The URL can be used to link to this page

98-768Cotmcil FIle # � $ `'�� p Green Sheet #� a t � �P ��3��ir Presented By Referred To RESOLUTION CITY OF SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA Committee: Date ■1 2 WI�REAS, in Board of Zoning Appeals file No. 98-146, Joseph and Laura Benysek 3 made application or a variance from the strict application of the provisions of the Saint Paul 4 Zoning Code (Code) for properry commonly lrnown as 858 Point Douglas Road South and 5 legally described as: Subject to Highway, the Following; Lots 2, 3& 4 and Except the East 35 6 feet, Lot 1, Also Vacated Alley East of and Adjacent to Lots 2, 3 and 4, Block 10, Burlington 7 Heights; and $ 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 WIiEREAS, the purpose of the application was to vary the standards of the Code so as to obtain a°lot sp1iY' and construct a new single family home; and WHEREAS, the Boazd of Zoning Appeals (Boazd) conducted a publia heazing on 7uly 13, 1998, after having provided notice to affected property owners, and the Boazd, by its Resolution No. 98-146, dated July 13, 1998, decided to deny the requested variances based upon the following findings and conclusions: 1. 2. The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use under the strict provisions of the code. The applicants haue lived in this azea most of their lives and would like to stay in the area. However, there are few buildable lots left in the area and those that are buildable aze too expensive for the applicants. There is enough lot size to split the properry into two lots that would meet the minunum lot size requirements but that would entail moving the exisfing house and gazage. The conshucfion of a house on the available portion of land is complicated by the slope of the properiy and the inegular shape of the lot. The plight of the land owner is due to circumstances unique to this properiy, and these circumstances were not created by the land owner. The location of the existing buildings on the properiy which limits the land available for development as well as the irregular shape and slope of the property are circumstances that were not created by the applicants. Page 1 of 3 ORiGINAL qg -�� 4 3. The proposed variance is not in keeping with the spirit and intent of the code, and is not 5 consistent with the health, safety, comfort, morals and welfaze of the inhabitauts of the 6 City of Saint Paul. 7 8 The Highwood Small Area Plan adopted in 1992, requires that lots created after the 9 effecrive date of the ordinauce {i992) must have a m;n;mum lot size of 4,600 square feet. 10 This proposal does not meet the spirit and intent of that ordinance. 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 411 45 46 47 48 49 4. The proposed variance will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent properiy, nor will it alter the essenfial character of the surrounding area or unreasonably diminish established property values within the surrounding area. The west and north sides of the proposed new home abut streets. The east side of the lot is steeply sloped and wooded. There will be no impact on the supply of light or air to the adjacent properkies. There are several lots in this immediate area that do not meet the minunum lot size requirements. A home constructed on a 6,732 square foot lot will not be out of chazacter with the neighborhood. The applicants haue submitted a petition signed by several of their neighbors stating that they have no objection to the proposed variances. 5. The variance, if granted, would not permit any use that is not permitted under the provisions of the code for the property in the district where the affected land is located, nor would it alter or change the zoning district classification of the property. The proposed variance, if granted, would not change or alter the zoning classification of the property. 6. The request for variance is not based primarily on a desire to increase the value or income potential of the parcel of land. Wf��REAS, pursuant to the provisions of Saint Paul L,egislative Code § 64.205, Joseph and Laura Benysek duly filed with the City Clerk an appeal from the determination made by the Board and requested that a hearing be held before the City Council for the purpose of considering the acrions taken by the Board; and WHEREAS, acting pursuaut to Saint Paul Legislative Code § 64.205 through § 64.208, and upon notice to affected parties, a public hearing was duly conducted by the City Council on August 5, 1998, where all interested parties were given an opportunity to be heard; and WIIEREAS, the Council, having heard the statements made, and having considered the variance application, the report of staff, the record, minutes and resolution of the Boazd of Zoning Appeals, does hereby; RESOLVE, that the Council of the City of Saint Paul does hereby reverse the decision of the Board of Zoning Appeals in this matter, based upon the following findings of the Council: Page 2 of 3 � 6 The Board erred in its strict application of Saint Paul Legislative Code § 64.203(3) to this application by requiring strict adherence to the m;nimum lot sizes stated in the Highwood Plan. This proposed development meets the overall spirit and intent of the code in that the applicant will protect the environmental resources of the area by 1) preserving trees in wooded azeas; 2) not altering the natival slope or topography of the lot; and 3) would be served by City water and ct g -'?�� 7 sewer. 8 9 AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that for the above stated reasons, the appeat of 10 Joseph and Laura Benysek be and is hereby granted; and 11 12 BE TT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the applicanPs originai request for a lot split and 13 variances as set forth in the site plan on file with the zoning administrator in Zoning File No. 98- 14 146 is approved; and 15 16 BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED, that the City Clerk shall mail a copy of this resolution 17 to the Zoning Administrator, the Board of Zoning Appeals, and the Saint Paul Planning 18 Commission. ORlG1NA� Requested by Department of: By: Adopted by Council: Date -`� � Adoption Certified by Council Se etary ay: - Approved by Mayor Dat By: Form Appr�ov� d by City Attorney BY: �J �G'✓ `"" � O ' `.� %✓ Approved by Mayor for Submission to Council Byc City Council Councilmember TOTAL # OF SIGNATURE PAGES v 1998 I GREEN SHEET xr�rt�xrcwecrw c�Q-rll.�' No 62116 NWYIDab arvco�rra ❑ arv�rroroEV ❑ rn'u.o�R _ �nuxcw.temncesme ❑Fxuiuumtw,�xro ❑ r�raa(oR�essrurt� � (CL1P ALL LOCATIONS FOR SIGNATURE) Finalizing City Council Action taken August 5, 1998 granting the appeal of Laura and Joseph Benysek to a decision of the Board of Zoning Appeals denying a setback variance and a minimum lot size variance in order to split a lot and construct a new single family home at 85S South Point Douglas Road. PLANNtNG COMMISSION CIB COMMITf EE CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION TRANSACTION r�ssmfsxisorvfiimeverwaricedunaeraconnaarortnieaeaammenn . rES nio Has this P�Nfirtn evef been a cib' empbyce7 YES NO Dcesthis G�� W� e SIdN rwA nomiefyP�sessetl bY arc�' cuneM d�P emP�%'ee? YES NO Is this persoMfirm a tarpetetl venda4 YES NO COST/REVQIUE BUD(iETED (qRCLE ONE) YES NO ACTNITYNWIIBER OFFICE OF Tf� CITY ATTORNEY� ��G� Clayton M. Robinson, Jr., Ciry Attorney � CITY OF SAINT PAUL NormColemtm, M¢yar CivilDivision 4QQ City Xa11 1 S West Kellogg &Ivd Saint Paul, Minnesota 55102 Telephone: 651 266-8710 Farsimile: 651 298-5619 Cous�t F�esearc�r Ce�.er August 14, 1998 Nancy Anderson Council Secretary 310 City Hall I S West Kellogg Blvd. St. Paul, MN 55102 Re: Appeal of 7oseph and Laura Benysek Board of Zoning Appeals File No: 98-146 City Council Action Date: August 5, 1998 Deaz Ms. Anderson: a�� ss� Attached please find a signed copy of a resolution memorializing the decision of the Saint Paul City Council to grant the appeal of the individuals above named. Would you please have this resolution placed on the Council's Consent Agenda at your earliest convenience. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Very truly yours, /C/.�.�/i Peter W. Warner Assistant City Attorney PWWlrmb Enclosure cc: Councilmember Coleman e. . CITY OF SAINT PAUL Norm Coleman, bfayar JUIy 1$� 1998 Ms. Nancy Anderson City Council Research Office Raom 310 City Hall Saint Paul, Minnesota 55102 Dear Ms. Anderson: ENVIRON.�IENTAL PROTEC'I'ION 5 � { 0 � � � RobeJt Kessler, Direclor S4 LOA'RY PROFESSIONAL Zelepharse: 6I2-2669090 BUILDING Facsimile: 612-2669099 Suite 300 672-26b9124 350 St. Peter Stree[ S¢int poul, Minnerota 55102-I510 �iCz�;l-�3; �-v,,:ci.^.`? `_ ��'.,P� ��;L i °� ��9� T would like to confirm that a public hearing before the City Council is scheduled for Wednesday August 5, 1998 for the following appeal of a Boazd of Zoning Appeals decision: Appellant: File Number: Purpose: Appeal of a Board of Zoning Appeals decision denying a setback variance and a minimum lot size variance in order to split a lot and construct a new single family Address: Legal Description: Previous Action: Laura & Joseph Benysek 98-146 858 South Point Douglas Road PIN 142822130008 District 1 took no position on this matter Staff recommended approval. Board of Zoning Appeals; Denied the request on a vote of 4-3. My understanding is that this public hearing request will appear on the agenda for the August 5, 1998 City Council meeting and that you will publish notice of the hearing in the Saint Paul Legal Ledger. Please call me at 266-9082 if you have any questions. Sincer y, -` �� ohn Hardwick " +F7RS1'RUfS� ' ' - - . . . . -_' NOTICE OF PUI3LIC HBARTlRG � _ � _ - -, The Saint Paul City Council will conduct a pubtic hearing on Wednesday, August 5, _ CC: COUricil IVIeIDbei L8t111y 1995 at p.m, in theCity Councii Chambers, Third�Floor, City Hall-Court House, to consider �the appeal of' Laura and Joseph Benysek to a_ decision of the Baazd of Zoning Appeals�denying a setback yariance and a minimum 7ot siae variance in�oz&er ta�split a lot.and construct a�new siugle family home at 858 South Point Douglas Road. - ., - - .. _ � - - - Dated: July f7, 1998 . " �. � �- � � . � � � NANCY hNDERSON� : �'' ,-_ . . - . - -- � �_ Assistant City Conpcil Secretary � . - ' .. . , � (Jaly�1.1998): . . Zoning Technician `lg-��1 APPL1CATt Depanment o Zoning Sectic II00 City Ha� 25 West Four Saint Pau1, h 26lr6589 APPELLANT PROPERTY LOCATION Zoning File Name , Address/Location� �� 7-4�F� �ni,Lll�� TYP� OF APPEAL: Appiication is hereby made for an appeat to the: � Board of Zoning Appeais � City Council under the provisions of Chapter 64, Section , Paragraph appeal a decision made by the /Sc�✓� a� Z�,�.-r on � wt-�, ! 3 , 19�Y. File number:_ (date o decision) of the Zoning Code, to A a��-C S GROUNDS FOR APPEAL: Expiain why you feel there has been an error in any requirement, permit, decision or refusai made by an administrative officia4, or an error in 4act, procedure or finding made by the Board of Zoning Appeals or the Planning Commission. if" �4'_C� j� A j ��_ ��tt=�C�([Cl l.L,�r j7^.,'$�i'.�'a.�.�.41i �4�r'..f� .. , .�1'1 .1��{�� .4 __ � ii't __ .� _ l _ �'.4 � � � ��. Attach additional sheef if necessary) AppiicanYs signzfvre��,i t�� ,�_i ��0�_�C _� Date 7 �-, City ��,�Gd' L�r rif� i"o�aeil ?!�Ism.,�'ers, �r names ara Tosao$ and Lau€a BenyseI�. i�iy husban�i anci I aion� wi�it rnv father a2oger i�i. Ck;I�rlein :�plied fvr n�ajor variau�,c #Iirou� fY Fx�aru of Zonir,�- Tne Eclarci uf 7nning ruIc;ci aga�1;! s�ur ap�Iiwlicu� �n the basis thai it uici uc�f .;oxupIy �viih [iie fIi�waa� a�EtiEiOF:I'u�i� �U12Ci85. 1 t'iE�Ic1%� `u u0 ilfii li1`u"�c�IS'�.3I"iu uc �I�c.�Itiri.'s s7� uii, �'iia3l -�2'i{�i ttcT'ile.^a�i 'Jt2'i 3�1P�1Cc'1�1DI11II CISO7. i 4?��e read the Highweed I)e��elonmen# Yoiic�es Book±et as±d can oni� fi� one of' iheir eriteria's that we cio a�t meet. th� page 4 under tlte Si�b-Eieacling i'�orih F3ighwcxx! N. �I. I it states the m;nim� Iot size to be 9_6UU souase feeY. i believe the oaraQragh following N. fi. I e�slaixss thc previous cu�uicil`s nrsmacv inif:nt �i inereasiva� i.hc minimum lc�t size is to pratei;l wcxrded areas ancl areas �n tugh slr��es. In c�ur �tans to buil� ocEr Iwme rac ��ill r�ot be bu;l�g cn a sl�pe h;�� fria�� 1 I�,.�cu�#. '�'he 14�ii�Gs:,ta I'.iver Ccrrciar crit;,ri� are ttsa: thcre is no resid�ntiat devetc�ginent an s3��nes grcaf:r tf�au i& g:,rc�:t. �Nc �;�ill bQ 4vall A�in tt�ei� �ide?ines. 4�e aisa wili not be rwmesing aar tr�es or �:eb tatien 4��?e* L}L?II �.'�S. �tY f��t �p iIItQt*£� QR �?�?ILti*I� 3Lf{�?ti0I28� fTE�S .�t2ff gYi.*?I�Jc tp titp ini ¢?f8. �e believe that �e �ave meet all af ts'�e criteria set fortltt by the �oard of Zoning's applicafion for vatiance's requiretnenis. I have liveci in "the �ii�hwood arE:a for 3i �ears. Iv1y husb�md has li�ueci h�.te sins:� vze nz�u�ied i� 1�89, i�'e wuu2d 1� ic� wr�fin;z� to Iive in 5l. Pakt and b�'d �ur haxUe. C+� cl�ildren go t� schcol at St. Pascal's F;ay3�a on Tliir3 St. and �hit� Bear Ave. a�d are d�siy rooted � the comm��tity. W� �,.2cc �.e� :�ctive 'vz oar �ommtmity and so have our children b� doing voluntear wer� church and clesn zig. We are vea}J ciose tv our fami.sy whom aii raside in ��tnot 1, an� weuId like t�a *e_main so. we vatue �e chance to xnpeai tire Board of Zoning`s de�:ision anci hone that agree wifh ;vSr. John Hardwick's recc,m�uencisiion ann voie for approvaI. +"TV'c: also hopc tt�at if yoa t�cve any quesrions or i�t� i.hai yvu biux� them to our atteaiiion. L�'e wiII cica our besi. 40 �ess �azm. Tl�a�' y�u for you: time and considcraYion. Stncerely ��,�, � � �' � ��',,�L 'r 4�U�,� ^ J � ��s�� ;,aura C�cIuiei� Ber.ysck `'-! � 3- i � q�-�1� � �-�i !? S�3#3 ! have s��n the proposed site �lan that is sho�rrn on pag� 2R of the Saard of �,ppeals Staff Rep�rt ;n�restiyuti�� d�t�� Juna 11, 9��8, I agree w�ith th� st�ff r�c;c�mrr}endai�or� t'r�ai is �n pac�� 23 of �f�i� repor�. Sir�aiure Aridress fYaie Ptu�wNumb_x � t�> �L �? � I=: �<, � ;�: n —'� � � i_� .^ =:: � 2 j�i 5- ('t l�o�;,°l<, .< - � _-,.- i ,, r � ,, ; r Y,, � ��,. i� _ �^ � � t .z 31 > � =1Y�� -��f�`i - � — ., � . `� �r-- -�� .% _) �� . �� 7 4•3317 >�� i ` /`I � %�fl�� -�� f > �,�- � 1 L �7�g"��S �Q, 7/�'� i ,�v' 73y-s5 E� �`13 � S 57�- G � 73�•C3 s /� `,7�� `� ;t� c�-f 3 -' I � = �� 59� i 73G �;, �-i 73� -S'9� 7 735 ; , , �i=/�� ; ��-�G� r��itiQn i ha:r° s°°n th� �r�posn� sit� plar that is sho�rrn on pa�° �3 of tt�e �aard cf �p�als Sta�# Pe�ort in��estigation dated ,luna '11, 1 g98, 1 agr�� wiih the staff r�cc�m�t7�n�faiio�� thai is �n �aaete 23 vf if�is repori. Simature Adcitess �aie Phon? Number � /, v'' '� �.��. .�,,, - �:c�_ l /,�r� `'�.�?..�� o-?,'-y� 73� � , .� � � .�t '?�` P ( �;�.�J �� +� �.�'� - 7:: C� - t'' � . � i � .; l'✓ � i . . � y _ c) `5 7%'-� ' C� �S J <;?�) �,-�-1 i i':'%;y 7 �; ��; ` ;r' _ i`��. `.:I -� c �'�l. c .- -, ��_:,,,� �� p � J - { =�� ='�_. _� _� __�- -�''/ ? =:L ' , % �,%�'!- = -'/> f� F i�' --� � 'ii"� C I LI Cl'--i '. _°i �`�l;�-' �'r � , r��i �-' �, . �,� ` � � r ; %, " y^ � rn -/ ,\ :' y y � � ' `�<--. , f -�--��---- ;.- � % `� � 1 ��ta .�c;.:� �7' ��, ��.T� 1 'l;;uc.�;;�:_a�> ../I�I%;`%�`( � 73 = 7 �� , 5• �� . G�R ; i'Y^_�'�/i _l �/S�i >:;- T- I Gt� I�G_S / yi, �=' �=' 7`�"� �>�j '� ,-� � � � ,. , , � r/� �� , . . `'�,= "� s � � �� o ', _ V 7 /-! r , / .'' � � � 1-" � "r . ., � "l �l'� , 'i �'o __-.. � �. / � J — � ? ��, � >— � `I ? -� �; 1� -� , � - p i ��} � �� — ,�; �� < r� `', � ' J— l ~�/� "!;)� Y_'�� L�� tl: � �/:) �- ' � �.oG - .� j I y''�'='r y; � : i -`vL�" �y�-��; Y�`G� {�r � .�S i , , � ., .� �., � ,'S �� 6zi � n � c=�,� � /�� i' �. ?SCI�t�e; i !!1�'I.-,. �.,_ / �, � � �, _ -N/�� n i�, ,, l-�i i l '.., >> � ,.,-:�/ ��.- --..ct_i -��' !� ' 7 y _ G Y_ �� la 5 I� � � � _ ,�:� /,. i� ; 7 , , Y � � �- A��;S �i:� [r " << J !/ i fl� ✓ `� j� � � r ! ( r �_ v (! �� (� � �L�. ��-�� GsG2- �o�d lJCa=�t�r+sr� /4u �" � 8' d -- . /.',,.L(e�/' �J 21'/� .ht�iinoCld Pi 1� > 3 S 7,d'IS ��' -,3s, s�a�- i f� -�! _�� v n (! /( ,-'�.�rt"-^ " �> �S�-5�� >��'— �S! -S�-�S �- 23� ' 73s-7sR�-- ��,�� Pe�i�ion I ha�is se�n th� propose� sits p!an that is shown on pagA 23 of th� Board of Appeals Staff Report Investigation dated June 11, 1958, I agree with the staff recamrnet�dation tF�afi is or� �aea� 23 0� ihis r�poit. Sinature Address Qate Ph�xw Nismber ,, -� �-� �f , u x l ,�' 5�\ ;� - ; S% : �`' < �h ^ �S,i m C�?� / ��. � � r�� _ � a� L�,�. �ths �G� �� 5��✓x1� - ZI �4S �g�, dl zl O 7 A -�_ � 1 � / >�� r` Vt cr S,� �-(_ c� 0 �'3. ��lTil�ti .�'D. j. Si !;�L� � ( � c C�� '( O ,( Ssll� Ce�z� � --� �l zs `fS �l �i c�/zs�� 6�� 4 �� t � �� (�J�b 1�73 -(�31� i�l� -ii; 7i% ;3 73G-9��, .;h�� '�t i}��R, Gh��-, _ �� t�if"�r �Y�S'��r �x�� '�. � �� I �r_� /, 1� �1�-r-- (;l�Cv1� '• - �.s {i'Z � r- % )�1t �q� C �-c {1 � ( 3 i� - � < ` -' , – � -� — _i ��i �1`J�l '.R.'� _1 j�.�i�t:c/\� �.'fi�t {�i �Utial-:��' i��t3. G,�!i� ��'� -� 7 I °'%: �;�/ f�/� q �,�� 'etition 1 ha�re seen ths proposed site plan that is sho�rrn on p�gs 2� of the Board ofi�ppeafs Staffi P.eport tr�vestig Vat�C� JUTTc 11, 1�98, 1 agree with it�e siaff recc�mmendat�on thai is on �a�� 23 ui ii�is r�port. Sinaturn Addre�cs t�t? PRu�n? Number r 7 q�� 'etition � have s��n the proposed site pfan that is sho�rrn on page 28 of the f3oard of f�ppEais Staff Report fn��restigation dated .lune 11, 'f 998, 1 agree with the sta3f recon}mendatian that is on page 23 of this repurt. Sir.ature aciclress t7atP Plsc�nP tJumbx � '1 � / �� 4�C�,� ac.�� 7 H�n��z�� 1�� '� L�/�I� 73�5 �us_s� 'S � � � . � �-, � �, �,��ati �,1 t i k'?c�� `l `F �� ` � �� 7 ) ;� 7 """'__ g; '�/�. ��! �' ._rrr.t'.( .. � E�'7 (1 �jti J �; �c��•��<% �1�. 4� �/A S G ? (' r�� t 3 _ ,. � , . . ., � Y '\` � �°�.� �1 � 7� ; � => �: � i� `� o�� ; � , �,> � -,--� c,� . ( , �,.._' cy�� G �`� � C �� _� �' �' � � � � :_� riy � � �� l_ �� ,� . IP� � ao - 7 2 ' �,4�;� � �� r�.�� i af'r �� .r�z. ,� �9G� �r�L� t��, ,� �l1-,� 2.� � 1�,��„ ' (2ti�, ��,�� ( S�a', �� -c � 7 _5e�.� � �: � � � ��..� C��Y'�� 1,'C�'� � �.� �' '�.�i f L�� `� I )/,` _ �1C.S� C? C�;: / r. �, c. .\-f- �„�- l� � � � �' �, �'� J. � S/� l/�" .�- {Cj>` i.� (.�" ":� � X� l L� .1 KL} N/�+%� / /�✓ _�� r (t(��y��IC `�3D �- -z�- ,x `23fc-6��, "/�-YI`7� 73f-s�� , , i� � /; �! `7 -�'� � /��5'� 7�/-.�/jr C--7=i Y� 73�-%��-�1 � i 1� i�,�, ��._'� 5= l ' i I l`--�s"=%� �3s J �`�% ( - j� �3 -S� �� J�,�-��- �3r-s-; � _ho� r/ �35"--��2� C/ 3'c%2 � 7�B"7�s � r � �^ �'7�� '�` �C �i / �3u/ � � 730- ��3'i % - 3� �_ ��s,�s�� '� � �e�l�IOtl .: � �y_ _ I have sesn the propvsAd site plan that is sha�.vn on pag� 28 of the Board of Appeais Staff Report inrrestigation dated June 19, 19�38, i agree with the staff recam�nenciation t9�at is on page 23 of this report. l -- - -� r, .,,:.c..