTION FAILED. MOTION by Mr. Sherek, seconded by Mr. Kuechle, to DENY the request for variance on the west from 10 feet to 5 feet. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BARNA DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Mr. Barna indicated this variance request would be before the City Council on May 16th. He recommended that Mr. Buchli contact City Hall prior to the meeting to get an approximate time this item would be discussed and asked Mr. Buchli to bring to the meeting any additional information or statements he may have. TION OF A IANCE REQUEST, VAR #88-05, BY MENARD, INC.: Pursuant to Chapter 2 .04.06.A,(6), of the Fridley City Code to increase the height of a fence i a commercial district from 8 feet to 15 feet in order to allow a vary g fence height because of grade on Lot 9, Auditor's Subdivision No. 4, the same being 5351 Central Avenue N.E. MOTION by Mr. Sherek, second6\d by Ms. Savage, to open the public hearing. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING ASE, CHAIRPERSON BARNA DECLARED THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AT 8:38 P.M. Chairperson Barna read the Administbative Staff Report: ADMINISTRATIVE STAF REPORT 5351 CENTRAL AVENU N.E. VAR #88-05 A. PUBLIC PURPOSE SERVED BY REQUIREMENT: Section 205.04.07.A,(6), requires a fence h ight bordering side and rear lot lines in a commercial district to be no more than eight (8) feet. Public purpose served by this requirement is to kevent excessively tall fences in order to maintain the attractibiliof a commercial zone. B. STATED HARDSHIP: "Severe grade into lot along rear lot line does not alloy for use of much of it." do • r� APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING, JUNE 23, 1987 PAGE 3 r. Clark explained that if the gazebo was on -the deck but not attached _Wbysically to the house, he believed there would be no need for a variance. T deck itself would meet code. But, since Mrs. Elwell is severely allergic to ees, if the gazebo was not attached physically to the house, she would T\ have to go outside before entering the gazebo. fir. E111 stated he did know know what the gazebo would look like if it was separate from the house as they had no plans for it that way. He stated the exist g deck will be replaced with a new redwood deck. The new deck will exten 2 ft. beyond the existing deck where their bushes are now. He did not know hat impact this would have on the neighbors because of the heavy foliage. Of course, the deck and gazebo would be a little more visible in the winterti e. Mr. Sherek askedf� ell if they had spoken to their neighbors about the gazebo. Mrs. Elwell stated theave not had a chance to speak to the neighbors behind them as they mov d in only about six weeks ago. She stated the neighbors on the north a on the south have no problem with the deck or the gazebo. Mr. Elwell stated they have fled a lot of trouble with bees in their backyard. Mrs. Elwell stated she felt theNproject was going to be done very nicely and would add beauty to their home a to the neighborhood. As far as her medical situation, she has been al ergic to bee stings for about 10 years, and she must carry injection -type m dicati0n with her at all times when she is outdoors. Mrs. Elwell stated that as far as havin the gazebo detached from the house, she, too, did not know what it would loo like because she did not know what. kind of plan the contractor could come up ith. She did not think it would look as nice if they want something that wi 1 add value to their home and future resale value. Mrs. Elwell stated they just recently took down two bee nests. Spring aid fall are very bad for bees. She stated they have lived in this home for five years, and there have been only about ten tim s when she has been able to sit outside for any length of time without havin to go in because of bees. She stated it is a beautiful area, and she would like to enjoy it more. MOTION BY MS. SAVAGE, SECONDED BY MR. SHEREK, TO CLOSE IV(E PUBLIC HF•ARING. