PL PACKET 08211984 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

-2- �> DeKanick =checked the Hennepin County .Law Library in her pursuit of the definition but to no avail . She then:- contacted the State of Minnesota Building Code Department where - she was told to . refer to a dictionary at the library. She went to the St. Anthony Library • and proceeded to quote the definition of a bay to the Planning Commission members . The applicant indicated they have access to an 8 foot bay window or would provide two 42 inch windows, which they propose to place together. Mrs . . DeKanick had taken pictures throughout St. Anthony of housing units which are closer together than what their proposal calls for. She had obtained a picture of a similar house on 28th and Coolidge, which she felt fits the definition of bay. The appli- cants propose to construct a porch, with brick front, aluminum- facia and completely stucco the structure. Mrs . DeKanick also presented a picture which showed that the bushes in their yard were further out than the proposed cantilever. Commissioner Bjorklund went to the blackboard to draw a detailed illustration of the proposed construction. The Commissioner questioned whether the porch will align with the building. Mrs . DeKanick had researched this and indicated the porch must be 5 feet off the property line . It was felt an overhang over the porch is needed. Again, the question of the interpretation of bay was discussed.. The City Manager indicated neither the zoning ordinance nor the building code defines the word "bay" or "bay window" . He perceives there is a difference between the two , and that when "bay" or "bay window" as • an ordinance definition comes to his mind, the DeKanick' s interpreta- tion may be correct and if the Planning Commission interprets the addition to be a bay , a variance wouldn't be necessary . This would be true only if the bay is cantilevered and does not go to the ground. Mr. E. B. Emerson, 2615 Townview, was present to speak for the DeKanick ' s proposal . He stated he is a neighbor and close friend of the applicants and also with other interested parties . He does not feel the proposed structure would interfere with saleable property or with access to property during an emergency . Mr . Emerson stressed he does not believe the structure would be a detriment and emphasized he wants peace and harmony in the neighborhood to prevail . Mr. Harold Root, 3107 Wilson Street N.E. , was present to speak against the DeKanick. request. Mr. Root feels the proposed 13� feet is an addition and part of the building, therefore not a "bay" . He questioned the dimensions shown on the plan and asked for a clarification. He also stated his house is 7 feet away from the property line, however, he said, his original plan was 10 feet. He wanted space between the houses . He noted, however, that the Village. said no to his original plan and -he had had to build according to their wishes because the neighboring - lot was a corner lot. Mr. Root indicated there is a water- shed between the properties which could possibly create a water drainage problem on that side.. He feels the proposed structure would be an infringement on his property and should not be closer than 5 ,feet from the property line. He added that he feels a 9 foot • separation between roof .lines; is too close .