�;j? ��s r� �, .—: _,__�— . , .,,�. � _�.rl �� .t� �L � c<�, �-� , Q��«1 t� C; t C��n�:l ��i y 1�� 1 , � � � � , �; ._ � �.,.,, �;; �-('�.�� w-»-: �,��!, .., l � , s�� r i c �"- + ��\ <? _:_=��.i 4"li�. � :� �. .� �'_ � � � �18—�� ` AS4iLi�S 3� �g -`1 �� Original variance request packet q &� - �1 t� � BOARD OF ZO?�iING APPEALS STA�F REPORT I. APPLICANT: JOSEPH & LALJRA BENYSEK , ROGER OEHRLEiIv' FILE # 98-146 2. CLASSIFICATION: Major Variance AATE OF HEARIriG: 06,'22(48 3. LOCATIOti: 8�8 PO1NT DOUGLAS ROAD S. 4. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Subject to Highway, the Following; Lots 2, 3& 4 and Except ihe East 35 feet, Lot 1, also Vacated Alley East of and Ad,}acent to Lots 2, 3 and 4, Block l�, Burlinn on Heights 5. PLANNING DISTRICT: 1 6. PRESENT ZO\ING: R-1, RC3, TPD ZONI:�G CODE REFERENCE: 67.304 (3) & 61.101 7. STAFF INVESTIGATION AND REPORT DATE: 06/11198 BY: John Hazdwick 8. DEADLINE FOR ACTTON: 07/28/98 DATE RECEIVED: OS/28/98 A. PURPOSE: Several variances in order to split off a lot and construct a new singie family home. B. ACTION REQUESTED: 1). A minimum lot size of 9,600 squaze feet is required and a lot size of 6,732 square feet is proposed, for a vaziance of 2,86& square feet. 2). A front setback of 30 feet is re�uired and a setback of 25 fPet is proposed, for a variance of 5 feer. 3). Side yard setbacks of 10 feet are required and side yard setbacks of 8.9 feet on each side are proposed, for variances of 1.1 feet on each side. .��,a�� C. SITE AND AREA CONDITIONS: This is an irregular pazcel of about2�t6 square feet. The applicants are proposing to split off a portion of the property with an azea of 6,732 squaze feet and construct a new single family home. There is no aliey access to the property. The entire properry slopes from the east to the west and the easterly half slopes quite steepiy. Surounding Land Use: Primarily single family homes to the north, south and the east with Highway 61 and railroad tracks to the west. D. BACRGROUIVD: The owners of this pazcel aze giving a portion of the property to their daugh?er and son-in-law, the applicants, so that the}' can construct a house. The property owner, Roger Oehrlein, has a refuse hauling business and has legal nonconforming status to a� File �98-146 ��-�� Page Three The proposed variance, if granted, would not change or alter the zoning classification of the property. 6. The request for variance is not based primarily on a desire to increase the value or income potential of the parcel of land. F. DISTRiCT COIJNCIL RECOMMENDATION: As of the date of this report we have not received a recommendation from District l. G. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Based on findings i through 6, staff recommends approval of the variance. �3 APPLICATION FOR ZONING VARIANCE Zorting o€fice use onTy _ FiEe nurttber: Fee: g � � :. - _�--- OFFICE OF LICE�SE, INSPE�7�E0,�'S �.�D E��4�IR0��3IE,ti"TAL PROTECT O.�' 3 '� � 350 St. Peter Street, Suite 300 _ - � Saini Pai�l, bLV 55102-I510 • J� J!� Ci i 166-9003 '--------�'. APP�ICANT PROPERTY Tentative hearing date: �`- '= � � -, � Seetion(s): i= `I'. =.' ' / t ; ? City agent `.._.°~� Name � . . �i ., -, � • �-�_ [�� _ � � �� °�*=1� Company - } Address�`J�;S . 'I� -'' 1�)�'�';�:•� Y:c'). ,�� ; � — City ��i 1-�`��.% State}}�;� Z :>'j� DaytimePhone ;,1�-�-�;::� � Property interest of applicant (owner, conhact purchaser, etc )'"�.`. .'� �l� 1`ll�.�;.�'. ; I�lu ��' t,n ;.,- �(' J 't Name of owner (if different) I ��'�,3c � f � �)�% �t'� � � Q_'� r'� .1 � ' � 1 , .� .. xl J i (attach additionalsheet ifnecessary) �� - _ 1 „�� • t r 5 � � � �"' � �?,-� PresentUse ��;�[,"1tYC. t �'��- t� Lot size {� � -: k� Present Zoning �_ Proposed Use JLl i j%i � �'l�'s\`�= :,T�t 1� _ _ _ � V_ � �� Legaldescrip6oni"i�� ,+1'1t:��1 �-�',. � �`�� t { � � ��5i 1 -� , _ 1. Variznce(s)requested: `r;a ;;cu2' li's:�= to s�?it T�t 7 fr�x: 3,3 �^u 4. 2 What physical characterisUcs of the property prevent its being used for any of the permitted uses in your zone? (topography, size and shape of lot, soii conditions, etc.) `t':e size of t;ie lo� 1 fa?ls s`c;rt of th4 recvir� L�� size for �-7 zening. 3. Explain how the strict application of the provislons of the Zoning O�dinance woufd result in pecufiar or exceptionai practical difficuliies or exceptional undue hardships �;itn t:e ci:�.�er:t zr�r,ir� we ��czLtd ro� Ix� a;�la 'to :.uild <x Y�,r2 �r tne l�n� ar*� 4iC CGU�.:' 1:G� �uiT9Z�' ; 'i.0 ''J�dl�.•: � lYJ!'•r? JT'i d?C� L:13L 4:° v.L'.l`�Z:3 i13�13 CQ v:.7S'C�e�4S°. ��.Y E:dL'.°..L'i�a :7.3J° �2�1t..� L'J U� fA'C Z Oi 1:122 t LrC�.o"'.`,��. �� ...�., ..��_ _ .. .-' 't •—_ — . � _ 4. Explain how the granting of a vanance will not be a substantial dztriment to the pub{ic good or a substantial impairment of the intent and purpose ofthe Zoning Ordinance. 'Itrre is rcct;. ca ti�� lo� tu �ild a?ia:e. Tns.-2 a:a ::tr2> hcTrs �n �i? 3��a k;i.rt� ts!:: sa; � zcr:in^ c:^,a:_ga�. :+11 c= c�� iyh;�rs act,rove of a nar,e teiny built ci: t:1e rm Al.sc tha hi3l �"nind lct was d�a:ed to � Y,c�n ste�o to _builu er:. .So ch� �e�. would nat lcak crcwde:3 - �'�.,�t.'LCL U�G- i..�.�.. Appiicant's signature ru---�P�t v`. � , �. . � � //_9,P` ;��,�; iC�SHIry�SUSE :.i..'•3` � C�E� , �;��. i,i',GiF�GL � _.t J. ''4_ k �_ �:. 4_. a"_ i +,:� -`,c5 Date S"�-5'-4`"�!' .�� 'IUV C—� --"��3" �U'�:'1�R.: ..iP��:11b�.i �i.1��I. i_OWi V rrc T25^10':r.at Gu11GiFiV .�SU SL. F'2LeT Si. 5u7EE .7'vl� 5L. l � k��l 7J1U�' Uear �oninq Hdministration; We are requestrnq a variance ana a tot split at sne property 858 So. Pt. Louqias Ro_ (ne property is oa�ned oy my parents Roqer and hiarv�ou uenrlein. rie ano my husoand Joe wouid like to ouiia a nome on Lot 1 or she properiy. We have the home we wouid iike to ouilo pickeo oui and have siqneo a purcnase aqreemenc wizh Shaae �ree �ottstruction. We also t�ave been approvea aireadv ior rinancinq snrpuqh Norwest hiortqaqe. i nave livea in tne area mv encire lir'e ana reailv woutd like to stav in ine area tor manv reasons. we nave cwo cniidren our ooy 3s aiready qoinq zo St, rascal`s i�avion and our aauqnter wili be startinq Kinoeroaroen in zne Tail. i wouid like them to continue qoina to sne same scnool. r=itso i worK ror my parents at tneir home ano ir we can ouild a home there i wiit be able to work and be there 7or our cnitaren wnen tnev qet out oT school. 1 nave a verv ciose Tamiiv cnai all live within 3 miles OT my parents nome. ihese are ,tust a Tew reasons ror wancinq to builo a home on Lot 1. ihe Hiqhwootl area nas beer a wonoerful piace to live in Lhe past :�v years. We woul❑ appreciate vour approvai or tne varidnC2 d.nC7 1ot Sp11t s0 tnat W2 Cfli'7 COnLli'iuE: LO l2vC tnere, inanK y0u TOt' yOUY L11Pte 3fld consideracion. Sincereiv, a.ti-��-�"'�L�.�---\�1.��-�.� � Laura uehrlein benvseK � �� nat�r�s 5-�1-9�' o � n �; ghho� �= � � . � �:_, S °` af � ho�-� �et� �� " 1 A� �e corNer� o-� �� Uac��as' �Cl , � v Prin�a Sid� uf. J �. � ��_:,.�'�.: ,�rp.�/-. -�� Chu�rli�ac Scic�tl�S� oi �- �. ��.,,�1i�- t�; �L1�.�Fay� � r �-r� �� 2� ��. � 3. � �� , l� � b' � s, ��. Qouq (o� '� / t tC � �= - —f �a y� /�� t�� F��>, ? ✓)�! 'L_. � �/�t ��-�/' J S '� �� iiNUe\ � �c3�-1' •4d-16��"�:�D'�i�, >`t - c-rr��, rti,v �J ' L . `�Y�,�..�5< -z_`\.. '� � �� /%,,L%.:.-e a�/ �'l % %'��; �� c,i:so�/ G-'--� /! •- �e-�� 1 MRY-29-1992 � � � � Q9 6 � ro � c � � � � � � � � �`I � Q� � 92�21 � m � � taDVRNCE SURVEYING 6124748267 P.02i02 i � � ' j' r l f f � � ` � � � i ---� ' I L _ � - � - °�` � � r �' r � r_ —I ' �� l r �p l �� l r � V O �j �� ;j Q� o � �'� � u�n � �J' �� r : �� h C! � ��7 � ` 1 �� { �� N 05•38'19" w ` c�x"� X ! _- � --80.11� ^,:, f c-7 56-� i U n 1--� � � �' � � � I N � * 1� �� N �S Z�� `g � ry b d � �.�?��Hl�� .9 � �� 1 � x� y �yg,1.3S S�� 1 �y� W(1WINNI � � W � o � !P _ w O J � '_' P Q � ��Zrc\�Y r � Ol vi o �,N\ O Z m M�� p ?u� r �^\ �� rn rm z � OS' o\ X�\t �.\�° �� i� Z N l6'g c '� \ ,� �3�? iNpIM'�pNi il �V 6 .� ° 00'4Z W S�'fBACK � . ll ' � �� ~ - - _____-;--Z�'L9 � p�� 1, r QQ• ��' � `" L � � , 1 � Del',t ° ��67.9 �.r�""� � N W � Q Q �g� � � � z `, �� Q �: m ,� � y � v M ~ Q � U � � ri � X � L`J w ri M ��, rrT� � , - „�, , XI� rn 1 "' � � _ '�� r � � ` � "�' � ' X � 1 f �l !� r � ��' ,i �� Y , � , TOTAL P.02 a�-�� \' , i �� V �' �� w � a , 9 I ^ � tI) ��tr � � } w o� � N 1a- 0 � .9•sz X �1 H�2�od =. , :� � �� . � � � � sq �'.; '�1 ; � �� . ��-�� . � _-- ..-y ` �--� .., w , � .-.:.. ��,� �� . ..�, ,, <- � ' . �- . � 'G n .. �V A � � a - .�� `.Y' ' �,'�"•'�,,£'k.a` .. `� `�� ` : � -_ �s . " �ii � �� ^m% fP,' ��—" ,� �_ry �� -_. � � '� : � =,,,�,�,�� - ��"_ . 4�°.=. •.� . � ,;� �=-,..y > - - '" ; i=; '- t A ¢{ t J f , 1� I J ° ^9 � � � , _ ./ ;a _ � _.:�vsX �.'� Y Y Y Y " �`� A � _ , _ . _ :+�:xcs a'sy"•:.-_ �' _ S� i O F L 1l� �� :,� ° 1 � " ^ � yy 1 � � �� F(' � � Vj � �" . � � � � _ � _ _. _ __ J S � � . � � � * '� 3 � �� Z'. W � � � ,. � ��i. a' � � `' s� P t � � s� M �" s , �1'`iV@i l ^� .�_ '. �� y�n � � f r''� ~ � � i �''-�+.:p_ . . 'n . ' - - " � � y � r � y' � ��!F ��H� :S'- �i �-. V ] y ,w �� # � �i ��^�;.� ;:. � � '� �-� ; . �- = _ q � `T`�- 4�:� ��.�°``. � ``�} 7 � . : � � ; F �.f �'� ''�� / � Y++ ` s� �� a �� . �:�sab�:.y.„`'`. : '� � � k , .° � {'yY F� �. L . ":. a � . �... %�. � 1` � Za{ � .�e� Y f �„ , -:�::-° �.0 �:,�. , . ;�= = ��:: � .: � �� =r __ . . �=�,.� t �.: (' � �= � �-„ . � �- � � :' �-- � '��..' 2 . F� '.�y � yL '+Y. ^5�sT� . ��4. 4 ' j j X " 5 ..:� � - 'rqn,i ' >�i . =S Y�� _ '.. a�� """`,•a, �. ''`� _i'`�z�= �_�� .s,"" Y. i �''c` � ''=' ♦ r y � � �.� ,r+ � � � ,� �� t:' . ' Y �/ . /�tf �! �,.� �c��c� ��r�� i �� 1 3�� e� � � � � � _� �� . � � � � _ , N � �� . _ -_ _ Q � 1 c� � - `l ��' � � ; '� i ��I I �� , � �-- _ i� . ��,, �, -_ -- ------_--------. i� � { ' - - �=; ,�5� , .._ -- aza. �, �. ,,_ � /.� - � ,-�_— P , e e- i �` � -- -- --' o �5 '\ z -- - __: (ia) � / � . , -�. •��g) ,, °^`_-- -- � o ' .g2g , ; ' ` y ' ;�. �� p ---- � .I_' , ; �� m�� - c __, , _ �, � . J ��) � 12) ��g)� / . - . .� � %" ` ` `' N �-->.{ 10 } --- '� 0 i 0, 0 i , \ '. / - �,,. , \ �� -- � �:r` y �, � , ,� j��,p '\� �\� ��.�� i , ,, �F�- - -- -�\ tio i i , r / � � . �� /: , ! j , -- - '�—'— ,% �(43) (42) \ \ � �'.�f � ��-':(�)� 01 �� '�t� ' � 0 ; : j� _- 2osa, � ; ; ; � _ , � � ; / :�'j_ �,. .:� � � � O�OiO: .. --.� . � _l. _ ._ i�z� e --=' - � --. : � ��. � �p ,, � __'- �-- � c� , x x �- a � � �, 20: � � _ .... m m -- \� ��_� , /T\ X /. `: ,�� j ,. ,� - � ;. : �\�� .;��. � �,-. , \ �/`\ \\ , \ ': , � .�, �- `� APPLICANT ��G�c'p� ��.Q 1 t(CL �CYI i ISC_K Pu��osE M a;� � 1, u-� re e.. FILE:t �n�/ � DAT[ lG'ZZ� P�i�G. DIS7 SCALG 1' = 400'� LEGEND ..��. zoning districl boundary %////////. . . ..- �pp � o one tamily � two tamiiy , b,�-Q multipte (am;fy nL orth�` • � ^ commercial ♦ r.,. industrial V vacant (�> � 9,�'� , zos2 y � o . �' c. 'rftn, .•'� °o ��-�� 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. SUNRAY-BATTLECREEK-HIGHW OOD I�1ZEL PARK HADEN-PROSPERIT'Y HILLCREST WEST SIDE DAYTON'S BLUFF PAYNE-PIIALEN NORTH END THOMAS-DALE SUMMIT-UNIVERSITY WEST SEVENTH COMO HAMLINE-MIDWAY ST. ANTfiONY PARK MERRIAM PARK-LEXINGTON HAMLINE-SNELLING HAMLINE MACAI.ESTER GROVEI.AND HIGHLAND SUMMTT HILL DOWNI'OWN Lz��i�G ��l.� �y j CITIZEN PARTTCIPAT'ION PLANNING DISTRICIS q� -� �� CITY OF SAINT PAUL BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS RESOLUTION ZONING FILE NLTMBER 98-146 DATE July 13, 1998 WHEREAS, JOSEPH & LAURA BENYSEK has applied for a variance from the strict application of the provisions of Sectioas 67.304 (3) & 61.101 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code pertaining to several variances in order to split off a lot and construct a new single family home in the R-1, RC3, TPD zoning district at 858 POINT DOUGLAS ROAD S; and WHEREAS, ihe Saint Paul Board of Zoning Appeais conducted a public hearing on 06/22/1998, pursuant to said appeal in accordance with the requirements of Section 64.205 of the I.egisiative Code; and WHEREAS, the Saint Paul Board of Zoning Appeals based upon evidence presented at the public hearing, as substantially reflected in the minutes, made the following findings of fact: The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use under the strict provisions of the code. The applicants have lived in this azea most of their lives and would like to stay in the area. However, there are few buildable lots left in the area and those that are buildable are too expensive for the applicants. There is enough lot size to split the property into two lots that would meet the minimum lot size requirements but that would entai] moving the existing house and garage. The construction of a house on the available portion of land is complicated by the slope of the property and the irregular shape of the lot. 2. The plight of the land owner is due to circumstances unique to this property, and these circumstances were not created by the land owner. The location of the existing buildings on the properiy which lunits the land available for development as well as the irregular shape and slope of the property are circumstances that were not created by the applicants. 3. The proposed variance is not in keeping with the spirit and intent of the code, and is not consistent with the health, safety, comfort, morals and welfare of the inhabitants of the City of St. Paul. The Highwood Small Area Plan adopted in 1942, requires that lots created after the effective date of the ordinance (1992) must have a minimum lot size of 9,600 square feet. This proposal does not meet the spirit and intent of that ordinance. a�-�c�� File #98-146 Page Three TII� LLViIT: No order of the Board of Zoning Appeals permitting the erection or alteration of a building or off-street parldng facility shall be valid for a period longer than one year, unless a building permit for such erecrion or alteration is obtained within such period and such erecrion or alteration is proceeding pursuant to the terms of such permit. The Board of Zoning Appeals or the City Council may grant an e�rtension not to exceed one year. In granting such e�rtension, the Board of Zoning Appeals may decide to hold a public hearing. APpEAL: Aecisions of the Board of Zoning Appeals are Cmal subject to appeal to the City Council within 15 days by anyone affected by the decision. Building permits shall not be issued after an appeal has been filed. If permits have been issued before an appeal has been t"�led, then the permits are suspended and construction shall cease until the City Council has made a final determination of the appeal. CERTIFICATION: I, the undersigned Secretary to the Board of Zoning Appeals for the City of Saint Paul, Minnesota, do hereby certify that I have compared the foregoing copy with the original record in my office; and find the same to be a true and correct copy of said origuial and of the whole thereoF, as based on approved minutes of the Saint Paul Board of Zoning Appeals meeting held on July 13, 1998 and on record in the Office of License Inspection and Environmental Protection, 350 St. Peter Street, Saint Paul, Mimiesota. SAINT PAUL BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS Noel Diedrich Secretary to the Boazd q�,�c� .iltly C,j� 1YY£i Dear City Gouncil Memoers, I am sending you a copy or the home that we are prapossng co build, site plan, our application ror a variance, a copy ot tne szarr repori from the zoning inspector ana his recommenaataon ot ap�rovai� a petition signed by over one hundred and tnirty or the ciosest neighbors, a summary oi the t-lighwood Development Policies and aur answers tn them, Zoning Board's reasan for deniai, and pictures oT tne property before the State acquired a part or our property tor t-iighway improvements and to con'tinue service lane to }iighwaod Avenue. Joe and I would appreciate you looking over the information. We have our hearis and dreams invested in this matter. It was quite disappointing to have the BoarG of �oning tleny our variance request. Especialiy because they seemed to deny the request ior a variance ❑aseo on the fact that we needed a variance. The Board of Zoning's reason tor th�eir denial was based upon tne i-lighwood Development Policies adopted by the �ity Council in 1992. in the plan right after the lot size requirements listed tor North Highwood the City Counci2 added they're reasons for increasing Iot size requirements was to preserve the waaded area's and the bluff. We will not be building inip the biuff or will we be removing any tree's to build our home. (]ur lot that we propose to ouild a home on would have been large enough if it wasn't zor the state acquiring a part of our land to improve Highway bl and to make the service lane continue across our property to Highwood Rvenue. 4�ie are being penaiized for it today. 1 believe unfairly. I have lived in the Highwood area far over 30 years. My husband Joe has lived here since our marriage in 1989, pur chiidren go za schopl at St. S'ascai's. Our son will tra 5tartinq his final year and our daughter is starting kindergarten. We love tnss area and 'nave aiways tried to iook out for its best interest with crime watch and volunteering, and neighborhoods ciean up. i'hank you for your time, we will appreciate tne chance to appeai the Board o Zoning's denial. aircerely, � � �, �� / � J � Joe and Laura Benysek 8S8 So. Pt. Douglas Rd. District 1, Ward % Joe. �- l..aura �Q�.ys�� 58 So Pt �ovg (as �d S-�. �Pa.ul, YYtxt 5� I 19 �31-l03�2 - �om� `13 S=:!�425 - U)ork (,t�.u,�� - � �� ,�.._ ,..... �� ,.,.. � '' � . . �a.. �I a . •_ - - w.� �ropose.d. �lome ASFILEY lI �MP ^y� � . � 1 � D9 � � � _ �,. � � � � � � �+ � r � 09'. Q2-21 \ � � AL'VFlNCE SUrt1EY]NG 6124746267 P.62i02 � ��, �,^.,' r �j '~ r l� � `%�'r I � 1 gr- -- �--� L_ L. L� �� r� � ^� —� ( � �— �' '�^ ^^� ` � + � N � t O u j l Y o� O j � a ° �'; `�� <y � "i" � � ''� � n u i � � �- v r�.' �� y p5'38'19" w• �' `' X � _ � _..g0.11-� .. r�J 67 56-� � i v ,°� o -,' V � . 3 . v � � ( - e 1��1 ^ O r � N e O . �� '� .,:=. � , •' � . Jol tD W ri M �. � E t N t7 � � ��N � Z Q � � � M � ¢ U � '�t M M x 1__ ' .__ * ��NDS Z�L`� � �1��2�d d%�,J��I� H��iO s�s£ s-�: � x�deias /`� 4 , 1¢ WINNI{ ��Z/ Kr £ � p �Ol �� _'_^��o�\\� �.c t� I < .'�. c ° 3m L6'8 y�� . .. +re+e�7 Ol � � o� � MtNNII.' U� ��N C o � z � 4 SE're ;C � i'B � . n 4 � � _... u--;--Z£'L9 -i�_�_��_�.._ l Q� � "' � ' — 00� �� 8 � `�-� �o Dei�,<a ��57.