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, VICE -CHAIRPERSON BARNA1CLARED THE PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 7:50 P.M. N Mr. Sherek stated this is -a beautiful house and area. He thou4tt the plan for the gazebo would definitely fit in with the style of the hod e. The reason for the rear yard setback was to provide rear yard space t be used r • APPEALS C01114ISSION MEETING, JUNE 23, 1987 PAGE 4 for reen areas which enhance the neighborhood. He stated there are a lot of tre in the back yard and there is as much green area as is possible. This dec and gazebo would certainly not encroach on any of the neighbors' sites, so would be in favor of approving the variance, especially because of th hardship as stated. Ms. Savage stated a would agree. This was not a situation where there is a back yard with a 1 n adjacent to another back yard with a lawn. It was a unique back yard wit all the bushes and trees that are completely hiding, at least in the summer, t gazebo and deck from the other properties. Because of the uniqueness o the property and the hardship, she felt the hardship was met and the spire of the code was met, and she would be in favor of the variance as stated. Mr. Barna stated the hardship was me. The spirit of the code was definitely being met.- This was a very unique neig orhood with large wild spaces where there are high incidences of all differen species of bees. He would have no objection to approving the variance. MOTION BY MS. SAVAGE, SECONDED BY MR. SHEREK, TO PROVE VARIANCE REQUEST, VAR #87-22, BY THOMAS AND JOANNE ELWELL, PURSUANT T CHAPTER 205.07.03. D, 3a, OF THE FRIDLEY CITY CODE TO REDUCE THE REAR YARD SETS FROM 30 FEET TO 16 FEET TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF A DECK AND GAZEBO O LOT 9, BLOCK 1, HEATHER HILLS WEST, THE SAME BEING 6175 HEATHER PLACE N.E., FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA, 55432. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, VICE -CHAIRPERSON BARNA DECLARED,,THF, MOTION - CATINA N TMOUS TV _ I 2. CONSIDERATION OF A VARIANCE RE UEST, VAR #87-23, BY ARTHUR SILSETH, PURSUANT TU CHAPTER -205.07.0-3797. a, OF THE FRIDLEY CITY CODE TO REDUCE THE REQ IRED = T6TH W -A -Y- . E. . na-1 , , .r'-, vv-rv�• MOTION BY MS. SAVAGE, SECONDED BY MR. SHEREK, TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, VICE -CHAIRPERSON BARNA DECLARED THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AT 7:55 P.M. ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF REPORT 141 - 76TH WAY N.E. VAR #87-23 A. PUBLIC PURPOSE SERVED BY REQUIREMENT: Section 205.07.3, D, 2a, requires a side yard setback of 10 feet between any living area and side property lines. • APPEALS COMMISSION M ETING, JUNE 23, 1987 PAGE 5 Public purpose served by this requirement is to maintain a minimum of 20 feet between living areas 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: "We are building a 44 foot long rambler with a 20 foot minimum width of garage which gives us 64 feet of building and only 60 feet of buildable space as per building code. The house to the east or right side of me is at least 50 feet from where I will be building. I shall have the exact footage for you at the June 23 meeting. The reason I am building a rambler and asking for a variance is that my in-laws may be living with my wife and I. Their ages are 84 years and 88 years." C. ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF REVIEW: This property is located north of 76th Way and west of East River Road in the new Oak River Estates subdivision. The lot is currently vacant but the petitioner plans to construct a 64 foot long dwelling unit (44 foot long house, 20 foot long garage). The lot is 75 feet wide. This allows for a five foot setback on the garage side and a six foot setback on the living area side, which requires the variance. The houses on the east and west sides of the petitioner's lot are set back 30 and 13 feet respectively from the side lot lines theyshare with the petitioner. Staff has no stipulations to recommend if this petition is approved. Mr. Clark stated this was rather a new plat. Mr. Clark stated the house to the west of the petitioner's lot was a new house and the house to the east was an older house, about 40-50 years old, with new sidina. The petitioner's house has to be set back 45 feet as per plat approval in 1985. Mr. Clark stated there were two easements on the lot --one on each side of the lot of 5 ft. The petitioner would like to place the garage on