�9 f„"r- M p � ri M �►n rr7'� � � 63 � � �w N < N t�i. N�L�Od � � , XI � � . � � , � ' M , se�� VI i � � �� a� �� •^� f� j M'1 ~ � X 1 F f t ' 1 � 1 + /�"� N � �� ; � � � , j,�y: , � , TOTFY. P.02 �0 �?b6 � y o�� . �d � d' W � � 'i o• r m 2 � N � O > 1 � . ' X � ,_ , � - �°' -„ ad ��- � � � � �° � � � ------------- --------• � � .� �$ _�� . �( 35.20 � ��'IN�",�'`II�.�' 47.18 � 9.16 }� 33.86 " • �3( 41.Ot ` � � , . � � � { . � ' „ X 33.49 `�'' � � ^ n 33.88 �' � i_ � :, �RI�� e� �6.88 DG38.28� it_7 , e�s vuv[ 5 8990'1 ' W . x 47.99 .: __98.6. -- 0 e _ .�4�.@.� � � ! � 36.85 wNMUW 90E o� o��_� -J � �� ,a,-� - . 4 � s* . � 1 � � i � � ' � O � � � � .. �0 _ . • � � � 35 � a ,o,_'" -... � I � I = i 11 i '�1 ' ! � y � i Z! �` ' J 'y � V J�N^�I.�, I �' I : '°u . �_�25.6 � °m c� � n' � � i o ' I�� j� r V � � � �' 25.�_r � I 3�� ;� V � n�` S � �/ O � � ' �� g � Y 17.8 � SC7BA __85 � z ' S , �� I �I I I A + N 89'10'16" E J( 45J \ � . � e 1 X 6.58 X�1.02 S 89'10�16' N� '_ I � — — - 4�.0�. ►S� �'- --+V5.12-- � � I 33.96 L � I X 33.#0 IO I � � � � °tl � � �� _. �� A /��, � PNW � A O . ' N r\� ``{ �, ' \ l � � � ` �/ i — — � f . � I �� " L _ �. �� J � `ii.i;.�J. t ' I � J �K � 2 S70RT i DECK 1 ° � FRAME ;1858 � � 1 ' � v ' 1I.6� p� � • I � � '�e 8.J � i � t� �� -1 � u.e � ° ,, , I l; _ -- -- -� --�� R�� _ _ _ ._ — �–I G f� S pv�� SQ ; 1 ° ^a 1,`� 1 � n i � "� � L � c�n, � a � Z� o u i� J3.6 0� N "' T �,, n � , � � v m�. i ✓ � � I � f; i � . ; � C . , � �� - ----------� � �� ° g Guiac¢ R l C , � ; � , � �\3 � � �r � � a ; � � a; -- 6 N HMARK• ; t � TOP �I{JT HTpRM1T � ' � ^ � 30.59 . . . . ... . . � 27.SI � �� --133.38-- ... N 89'70'16' E _l._� �, , � `� ___ � z 5 '1 C' � _ ' �ZoNng�otfice,yse,oniy ,°.,,.°;-'° <... _%af_� APPLICATION �Of� ZOJ�fNG VARiANCE OFFICEOFLICENSE, IA'SPE4'T{O��ND ENVIRON,�fEA'TAL PROTECTf01V b 350 St Pe�er S[reet, Suite 3U0 _�--- ' � SairttPaul,111N55702-I510 �"i � J ;{= 166-9DU8 L. �� __ �; , � , . . .. . . APPLICANT I Name T.r ,.�,��= 1 �_ r.,•; R C%�i��,c�.l� T ompany -- J�O ' .L �l_ _� _ _ J 1 PROPERTY Ciry '�f . r��1liL state l�j_zip �� DaytimeFnone '��iS-L1C>2.� Property interest of appiicant (owner, contract purchaser, eta)!'r',ir �r,�1�ti _fE1�� n r/,« �_� c �,(- � -• �..� � ; . . ' ' . '� . J r� Name ot owner (if difTerent) i� i)Jc (' i`� ,(� v.�l f � _ i r� legat description i 1,} �('11 t' 11 4- 1 G ii 11 T3 �� )t -'t ( IL`'t' h�tY� k �» � i•� `� f Z 3 �� (atiach additional sheet rt necessary) � i cs�cl.ti,��11 t � � Lot s¢e :!, `� X i�' Present Zoning �Z -� present Use J��C�') l, �ti � ProposedUse _4l.ti �Cl Yi `�C'"�l•=� CYl It 2 • t• `• :. �:' 1 i.i. . c:c:.:: je 1. Vatiance(s) sequested: - � iv� M�uld li�;e to s�.2it Irt 1 fma 3, 3 aa,: 4. 2. What physical charecteristics of the property prevent its being used for any ot the permitted uses (n your zone? (topogrephy, size and shape of lot, soil conditions, etc.) 7Y�e size of the lot 1 falls short oE the recuir�: I,�t size for R-1 zaning . 3. Exptain how ihe sirict appfication of the provisions oi the Zoning Ordnance would resuft in pecu6ar ot exceptional practicai diificut�es or exceptional undue hardships. kith the cxvs+ent za�inq we wuuld not be able to b�i7.d a home an the land asxl we oould nct affani to build a home on a lot that we +aould have tp �ase, _ MY P�ts have gifted to us ?nt 1 of the � ��,..� • ' 1 s�S�66'T'pC�V`I'CSl�YR!1 4. Expiain how the pranOng oi a variance wili not be a substantial detriment to the pubiic good or a substantiai impairment of the intent and purpose oi the Zoniny Ordinance. There is roaa on the lot to build a Ysame. There are other homes �in the srea k the saroe zc�nin9 chancJes. All of a�r neighbors appruve of a hocae being t�uilt cn ��P'�tY• � the hiil behini 2ot Was dea.�sed to be CAC�c�a��o��r,�l�„>�a��° �e ai,e3 wvuld mt look c=o� ��••-:<.. Appiicant's , _- ; , ,,. Z .� ',� '�� . - _ _ ii o�.. . � �� SUHTTL C3�CK Tt� CtIAWGE il ':."y_ � . �;:.,<� � �t.:. . � � :. . . . .:... ... _-,/ . � �.:::_ `': ":s ��5. C30 ��5. C►� ■.00 �L�� Date S�t-�-4s( .. ° . �i . . � , `� BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS STAFF REPORT �" /� 1. APPLICANT: JOSEPH & LAURA BENYSEK , ROGER OEHRLEIN FILE # 98-146 � 2. CLASSIFICATION: Major Variance DATE OF HEARING: 06/22/98 :� � � . . 3. LOCATION: 858 POINT DOUGLAS �OAD S: .�, 4. LEGAL DESCRIPTIOPI: Subject to Highway, the Follbwing; Lots 2, 3 8c 4 and Excepi the East 35 feet, Lot 1, also Vacated Alley East of and Adjacent to Lots 2, 3 and 4, $lock I4, Burlington Heights • � 5. PLANNING DISTRICT: 1 6. PRESENT ZONING: R-1, RC3, TPD ZONING CODE REFERENCE: 67304 (3) & 61.101 7. STAFF INV�STIGATION AND REPORT DATE: 06/I 1/98 • BY: John Hazdwick 8. DEADLINE FOR ACTION: 07/28/98 DATE RECEIVED: OS/28/98 A. PURPOSE: Several vaziances in order to split off a lot and construct a new single family . home. .. . B. ACTION REQUESTED: 1). A minimum lot size of 4,600 square feet is required and a lot size of 6,732 squaze feet is proposed, for a variance of 2,868 squate feet. 2). A&ont setback of 30 feet is re�uired and a setback of 25 feet is proposed, for a variance of 5 feet. 3). Side yard setbacks of 1Q feet aze required and side yazd setbacks of 8.9 feet on each side axe '� proposed, for variances of 1.1 feet on each side. � ��,a�y C. SITE AND AREA CONDITIONS: This is an irregular pazcel of about-�t;569 square feet. The applicants aze proposing to split off a portion of the property with an area of 6,732 squaze feet and construct a new single family home. Theze is no ailey access to the property. The entire properiy slopes from the east to the west and the easterly hzlf slopes quite steeply. Surrounding Land Use: Primarily single family homes to the north, south and the east with Highway 61 and railroad tracks to the west. -ti D. BACKGROUND: The owners of this pazcel are giving a portion of the property to their daughter and son-in-law, the applicants, so that ihey can construct a house. The property owner, Roger Oehrlein, has a refuse hauling business and has legal nonconforming status to 0 File #98-146 Page Two E. FINDIIVGS:' ,_. , i. The property in question cannot be put to a.reasonabt� �se under the strict provisions of the code. . ' � The applicants have lived in this azea most of their liv�s'and would like to stay in the � azea. However, there are few buildable lots left in the erea and those that are.buildable aze too expensive for the applicants. There is enough Iqt size to split the propertx into � two lots that would meet the minimum lot size requirements but that would entail moving the exisung house and garage. The construction o f a house on the available portion of land is complicated by the sloge of the property and the uregular shape of the lot. 2. The pli�ht of the land owner is due to circumstances unique to this property, and these circumstances were not created by the land owner. ' The location of the existing buildings on the property which lanits the Iand available for development as well as the irregular s:�ape and slope of the property aze circumstances fliat were not created by the applicants. 3. � The proposed variance is in keeping with the spirit and intent of the code, and is consisfent with the heaith, safety, comf'ort, morals and welfaze of the inhabitants of the City'of St. Paul. The desire to remain in this area, close to family and work, and to develop a portion of •� ' unused land with the construction of a new single family home is in keeping with the � spirit and intent of the code. 4. Tl�e proposed variance wiJ�. not impair an adequate supply oi light and air to adjacent � property, nor will it alter the essential chazacter of the surrounding azea or unreasonably diminish established property values within the surrounding azea. Tfie west and north sides of the proposed new home abut stteets. The east side of the lot is steeply sloped and wooded. There will be no unpact on the supply of light or sir to the adjac�nt properties. ; '��.There are several lots in this immediate azea that do not meet the minimum lot size - reyuirements. A home constructed on a 6,732 squaze foot lot will not be out character with the neighborhood. The applicants have submit[ed a petition signed by several of their nei�hbors stating thai they have no objection to the proposed variances. 5. The variance, if granted, would not permit any use tliat is not pemutted under the provisions of the code for the property in the district where the af�'ected land is located, not would it alter cr change the zoning district ciassification �f the property. a�' �`� `�' '� File #98-146 , . a �, , � � � Page Three � .� � The proposed variance, if granted, would not change or alter the wning ciassificalion of the property. 6. - The requesf for �ariance is not based primarily on a d@s�re to increase the value or income potential of the pazcel of land. � ' ..�, F. DISTRICT COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION: As of the date of this report we have not received a recommendation from District 1. _ , i G. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Based on fmdings 1 trirough 6, staff recommends approval of the variance. , � , . e � � {. . . ,. �3 . _ �-� . , � , . ,. ��_ �� e�ition 1 have sesn the proposed site pian that is shown on page 28 of the Board of Appeals Staff Report investigatian datEd June 11, 1998, ! agree with the staff r�cammendation fhat is dn pag� 23 of this report. Si�ure Address Dale PMne Number � / ' t i . �,; • � ° � / � � L � ��d -S 3 5 / „ e_ ' 3 _ 3� c�C� �, Q 2 ./- . _ z.Z • fF'" 7 9 �7�G !3$:3317 '39� t ,�� y-9y��_ 7a-�ze I 3c� 6zb 1 i �3 � i I4 � ZCC� Z� ZZ Z� e >2 � ,� F� � f4 �Y�. �-Z`l' � �3g - S`� 2 7/4� 9`� �9� 7�9-srE� ��3 9S57p� �,�73S-C35'� ��1d� . �..� �s g ��s-�� i � 6 -a.5'i�'` S� ?3S-S'9�7 � 735-7�1/S �X �%/��l ZZ a �,�� Petition i have seen the prapasesf site plan that is sfioum on page 23 of #he Soard af Appeals Staff Report tnves#igation dated June 11, 1998, 1 agree with the staff recotnmendation that is on page 23 of this report. s� naa�ss o�e . � H� aa� � ,� Z S�-� s b-z� ��5� �� ov 5. �f-. nu �Q r��29�9� �g-a�s3 a�> � -..� �_ ` �' � �/ o y,S' �� s � 5 �a —z� � zi . _ .. , . ., _ _ . � - ._ _ . .,,�� _ , d �-. _,� � -j _ �3�- `� / �� .��o� � � 3> � ��I � _ �s� 3°) 3�� 3�� 39� yu} vr), yL� �{3� � ,,�_ ,, !r /� .a � -�/ Y� - � i�� r"sJ`at.fi�'�'` !�f_"`i'. � .i � _ r� � � t/ C( " � � rr u ( �, ;s. s�a „ „ _ ,. > _/�f'� n ir i( �� 6 �' �"� � 5 -3�-b - 6��"�(�'-7.Sl-�.�5`- u,� 23��7,aZ. %�....-Q � 3 r-�rR�.-, 'r ��'�� Petition I have seert the proposed site plan that is shown on page 28 of the Board of Appeats Staff Report Investigation dated June 11, 1998, I agree with ifie staff recammendation that is on page 23 of this report. ��1€ Sl�� L 66) '��r, �- r �, .-� Laa�-I P�, r� �rra�jo� F� S. �� f 9 I ;o-ra� G�� .�- �'� %. v T' i��=�=�-�r3 (t� S SS f l� 7.30 r�� G2� Rr76G�-T T t-(�R�wna b��t- �� rovrr..� r� �� I�G �O�-�2�-� .� �� / r , � ►-. ' . � , ,. •; � . Petition �1�' �� I have seert the proposed site plan that is shown on page 28 of the Boarc! of Appeals Staff Report ir�ves#igation dated June 11, 1998, i agree with the staff recommendation that is on page 23 of this re{�ort. Sinature Adc#ess Date Rhone Number . , � �� Petifion t have sesn the proposed site pian that is shown on page 28 of the Soard of Appeals Staff Report Investigation dated June 11, 1998, f agree with the staff recommendation that is on page 23 of this report. �� $� $� s� �� s� s� s� 9> �� , G� � G� �� °� � Si�ture Address tlate Pfio� tSumber n (1 n . .. , . i i .. f 0 �� S ��, � I� � 3� �ossa :o� Q � _ aa13 ?(aY/9Q 73D �-z�-�k °23fr-bn�� °a 9� 73(-sa�. � �3 � a.�/�a' 7�i - airo •��- 4£� 73�-7�I� l> �,�q�-q�-Z3 5 ° C��r'/f i -ia ° �3s� =�-S%7 - 9� �3s =s s�, �$? 3�-s'4g �� r� � 8� �S76sF� ��1�� i � 3 � � `� z3'� � �. s � , �� . , ' 6 . . t^� . �p��bb 0 Petition �" � � � lc �L /1 /� i� � �. G1 C�� 3 ! have seen the proposed site pian that is showrr on page 28 af the Bcard of Appeals Staff Report Investigation dated .lune 91, 19J8, I agree with �e staff recommendatian that is on page 23 of this report. q�-�� Peti#ion 1 have seen the proposed site plan tha# is shown on page 28 of the Board of Appeals Staff Report in�estigation dated June 11, 1998, I agree with the staff recommendation that is on page 23 of this report. Sinature A�ldress Date Phorta Number !�� 12� 130 /31 t32 �33 )3Y /35 IiG �3� � 3�' �3 f �� yye !v ( !y 2 . W !YY � rys IYL t9? le /Y9 fso i II''1�'� CITY OF SAINT PAUL � BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS RESOLUTION ZONING FILE NUMBER 98-146 DATE July 13, 1998 --_ � � � .✓,ot� �� WHEREAS, JOSEPH & LAURA BENYSEK has applied fqr a variance from the suict application of the provisions of Sections 67304 (3) & 61.101 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code pertaining to several variances in order to spiit off a lot and construct a new single family home in the R-1, RC3, TPD zo�ing district at 858 POINT DOUGLAS ROAD S; and , WI�EREA5, the Saint Paui Boazd of Zoning Ap(�eals conducted a public hearing on 06/22/1998, pursuant to said appeal in accordance with the requirements of Section 64.205 of the Legislative Code; and WHEREAS, the Saint Paul Board of Zoning Appeals based upon evidence presented at the pubtic hearing, as substantially reflected in the minutes, made the following findings of fact: The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use under the strict provisions of the code. The applicants have lived in this area most of their lives and would like to stay in the azea However, there aze few buildable lots left in the azea and those that aze buildable are too expensive for the applicants. There is enough lot size to split the property into two lots that would meet the minimum lot size requirements but that would entail moving the existing house and garage. The construction of a house on the available portion of land is complicated by the slope of the property and the irregulaz shape of the lot. 2. The plight of the land owner i5 due to circumstances unique to this property, and these circumstances were not created by the land owner. The location of the existing buildings on the property which limits the land available for development as well as the irregulaz shape and siope of the property are circumstances that were not created by the applicants. 3. The proposed variance is not in keeping with the spirit and intent of the code, and is not consistent with the health, safety, comfort, morals and weifaze of the inhabitants of the City of St. Paul. The Highwood Small Area Plan adopted in 1992, requires that lots created after the effective date of the ordinance (1992) must have a minimum lot size of 9,600 squaze feet. This proposal does not meet the spirit and intent of that ordinance. �� File #98-146 Page Two . 4. The proposed vaziance will not impair an adequ�te suppl}� of light and air to adjacent property, nor wili it aiter the essential cHaracter of the surrounding area or unreasonably diminish established property values within the surround,in,g azea. The west and north sides of the proposed new home �but streets. The east side of the lot is steepiy sloped and wooded. There will be no impact on the supply of light or air to the adjacent properties. , There are several lots in this immediate area t�at do not meet the minimum lot size requirements. A home constructed on a 6,732 squaze foot lot will not be out of chazacter with the neighborhood. The applicants have submitted a petition signed by several of their neighbors stating that they have no objection to the proposed vaziances. 5. The vaziance, if granted, would not pecmit any use that is not permitted under the provisions of the code for the property in the district where the affected (and is located, nor would it alter or change the zoning district classification of the property. The proposed vaziance, if granted, would not change or alter the zoning classification of the property. 6. The request for vaziance is not based primazily on a desire to increase the value or income, potential of the parcel of land. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Saint Paul Board of Zoning Appeals that application to waive the provisions of Sections 67304 (3) & 61.101 in order to split off a lot and construct a new single family home is hereby denied, on property located at 858 POINT DOUGLAS ROAD S and legaily described as Subj to Hwy, the Following; Lots 2,3 & 4 and Ex the east 35 ft, I,ot 1, Also Vac Alley E of and Adj Lots 2,3 and 4, Blk 10, Burlington Heights; in accordance with the application for variance and the site plan on file with the Zoning Administrator. MOVED BY : Morton SECONDED BY: wi�son IN FAVOR: a AGAINST: a NIAILED: July 14, 1998 Fi(e #98-146 Page Three �� TIME LIi�IIT: No order of the Board of Zoning Appeals permitting the erection or alteration of a building or- off-street p3� g facility shatl be valid for a period ]onger than one�year, udless a b�di�g permit for such erection or alteration is obtained within such period and such erection or alteration is proceeding pursuant to the terms of suci�•permit. The Board of Zoning Appeals or the City Council may grant an extension not to exceed one year. In granting such extension, the Boasd o�Zoning Appeals may deci@e to hold a public hearing. . APPEAL: Decisions of the Board of Zoning Appeals are final subject to appeal to the City Council within 15 days by anyone affected by the decision. Building permits shall not be issued after an appeal has been fded. If permits have been issued before an appeal has been filed, then the permits are suspended and construction shall cease untff the City Council has made a fmal determination of the appeal. CERTIF'ICATION: I, the undersigned Secretary to the Board of Zoning Appeals for the City of Saint Paul, l�iinnesota, do hereby certify that I have compared the foregoing copy with the original record in my office; and find the same to be a true and correct copy of said original and of the whole thereof, as based on approved minutes of the Saint Paul Board of Zoning Appeals meeting held an Jaly 13, 1998 and on record in the Office of License Inspection and Environmental Protection, 350 St. Peter Street, Saint Paul, Minnesota. SAINT PAUL BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS ��" ��C; ' C � �� Noel Diedrich Secretary to the Board ��.��Y '�ity �ouuci2 �i�mbers: I believe tt�e members on ihe isoarci of Zoning i�ppesis wna voied against our reauest for a variance did so not fuitv understandmg tl�e wav �me property in c�uescion at 8iR South Point l�ou�as itoad and the h�me tF_iaz we wotvd Iike to buil� corr�iciec� svith tt�e "Iii�hevooci L�eve2opn2e� PoL�ies". 1 wot�d like to g� through esch af the F1aas ihat are apglieabte to our situatian. The fallcwin�are Ceneral Plaas far the I3ighwoad Area: GI. ilie woaded r,u in Highwood especisjIIlv alon� the frr�ile btuIDine_ shoulci �ie preserved and pmtected. We will not be removing �rry trces #'rom ttss lot eithPr in xhe grocess of bcutdiag the hame ar cnee the h�me has been t�uitt. �Ne LviZt in fsct be �dcting trees to the Iot once the home is finisEicd. G2. �'�ppIic�Ie guideIines and stancI:u cls for Iancls within the bouncitlries of the �vlississippi I�Iatiai�ai River ruca Recxe,arion t�res skc�uld be endarsee�. The River C;orridor St�ndstrcis prohibit residential developm�ni c�n sl�pes of � eater than I8 percen� The slope of the lsnd in quesFion is 9 percent on the soutt� side of lot and 12 percent on the north side af t�e l�t. I do belie��e that ��e a.*e f�Iloti°ing the Ri�cr Canid�r Standards. G3. The e�tisl.ing matwe stand of t� should be preserved, a�x�T the natural canogy c�f vegeiative c:c2ver on vaeani and occ:upiec� Iots shoutd be rnainir�ineci. Again we wauid nc�t be ciisturbin� any existing w�?cxleci arer+. c�z natural canopy of vegetz3tive areas. G�. Trcc� r.�h a dia�:�:,: ir c;cccss of i^ in:..'�cs r�ot:i �C ^y1'�t cetcd. Again we will not be remuving any irees :ii all. Gy. A tandscape p�an shautd he required far a1i subdivisions. ��-'� ��' �te have a Iandscape pIan made. Ne eaould apprec.iate a Iitde Iead way witi�, the exac:i placemc�t of the trees and �rubs fhat we int�d to actct to the home site. The reasan for this bein� aEter the home has be� buiii ii wilI be mur� easier io imagine the landsc:aning. We will be doing the Iandscapm� ta t�e lot ourselves. G6. throu� tsi3. Ate Not Applica�te_ G24. Hnmeawners stiould be require3 to h�.ve c�' street paridng f�r i�vo ca�-s per househald. There is ample off sireet gari�ici�. an bath sides oFSprinrrsicie Drive and i�oth sides nf Ft. Dougtas Roacl. GIS. All utilities shouId he tmdergound. We have included undergrouad utilities ia the plaas far tE�e home. GI6. Is Nat Applic:able. The_pla�s for North Hi�hwood are as follows: NHI. `�'he mixlimmiun !ot size for unptatted reside�al Iots with mare ttcan 5t� gercent nf th� tot at a sloge csf less than I2 gercent should be 9,(i0Q sq�re feet. 1�e miIIimut� �ot �ize f�r unglattcd resdartial lots �vith mc�re ihau 50 percertt of the Iat ai a slope af IZ percent ar greater shauld be FS,OOQ square f�et. When detern�ining Iot size, the "base case" sIupes should be those ui exist�ce at Ihe time af preIirninary plat subdivision. Eslteraiians to t�te slopes should naY be allowed tttai would lower tt►e "base case" slope from 1 Z percent nr greater ta Iess tfi�an l 2 percent, P}atieci, �andersized lots wo�ild be consideir,cf non-c�anforming. This subject is tfie r�an fc�r us agglying f�r a vaziance for o•rer a111at size. Wc wi11 not be atterfng the �Iope af the tand in ordcz t� bui�d aa it �i2. Installation �nci ixnpravemeni of the water Iiues, �:uiiiaiy �nd storm sewers, pgvecl streets aud at�proorie#e liQhting shoul� be c:c3niinueci. We intend to have cily water installed and there is existing city sewer on Springside Drive and a Metra sewer vn Pt. Douglas Road. a�� tfI3. �riva#e domes�ic weIls 3houtci be gradiiatly phaseci �ut with the u;traciuclion of ciiv water service. We wi�t have city water service. NH4. t�sraugk NH8. Are Not Apg�icable. On page S of the Highwood Plaa iT cIearly sKates the f�llowing: The City Council's sspproved policy is c:ansisient with a Highwood Task �orce compromise solution based on pubIic comment during the review period. Since the Ari� in#ent of increasin� ihe miinimwm int size is to protect the environmemal resources in the area (includin� waoded areas and areas wit� hi�her sla�es) t�e ccrm�sromise is geared to a distinciion based on �ove. In addition, sitc rcview is re�uirea far arry residentzal deve3ogme�t on siopes 22 percent or greater. The palicy cancerning alteraiions to "base case" slope is to avoid the situation where a developer ftattens a lb gercent slope f� a o percenfi slope in arder io deveIop ihe entire subciivision wifh 9 square foot lots. ...,_ ,. � :.�; � � F ; �r�_ � ` �_ . � �; , �� , :� � �: s. 0. '. 4 �� ° a��;i -,�,��`r�,� �a �, +� + �� r .. y . ..a '*" , .._' � �� r �a, "` `.,;.-.,, _ w'�s � _ 5�4e �.. :, �;�� ,. ' �. n�,��' � � ° � � : y i `F �� 6 �:. �.,- �� .' �� _.� ' ° �-.-x^ u . ,. Cotmcil FIle # � $ `'�� p Green Sheet #� a t � �P ��3��ir Presented By Referred To RESOLUTION CITY OF SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA Committee: Date ■1 2 WI�REAS, in Board of Zoning Appeals file No. 98-146, Joseph and Laura Benysek 3 made application or a variance from the strict application of the provisions of the Saint Paul 4 Zoning Code (Code) for properry commonly lrnown as 858 Point Douglas Road South and 5 legally described as: Subject to Highway, the Following; Lots 2, 3& 4 and Except the East 35 6 feet, Lot 1, Also Vacated Alley East of and Adjacent to Lots 2, 3 and 4, Block 10, Burlington 7 Heights; and $ 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 WIiEREAS, the purpose of the application was to vary the standards of the Code so as to obtain a°lot sp1iY' and construct a new single family home; and WHEREAS, the Boazd of Zoning Appeals (Boazd) conducted a publia heazing on 7uly 13, 1998, after having provided notice to affected property owners, and the Boazd, by its Resolution No. 98-146, dated July 13, 1998, decided to deny the requested variances based upon the following findings and conclusions: 1. 2. The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use under the strict provisions of the code. The applicants haue lived in this azea most of their lives and would like to stay in the area. However, there are few buildable lots left in the area and those that are buildable aze too expensive for the applicants. There is enough lot size to split the properry into two lots that would meet the minunum lot size requirements but that would entail moving the exisfing house and gazage. The conshucfion of a house on the available portion of land is complicated by the slope of the properiy and the inegular shape of the lot. The plight of the land owner is due to circumstances unique to this properiy, and these circumstances were not created by the land owner. The location of the existing buildings on the properiy which limits the land available for development as well as the irregular shape and slope of the property are circumstances that were not created by the applicants. Page 1 of 3 ORiGINAL qg -�� 4 3. The proposed variance is not in keeping with the spirit and intent of the code, and is not 5 consistent with the health, safety, comfort, morals and welfaze of the inhabitauts of the 6 City of Saint Paul. 7 8 The Highwood Small Area Plan adopted in 1992, requires that lots created after the 9 effecrive date of the ordinauce {i992) must have a m;n;mum lot size of 4,600 square feet. 10 This proposal does not meet the spirit and intent of that ordinance. 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 411 45 46 47 48 49 4. The proposed variance will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent properiy, nor will it alter the essenfial character of the surrounding area or unreasonably diminish established property values within the surrounding area. The west and north sides of the proposed new home abut streets. The east side of the lot is steeply sloped and wooded. There will be no impact on the supply of light or air to the adjacent properkies. There are several lots in this immediate area that do not meet the minunum lot size requirements. A home constructed on a 6,732 square foot lot will not be out of chazacter with the neighborhood. The applicants haue submitted a petition signed by several of their neighbors stating that they have no objection to the proposed variances. 5. The variance, if granted, would not permit any use that is not permitted under the provisions of the code for the property in the district where the affected land is located, nor would it alter or change the zoning district classification of the property. The proposed variance, if granted, would not change or alter the zoning classification of the property. 6. The request for variance is not based primarily on a desire to increase the value or income potential of the parcel of land. Wf��REAS, pursuant to the provisions of Saint Paul L,egislative Code § 64.205, Joseph and Laura Benysek duly filed with the City Clerk an appeal from the determination made by the Board and requested that a hearing be held before the City Council for the purpose of considering the acrions taken by the Board; and WHEREAS, acting pursuaut to Saint Paul Legislative Code § 64.205 through § 64.208, and upon notice to affected parties, a public hearing was duly conducted by the City Council on August 5, 1998, where all interested parties were given an opportunity to be heard; and WIIEREAS, the Council, having heard the statements made, and having considered the variance application, the report of staff, the record, minutes and resolution of the Boazd of Zoning Appeals, does hereby; RESOLVE, that the Council of the City of Saint Paul does hereby reverse the decision of the Board of Zoning Appeals in this matter, based upon the following findings of the Council: Page 2 of 3 � 6 The Board erred in its strict application of Saint Paul Legislative Code § 64.203(3) to this application by requiring strict adherence to the m;nimum lot sizes stated in the Highwood Plan. This proposed development meets the overall spirit and intent of the code in that the applicant will protect the environmental resources of the area by 1) preserving trees in wooded azeas; 2) not altering the natival slope or topography of the lot; and 3) would be served by City water and ct g -'?�� 7 sewer. 8 9 AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that for the above stated reasons, the appeat of 10 Joseph and Laura Benysek be and is hereby granted; and 11 12 BE TT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the applicanPs originai request for a lot split and 13 variances as set forth in the site plan on file with the zoning administrator in Zoning File No. 98- 14 146 is approved; and 15 16 BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED, that the City Clerk shall mail a copy of this resolution 17 to the Zoning Administrator, the Board of Zoning Appeals, and the Saint Paul Planning 18 Commission. ORlG1NA� Requested by Department of: By: Adopted by Council: Date -`� � Adoption Certified by Council Se etary ay: - Approved by Mayor Dat By: Form Appr�ov� d by City Attorney BY: �J �G'✓ `"" � O ' `.� %✓ Approved by Mayor for Submission to Council Byc City Council Councilmember TOTAL # OF SIGNATURE PAGES v 1998 I GREEN SHEET xr�rt�xrcwecrw c�Q-rll.�' No 62116 NWYIDab arvco�rra ❑ arv�rroroEV ❑ rn'u.o�R _ �nuxcw.temncesme ❑Fxuiuumtw,�xro ❑ r�raa(oR�essrurt� � (CL1P ALL LOCATIONS FOR SIGNATURE) Finalizing City Council Action taken August 5, 1998 granting the appeal of Laura and Joseph Benysek to a decision of the Board of Zoning Appeals denying a setback variance and a minimum lot size variance in order to split a lot and construct a new single family home at 85S South Point Douglas Road. PLANNtNG COMMISSION CIB COMMITf EE CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION TRANSACTION r�ssmfsxisorvfiimeverwaricedunaeraconnaarortnieaeaammenn . rES nio Has this P�Nfirtn evef been a cib' empbyce7 YES NO Dcesthis G�� W� e SIdN rwA nomiefyP�sessetl bY arc�' cuneM d�P emP�%'ee? YES NO Is this persoMfirm a tarpetetl venda4 YES NO COST/REVQIUE BUD(iETED (qRCLE ONE) YES NO ACTNITYNWIIBER OFFICE OF Tf� CITY ATTORNEY� ��G� Clayton M. Robinson, Jr., Ciry Attorney � CITY OF SAINT PAUL NormColemtm, M¢yar CivilDivision 4QQ City Xa11 1 S West Kellogg &Ivd Saint Paul, Minnesota 55102 Telephone: 651 266-8710 Farsimile: 651 298-5619 Cous�t F�esearc�r Ce�.er August 14, 1998 Nancy Anderson Council Secretary 310 City Hall I S West Kellogg Blvd. St. Paul, MN 55102 Re: Appeal of 7oseph and Laura Benysek Board of Zoning Appeals File No: 98-146 City Council Action Date: August 5, 1998 Deaz Ms. Anderson: a�� ss� Attached please find a signed copy of a resolution memorializing the decision of the Saint Paul City Council to grant the appeal of the individuals above named. Would you please have this resolution placed on the Council's Consent Agenda at your earliest convenience. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Very truly yours, /C/.�.�/i Peter W. Warner Assistant City Attorney PWWlrmb Enclosure cc: Councilmember Coleman e. . CITY OF SAINT PAUL Norm Coleman, bfayar JUIy 1$� 1998 Ms. Nancy Anderson City Council Research Office Raom 310 City Hall Saint Paul, Minnesota 55102 Dear Ms. Anderson: ENVIRON.�IENTAL PROTEC'I'ION 5 � { 0 � � � RobeJt Kessler, Direclor S4 LOA'RY PROFESSIONAL Zelepharse: 6I2-2669090 BUILDING Facsimile: 612-2669099 Suite 300 672-26b9124 350 St. Peter Stree[ S¢int poul, Minnerota 55102-I510 �iCz�;l-�3; �-v,,:ci.^.`? `_ ��'.,P� ��;L i °� ��9� T would like to confirm that a public hearing before the City Council is scheduled for Wednesday August 5, 1998 for the following appeal of a Boazd of Zoning Appeals decision: Appellant: File Number: Purpose: Appeal of a Board of Zoning Appeals decision denying a setback variance and a minimum lot size variance in order to split a lot and construct a new single family Address: Legal Description: Previous Action: Laura & Joseph Benysek 98-146 858 South Point Douglas Road PIN 142822130008 District 1 took no position on this matter Staff recommended approval. Board of Zoning Appeals; Denied the request on a vote of 4-3. My understanding is that this public hearing request will appear on the agenda for the August 5, 1998 City Council meeting and that you will publish notice of the hearing in the Saint Paul Legal Ledger. Please call me at 266-9082 if you have any questions. Sincer y, -` �� ohn Hardwick " +F7RS1'RUfS� ' ' - - . . . . -_' NOTICE OF PUI3LIC HBARTlRG � _ � _ - -, The Saint Paul City Council will conduct a pubtic hearing on Wednesday, August 5, _ CC: COUricil IVIeIDbei L8t111y 1995 at p.m, in theCity Councii Chambers, Third�Floor, City Hall-Court House, to consider �the appeal of' Laura and Joseph Benysek to a_ decision of the Baazd of Zoning Appeals�denying a setback yariance and a minimum 7ot siae variance in�oz&er ta�split a lot.and construct a�new siugle family home at 858 South Point Douglas Road. - ., - - .. _ � - - - Dated: July f7, 1998 . " �. � �- � � . � � � NANCY hNDERSON� : �'' ,-_ . . - . - -- � �_ Assistant City Conpcil Secretary � . - ' .. . , � (Jaly�1.1998): . . Zoning Technician `lg-��1 APPL1CATt Depanment o Zoning Sectic II00 City Ha� 25 West Four Saint Pau1, h 26lr6589 APPELLANT PROPERTY LOCATION Zoning File Name , Address/Location� �� 7-4�F� �ni,Lll�� TYP� OF APPEAL: Appiication is hereby made for an appeat to the: � Board of Zoning Appeais � City Council under the provisions of Chapter 64, Section , Paragraph appeal a decision made by the /Sc�✓� a� Z�,�.-r on � wt-�, ! 3 , 19�Y. File number:_ (date o decision) of the Zoning Code, to A a��-C S GROUNDS FOR APPEAL: Expiain why you feel there has been an error in any requirement, permit, decision or refusai made by an administrative officia4, or an error in 4act, procedure or finding made by the Board of Zoning Appeals or the Planning Commission. if" �4'_C� j� A j ��_ ��tt=�C�([Cl l.L,�r j7^.,'$�i'.�'a.�.�.41i �4�r'..f� .. , .�1'1 .1��{�� .4 __ � ii't __ .� _ l _ �'.4 � � � ��. Attach additional sheef if necessary) AppiicanYs signzfvre��,i t�� ,�_i ��0�_�C _� Date 7 �-, City ��,�Gd' L�r rif� i"o�aeil ?!�Ism.,�'ers, �r names ara Tosao$ and Lau€a BenyseI�. i�iy husban�i anci I aion� wi�it rnv father a2oger i�i. Ck;I�rlein :�plied fvr n�ajor variau�,c #Iirou� fY Fx�aru of Zonir,�- Tne Eclarci uf 7nning ruIc;ci aga�1;! s�ur ap�Iiwlicu� �n the basis thai it uici uc�f .;oxupIy �viih [iie fIi�waa� a�EtiEiOF:I'u�i� �U12Ci85. 1 t'iE�Ic1%� `u u0 ilfii li1`u"�c�IS'�.3I"iu uc �I�c.�Itiri.'s s7� uii, �'iia3l -�2'i{�i ttcT'ile.^a�i 'Jt2'i 3�1P�1Cc'1�1DI11II CISO7. i 4?��e read the Highweed I)e��elonmen# Yoiic�es Book±et as±d can oni� fi� one of' iheir eriteria's that we cio a�t meet. th� page 4 under tlte Si�b-Eieacling i'�orih F3ighwcxx! N. �I. I it states the m;nim� Iot size to be 9_6UU souase feeY. i believe the oaraQragh following N. fi. I e�slaixss thc previous cu�uicil`s nrsmacv inif:nt �i inereasiva� i.hc minimum lc�t size is to pratei;l wcxrded areas ancl areas �n tugh slr��es. In c�ur �tans to buil� ocEr Iwme rac ��ill r�ot be bu;l�g cn a sl�pe h;�� fria�� 1 I�,.�cu�#. '�'he 14�ii�Gs:,ta I'.iver Ccrrciar crit;,ri� are ttsa: thcre is no resid�ntiat devetc�ginent an s3��nes grcaf:r tf�au i& g:,rc�:t. �Nc �;�ill bQ 4vall A�in tt�ei� �ide?ines. 4�e aisa wili not be rwmesing aar tr�es or �:eb tatien 4��?e* L}L?II �.'�S. �tY f��t �p iIItQt*£� QR �?�?ILti*I� 3Lf{�?ti0I28� fTE�S .�t2ff gYi.*?I�Jc tp titp ini ¢?f8. �e believe that �e �ave meet all af ts'�e criteria set fortltt by the �oard of Zoning's applicafion for vatiance's requiretnenis. I have liveci in "the �ii�hwood arE:a for 3i �ears. Iv1y husb�md has li�ueci h�.te sins:� vze nz�u�ied i� 1�89, i�'e wuu2d 1� ic� wr�fin;z� to Iive in 5l. Pakt and b�'d �ur haxUe. C+� cl�ildren go t� schcol at St. Pascal's F;ay3�a on Tliir3 St. and �hit� Bear Ave. a�d are d�siy rooted � the comm��tity. W� �,.2cc �.e� :�ctive 'vz oar �ommtmity and so have our children b� doing voluntear wer� church and clesn zig. We are vea}J ciose tv our fami.sy whom aii raside in ��tnot 1, an� weuId like t�a *e_main so. we vatue �e chance to xnpeai tire Board of Zoning`s de�:ision anci hone that agree wifh ;vSr. John Hardwick's recc,m�uencisiion ann voie for approvaI. +"TV'c: also hopc tt�at if yoa t�cve any quesrions or i�t� i.hai yvu biux� them to our atteaiiion. L�'e wiII cica our besi. 40 �ess �azm. Tl�a�' y�u for you: time and considcraYion. Stncerely ��,�, � � �' � ��',,�L 'r 4�U�,� ^ J � ��s�� ;,aura C�cIuiei� Ber.ysck `'-! � 3- i � q�-�1� � �-�i !? S�3#3 ! have s��n the proposed site �lan that is sho�rrn on pag� 2R of the Saard of �,ppeals Staff Rep�rt ;n�restiyuti�� d�t�� Juna 11, 9��8, I agree w�ith th� st�ff r�c;c�mrr}endai�or� t'r�ai is �n pac�� 23 of �f�i� repor�. Sir�aiure Aridress fYaie Ptu�wNumb_x � t�> �L �? � I=: �<, � ;�: n —'� � � i_� .^ =:: � 2 j�i 5- ('t l�o�;,°l<, .< - � _-,.- i ,, r � ,, ; r Y,, � ��,. i� _ �^ � � t .z 31 > � =1Y�� -��f�`i - � — ., � . `� �r-- -�� .