the East River Road side which would place the house 6 ft. off the west lot line and 19 ft. from the new house to the west. Mr. Clark stated an alternative would be to flip the house which then put the garage 5 ft. off the west lot line and then the house would be 36 ft. or better from the house to the east. L J APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING, JUNE 23, 1987 PAGE 6 Mr. Clark stated 20 ft. was the minimum size for a garage so the garage could not be reduced any more. If the petitioner does not get the variance, he could reduce the width of the house to 40 ft., but that was not veru large for a rambler. Mr. Barna asked Mr. Silseth if he had looked at other rambler -style house plans such as an L-shaped rambler. Mr. Silseth stated they have looked at other plans, but they have not seen any other acceptable plans at this time. He stated nowadays most lots are too small for ramblers. They live in a split level now, but a split level is not designed for older people. He stated this would be a two bedroom house, and he would prefer an attached garage. Mr. Sherek stated this was quite a deep lot and would allow for other styles of houses. Mr. Nick DeGroot, 149 - 76th Way N.E., stated he owned the new house to the west. He stated that on the side of his house facing the petitioner's lot, he had two bay windows, one of which was his master bedroom. He stated he would not mind looking at a garage from his windows, but he would object to living space on that side. If the house was flipped, then he would have no problem with it. He stated the three houses to the west, even the older one, all have garages on the west side of the house, and it would be more uniform if the petitioner's garage was on that side also. Mr. John Stifle, 119 - 75th Way N.E., stated he lived across the street from Mr. DeGroot. He stated he had no real objection to the variance; however, his biggest concern was that the house would be positioned in relation to the setback of the older house on Lot 4. He stated he has heard rumours that the owner of the older house has abandoned the house because of code violations. What will happen to that house if the bank forecloses on it? -Will it eventually be torn down? He objected to building this house in accordance with the older house on Lot 4 which might eventually be torn down. MOTION BY MS. SAVAGE, SECONDED BY MR. SHEREK, TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, VICE—CHAIRPERSON BARNA DECLARED THE PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 8:11 P.M. Mr. Sherek stated he had difficulty in being able to be in favor of this variance request. One reason was because it was new construction, and there has to be other house plans that could be used on this lot that would not require a variance. With a long 64 ft. structure stretched from one side of the lot to the other, he felt it would break up the visual look of the neighborhood. For that reason and because there was no valid hardship, he would have to vote against the variance. Ms. Savage stated she agreed with Mr. Sherek. Unfortunately, these were rather small lots, and the proposed rambler gave the appearance of crowding the lot. As pointed out, the house has not been built. Mr. Silseth knew what he was getting into when he purchased the lot. Hopefully, he will be able to come up with a different plan that will not require a variance. 1 APPEALS C014MISSION MEETING, JUNE 23, 1987 PAGE 7 Mr. Barna stated that on 75th Way, there quite a number of ramblers, but on 76th Way, there were different styles of houses and none were really close to the lot lines. There were no trees or shrubs to break up the continuity either. With the house not being built yet, the fact that there were a number of other house plans that could be built on the lot that would satisfy the petitioner's living requirements and the code requirements, and the fact that there was no real viable hardship, he would have to vote to deny the variance. Ms. Savage stated there was also opposition from one neighbor. MOTION BY MR. SHEREK, SECONDED BY MS. SAVAGE, TO RECOMMEND TO CITY COUNCIL DENIAL OF VARIANCE REQUEST, VAR #87-23, BY ARTHUR SILSETH, PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 205.07.03. D, 2a, OF THE FRIDLEY CITY CODE TO REDUCE THE REQUIRED SIDE YARD SETBACK FROM 10 FEET TO 6 FEET TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW HOUSE ON LOT 3, BLOCK 1, OAK RIVER ESTATES, THE SAME BEING 141 - 76TH WAY N.E., FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA, 55432. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, VICE -CHAIRPERSON BARNA DECLARED THF. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Mr. Barna stated this item would go to City Council on July 20 if fir. Silseth wished to continue with his variance request. An,1ni1R1JMFNT MOTION BY MR. SHEREK, SECONDED BY MS. SAVAGE, TO ADJOURN THE MEETING. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, VICE -CHAIRPERSON BARNA DECLARED THE JUNE 23, 1987, APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING ADJOURNED AT 8:20 P.M. Respectfully subm'tted, LytfngVSaba Recording Secretary y 1 e fz' e � - R y " Xtn kDl �F �� ..1`J��!�/ ^/jam/ Y '. � .. / � !/ • < -An 4 00 Y , COUNCIL MEETING OF JULY 209 1987 E-1. CONSIDERATION OF A VARIANCE REQUEST, VAR #87-23, TO REDUCE THE REQUIRED SIDE YARD SETBCK FROM 10 FEET TO 6 FEET TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW HOUSE ON LOT 3s BLOCK 1. OAK RIVER ESTATES, THE SAME BEING 141 76TH WAY N.E., BY ARTHUR SILSETH: Mr. Robertson, Community Development Director, stated the petitioner plans to construct a new dwelling on this lot. He stated the home would be 44 feet long and the garage would be 20 feet which allows for a five foot setback on the garage side and a six foot setback on the living area side. Mr. Robertson stated Mr. Silseth has changed his original request and is moving the home further east so a variance from ten to six feet is requested on the east side of the lot. Mr. Silseth stated the reason he is moving the home east is because the home located on the lot to the east has a setback of 33 feet on the west side. He stated his garage would be located on the west. MOTION by Councilman Fitzpatrick to grant variance request, VAR #87-23, to reduce the required side yard setback from 10 feet to 6 feet on the east side of this lot to allow construction of a house on Lot 3, Block 1, Oak River Estates at 141 76th Way N.E. Seconded by Councilman Goodspeed. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. Mr. Silseth stated residents on Rickard Road and 76th Way have stated they wished something could be done with the house on Lot 4. Councilman Fitzpatrick stated when this plat was approved, this home was existing and the plat tried to accommodate it. He thought some stipulations were made relative to this home and perhaps they should be reviewed. MOTION by Councilman Fitzpatrick to receive the minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of July 8, 1987. Seconded by Councilman Schneider. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. 10. RECEIVING THE MINUTES OF THE CATV MEETING OF JUNE 18, 1987_: 11. MOTION by Councilman Goodspeed to receive the minutes of the Cable Television Commission meeting of June 18, 1987. Seconded by Counci, n Schneider. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared motion carried unanimously. NO. 163, ENEBAK CONSTRUCTION: Mr. Robertson, Community Development actor, stated this change order covers the compensation Enebak CpjWtruction was awarded in the American Arbitration Association Indus Arbitration Tribunal. Mr. Flora, Public Wo Director, stated the change order also includes costs for on -sit sand mining and clay backfill placement. He stated any -11- COUNCIL MEETING OF JULY 20, 1987 quantities in excess of 2,000 cubic yards of useable sand remaining w thin the planned excavation areas, as agreed to by the engineer and Eneb , the City shall receive a credit of $1.25 per cubic yard. Mr. Robertson stated the City Attorney has reviewed this chan7/order and the HRA has authorized staff to present it to the Council. MOTION by Councilman Goodspeed to approve Change Order o. 3 to the Demolition and Site Grading Project #163 with Enebak Cor ction Company in the amount of $167,113 and a revised contract amount of $1,162,113. Seconded by Councilman Schneider. Upon a voice vote, al voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. 12. CONSIDERATION OF CHANGE ORDER NO. 2 FOR LANDSCAPIN PROJECT NO. 168, MINNESOTA VALLEY LANDSCAPE, INC.: 13. 