% _) �� . �� 7 4•3317 >�� i ` /`I � %�fl�� -�� f > �,�- � 1 L �7�g"��S �Q, 7/�'� i ,�v' 73y-s5 E� �`13 � S 57�- G � 73�•C3 s /� `,7�� `� ;t� c�-f 3 -' I � = �� 59� i 73G �;, �-i 73� -S'9� 7 735 ; , , �i=/�� ; ��-�G� r��itiQn i ha:r° s°°n th� �r�posn� sit� plar that is sho�rrn on pa�° �3 of tt�e �aard cf �p�als Sta�# Pe�ort in��estigation dated ,luna '11, 1 g98, 1 agr�� wiih the staff r�cc�m�t7�n�faiio�� thai is �n �aaete 23 vf if�is repori. Simature Adcitess �aie Phon? Number � /, v'' '� �.��. .�,,, - �:c�_ l /,�r� `'�.�?..�� o-?,'-y� 73� � , .� � � .�t '?�` P ( �;�.�J �� +� �.�'� - 7:: C� - t'' � . � i � .; l'✓ � i . . � y _ c) `5 7%'-� ' C� �S J <;?�) �,-�-1 i i':'%;y 7 �; ��; ` ;r' _ i`��. `.:I -� c �'�l. c .- -, ��_:,,,� �� p � J - { =�� ='�_. _� _� __�- -�''/ ? =:L ' , % �,%�'!- = -'/> f� F i�' --� � 'ii"� C I LI Cl'--i '. _°i �`�l;�-' �'r � , r��i �-' �, . �,� ` � � r ; %, " y^ � rn -/ ,\ :' y y � � ' `�<--. , f -�--��---- ;.- � % `� � 1 ��ta .�c;.:� �7' ��, ��.T� 1 'l;;uc.�;;�:_a�> ../I�I%;`%�`( � 73 = 7 �� , 5• �� . G�R ; i'Y^_�'�/i _l �/S�i >:;- T- I Gt� I�G_S / yi, �=' �=' 7`�"� �>�j '� ,-� � � � ,. , , � r/� �� , . . `'�,= "� s � � �� o ', _ V 7 /-! r , / .'' � � � 1-" � "r . ., � "l �l'� , 'i �'o __-.. � �. / � J — � ? ��, � >— � `I ? -� �; 1� -� , � - p i ��} � �� — ,�; �� < r� `', � ' J— l ~�/� "!;)� Y_'�� L�� tl: � �/:) �- ' � �.oG - .� j I y''�'='r y; � : i -`vL�" �y�-��; Y�`G� {�r � .�S i , , � ., .� �., � ,'S �� 6zi � n � c=�,� � /�� i' �. ?SCI�t�e; i !!1�'I.-,. �.,_ / �, � � �, _ -N/�� n i�, ,, l-�i i l '.., >> � ,.,-:�/ ��.- --..ct_i -��' !� ' 7 y _ G Y_ �� la 5 I� � � � _ ,�:� /,. i� ; 7 , , Y � � �- A��;S �i:� [r " << J !/ i fl� ✓ `� j� � � r ! ( r �_ v (! �� (� � �L�. ��-�� GsG2- �o�d lJCa=�t�r+sr� /4u �" � 8' d -- . /.',,.L(e�/' �J 21'/� .ht�iinoCld Pi 1� > 3 S 7,d'IS ��' -,3s, s�a�- i f� -�! _�� v n (! /( ,-'�.�rt"-^ " �> �S�-5�� >��'— �S! -S�-�S �- 23� ' 73s-7sR�-- ��,�� Pe�i�ion I ha�is se�n th� propose� sits p!an that is shown on pagA 23 of th� Board of Appeals Staff Report Investigation dated June 11, 1958, I agree with the staff recamrnet�dation tF�afi is or� �aea� 23 0� ihis r�poit. Sinature Address Qate Ph�xw Nismber ,, -� �-� �f , u x l ,�' 5�\ ;� - ; S% : �`' < �h ^ �S,i m C�?� / ��. � � r�� _ � a� L�,�. �ths �G� �� 5��✓x1� - ZI �4S �g�, dl zl O 7 A -�_ � 1 � / >�� r` Vt cr S,� �-(_ c� 0 �'3. ��lTil�ti .�'D. j. Si !;�L� � ( � c C�� '( O ,( Ssll� Ce�z� � --� �l zs `fS �l �i c�/zs�� 6�� 4 �� t � �� (�J�b 1�73 -(�31� i�l� -ii; 7i% ;3 73G-9��, .;h�� '�t i}��R, Gh��-, _ �� t�if"�r �Y�S'��r �x�� '�. � �� I �r_� /, 1� �1�-r-- (;l�Cv1� '• - �.s {i'Z � r- % )�1t �q� C �-c {1 � ( 3 i� - � < ` -' , – � -� — _i ��i �1`J�l '.R.'� _1 j�.�i�t:c/\� �.'fi�t {�i �Utial-:��' i��t3. G,�!i� ��'� -� 7 I °'%: �;�/ f�/� q �,�� 'etition 1 ha�re seen ths proposed site plan that is sho�rrn on p�gs 2� of the Board ofi�ppeafs Staffi P.eport tr�vestig Vat�C� JUTTc 11, 1�98, 1 agree with it�e siaff recc�mmendat�on thai is on �a�� 23 ui ii�is r�port. Sinaturn Addre�cs t�t? PRu�n? Number r 7 q�� 'etition � have s��n the proposed site pfan that is sho�rrn on page 28 of the f3oard of f�ppEais Staff Report fn��restigation dated .lune 11, 'f 998, 1 agree with the sta3f recon}mendatian that is on page 23 of this repurt. Sir.ature aciclress t7atP Plsc�nP tJumbx � '1 � / �� 4�C�,� ac.�� 7 H�n��z�� 1�� '� L�/�I� 73�5 �us_s� 'S � � � . � �-, � �, �,��ati �,1 t i k'?c�� `l `F �� ` � �� 7 ) ;� 7 """'__ g; '�/�. ��! �' ._rrr.t'.( .. � E�'7 (1 �jti J �; �c��•��<% �1�. 4� �/A S G ? (' r�� t 3 _ ,. � , . . ., � Y '\` � �°�.� �1 � 7� ; � => �: � i� `� o�� ; � , �,> � -,--� c,� . ( , �,.._' cy�� G �`� � C �� _� �' �' � � � � :_� riy � � �� l_ �� ,� . IP� � ao - 7 2 ' �,4�;� � �� r�.�� i af'r �� .r�z. ,� �9G� �r�L� t��, ,� �l1-,� 2.� � 1�,��„ ' (2ti�, ��,�� ( S�a', �� -c � 7 _5e�.� � �: � � � ��..� C��Y'�� 1,'C�'� � �.� �' '�.�i f L�� `� I )/,` _ �1C.S� C? C�;: / r. �, c. .\-f- �„�- l� � � � �' �, �'� J. � S/� l/�" .�- {Cj>` i.� (.�" ":� � X� l L� .1 KL} N/�+%� / /�✓ _�� r (t(��y��IC `�3D �- -z�- ,x `23fc-6��, "/�-YI`7� 73f-s�� , , i� � /; �! `7 -�'� � /��5'� 7�/-.�/jr C--7=i Y� 73�-%��-�1 � i 1� i�,�, ��._'� 5= l ' i I l`--�s"=%� �3s J �`�% ( - j� �3 -S� �� J�,�-��- �3r-s-; � _ho� r/ �35"--��2� C/ 3'c%2 � 7�B"7�s � r � �^ �'7�� '�` �C �i / �3u/ � � 730- ��3'i % - 3� �_ ��s,�s�� '� � �e�l�IOtl .: � �y_ _ I have sesn the propvsAd site plan that is sha�.vn on pag� 28 of the Board of Appeais Staff Report inrrestigation dated June 19, 19�38, i agree with the staff recam�nenciation t9�at is on page 23 of this report. l -- - -� r, .,,:.c..�;j? ��s r� �, .—: _,__�— . , .,,�. � _�.rl �� .t� �L � c<�, �-� , Q��«1 t� C; t C��n�:l ��i y 1�� 1 , � � � � , �; ._ � �.,.,, �;; �-('�.�� w-»-: �,��!, .., l � , s�� r i c �"- + ��\ <? _:_=��.i 4"li�. � :� �. .� �'_ � � � �18—�� ` AS4iLi�S 3� �g -`1 �� Original variance request packet q &� - �1 t� � BOARD OF ZO?�iING APPEALS STA�F REPORT I. APPLICANT: JOSEPH & LALJRA BENYSEK , ROGER OEHRLEiIv' FILE # 98-146 2. CLASSIFICATION: Major Variance AATE OF HEARIriG: 06,'22(48 3. LOCATIOti: 8�8 PO1NT DOUGLAS ROAD S. 4. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Subject to Highway, the Following; Lots 2, 3& 4 and Except ihe East 35 feet, Lot 1, also Vacated Alley East of and Ad,}acent to Lots 2, 3 and 4, Block l�, Burlinn on Heights 5. PLANNING DISTRICT: 1 6. PRESENT ZO\ING: R-1, RC3, TPD ZONI:�G CODE REFERENCE: 67.304 (3) & 61.101 7. STAFF INVESTIGATION AND REPORT DATE: 06/11198 BY: John Hazdwick 8. DEADLINE FOR ACTTON: 07/28/98 DATE RECEIVED: OS/28/98 A. PURPOSE: Several variances in order to split off a lot and construct a new singie family home. B. ACTION REQUESTED: 1). A minimum lot size of 9,600 squaze feet is required and a lot size of 6,732 square feet is proposed, for a vaziance of 2,86& square feet. 2). A front setback of 30 feet is re�uired and a setback of 25 fPet is proposed, for a variance of 5 feer. 3). Side yard setbacks of 10 feet are required and side yard setbacks of 8.9 feet on each side are proposed, for variances of 1.1 feet on each side. .��,a�� C. SITE AND AREA CONDITIONS: This is an irregular pazcel of about2�t6 square feet. The applicants are proposing to split off a portion of the property with an azea of 6,732 squaze feet and construct a new single family home. There is no aliey access to the property. The entire properry slopes from the east to the west and the easterly half slopes quite steepiy. Surounding Land Use: Primarily single family homes to the north, south and the east with Highway 61 and railroad tracks to the west. D. BACRGROUIVD: The owners of this pazcel aze giving a portion of the property to their daugh?er and son-in-law, the applicants, so that the}' can construct a house. The property owner, Roger Oehrlein, has a refuse hauling business and has legal nonconforming status to a� File �98-146 ��-�� Page Three The proposed variance, if granted, would not change or alter the zoning classification of the property. 6. The request for variance is not based primarily on a desire to increase the value or income potential of the parcel of land. F. DISTRiCT COIJNCIL RECOMMENDATION: As of the date of this report we have not received a recommendation from District l. G. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Based on findings i through 6, staff recommends approval of the variance. �3 APPLICATION FOR ZONING VARIANCE Zorting o€fice use onTy _ FiEe nurttber: Fee: g � � :. - _�--- OFFICE OF LICE�SE, INSPE�7�E0,�'S �.�D E��4�IR0��3IE,ti"TAL PROTECT O.�' 3 '� � 350 St. Peter Street, Suite 300 _ - � Saini Pai�l, bLV 55102-I510 • J� J!� Ci i 166-9003 '--------�'. APP�ICANT PROPERTY Tentative hearing date: �`- '= � � -, � Seetion(s): i= `I'. =.' ' / t ; ? City agent `.._.°~� Name � . . �i ., -, � • �-�_ [�� _ � � �� °�*=1� Company - } Address�`J�;S . 'I� -'' 1�)�'�';�:•� Y:c'). ,�� ; � — City ��i 1-�`��.% State}}�;� Z :>'j� DaytimePhone ;,1�-�-�;::� � Property interest of applicant (owner, conhact purchaser, etc )'"�.`. .'� �l� 1`ll�.�;.�'. ; I�lu ��' t,n ;.,- �(' J 't Name of owner (if different) I ��'�,3c � f � �)�% �t'� � � Q_'� r'� .1 � ' � 1 , .� .. xl J i (attach additionalsheet ifnecessary) �� - _ 1 „�� • t r 5 � � � �"' � �?,-� PresentUse ��;�[,"1tYC. t �'��- t� Lot size {� � -: k� Present Zoning �_ Proposed Use JLl i j%i � �'l�'s\`�= :,T�t 1� _ _ _ � V_ � �� Legaldescrip6oni"i�� ,+1'1t:��1 �-�',. � �`�� t { � � ��5i 1 -� , _ 1. Variznce(s)requested: `r;a ;;cu2' li's:�= to s�?it T�t 7 fr�x: 3,3 �^u 4. 2 What physical characterisUcs of the property prevent its being used for any of the permitted uses in your zone? (topography, size and shape of lot, soii conditions, etc.) `t':e size of t;ie lo� 1 fa?ls s`c;rt of th4 recvir� L�� size for �-7 zening. 3. Explain how the strict application of the provislons of the Zoning O�dinance woufd result in pecufiar or exceptionai practical difficuliies or exceptional undue hardships �;itn t:e ci:�.�er:t zr�r,ir� we ��czLtd ro� Ix� a;�la 'to :.uild <x Y�,r2 �r tne l�n� ar*� 4iC CGU�.:' 1:G� �uiT9Z�' ; 'i.0 ''J�dl�.•: � lYJ!'•r? JT'i d?C� L:13L 4:° v.L'.l`�Z:3 i13�13 CQ v:.7S'C�e�4S°. ��.Y E:dL'.°..L'i�a :7.3J° �2�1t..� L'J U� fA'C Z Oi 1:122 t LrC�.o"'.`,��. �� ...�., ..��_ _ .. .-' 't •—_ — . � _ 4. Explain how the granting of a vanance will not be a substantial dztriment to the pub{ic good or a substantial impairment of the intent and purpose ofthe Zoning Ordinance. 'Itrre is rcct;. ca ti�� lo� tu �ild a?ia:e. Tns.-2 a:a ::tr2> hcTrs �n �i? 3��a k;i.rt� ts!:: sa; � zcr:in^ c:^,a:_ga�. :+11 c= c�� iyh;�rs act,rove of a nar,e teiny built ci: t:1e rm Al.sc tha hi3l �"nind lct was d�a:ed to � Y,c�n ste�o to _builu er:. .So ch� �e�. would nat lcak crcwde:3 - �'�.,�t.'LCL U�G- i..�.�.. Appiicant's signature ru---�P�t v`. � , �. . � � //_9,P` ;��,�; iC�SHIry�SUSE :.i..'•3` � C�E� , �;��. i,i',GiF�GL � _.t J. ''4_ k �_ �:. 4_. a"_ i +,:� -`,c5 Date S"�-5'-4`"�!' .�� 'IUV C—� --"��3" �U'�:'1�R.: ..iP��:11b�.i �i.1��I. i_OWi V rrc T25^10':r.at Gu11GiFiV .�SU SL. F'2LeT Si. 5u7EE .7'vl� 5L. l � k��l 7J1U�' Uear �oninq Hdministration; We are requestrnq a variance ana a tot split at sne property 858 So. Pt. Louqias Ro_ (ne property is oa�ned oy my parents Roqer and hiarv�ou uenrlein. rie ano my husoand Joe wouid like to ouiia a nome on Lot 1 or she properiy. We have the home we wouid iike to ouilo pickeo oui and have siqneo a purcnase aqreemenc wizh Shaae �ree �ottstruction. We also t�ave been approvea aireadv ior rinancinq snrpuqh Norwest hiortqaqe. i nave livea in tne area mv encire lir'e ana reailv woutd like to stav in ine area tor manv reasons. we nave cwo cniidren our ooy 3s aiready qoinq zo St, rascal`s i�avion and our aauqnter wili be startinq Kinoeroaroen in zne Tail. i wouid like them to continue qoina to sne same scnool. r=itso i worK ror my parents at tneir home ano ir we can ouild a home there i wiit be able to work and be there 7or our cnitaren wnen tnev qet out oT school. 1 nave a verv ciose Tamiiv cnai all live within 3 miles OT my parents nome. ihese are ,tust a Tew reasons ror wancinq to builo a home on Lot 1. ihe Hiqhwootl area nas beer a wonoerful piace to live in Lhe past :�v years. We woul❑ appreciate vour approvai or tne varidnC2 d.nC7 1ot Sp11t s0 tnat W2 Cfli'7 COnLli'iuE: LO l2vC tnere, inanK y0u TOt' yOUY L11Pte 3fld consideracion. Sincereiv, a.ti-��-�"'�L�.�---\�1.��-�.� � Laura uehrlein benvseK � �� nat�r�s 5-�1-9�' o � n �; ghho� �= � � . � �:_, S °` af � ho�-� �et� �� " 1 A� �e corNer� o-� �� Uac��as' �Cl , � v Prin�a Sid� uf. J �. � ��_:,.�'�.: ,�rp.�/-. -�� Chu�rli�ac Scic�tl�S� oi �- �. ��.,,�1i�- t�; �L1�.�Fay� � r �-r� �� 2� ��. � 3. � �� , l� � b' � s, ��. Qouq (o� '� / t tC � �= - —f �a y� /�� t�� F��>, ? ✓)�! 'L_. � �/�t ��-�/' J S '� �� iiNUe\ � �c3�-1' •4d-16��"�:�D'�i�, >`t - c-rr��, rti,v �J ' L . `�Y�,�..�5< -z_`\.. '� � �� /%,,L%.:.-e a�/ �'l % %'��; �� c,i:so�/ G-'--� /! •- �e-�� 1 MRY-29-1992 � � � � Q9 6 � ro � c � � � � � � � � �`I � Q� � 92�21 � m � � taDVRNCE SURVEYING 6124748267 P.02i02 i � � ' j' r l f f � � ` � � � i ---� ' I L _ � - � - °�` � � r �' r � r_ —I ' �� l r �p l �� l r � V O �j �� ;j Q� o � �'� � u�n � �J' �� r : �� h C! � ��7 � ` 1 �� { �� N 05•38'19" w ` c�x"� X ! _- � --80.11� ^,:, f c-7 56-� i U n 1--� � � �' � � � I N � * 1� �� N �S Z�� `g � ry b d � �.�?��Hl�� .9 � �� 1 � x� y �yg,1.3S S�� 1 �y� W(1WINNI � � W � o � !P _ w O J � '_' P Q � ��Zrc\�Y r � Ol vi o �,N\ O Z m M�� p ?u� r �^\ �� rn rm z � OS' o\ X�\t �.\�° �� i� Z N l6'g c '� \ ,� �3�? iNpIM'�pNi il �V 6 .� ° 00'4Z W S�'fBACK � . ll ' � �� ~ - - _____-;--Z�'L9 � p�� 1, r QQ• ��' � `" L � � , 1 � Del',t ° ��67.9 �.r�""� � N W � Q Q �g� � � � z `, �� Q �: m ,� � y � v M ~ Q � U � � ri � X � L`J w ri M ��, rrT� � , - „�, , XI� rn 1 "' � � _ '�� r � � ` � "�' � ' X � 1 f �l !� r � ��' ,i �� Y , � , TOTAL P.02 a�-�� \' , i �� V �' �� w � a , 9 I ^ � tI) ��tr � � } w o� � N 1a- 0 � .9•sz X �1 H�2�od =. , :� � �� . � � � � sq �'.; '�1 ; � �� . ��-�� . � _-- ..-y ` �--� .., w , � .-.:.. ��,� �� . ..�, ,, <- � ' . �- . � 'G n .. �V A � � a - .�� `.Y' ' �,'�"•'�,,£'k.a` .. `� `�� ` : � -_ �s . " �ii � �� ^m% fP,' ��—" ,� �_ry �� -_. � � '� : � =,,,�,�,�� - ��"_ . 4�°.=. •.� . � ,;� �=-,..y > - - '" ; i=; '- t A ¢{ t J f , 1� I J ° ^9 � � � , _ ./ ;a _ � _.:�vsX �.'� Y Y Y Y " �`� A � _ , _ . _ :+�:xcs a'sy"•:.-_ �' _ S� i O F L 1l� �� :,� ° 1 � " ^ � yy 1 � � �� F(' � � Vj � �" . � � � � _ � _ _. _ __ J S � � . � � � * '� 3 � �� Z'. W � � � ,. � ��i. a' � � `' s� P t � � s� M �" s , �1'`iV@i l ^� .�_ '. �� y�n � � f r''� ~ � � i �''-�+.:p_ . . 'n . ' - - " � � y � r � y' � ��!F ��H� :S'- �i �-. V ] y ,w �� # � �i ��^�;.� ;:. � � '� �-� ; . �- = _ q � `T`�- 4�:� ��.�°``. � ``�} 7 � . : � � ; F �.f �'� ''�� / � Y++ ` s� �� a �� . �:�sab�:.y.„`'`. : '� � � k , .° � {'yY F� �. L . ":. a � . �... %�. � 1` � Za{ � .�e� Y f �„ , -:�::-° �.0 �:,�. , . ;�= = ��:: � .: � �� =r __ . . �=�,.� t �.: (' � �= � �-„ . � �- � � :' �-- � '��..' 2 . F� '.�y � yL '+Y. ^5�sT� . ��4. 4 ' j j X " 5 ..:� � - 'rqn,i ' >�i . =S Y�� _ '.. a�� """`,•a, �. ''`� _i'`�z�= �_�� .s,"" Y. i �''c` � ''=' ♦ r y � � �.� ,r+ � � � ,� �� t:' . ' Y �/ . /�tf �! �,.� �c��c� ��r�� i �� 1 3�� e� � � � � � _� �� . � � � � _ , N � �� . _ -_ _ Q � 1 c� � - `l ��' � � ; '� i ��I I �� , � �-- _ i� . ��,, �, -_ -- ------_--------. i� � { ' - - �=; ,�5� , .._ -- aza. �, �. ,,_ � /.� - � ,-�_— P , e e- i �` � -- -- --' o �5 '\ z -- - __: (ia) � / � . , -�. •��g) ,, °^`_-- -- � o ' .g2g , ; ' ` y ' ;�. �� p ---- � .I_' , ; �� m�� - c __, , _ �, � . J ��) � 12) ��g)� / . - . .� � %" ` ` `' N �-->.{ 10 } --- '� 0 i 0, 0 i , \ '. / - �,,. , \ �� -- � �:r` y �, � , ,� j��,p '\� �\� ��.�� i , ,, �F�- - -- -�\ tio i i , r / � � . �� /: , ! j , -- - '�—'— ,% �(43) (42) \ \ � �'.�f � ��-':(�)� 01 �� '�t� ' � 0 ; : j� _- 2osa, � ; ; ; � _ , � � ; / :�'j_ �,. .:� � � � O�OiO: .. --.� . � _l. _ ._ i�z� e --=' - � --. : � ��. � �p ,, � __'- �-- � c� , x x �- a � � �, 20: � � _ .... m m -- \� ��_� , /T\ X /. `: ,�� j ,. ,� - � ;. : �\�� .;��. � �,-. , \ �/`\ \\ , \ ': , � .�, �- `� APPLICANT ��G�c'p� ��.Q 1 t(CL �CYI i ISC_K Pu��osE M a;� � 1, u-� re e.. FILE:t �n�/ � DAT[ lG'ZZ� P�i�G. DIS7 SCALG 1' = 400'� LEGEND ..��. zoning districl boundary %////////. . . ..- �pp � o one tamily � two tamiiy , b,�-Q multipte (am;fy nL orth�` • � ^ commercial ♦ r.,. industrial V vacant (�> � 9,�'� , zos2 y � o . �' c. 'rftn, .•'� °o ��-�� 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. SUNRAY-BATTLECREEK-HIGHW OOD I�1ZEL PARK HADEN-PROSPERIT'Y HILLCREST WEST SIDE DAYTON'S BLUFF PAYNE-PIIALEN NORTH END THOMAS-DALE SUMMIT-UNIVERSITY WEST SEVENTH COMO HAMLINE-MIDWAY ST. ANTfiONY PARK MERRIAM PARK-LEXINGTON HAMLINE-SNELLING HAMLINE MACAI.ESTER GROVEI.AND HIGHLAND SUMMTT HILL DOWNI'OWN Lz��i�G ��l.� �y j CITIZEN PARTTCIPAT'ION PLANNING DISTRICIS q� -� �� CITY OF SAINT PAUL BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS RESOLUTION ZONING FILE NLTMBER 98-146 DATE July 13, 1998 WHEREAS, JOSEPH & LAURA BENYSEK has applied for a variance from the strict application of the provisions of Sectioas 67.304 (3) & 61.101 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code pertaining to several variances in order to split off a lot and construct a new single family home in the R-1, RC3, TPD zoning district at 858 POINT DOUGLAS ROAD S; and WHEREAS, ihe Saint Paul Board of Zoning Appeais conducted a public hearing on 06/22/1998, pursuant to said appeal in accordance with the requirements of Section 64.205 of the I.egisiative Code; and WHEREAS, the Saint Paul Board of Zoning Appeals based upon evidence presented at the public hearing, as substantially reflected in the minutes, made the following findings of fact: The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use under the strict provisions of the code. The applicants have lived in this azea most of their lives and would like to stay in the area. However, there are few buildable lots left in the area and those that are buildable are too expensive for the applicants. There is enough lot size to split the property into two lots that would meet the minimum lot size requirements but that would entai] moving the existing house and garage. The construction of a house on the available portion of land is complicated by the slope of the property and the irregular shape of the lot. 2. The plight of the land owner is due to circumstances unique to this property, and these circumstances were not created by the land owner. The location of the existing buildings on the properiy which lunits the land available for development as well as the irregular shape and slope of the property are circumstances that were not created by the applicants. 3. The proposed variance is not in keeping with the spirit and intent of the code, and is not consistent with the health, safety, comfort, morals and welfare of the inhabitants of the City of St. Paul. The Highwood Small Area Plan adopted in 1942, requires that lots created after the effective date of the ordinance (1992) must have a minimum lot size of 9,600 square feet. This proposal does not meet the spirit and intent of that ordinance. a�-�c�� File #98-146 Page Three TII� LLViIT: No order of the Board of Zoning Appeals permitting the erection or alteration of a building or off-street parldng facility shall be valid for a period longer than one year, unless a building permit for such erecrion or alteration is obtained within such period and such erecrion or alteration is proceeding pursuant to the terms of such permit. The Board of Zoning Appeals or the City Council may grant an e�rtension not to exceed one year. In granting such e�rtension, the Board of Zoning Appeals may decide to hold a public hearing. APpEAL: Aecisions of the Board of Zoning Appeals are Cmal subject to appeal to the City Council within 15 days by anyone affected by the decision. Building permits shall not be issued after an appeal has been filed. If permits have been issued before an appeal has been t"�led, then the permits are suspended and construction shall cease until the City Council has made a final determination of the appeal. CERTIFICATION: I, the undersigned Secretary to the Board of Zoning Appeals for the City of Saint Paul, Minnesota, do hereby certify that I have compared the foregoing copy with the original record in my office; and find the same to be a true and correct copy of said origuial and of the whole thereoF, as based on approved minutes of the Saint Paul Board of Zoning Appeals meeting held on July 13, 1998 and on record in the Office of License Inspection and Environmental Protection, 350 St. Peter Street, Saint Paul, Mimiesota. SAINT PAUL BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS Noel Diedrich Secretary to the Boazd q�,�c� .iltly C,j� 1YY£i Dear City Gouncil Memoers, I am sending you a copy or the home that we are prapossng co build, site plan, our application ror a variance, a copy ot tne szarr repori from the zoning inspector ana his recommenaataon ot ap�rovai� a petition signed by over one hundred and tnirty or the ciosest neighbors, a summary oi the t-lighwood Development Policies and aur answers tn them, Zoning Board's reasan for deniai, and pictures oT tne property before the State acquired a part or our property tor t-iighway improvements and to con'tinue service lane to }iighwaod Avenue. Joe and I would appreciate you looking over the information. We have our hearis and dreams invested in this matter. It was quite disappointing to have the BoarG of �oning tleny our variance request. Especialiy because they seemed to deny the request ior a variance ❑aseo on the fact that we needed a variance. The Board of Zoning's reason tor th�eir denial was based upon tne i-lighwood Development Policies adopted by the �ity Council in 1992. in the plan right after the lot size requirements listed tor North Highwood the City Counci2 added they're reasons for increasing Iot size requirements was to preserve the waaded area's and the bluff. We will not be building inip the biuff or will we be removing any tree's to build our home. (]ur lot that we propose to ouild a home on would have been large enough if it wasn't zor the state acquiring a part of our land to improve Highway bl and to make the service lane continue across our property to Highwood Rvenue. 4�ie are being penaiized for it today. 1 believe unfairly. I have lived in the Highwood area far over 30 years. My husband Joe has lived here since our marriage in 1989, pur chiidren go za schopl at St. S'ascai's. Our son will tra 5tartinq his final year and our daughter is starting kindergarten. We love tnss area and 'nave aiways tried to iook out for its best interest with crime watch and volunteering, and neighborhoods ciean up. i'hank you for your time, we will appreciate tne chance to appeai the Board o Zoning's denial. aircerely, � � �, �� / � J � Joe and Laura Benysek 8S8 So. Pt. Douglas Rd. District 1, Ward % Joe. �- l..aura �Q�.ys�� 58 So Pt �ovg (as �d S-�. �Pa.ul, YYtxt 5� I 19 �31-l03�2 - �om� `13 S=:!�425 - U)ork (,t�.u,�� - � �� ,�.._ ,..... �� ,.,.. � '' � . . �a.. �I a . •_ - - w.� �ropose.d. �lome ASFILEY lI �MP ^y� � . � 1 � D9 � � � _ �,. � � � � � � �+ � r � 09'. Q2-21 \ � � AL'VFlNCE SUrt1EY]NG 6124746267 P.62i02 � ��, �,^.,' r �j '~ r l� � `%�'r I � 1 gr- -- �--� L_ L. L� �� r� � ^� —� ( � �— �' '�^ ^^� ` � + � N � t O u j l Y o� O j � a ° �'; `�� <y � "i" � � ''� � n u i � � �- v r�.' �� y p5'38'19" w• �' `' X � _ � _..g0.11-� .. r�J 67 56-� � i v ,°� o -,' V � . 3 . v � � ( - e 1��1 ^ O r � N e O . �� '� .,:=. � , •' � . Jol tD W ri M �. � E t N t7 � � ��N � Z Q � � � M � ¢ U � '�t M M x 1__ ' .__ * ��NDS Z�L`� � �1��2�d d%�,J��I� H��iO s�s£ s-�: � x�deias /`� 4 , 1¢ WINNI{ ��Z/ Kr £ � p �Ol �� _'_^��o�\\� �.c t� I < .'�. c ° 3m L6'8 y�� . .. +re+e�7 Ol � � o� � MtNNII.' U� ��N C o � z � 4 SE're ;C � i'B � . n 4 � � _... u--;--Z£'L9 -i�_�_��_�.._ l Q� � "' � ' — 00� �� 8 � `�-� �o Dei�,<a ��57.�9 f„"r- M p � ri M �►n rr7'� � � 63 � � �w N < N t�i. N�L�Od � � , XI � � . � � , � ' M , se�� VI i � � �� a� �� •^� f� j M'1 ~ � X 1 F f t ' 1 � 1 + /�"� N � �� ; � � � , j,�y: , � , TOTFY. P.02 �0 �?b6 � y o�� . �d � d' W � � 'i o• r m 2 � N � O > 1 � . ' X � ,_ , � - �°' -„ ad ��- � � � � �° � � � ------------- --------• � � .� �$ _�� . �( 35.20 � ��'IN�",�'`II�.�' 47.18 � 9.16 }� 33.86 " • �3( 41.Ot ` � � , . � � � { . � ' „ X 33.49 `�'' � � ^ n 33.88 �' � i_ � :, �RI�� e� �6.88 DG38.28� it_7 , e�s vuv[ 5 8990'1 ' W . x 47.99 .: __98.6. -- 0 e _ .�4�.@.� � � ! � 36.85 wNMUW 90E o� o��_� -J � �� ,a,-� - . 4 � s* . � 1 � � i � � ' � O � � � � .. �0 _ . • � � � 35 � a ,o,_'" -... � I � I = i 11 i '�1 ' ! � y � i Z! �` ' J 'y � V J�N^�I.�, I �' I : '°u . �_�25.6 � °m c� � n' � � i o ' I�� j� r V � � � �' 25.�_r � I 3�� ;� V � n�` S � �/ O � � ' �� g � Y 17.8 � SC7BA __85 � z ' S , �� I �I I I A + N 89'10'16" E J( 45J \ � . � e 1 X 6.58 X�1.02 S 89'10�16' N� '_ I � — — - 4�.0�. ►S� �'- --+V5.12-- � � I 33.96 L � I X 33.#0 IO I � � � � °tl � � �� _. �� A /��, � PNW � A O . ' N r\� ``{ �, ' \ l � � � ` �/ i — — � f . � I �� " L _ �. �� J � `ii.i;.�J. t ' I � J �K � 2 S70RT i DECK 1 ° � FRAME ;1858 � � 1 ' � v ' 1I.6� p� � • I � � '�e 8.J � i � t� �� -1 � u.e � ° ,, , I l; _ -- -- -� --�� R�� _ _ _ ._ — �–I G f� S pv�� SQ ; 1 ° ^a 1,`� 1 � n i � "� � L � c�n, � a � Z� o u i� J3.6 0� N "' T �,, n � , � � v m�. i ✓ � � I � f; i � . ; � C . , � �� - ----------� � �� ° g Guiac¢ R l C , � ; � , � �\3 � � �r � � a ; � � a; -- 6 N HMARK• ; t � TOP �I{JT HTpRM1T � ' � ^ � 30.59 . . . . ... . . � 27.SI � �� --133.38-- ... N 89'70'16' E _l._� �, , � `� ___ � z 5 '1 C' � _ ' �ZoNng�otfice,yse,oniy ,°.,,.°;-'° <... _%af_� APPLICATION �Of� ZOJ�fNG VARiANCE OFFICEOFLICENSE, IA'SPE4'T{O��ND ENVIRON,�fEA'TAL PROTECTf01V b 350 St Pe�er S[reet, Suite 3U0 _�--- ' � SairttPaul,111N55702-I510 �"i � J ;{= 166-9DU8 L. �� __ �; , � , . . .. . . APPLICANT I Name T.r ,.�,��= 1 �_ r.,•; R C%�i��,c�.l� T ompany -- J�O ' .L �l_ _� _ _ J 1 PROPERTY Ciry '�f . r��1liL state l�j_zip �� DaytimeFnone '��iS-L1C>2.� Property interest of appiicant (owner, contract purchaser, eta)!'r',ir �r,�1�ti _fE1�� n r/,« �_� c �,(- � -• �..� � ; . . ' ' . '� . J r� Name ot owner (if difTerent) i� i)Jc (' i`� ,(� v.�l f � _ i r� legat description i 1,} �('11 t' 11 4- 1 G ii 11 T3 �� )t -'t ( IL`'t' h�tY� k �» � i•� `� f Z 3 �� (atiach additional sheet rt necessary) � i cs�cl.ti,��11 t � � Lot s¢e :!, `� X i�' Present Zoning �Z -� present Use J��C�') l, �ti � ProposedUse _4l.ti �Cl Yi `�C'"�l•=� CYl It 2 • t• `• :. �:' 1 i.i. . c:c:.:: je 1. Vatiance(s) sequested: - � iv� M�uld li�;e to s�.2it Irt 1 fma 3, 3 aa,: 4. 2. What physical charecteristics of the property prevent its being used for any ot the permitted uses (n your zone? (topogrephy, size and shape of lot, soil conditions, etc.) 7Y�e size of the lot 1 falls short oE the recuir�: I,�t size for R-1 zaning . 3. Exptain how ihe sirict appfication of the provisions oi the Zoning Ordnance would resuft in pecu6ar ot exceptional practicai diificut�es or exceptional undue hardships. kith the cxvs+ent za�inq we wuuld not be able to b�i7.d a home an the land asxl we oould nct affani to build a home on a lot that we +aould have tp �ase, _ MY P�ts have gifted to us ?nt 1 of the � ��,..� • ' 1 s�S�66'T'pC�V`I'CSl�YR!1 4. Expiain how the pranOng oi a variance wili not be a substantial detriment to the pubiic good or a substantiai impairment of the intent and purpose oi the Zoniny Ordinance. There is roaa on the lot to build a Ysame. There are other homes �in the srea k the saroe zc�nin9 chancJes. All of a�r neighbors appruve of a hocae being t�uilt cn ��P'�tY• � the hiil behini 2ot Was dea.�sed to be CAC�c�a��o��r,�l�„>�a��° �e ai,e3 wvuld mt look c=o� ��••-:<.. Appiicant's , _- ; , ,,. Z .� ',� '�� . - _ _ ii o�.. . � �� SUHTTL C3�CK Tt� CtIAWGE il ':."y_ � . �;:.,<� � �t.:. . � � :. . . . .:... ... _-,/ . � �.:::_ `': ":s ��5. C30 ��5. C►� ■.00 �L�� Date S�t-�-4s( .. ° . �i . . � , `� BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS STAFF REPORT �" /� 1. APPLICANT: JOSEPH & LAURA BENYSEK , ROGER OEHRLEIN FILE # 98-146 � 2. CLASSIFICATION: Major Variance DATE OF HEARING: 06/22/98 :� � � . . 3. LOCATION: 858 POINT DOUGLAS �OAD S: .�, 4. LEGAL DESCRIPTIOPI: Subject to Highway, the Follbwing; Lots 2, 3 8c 4 and Excepi the East 35 feet, Lot 1, also Vacated Alley East of and Adjacent to Lots 2, 3 and 4, $lock I4, Burlington Heights • � 5. PLANNING DISTRICT: 1 6. PRESENT ZONING: R-1, RC3, TPD ZONING CODE REFERENCE: 67304 (3) & 61.101 7. STAFF INV�STIGATION AND REPORT DATE: 06/I 1/98 • BY: John Hazdwick 8. DEADLINE FOR ACTION: 07/28/98 DATE RECEIVED: OS/28/98 A. PURPOSE: Several vaziances in order to split off a lot and construct a new single family . home. .. . B. ACTION REQUESTED: 1). A minimum lot size of 4,600 square feet is required and a lot size of 6,732 squaze feet is proposed, for a variance of 2,868 squate feet. 2). A&ont setback of 30 feet is re�uired and a setback of 25 feet is proposed, for a variance of 5 feet. 3). Side yard setbacks of 1Q feet aze required and side yazd setbacks of 8.9 feet on each side axe '� proposed, for variances of 1.1 feet on each side. � ��,a�y C. SITE AND AREA CONDITIONS: This is an irregular pazcel of about-�t;569 square feet. The applicants aze proposing to split off a portion of the property with an area of 6,732 squaze feet and construct a new single family home. Theze is no ailey access to the property. The entire properiy slopes from the east to the west and the easterly hzlf slopes quite steeply. Surrounding Land Use: Primarily single family homes to the north, south and the east with Highway 61 and railroad tracks to the west. -ti D. BACKGROUND: The owners of this pazcel are giving a portion of the property to their daughter and son-in-law, the applicants, so that ihey can construct a house. The property owner, Roger Oehrlein, has a refuse hauling business and has legal nonconforming status to 0 File #98-146 Page Two E. FINDIIVGS:' ,_. , i. The property in question cannot be put to a.reasonabt� �se under the strict provisions of the code. . ' � The applicants have lived in this azea most of their liv�s'and would like to stay in the � azea. However, there are few buildable lots left in the erea and those that are.buildable aze too expensive for the applicants. There is enough Iqt size to split the propertx into � two lots that would meet the minimum lot size requirements but that would entail moving the exisung house and garage. The construction o f a house on the available portion of land is complicated by the sloge of the property and the uregular shape of the lot. 2. The pli�ht of the land owner is due to circumstances unique to this property, and these circumstances were not created by the land owner. ' The location of the existing buildings on the property which lanits the Iand available for development as well as the irregular s:�ape and slope of the property aze circumstances fliat were not created by the applicants. 3. � The proposed variance is in keeping with the spirit and intent of the code, and is consisfent with the heaith, safety, comf'ort, morals and welfaze of the inhabitants of the City'of St. Paul. The desire to remain in this area, close to family and work, and to develop a portion of •� ' unused land with the construction of a new single family home is in keeping with the � spirit and intent of the code. 4. Tl�e proposed variance wiJ�. not impair an adequate supply oi light and air to adjacent � property, nor will it alter the essential chazacter of the surrounding azea or unreasonably diminish established property values within the surrounding azea. Tfie west and north sides of the proposed new home abut stteets. The east side of the lot is steeply sloped and wooded. There will be no unpact on the supply of light or sir to the adjac�nt properties. ; '��.There are several lots in this immediate azea that do not meet the minimum lot size - reyuirements. A home constructed on a 6,732 squaze foot lot will not be out character with the neighborhood. The applicants have submit[ed a petition signed by several of their nei�hbors stating thai they have no objection to the proposed variances. 5. The variance, if granted, would not permit any use tliat is not pemutted under the provisions of the code for the property in the district where the af�'ected land is located, not would it alter cr change the zoning district ciassification �f the property. a�' �`� `�' '� File #98-146 , . a �, , � � � Page Three � .� � The proposed variance, if granted, would not change or alter the wning ciassificalion of the property. 6. - The requesf for �ariance is not based primarily on a d@s�re to increase the value or income potential of the pazcel of land. � ' ..�, F. DISTRICT COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION: As of the date of this report we have not received a recommendation from District 1. _ , i G. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Based on fmdings 1 trirough 6, staff recommends approval of the variance. , � , . e � � {. . . ,. �3 . _ �-� . , � , . ,. ��_ �� e�ition 1 have sesn the proposed site pian that is shown on page 28 of the Board of Appeals Staff Report investigatian datEd June 11, 1998, ! agree with the staff r�cammendation fhat is dn pag� 23 of this report. Si�ure Address Dale PMne Number � / ' t i . �,; • � ° � / � � L � ��d -S 3 5 / „ e_ ' 3 _ 3� c�C� �, Q 2 ./- . _ z.Z • fF'" 7 9 �7�G !3$:3317 '39� t ,�� y-9y��_ 7a-�ze I 3c� 6zb 1 i �3 � i I4 � ZCC� Z� ZZ Z� e >2 � ,� F� � f4 �Y�. �-Z`l' � �3g - S`� 2 7/4� 9`� �9� 7�9-srE� ��3 9S57p� �,�73S-C35'� ��1d� . �..� �s g ��s-�� i � 6 -a.5'i�'` S� ?3S-S'9�7 � 735-7�1/S �X �%/��l ZZ a �,�� Petition i have seen the prapasesf site plan that is sfioum on page 23 of #he Soard af Appeals Staff Report tnves#igation dated June 11, 1998, 1 agree with the staff recotnmendation that is on page 23 of this report. s� naa�ss o�e . � H� aa� � ,� Z S�-� s b-z� ��5� �� ov 5. �f-. nu �Q r��29�9� �g-a�s3 a�> � -..� �_ ` �' � �/ o y,S' �� s � 5 �a —z� � zi . _ .. , . ., _ _ . � - ._ _ . .,,�� _ , d �-. _,� � -j _ �3�- `� / �� .��o� � � 3> � ��I � _ �s� 3°) 3�� 3�� 39� yu} vr), yL� �{3� � ,,�_ ,, !r /� .a � -�/ Y� - � i�� r"sJ`at.fi�'�'` !�f_"`i'. � .i � _ r� � � t/ C( " � � rr u ( �, ;s. s�a „ „ _ ,. > _/�f'� n ir i( �� 6 �' �"� � 5 -3�-b - 6��"�(�'-7.Sl-�.�5`- u,� 23��7,aZ. %�....-Q � 3 r-�rR�.-, 'r ��'�� Petition I have seert the proposed site plan that is shown on page 28 of the Board of Appeats Staff Report Investigation dated June 11, 1998, I agree with ifie staff recammendation that is on page 23 of this report. ��1€ Sl�� L 66) '��r, �- r �, .-� Laa�-I P�, r� �rra�jo� F� S. �� f 9 I ;o-ra� G�� .�- �'� %. v T' i��=�=�-�r3 (t� S SS f l� 7.30 r�� G2� Rr76G�-T T t-(�R�wna b��t- �� rovrr..� r� �� I�G �O�-�2�-� .� �� / r , � ►-. ' . � , ,. •; � . Petition �1�' �� I have seert the proposed site plan that is shown on page 28 of the Boarc! of Appeals Staff Report ir�ves#igation dated June 11, 1998, i agree with the staff recommendation that is on page 23 of this re{�ort. Sinature Adc#ess Date Rhone Number . , � �� Petifion t have sesn the proposed site pian that is shown on page 28 of the Soard of Appeals Staff Report Investigation dated June 11, 1998, f agree with the staff recommendation that is on page 23 of this report. �� $� $� s� �� s� s� s� 9> �� , G� � G� �� °� � Si�ture Address tlate Pfio� tSumber n (1 n . .. , . i i .. f 0 �� S ��, � I� � 3� �ossa :o� Q � _ aa13 ?(aY/9Q 73D �-z�-�k °23fr-bn�� °a 9� 73(-sa�. � �3 � a.�/�a' 7�i - airo •��- 4£� 73�-7�I� l> �,�q�-q�-Z3 5 ° C��r'/f i -ia ° �3s� =�-S%7 - 9� �3s =s s�, �$? 3�-s'4g �� r� � 8� �S76sF� ��1�� i � 3 � � `� z3'� � �. s � , �� . , ' 6 . . t^� . �p��bb 0 Petition �" � � � lc �L /1 /� i� � �. G1 C�� 3 ! have seen the proposed site pian that is showrr on page 28 af the Bcard of Appeals Staff Report Investigation dated .lune 91, 19J8, I agree with �e staff recommendatian that is on page 23 of this report. q�-�� Peti#ion 1 have seen the proposed site plan tha# is shown on page 28 of the Board of Appeals Staff Report in�estigation dated June 11, 1998, I agree with the staff recommendation that is on page 23 of this report. Sinature A�ldress Date Phorta Number !�� 12� 130 /31 t32 �33 )3Y /35 IiG �3� � 3�' �3 f �� yye !v ( !y 2 . W !YY � rys IYL t9? le /Y9 fso i II''1�'� CITY OF SAINT PAUL � BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS RESOLUTION ZONING FILE NUMBER 98-146 DATE July 13, 1998 --_ � � � .✓,ot� �� WHEREAS, JOSEPH & LAURA BENYSEK has applied fqr a variance from the suict application of the provisions of Sections 67304 (3) & 61.101 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code pertaining to several variances in order to spiit off a lot and construct a new single family home in the R-1, RC3, TPD zo�ing district at 858 POINT DOUGLAS ROAD S; and , WI�EREA5, the Saint Paui Boazd of Zoning Ap(�eals conducted a public hearing on 06/22/1998, pursuant to said appeal in accordance with the requirements of Section 64.205 of the Legislative Code; and WHEREAS, the Saint Paul Board of Zoning Appeals based upon evidence presented at the pubtic hearing, as substantially reflected in the minutes, made the following findings of fact: The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use under the strict provisions of the code. The applicants have lived in this area most of their lives and would like to stay in the azea However, there aze few buildable lots left in the azea and those that aze buildable are too expensive for the applicants. There is enough lot size to split the property into two lots that would meet the minimum lot size requirements but that would entail moving the existing house and garage. The construction of a house on the available portion of land is complicated by the slope of the property and the irregulaz shape of the lot. 2. The plight of the land owner i5 due to circumstances unique to this property, and these circumstances were not created by the land owner. The location of the existing buildings on the property which limits the land available for development as well as the irregulaz shape and siope of the property are circumstances that were not created by the applicants. 