14. Mr. Robertson, Community Development Director, st ted this change order is to add a sprinkling system for Pad C which wa the site where the first building was to be constructed within the L e Pointe development. He stated since construction has not commenced n a starting date determined, it is recommended this area be sprinkled. Mr. Robertson stated this change order ha been reviewed by the HRA and they have recommended approval. MOTION by Councilman Goodspeed to 9&prove Change Order No. 2 to the Landscaping, Irrigation and Lightin Project #168 with Minnesota Valley Landscape, Inc. in the amount of $11 872 and a revised contract amount of $498,870.47. Seconded by Council an Schneider. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared th motion carried unanimously. CONSIDERATION OF EXECUTION OF PI&NDED SUBSTATE AGREEMENT AND STATE GRANT AGREEMENT WITH MINNESOTA PO UTION CONTROL AGENCY FOR THE MOORE LAKE PROJECT. Mr. Flora, Public Works Di ctor, stated the City entered into an agreement with the Minnesota Pollu on Control Agency to complete the Moore Lake project. He stated in o der to continue receipt of payments from the State, an amended substate agr ement is required changing the project schedule from June 19 1980 to Decembor 31, 1987 instead of June 1, 1980 to March 12, 1985. MOTION by Councilm Schneider to authorize the Mayor to enter into the amended substate eement and state grant agreement with the Minnesota Pollution Contr Agency for the Moore Lake project. Seconded by Councilwoman J rgenson. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the m ion carried unanimously. OR ENE -12- • VAR #88-04 6P Jeffrey Buchli Vp 00 b •.E a - l� 0 _ ,[r, 9 f ,1�•B �J/�� Y • (/ _ � �{6/ /° CPA NN �� `�� Z ��' �a '.9�i)�E a sy �•�� `ao• � ••°`• 2 i�l \ �m /,pSpO) . �q;b�"• o �`� } �`'� `,, (¢1� .iii, bq o d• D • - �kkb 0��,, V) 0 'fir 9 1 �k 6��y� 1 ►a i e:z�' ' Cd�,� N p.�rKa• P" � � � ` oGs del 6) 6� yap) f}q `1 w 11 (lh��J red _ ° Z ` _ az' (A )/-b `� n 1` �� e1Ked030"' .., �� O I ` 7 (/°5 CRAIG ej [ ° 6� � Ci. o`efi �7� � N� ?7 %7y� o B t� ° °J+o.1• e + 9�:�.yyf I � I b,, e ' o PlJL t FV' 25J2/ re /or `.,/oa n.2 7`of 8B 68 .t 7l A ZOO /i6 Ys.. ./ z I "aE 7- t92 67 , �•. ° i ti �) •� �Q�(p)^ r BROAD 7.a9 0 3� 7 K ipy6 \� � `� t (JS%. J •x/0..9 � 1` � � -- � • �� 37.68^ 5c.,6 ts+� a 9I 0 �-aoa) Ilk 50 rG SIrN/V. 2 a 5-T 6�, `p6 ,1�,�• •'�� tq� ^ bid N • ul yp6n' M 2 y R7 O Ilk LOCATION MAP commt ZONING MAP VAR #88-04 �� Jeffrey Buchii 7801 -73rd Ave. No. 880-3083 INVOICE NO. ��✓`'�s USTRIAL—JUDICIAL Minneapolis, Minnesota 55428 F. a. NO. RCIAL—TOPOGRAPHICALSCALE I"= 'Y LOTS — PLATTING Aurl agars hlErtifiratE O — DE S IRON DOIJf' PETERSON 39 Block 1, OAK RIVER ESTATES - Cb4-3w 30 i 0 t 0t U� eby certify that this Is a true and correct representa- r a survey of the boundaries of the above described ! ;nd the location of all buildings and vialble chments, H any, from or on said land. Signed .. ed by us thio 23rd day of 'i' .t tem Ra and A Praach, Minn. Reg. No. 6743 SITE PLAN • Jeffrey Buchli 141 - 76th Way N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 r� May 23, 1988 On May 16, 1988 the Fridley City Council officially denied your request for a a Variance, VAR #88-041, to reduce the required side yard setback from 10 feet to 5 feet on the east and west side on Lot 3, Block 1, Oak River Estates, the same being 141 - 76th Way N.E., due to the extremity of the request. If you have any questions regarding the above action, please call the Planning Department at 571-3450. Sincerely, James L. Robinson Planning Coordinator JLR/dn �r LOT SURVEYS COMPANY, INC. LAND SURVEYORS REGISTERED UNDER LAWS OF STATE OF MINNESOTA QQ 7801 -73rd Ave. No. 580-3093 INVOICE NO. INDUSTRIAL— JUDICIAL Minneapolis, Minnesota 55428 F. B. NO. COMMERCIAL—TOPOGRAPHICAL Suriiegurs Certificate SCALE 1" = CITY LOTS — PLATTING 0 — DE S IRON DOUG PETERSON Cby_3�w of . 1 f J � o \ 1 a- 3, Block 1, OAK RIVER ESTATES w We hereby certify that this is a true and correct representa- tion of a survey of the boundaries of the above described land and the location of all buildings and visible encroachments, If any, from or on said land. Surveyed by us this 23rd day of 1 i t Signed ■ o