3. The proposed variance is not in keeping with the spirit and intent of the code, and is not consistent with the health, safety, comfort, morals and weifaze of the inhabitants of the City of St. Paul. The Highwood Small Area Plan adopted in 1992, requires that lots created after the effective date of the ordinance (1992) must have a minimum lot size of 9,600 squaze feet. This proposal does not meet the spirit and intent of that ordinance. �� File #98-146 Page Two . 4. The proposed vaziance will not impair an adequ�te suppl}� of light and air to adjacent property, nor wili it aiter the essential cHaracter of the surrounding area or unreasonably diminish established property values within the surround,in,g azea. The west and north sides of the proposed new home �but streets. The east side of the lot is steepiy sloped and wooded. There will be no impact on the supply of light or air to the adjacent properties. , There are several lots in this immediate area t�at do not meet the minimum lot size requirements. A home constructed on a 6,732 squaze foot lot will not be out of chazacter with the neighborhood. The applicants have submitted a petition signed by several of their neighbors stating that they have no objection to the proposed vaziances. 5. The vaziance, if granted, would not pecmit any use that is not permitted under the provisions of the code for the property in the district where the affected (and is located, nor would it alter or change the zoning district classification of the property. The proposed vaziance, if granted, would not change or alter the zoning classification of the property. 6. The request for vaziance is not based primazily on a desire to increase the value or income, potential of the parcel of land. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Saint Paul Board of Zoning Appeals that application to waive the provisions of Sections 67304 (3) & 61.101 in order to split off a lot and construct a new single family home is hereby denied, on property located at 858 POINT DOUGLAS ROAD S and legaily described as Subj to Hwy, the Following; Lots 2,3 & 4 and Ex the east 35 ft, I,ot 1, Also Vac Alley E of and Adj Lots 2,3 and 4, Blk 10, Burlington Heights; in accordance with the application for variance and the site plan on file with the Zoning Administrator. MOVED BY : Morton SECONDED BY: wi�son IN FAVOR: a AGAINST: a NIAILED: July 14, 1998 Fi(e #98-146 Page Three �� TIME LIi�IIT: No order of the Board of Zoning Appeals permitting the erection or alteration of a building or- off-street p3� g facility shatl be valid for a period ]onger than one�year, udless a b�di�g permit for such erection or alteration is obtained within such period and such erection or alteration is proceeding pursuant to the terms of suci�•permit. The Board of Zoning Appeals or the City Council may grant an extension not to exceed one year. In granting such extension, the Boasd o�Zoning Appeals may deci@e to hold a public hearing. . APPEAL: Decisions of the Board of Zoning Appeals are final subject to appeal to the City Council within 15 days by anyone affected by the decision. Building permits shall not be issued after an appeal has been fded. If permits have been issued before an appeal has been filed, then the permits are suspended and construction shall cease untff the City Council has made a fmal determination of the appeal. CERTIF'ICATION: I, the undersigned Secretary to the Board of Zoning Appeals for the City of Saint Paul, l�iinnesota, do hereby certify that I have compared the foregoing copy with the original record in my office; and find the same to be a true and correct copy of said original and of the whole thereof, as based on approved minutes of the Saint Paul Board of Zoning Appeals meeting held an Jaly 13, 1998 and on record in the Office of License Inspection and Environmental Protection, 350 St. Peter Street, Saint Paul, Minnesota. SAINT PAUL BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS ��" ��C; ' C � �� Noel Diedrich Secretary to the Board ��.��Y '�ity �ouuci2 �i�mbers: I believe tt�e members on ihe isoarci of Zoning i�ppesis wna voied against our reauest for a variance did so not fuitv understandmg tl�e wav �me property in c�uescion at 8iR South Point l�ou�as itoad and the h�me tF_iaz we wotvd Iike to buil� corr�iciec� svith tt�e "Iii�hevooci L�eve2opn2e� PoL�ies". 1 wot�d like to g� through esch af the F1aas ihat are apglieabte to our situatian. The fallcwin�are Ceneral Plaas far the I3ighwoad Area: GI. ilie woaded r,u in Highwood especisjIIlv alon� the frr�ile btuIDine_ shoulci �ie preserved and pmtected. We will not be removing �rry trces #'rom ttss lot eithPr in xhe grocess of bcutdiag the hame ar cnee the h�me has been t�uitt. �Ne LviZt in fsct be �dcting trees to the Iot once the home is finisEicd. G2. �'�ppIic�Ie guideIines and stancI:u cls for Iancls within the bouncitlries of the �vlississippi I�Iatiai�ai River ruca Recxe,arion t�res skc�uld be endarsee�. The River C;orridor St�ndstrcis prohibit residential developm�ni c�n sl�pes of � eater than I8 percen� The slope of the lsnd in quesFion is 9 percent on the soutt� side of lot and 12 percent on the north side af t�e l�t. I do belie��e that ��e a.*e f�Iloti°ing the Ri�cr Canid�r Standards. G3. The e�tisl.ing matwe stand of t� should be preserved, a�x�T the natural canogy c�f vegeiative c:c2ver on vaeani and occ:upiec� Iots shoutd be rnainir�ineci. Again we wauid nc�t be ciisturbin� any existing w�?cxleci arer+. c�z natural canopy of vegetz3tive areas. G�. Trcc� r.�h a dia�:�:,: ir c;cccss of i^ in:..'�cs r�ot:i �C ^y1'�t cetcd. Again we will not be remuving any irees :ii all. Gy. A tandscape p�an shautd he required far a1i subdivisions. ��-'� ��' �te have a Iandscape pIan made. Ne eaould apprec.iate a Iitde Iead way witi�, the exac:i placemc�t of the trees and �rubs fhat we int�d to actct to the home site. The reasan for this bein� aEter the home has be� buiii ii wilI be mur� easier io imagine the landsc:aning. We will be doing the Iandscapm� ta t�e lot ourselves. G6. throu� tsi3. Ate Not Applica�te_ G24. Hnmeawners stiould be require3 to h�.ve c�' street paridng f�r i�vo ca�-s per househald. There is ample off sireet gari�ici�. an bath sides oFSprinrrsicie Drive and i�oth sides nf Ft. Dougtas Roacl. GIS. All utilities shouId he tmdergound. We have included undergrouad utilities ia the plaas far tE�e home. GI6. Is Nat Applic:able. The_pla�s for North Hi�hwood are as follows: NHI. `�'he mixlimmiun !ot size for unptatted reside�al Iots with mare ttcan 5t� gercent nf th� tot at a sloge csf less than I2 gercent should be 9,(i0Q sq�re feet. 1�e miIIimut� �ot �ize f�r unglattcd resdartial lots �vith mc�re ihau 50 percertt of the Iat ai a slope af IZ percent ar greater shauld be FS,OOQ square f�et. When detern�ining Iot size, the "base case" sIupes should be those ui exist�ce at Ihe time af preIirninary plat subdivision. Eslteraiians to t�te slopes should naY be allowed tttai would lower tt►e "base case" slope from 1 Z percent nr greater ta Iess tfi�an l 2 percent, P}atieci, �andersized lots wo�ild be consideir,cf non-c�anforming. This subject is tfie r�an fc�r us agglying f�r a vaziance for o•rer a111at size. Wc wi11 not be atterfng the �Iope af the tand in ordcz t� bui�d aa it �i2. Installation �nci ixnpravemeni of the water Iiues, �:uiiiaiy �nd storm sewers, pgvecl streets aud at�proorie#e liQhting shoul� be c:c3niinueci. We intend to have cily water installed and there is existing city sewer on Springside Drive and a Metra sewer vn Pt. Douglas Road. a�� tfI3. �riva#e domes�ic weIls 3houtci be gradiiatly phaseci �ut with the u;traciuclion of ciiv water service. We wi�t have city water service. NH4. t�sraugk NH8. Are Not Apg�icable. On page S of the Highwood Plaa iT cIearly sKates the f�llowing: The City Council's sspproved policy is c:ansisient with a Highwood Task �orce compromise solution based on pubIic comment during the review period. Since the Ari� in#ent of increasin� ihe miinimwm int size is to protect the environmemal resources in the area (includin� waoded areas and areas wit� hi�her sla�es) t�e ccrm�sromise is geared to a distinciion based on �ove. In addition, sitc rcview is re�uirea far arry residentzal deve3ogme�t on siopes 22 percent or greater. The palicy cancerning alteraiions to "base case" slope is to avoid the situation where a developer ftattens a lb gercent slope f� a o percenfi slope in arder io deveIop ihe entire subciivision wifh 9 square foot lots. ...,_ ,. � :.�; � � F ; �r�_ � ` �_ . � �; , �� , :� � �: s. 0. '. 4 �� ° a��;i -,�,��`r�,� �a �, +� + �� r .. y . ..a '*" , .._' � �� r �a, "` `.,;.-.,, _ w'�s � _ 5�4e �.. :, �;�� ,. ' �. n�,��' � � ° � � : y i `F �� 6 �:. �.,- �� .' �� _.� ' ° �-.-x^ u . ,. Cotmcil FIle # � $ `'�� p Green Sheet #� a t � �P ��3��ir Presented By Referred To RESOLUTION CITY OF SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA Committee: Date ■1 2 WI�REAS, in Board of Zoning Appeals file No. 98-146, Joseph and Laura Benysek 3 made application or a variance from the strict application of the provisions of the Saint Paul 4 Zoning Code (Code) for properry commonly lrnown as 858 Point Douglas Road South and 5 legally described as: Subject to Highway, the Following; Lots 2, 3& 4 and Except the East 35 6 feet, Lot 1, Also Vacated Alley East of and Adjacent to Lots 2, 3 and 4, Block 10, Burlington 7 Heights; and $ 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 WIiEREAS, the purpose of the application was to vary the standards of the Code so as to obtain a°lot sp1iY' and construct a new single family home; and WHEREAS, the Boazd of Zoning Appeals (Boazd) conducted a publia heazing on 7uly 13, 1998, after having provided notice to affected property owners, and the Boazd, by its Resolution No. 98-146, dated July 13, 1998, decided to deny the requested variances based upon the following findings and conclusions: 1. 2. The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use under the strict provisions of the code. The applicants haue lived in this azea most of their lives and would like to stay in the area. However, there are few buildable lots left in the area and those that are buildable aze too expensive for the applicants. There is enough lot size to split the properry into two lots that would meet the minunum lot size requirements but that would entail moving the exisfing house and gazage. The conshucfion of a house on the available portion of land is complicated by the slope of the properiy and the inegular shape of the lot. The plight of the land owner is due to circumstances unique to this properiy, and these circumstances were not created by the land owner. The location of the existing buildings on the properiy which limits the land available for development as well as the irregular shape and slope of the property are circumstances that were not created by the applicants. Page 1 of 3 ORiGINAL qg -�� 4 3. The proposed variance is not in keeping with the spirit and intent of the code, and is not 5 consistent with the health, safety, comfort, morals and welfaze of the inhabitauts of the 6 City of Saint Paul. 7 8 The Highwood Small Area Plan adopted in 1992, requires that lots created after the 9 effecrive date of the ordinauce {i992) must have a m;n;mum lot size of 4,600 square feet. 10 This proposal does not meet the spirit and intent of that ordinance. 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 411 45 46 47 48 49 4. The proposed variance will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent properiy, nor will it alter the essenfial character of the surrounding area or unreasonably diminish established property values within the surrounding area. The west and north sides of the proposed new home abut streets. The east side of the lot is steeply sloped and wooded. There will be no impact on the supply of light or air to the adjacent properkies. There are several lots in this immediate area that do not meet the minunum lot size requirements. A home constructed on a 6,732 square foot lot will not be out of chazacter with the neighborhood. The applicants haue submitted a petition signed by several of their neighbors stating that they have no objection to the proposed variances. 5. The variance, if granted, would not permit any use that is not permitted under the provisions of the code for the property in the district where the affected land is located, nor would it alter or change the zoning district classification of the property. The proposed variance, if granted, would not change or alter the zoning classification of the property. 6. The request for variance is not based primarily on a desire to increase the value or income potential of the parcel of land. Wf��REAS, pursuant to the provisions of Saint Paul L,egislative Code § 64.205, Joseph and Laura Benysek duly filed with the City Clerk an appeal from the determination made by the Board and requested that a hearing be held before the City Council for the purpose of considering the acrions taken by the Board; and WHEREAS, acting pursuaut to Saint Paul Legislative Code § 64.205 through § 64.208, and upon notice to affected parties, a public hearing was duly conducted by the City Council on August 5, 1998, where all interested parties were given an opportunity to be heard; and WIIEREAS, the Council, having heard the statements made, and having considered the variance application, the report of staff, the record, minutes and resolution of the Boazd of Zoning Appeals, does hereby; RESOLVE, that the Council of the City of Saint Paul does hereby reverse the decision of the Board of Zoning Appeals in this matter, based upon the following findings of the Council: Page 2 of 3 � 6 The Board erred in its strict application of Saint Paul Legislative Code § 64.203(3) to this application by requiring strict adherence to the m;nimum lot sizes stated in the Highwood Plan. This proposed development meets the overall spirit and intent of the code in that the applicant will protect the environmental resources of the area by 1) preserving trees in wooded azeas; 2) not altering the natival slope or topography of the lot; and 3) would be served by City water and ct g -'?�� 7 sewer. 8 9 AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that for the above stated reasons, the appeat of 10 Joseph and Laura Benysek be and is hereby granted; and 11 12 BE TT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the applicanPs originai request for a lot split and 13 variances as set forth in the site plan on file with the zoning administrator in Zoning File No. 98- 14 146 is approved; and 15 16 BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED, that the City Clerk shall mail a copy of this resolution 17 to the Zoning Administrator, the Board of Zoning Appeals, and the Saint Paul Planning 18 Commission. ORlG1NA� Requested by Department of: By: Adopted by Council: Date -`� � Adoption Certified by Council Se etary ay: - Approved by Mayor Dat By: Form Appr�ov� d by City Attorney BY: �J �G'✓ `"" � O ' `.� %✓ Approved by Mayor for Submission to Council Byc City Council Councilmember TOTAL # OF SIGNATURE PAGES v 1998 I GREEN SHEET xr�rt�xrcwecrw c�Q-rll.�' No 62116 NWYIDab arvco�rra ❑ arv�rroroEV ❑ rn'u.o�R _ �nuxcw.temncesme ❑Fxuiuumtw,�xro ❑ r�raa(oR�essrurt� � (CL1P ALL LOCATIONS FOR SIGNATURE) Finalizing City Council Action taken August 5, 1998 granting the appeal of Laura and Joseph Benysek to a decision of the Board of Zoning Appeals denying a setback variance and a minimum lot size variance in order to split a lot and construct a new single family home at 85S South Point Douglas Road. PLANNtNG COMMISSION CIB COMMITf EE CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION TRANSACTION r�ssmfsxisorvfiimeverwaricedunaeraconnaarortnieaeaammenn . rES nio Has this P�Nfirtn evef been a cib' empbyce7 YES NO Dcesthis G�� W� e SIdN rwA nomiefyP�sessetl bY arc�' cuneM d�P emP�%'ee? YES NO Is this persoMfirm a tarpetetl venda4 YES NO COST/REVQIUE BUD(iETED (qRCLE ONE) YES NO ACTNITYNWIIBER OFFICE OF Tf� CITY ATTORNEY� ��G� Clayton M. Robinson, Jr., Ciry Attorney � CITY OF SAINT PAUL NormColemtm, M¢yar CivilDivision 4QQ City Xa11 1 S West Kellogg &Ivd Saint Paul, Minnesota 55102 Telephone: 651 266-8710 Farsimile: 651 298-5619 Cous�t F�esearc�r Ce�.er August 14, 1998 Nancy Anderson Council Secretary 310 City Hall I S West Kellogg Blvd. St. Paul, MN 55102 Re: Appeal of 7oseph and Laura Benysek Board of Zoning Appeals File No: 98-146 City Council Action Date: August 5, 1998 Deaz Ms. Anderson: a�� ss� Attached please find a signed copy of a resolution memorializing the decision of the Saint Paul City Council to grant the appeal of the individuals above named. Would you please have this resolution placed on the Council's Consent Agenda at your earliest convenience. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Very truly yours, /C/.�.�/i Peter W. Warner Assistant City Attorney PWWlrmb Enclosure cc: Councilmember Coleman e. . CITY OF SAINT PAUL Norm Coleman, bfayar JUIy 1$� 1998 Ms. Nancy Anderson City Council Research Office Raom 310 City Hall Saint Paul, Minnesota 55102 Dear Ms. Anderson: ENVIRON.�IENTAL PROTEC'I'ION 5 � { 0 � � � RobeJt Kessler, Direclor S4 LOA'RY PROFESSIONAL Zelepharse: 6I2-2669090 BUILDING Facsimile: 612-2669099 Suite 300 672-26b9124 350 St. Peter Stree[ S¢int poul, Minnerota 55102-I510 �iCz�;l-�3; �-v,,:ci.^.`? `_ ��'.,P� ��;L i °� ��9� T would like to confirm that a public hearing before the City Council is scheduled for Wednesday August 5, 1998 for the following appeal of a Boazd of Zoning Appeals decision: Appellant: File Number: Purpose: Appeal of a Board of Zoning Appeals decision denying a setback variance and a minimum lot size variance in order to split a lot and construct a new single family Address: Legal Description: Previous Action: Laura & Joseph Benysek 98-146 858 South Point Douglas Road PIN 142822130008 District 1 took no position on this matter Staff recommended approval. Board of Zoning Appeals; Denied the request on a vote of 4-3. My understanding is that this public hearing request will appear on the agenda for the August 5, 1998 City Council meeting and that you will publish notice of the hearing in the Saint Paul Legal Ledger. Please call me at 266-9082 if you have any questions. Sincer y, -` �� ohn Hardwick " +F7RS1'RUfS� ' ' - - . . . . -_' NOTICE OF PUI3LIC HBARTlRG � _ � _ - -, The Saint Paul City Council will conduct a pubtic hearing on Wednesday, August 5, _ CC: COUricil IVIeIDbei L8t111y 1995 at p.m, in theCity Councii Chambers, Third�Floor, City Hall-Court House, to consider �the appeal of' Laura and Joseph Benysek to a_ decision of the Baazd of Zoning Appeals�denying a setback yariance and a minimum 7ot siae variance in�oz&er ta�split a lot.and construct a�new siugle family home at 858 South Point Douglas Road. - ., - - .. _ � - - - Dated: July f7, 1998 . " �. � �- � � . � � � NANCY hNDERSON� : �'' ,-_ . . - . - -- � �_ Assistant City Conpcil Secretary � . - ' .. . , � (Jaly�1.1998): . . Zoning Technician `lg-��1 APPL1CATt Depanment o Zoning Sectic II00 City Ha� 25 West Four Saint Pau1, h 26lr6589 APPELLANT PROPERTY LOCATION Zoning File Name , Address/Location� �� 7-4�F� �ni,Lll�� TYP� OF APPEAL: Appiication is hereby made for an appeat to the: � Board of Zoning Appeais � City Council under the provisions of Chapter 64, Section , Paragraph appeal a decision made by the /Sc�✓� a� Z�,�.-r on � wt-�, ! 3 , 19�Y. File number:_ (date o decision) of the Zoning Code, to A a��-C S GROUNDS FOR APPEAL: Expiain why you feel there has been an error in any requirement, permit, decision or refusai made by an administrative officia4, or an error in 4act, procedure or finding made by the Board of Zoning Appeals or the Planning Commission. if" �4'_C� j� A j ��_ ��tt=�C�([Cl l.L,�r j7^.,'$�i'.�'a.�.�.41i �4�r'..f� .. , .�1'1 .1��{�� .4 __ � ii't __ .� _ l _ �'.4 � � � ��. Attach additional sheef if necessary) AppiicanYs signzfvre��,i t�� ,�_i ��0�_�C _� Date 7 �-, City ��,�Gd' L�r rif� i"o�aeil ?!�Ism.,�'ers, �r names ara Tosao$ and Lau€a BenyseI�. i�iy husban�i anci I aion� wi�it rnv father a2oger i�i. Ck;I�rlein :�plied fvr n�ajor variau�,c #Iirou� fY Fx�aru of Zonir,�- Tne Eclarci uf 7nning ruIc;ci aga�1;! s�ur ap�Iiwlicu� �n the basis thai it uici uc�f .;oxupIy �viih [iie fIi�waa� a�EtiEiOF:I'u�i� �U12Ci85. 1 t'iE�Ic1%� `u u0 ilfii li1`u"�c�IS'�.3I"iu uc �I�c.�Itiri.'s s7� uii, �'iia3l -�2'i{�i ttcT'ile.^a�i 'Jt2'i 3�1P�1Cc'1�1DI11II CISO7. i 4?��e read the Highweed I)e��elonmen# Yoiic�es Book±et as±d can oni� fi� one of' iheir eriteria's that we cio a�t meet. th� page 4 under tlte Si�b-Eieacling i'�orih F3ighwcxx! N. �I. I it states the m;nim� Iot size to be 9_6UU souase feeY. i believe the oaraQragh following N. fi. I e�slaixss thc previous cu�uicil`s nrsmacv inif:nt �i inereasiva� i.hc minimum lc�t size is to pratei;l wcxrded areas ancl areas �n tugh slr��es. In c�ur �tans to buil� ocEr Iwme rac ��ill r�ot be bu;l�g cn a sl�pe h;�� fria�� 1 I�,.�cu�#. '�'he 14�ii�Gs:,ta I'.iver Ccrrciar crit;,ri� are ttsa: thcre is no resid�ntiat devetc�ginent an s3��nes grcaf:r tf�au i& g:,rc�:t. �Nc �;�ill bQ 4vall A�in tt�ei� �ide?ines. 4�e aisa wili not be rwmesing aar tr�es or �:eb tatien 4��?e* L}L?II �.'�S. �tY f��t �p iIItQt*£� QR �?�?ILti*I� 3Lf{�?ti0I28� fTE�S .�t2ff gYi.*?I�Jc tp titp ini ¢?f8. �e believe that �e �ave meet all af ts'�e criteria set fortltt by the �oard of Zoning's applicafion for vatiance's requiretnenis. I have liveci in "the �ii�hwood arE:a for 3i �ears. Iv1y husb�md has li�ueci h�.te sins:� vze nz�u�ied i� 1�89, i�'e wuu2d 1� ic� wr�fin;z� to Iive in 5l. Pakt and b�'d �ur haxUe. C+� cl�ildren go t� schcol at St. Pascal's F;ay3�a on Tliir3 St. and �hit� Bear Ave. a�d are d�siy rooted � the comm��tity. W� �,.2cc �.e� :�ctive 'vz oar �ommtmity and so have our children b� doing voluntear wer� church and clesn zig. We are vea}J ciose tv our fami.sy whom aii raside in ��tnot 1, an� weuId like t�a *e_main so. we vatue �e chance to xnpeai tire Board of Zoning`s de�:ision anci hone that agree wifh ;vSr. John Hardwick's recc,m�uencisiion ann voie for approvaI. +"TV'c: also hopc tt�at if yoa t�cve any quesrions or i�t� i.hai yvu biux� them to our atteaiiion. L�'e wiII cica our besi. 40 �ess �azm. Tl�a�' y�u for you: time and considcraYion. Stncerely ��,�, � � �' � ��',,�L 'r 4�U�,� ^ J � ��s�� ;,aura C�cIuiei� Ber.ysck `'-! � 3- i � q�-�1� � �-�i !? S�3#3 ! have s��n the proposed site �lan that is sho�rrn on pag� 2R of the Saard of �,ppeals Staff Rep�rt ;n�restiyuti�� d�t�� Juna 11, 9��8, I agree w�ith th� st�ff r�c;c�mrr}endai�or� t'r�ai is �n pac�� 23 of �f�i� repor�. Sir�aiure Aridress fYaie Ptu�wNumb_x � t�> �L �? � I=: �<, � ;�: n —'� � � i_� .^ =:: � 2 j�i 5- ('t l�o�;,°l<, .< - � _-,.- i ,, r � ,, ; r Y,, � ��,. i� _ �^ � � t .z 31 > � =1Y�� -��f�`i - � — ., � . `� �r-- -�� .% _) �� . �� 7 4•3317 >�� i ` /`I � %�fl�� -�� f > �,�- � 1 L �7�g"��S �Q, 7/�'� i ,�v' 73y-s5 E� �`13 � S 57�- G � 73�•C3 s /� `,7�� `� ;t� c�-f 3 -' I � = �� 59� i 73G �;, �-i 73� -S'9� 7 735 ; , , �i=/�� ; ��-�G� r��itiQn i ha:r° s°°n th� �r�posn� sit� plar that is sho�rrn on pa�° �3 of tt�e �aard cf �p�als Sta�# Pe�ort in��estigation dated ,luna '11, 1 g98, 1 agr�� wiih the staff r�cc�m�t7�n�faiio�� thai is �n �aaete 23 vf if�is repori. Simature Adcitess �aie Phon? Number � /, v'' '� �.��. .�,,, - �:c�_ l /,�r� `'�.�?..�� o-?,'-y� 73� � , .� � � .�t '?�` P ( �;�.�J �� +� �.�'� - 7:: C� - t'' � . � i � .; l'✓ � i . . � y _ c) `5 7%'-� ' C� �S J <;?�) �,-�-1 i i':'%;y 7 �; ��; ` ;r' _ i`��. `.:I -� c �'�l. c .- -, ��_:,,,� �� p � J - { =�� ='�_. _� _� __�- -�''/ ? =:L ' , % �,%�'!- = -'/> f� F i�' --� � 'ii"� C I LI Cl'--i '. _°i �`�l;�-' �'r � , r��i �-' �, . �,� ` � � r ; %, " y^ � rn -/ ,\ :' y y � � ' `�<--. , f -�--��---- ;.- � % `� � 1 ��ta .�c;.:� �7' ��, ��.T� 1 'l;;uc.�;;�:_a�> ../I�I%;`%�`( � 73 = 7 �� , 5• �� . G�R ; i'Y^_�'�/i _l �/S�i >:;- T- I Gt� I�G_S / yi, �=' �=' 7`�"� �>�j '� ,-� � � � ,. , , � r/� �� , . . `'�,= "� s � � �� o ', _ V 7 /-! r , / .'' � � � 1-" � "r . ., � "l �l'� , 'i �'o __-.. � �. / � J — � ? ��, � >— � `I ? -� �; 1� -� , � - p i ��} � �� — ,�; �� < r� `', � ' J— l ~�/� "!;)� Y_'�� L�� tl: � �/:) �- ' � �.oG - .� j I y''�'='r y; � : i -`vL�" �y�-��; Y�`G� {�r � .�S i , , � ., .� �., � ,'S �� 6zi � n � c=�,� � /�� i' �. ?SCI�t�e; i !!1�'I.-,. �.,_ / �, � � �, _ -N/�� n i�, ,, l-�i i l '.., >> � ,.,-:�/ ��.- --..ct_i -��' !� ' 7 y _ G Y_ �� la 5 I� � � � _ ,�:� /,. i� ; 7 , , Y � � �- A��;S �i:� [r " << J !/ i fl� ✓ `� j� � � r ! ( r �_ v (! �� (� � �L�. ��-�� GsG2- �o�d lJCa=�t�r+sr� /4u �" � 8' d -- . /.',,.L(e�/' �J 21'/� .ht�iinoCld Pi 1� > 3 S 7,d'IS ��' -,3s, s�a�- i f� -�! _�� v n (! /( ,-'�.�rt"-^ " �> �S�-5�� >��'— �S! -S�-�S �- 23� ' 73s-7sR�-- ��,�� Pe�i�ion I ha�is se�n th� propose� sits p!an that is shown on pagA 23 of th� Board of Appeals Staff Report Investigation dated June 11, 1958, I agree with the staff recamrnet�dation tF�afi is or� �aea� 23 0� ihis r�poit. Sinature Address Qate Ph�xw Nismber ,, -� �-� �f , u x l ,�' 5�\ ;� - ; S% : �`' < �h ^ �S,i m C�?� / ��. � � r�� _ � a� L�,�. �ths �G� �� 5��✓x1� - ZI �4S �g�, dl zl O 7 A -�_ � 1 � / >�� r` Vt cr S,� �-(_ c� 0 �'3. ��lTil�ti .�'D. j. Si !;�L� � ( � c C�� '( O ,( Ssll� Ce�z� � --� �l zs `fS �l �i c�/zs�� 6�� 4 �� t � �� (�J�b 1�73 -(�31� i�l� -ii; 7i% ;3 73G-9��, .;h�� '�t i}��R, Gh��-, _ �� t�if"�r �Y�S'��r �x�� '�. � �� I �r_� /, 1� �1�-r-- (;l�Cv1� '• - �.s {i'Z � r- % )�1t �q� C �-c {1 � ( 3 i� - � < ` -' , – � -� — _i ��i �1`J�l '.R.'� _1 j�.�i�t:c/\� �.'fi�t {�i �Utial-:��' i��t3. G,�!i� ��'� -� 7 I °'%: �;�/ f�/� q �,�� 'etition 1 ha�re seen ths proposed site plan that is sho�rrn on p�gs 2� of the Board ofi�ppeafs Staffi P.eport tr�vestig Vat�C� JUTTc 11, 1�98, 1 agree with it�e siaff recc�mmendat�on thai is on �a�� 23 ui ii�is r�port. Sinaturn Addre�cs t�t? PRu�n? Number r 7 q�� 'etition � have s��n the proposed site pfan that is sho�rrn on page 28 of the f3oard of f�ppEais Staff Report fn��restigation dated .lune 11, 'f 998, 1 agree with the sta3f recon}mendatian that is on page 23 of this repurt. Sir.ature aciclress t7atP Plsc�nP tJumbx � '1 � / �� 4�C�,� ac.�� 7 H�n��z�� 1�� '� L�/�I� 73�5 �us_s� 'S � � � . � �-, � �, �,��ati �,1 t i k'?c�� `l `F �� ` � �� 7 ) ;� 7 """'__ g; '�/�. ��! �' ._rrr.t'.( .. � E�'7 (1 �jti J �; �c��•��<% �1�. 4� �/A S G ? (' r�� t 3 _ ,. � , . . ., � Y '\` � �°�.� �1 � 7� ; � => �: � i� `� o�� ; � , �,> � -,--� c,� . ( , �,.._' cy�� G �`� � C �� _� �' �' � � � � :_� riy � � �� l_ �� ,� . IP� � ao - 7 2 ' �,4�;� � �� r�.�� i af'r �� .r�z. ,� �9G� �r�L� t��, ,� �l1-,� 2.� � 1�,��„ ' (2ti�, ��,�� ( S�a', �� -c � 7 _5e�.� � �: � � � ��..� C��Y'�� 1,'C�'� � �.� �' '�.�i f L�� `� I )/,` _ �1C.S� C? C�;: / r. �, c. .\-f- �„�- l� � � � �' �, �'� J. � S/� l/�" .�- {Cj>` i.� (.�" ":� � X� l L� .1 KL} N/�+%� / /�✓ _�� r (t(��y��IC `�3D �- -z�- ,x `23fc-6��, "/�-YI`7� 73f-s�� , , i� � /; �! `7 -�'� � /��5'� 7�/-.�/jr C--7=i Y� 73�-%��-�1 � i 1� i�,�, ��._'� 5= l ' i I l`--�s"=%� �3s J �`�% ( - j� �3 -S� �� J�,�-��- �3r-s-; � _ho� r/ �35"--��2� C/ 3'c%2 � 7�B"7�s � r � �^ �'7�� '�` �C �i / �3u/ � � 730- ��3'i % - 3� �_ ��s,�s�� '� � �e�l�IOtl .: � �y_ _ I have sesn the propvsAd site plan that is sha�.vn on pag� 28 of the Board of Appeais Staff Report inrrestigation dated June 19, 19�38, i agree with the staff recam�nenciation t9�at is on page 23 of this report. l -- - -� r, .,,:.c..�;j? ��s r� �, .—: _,__�— . , .,,�. � _�.rl �� .t� �L � c<�, �-� , Q��«1 t� C; t C��n�:l ��i y 1�� 1 , � � � � , �; ._ � �.,.,, �;; �-('�.�� w-»-: �,��!, .., l � , s�� r i c �"- + ��\ <? _:_=��.i 4"li�. � :� �. .� �'_ � � � �18—�� ` AS4iLi�S 3� �g -`1 �� Original variance request packet q &� - �1 t� � BOARD OF ZO?�iING APPEALS STA�F REPORT I. APPLICANT: JOSEPH & LALJRA BENYSEK , ROGER OEHRLEiIv' FILE # 98-146 2. CLASSIFICATION: Major Variance AATE OF HEARIriG: 06,'22(48 3. LOCATIOti: 8�8 PO1NT DOUGLAS ROAD S. 4. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Subject to Highway, the Following; Lots 2, 3& 4 and Except ihe East 35 feet, Lot 1, also Vacated Alley East of and Ad,}acent to Lots 2, 3 and 4, Block l�, Burlinn on Heights 5. PLANNING DISTRICT: 1 6. PRESENT ZO\ING: R-1, RC3, TPD ZONI:�G CODE REFERENCE: 67.304 (3) & 61.101 7. STAFF INVESTIGATION AND REPORT DATE: 06/11198 BY: John Hazdwick 8. DEADLINE FOR ACTTON: 07/28/98 DATE RECEIVED: OS/28/98 A. PURPOSE: Several variances in order to split off a lot and construct a new singie family home. B. ACTION REQUESTED: 1). A minimum lot size of 9,600 squaze feet is required and a lot size of 6,732 square feet is proposed, for a vaziance of 2,86& square feet. 2). A front setback of 30 feet is re�uired and a setback of 25 fPet is proposed, for a variance of 5 feer. 3). Side yard setbacks of 10 feet are required and side yard setbacks of 8.9 feet on each side are proposed, for variances of 1.1 feet on each side. .��,a�� C. SITE AND AREA CONDITIONS: This is an irregular pazcel of about2�t6 square feet. The applicants are proposing to split off a portion of the property with an azea of 6,732 squaze feet and construct a new single family home. There is no aliey access to the property. The entire properry slopes from the east to the west and the easterly half slopes quite steepiy. Surounding Land Use: Primarily single family homes to the north, south and the east with Highway 61 and railroad tracks to the west. D. BACRGROUIVD: The owners of this pazcel aze giving a portion of the property to their daugh?er and son-in-law, the applicants, so that the}' can construct a house. The property owner, Roger Oehrlein, has a refuse hauling business and has legal nonconforming status to a� File �98-146 ��-�� Page Three The proposed variance, if granted, would not change or alter the zoning classification of the property. 6. The request for variance is not based primarily on a desire to increase the value or income potential of the parcel of land. F. DISTRiCT COIJNCIL RECOMMENDATION: As of the date of this report we have not received a recommendation from District l. G. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Based on findings i through 6, staff recommends approval of the variance. �3 APPLICATION FOR ZONING VARIANCE Zorting o€fice use onTy _ FiEe nurttber: Fee: g � � :. - _�--- OFFICE OF LICE�SE, INSPE�7�E0,�'S �.�D E��4�IR0��3IE,ti"TAL PROTECT O.�' 3 '� � 350 St. Peter Street, Suite 300 _ - � Saini Pai�l, bLV 55102-I510 • J� J!� Ci i 166-9003 '--------�'. APP�ICANT PROPERTY Tentative hearing date: �`- '= � � -, � Seetion(s): i= `I'. =.' ' / t ; ? City agent `.._.°~� Name � . . �i ., -, � • �-�_ [�� _ � � �� °�*=1� Company - } Address�`J�;S . 'I� -'' 1�)�'�';�:•� Y:c'). ,�� ; � — City ��i 1-�`��.% State}}�;� Z :>'j� DaytimePhone ;,1�-�-�;::� � Property interest of applicant (owner, conhact purchaser, etc )'"�.`. .'� �l� 1`ll�.�;.�'. ; I�lu ��' t,n ;.,- �(' J 't Name of owner (if different) I ��'�,3c � f � �)�% �t'� � � Q_'� r'� .1 � ' � 1 , .� .. xl J i (attach additionalsheet ifnecessary) �� - _ 1 „�� • t r 5 � � � �"' � �?,-� PresentUse ��;�[,"1tYC. t �'��- t� Lot size {� � -: k� Present Zoning �_ Proposed Use JLl i j%i � �'l�'s\`�= :,T�t 1� _ _ _ � V_ � �� Legaldescrip6oni"i�� ,+1'1t:��1 �-�',. � �`�� t { � � ��5i 1 -� , _ 1. Variznce(s)requested: `r;a ;;cu2' li's:�= to s�?it T�t 7 fr�x: 3,3 �^u 4. 2 What physical characterisUcs of the property prevent its being used for any of the permitted uses in your zone? (topography, size and shape of lot, soii conditions, etc.) `t':e size of t;ie lo� 1 fa?ls s`c;rt of th4 recvir� L�� size for �-7 zening. 3. Explain how the strict application of the provislons of the Zoning O�dinance woufd result in pecufiar or exceptionai practical difficuliies or exceptional undue hardships �;itn t:e ci:�.�er:t zr�r,ir� we ��czLtd ro� Ix� a;�la 'to :.uild <x Y�,r2 �r tne l�n� ar*� 4iC CGU�.:' 1:G� �uiT9Z�' ; 'i.0 ''J�dl�.•: � lYJ!'•r? JT'i d?C� L:13L 4:° v.L'.l`�Z:3 i13�13 CQ v:.7S'C�e�4S°. ��.Y E:dL'.°..L'i�a :7.3J° �2�1t..� L'J U� fA'C Z Oi 1:122 t LrC�.o"'.`,��. �� ...�., ..��_ _ .. .-' 't •—_ — . � _ 4. Explain how the granting of a vanance will not be a substantial dztriment to the pub{ic good or a substantial impairment of the intent and purpose ofthe Zoning Ordinance. 'Itrre is rcct;. ca ti�� lo� tu �ild a?ia:e. Tns.-2 a:a ::tr2> hcTrs �n �i? 3��a k;i.rt� ts!:: sa; � zcr:in^ c:^,a:_ga�. :+11 c= c�� iyh;�rs act,rove of a nar,e teiny built ci: t:1e rm Al.sc tha hi3l �"nind lct was d�a:ed to � Y,c�n ste�o to _builu er:. .So ch� �e�. would nat lcak crcwde:3 - �'�.,�t.'LCL U�G- i..�.�.. Appiicant's signature ru---�P�t v`. � , �. . � � //_9,P` ;��,�; iC�SHIry�SUSE :.i..'•3` � C�E� , �;��. i,i',GiF�GL � _.t J. ''4_ k �_ �:. 4_. a"_ i +,:� -`,c5 Date S"�-5'-4`"�!' .�� 'IUV C—� --"��3" �U'�:'1�R.: ..iP��:11b�.i �i.1��I. i_OWi V rrc T25^10':r.at Gu11GiFiV .�SU SL. F'2LeT Si. 5u7EE .7'vl� 5L. l � k��l 7J1U�' Uear �oninq Hdministration; We are requestrnq a variance ana a tot split at sne property 858 So. Pt. Louqias Ro_ (ne property is oa�ned oy my parents Roqer and hiarv�ou uenrlein. rie ano my husoand Joe wouid like to ouiia a nome on Lot 1 or she properiy. We have the home we wouid iike to ouilo pickeo oui and have siqneo a purcnase aqreemenc wizh Shaae �ree �ottstruction. We also t�ave been approvea aireadv ior rinancinq snrpuqh Norwest hiortqaqe. i nave livea in tne area mv encire lir'e ana reailv woutd like to stav in ine area tor manv reasons. we nave cwo cniidren our ooy 3s aiready qoinq zo St, rascal`s i�avion and our aauqnter wili be startinq Kinoeroaroen in zne Tail. i wouid like them to continue qoina to sne same scnool. r=itso i worK ror my parents at tneir home ano ir we can ouild a home there i wiit be able to work and be there 7or our cnitaren wnen tnev qet out oT school. 1 nave a verv ciose Tamiiv cnai all live within 3 miles OT my parents nome. ihese are ,tust a Tew reasons ror wancinq to builo a home on Lot 1. ihe Hiqhwootl area nas beer a wonoerful piace to live in Lhe past :�v years. We woul❑ appreciate vour approvai or tne varidnC2 d.nC7 1ot Sp11t s0 tnat W2 Cfli'7 COnLli'iuE: LO l2vC tnere, inanK y0u TOt' yOUY L11Pte 3fld consideracion. Sincereiv, a.ti-��-�"'�L�.�---\�1.��-�.� � Laura uehrlein benvseK � �� nat�r�s 5-�1-9�' o � n �; ghho� �= � � . � �:_, S °` af � ho�-� �et� �� " 1 A� �e corNer� o-� �� Uac��as' �Cl , � v Prin�a Sid� uf. J �. � ��_:,.�'�.: ,�rp.�/-. -�� Chu�rli�ac Scic�tl�S� oi �- �. ��.,,�1i�- t�; �L1�.�Fay� � r �-r� �� 2� ��. � 3. � �� , l� � b' � s, ��. Qouq (o� '� / t tC � �= - —f �a y� /�� t�� F��>, ? ✓)�! 'L_. � �/�t ��-�/' J S '� �� iiNUe\ � �c3�-1' •4d-16��"�:�D'�i�, >`t - c-rr��, rti,v �J ' L . `�Y�,�..�5< -z_`\.. '� � �� /%,,L%.:.-e a�/ �'l % %'��; �� c,i:so�/ G-'--� /! •- �e-�� 1 MRY-29-1992 � � � � Q9 6 � ro � c � � � � � � � � �`I � Q� � 92�21 � m � � taDVRNCE SURVEYING 6124748267 P.02i02 i � � ' j' r l f f � � ` � � � i ---� ' I L _ � - � - °�` � � r �' r � r_ —I ' �� l r �p l �� l r � V O �j �� ;j Q� o � �'� � u�n � �J' �� r : �� h C! � ��7 � ` 1 �� { �� N 05•38'19" w ` c�x"� X ! _- � --80.11� ^,:, f c-7 56-� i U n 1--� � � �' � � � I N � * 1� �� N �S Z�� `g � ry b d � �.�?��Hl�� .9 � �� 1 � x� y �yg,1.3S S�� 1 �y� W(1WINNI � � W � o � !P _ w O J � '_' P Q � ��Zrc\�Y r � Ol vi o �,N\ O Z m M�� p ?u� r �^\ �� rn rm z � OS' o\ X�\t �.\�° �� i� Z N l6'g c '� \ ,� �3�? iNpIM'�pNi il �V 6 .� ° 00'4Z W S�'fBACK � . ll ' � �� ~ - - _____-;--Z�'L9 � p�� 1, r QQ• ��' � `" L � � , 1 � Del',t ° ��67.9 �.r�""� � N W � Q Q �g� � � � z `, �� Q �: m ,� � y � v M ~ Q � U � � ri � X � L`J w ri M ��, rrT� � , - „�, , XI� rn 1 "' � � _ '�� r � � ` � "�' � ' X � 1 f �l !� r � ��' ,i �� Y , � , TOTAL P.02 a�-�� \' , i �� V �' �� w � a , 9 I ^ � tI) ��tr � � } w o� � N 1a- 0 � .9•sz X �1 H�2�od =. , :� � �� . � � � � sq �'.; '�1 ; � �� . ��-�� . � _-- ..-y ` �--� .., w , � .-.:.. ��,� �� . ..�, ,, <- � ' . �- . � 'G n .. �V A � � a - .�� `.Y' ' �,'�"•'�,,£'k.a` .. `� `�� ` : � -_ �s . " �ii � �� ^m% fP,' ��—" ,� �_ry �� -_. � � '� : � =,,,�,�,�� - ��"_ . 4�°.=. •.� . � ,;� �=-,..y > - - '" ; i=; '- t A ¢{ t J f , 1� I J ° ^9 � � � , _ ./ ;a _ � _.:�vsX �.'� Y Y Y Y " �`� A � _ , _ . _ :+�:xcs a'sy"•:.-_ �' _ S� i O F L 1l� �� :,� ° 1 � " ^ � yy 1 � � �� F(' � � Vj � �" . � � � � _ � _ _. _ __ J S � � . � � � * '� 3 � �� Z'. W � � � ,. � ��i. a' � � `' s� P t � � s� M �" s , �1'`iV@i l ^� .�_ '. �� y�n � � f r''� ~ � � i �''-�+.:p_ . . 'n . ' - - " � � y � r � y' � ��!F ��H� :S'- �i �-. V ] y ,w �� # � �i ��^�;.� ;:. � � '� �-� ; . �- = _ q � `T`�- 4�:� ��.�°``. � ``�} 7 � . : � � ; F �.f �'� ''�� / � Y++ ` s� �� a �� . �:�sab�:.y.„`'`. : '� � � k , .° � {'yY F� �. L . ":. a � . �... %�. � 1` � Za{ � .�e� Y f �„ , -:�::-° �.0 �:,�. , . ;�= = ��:: � .: � �� =r __ . . �=�,.� t �.: (' � �= � �-„ . � �- � � :' �-- � '��..' 2 . F� '.�y � yL '+Y. ^5�sT� . ��4. 4 ' j j X " 5 ..:� � - 'rqn,i ' >�i . =S Y�� _ '.. a�� """`,•a, �. ''`� _i'`�z�= �_�� .s,"" Y. i �''c` � ''=' ♦ r y � � �.� ,r+ � � � ,� �� t:' . ' Y �/ . /�tf �! �,.� �c��c� ��r�� i �� 1 3�� e� � � � � � _� �� . � � � � _ , N � �� . _ -_ _ Q � 1 c� � - `l ��' � � ; '� i ��I I �� , � �-- _ i� . ��,, �, -_ -- ------_--------. i� � { ' - - �=; ,�5� , .._ -- aza. �, �. ,,_ � /.� - � ,-�_— P , e e- i �` � -- -- --' o �5 '\ z -- - __: (ia) � / � . , -�. •��g) ,, °^`_-- -- � o ' .g2g , ; ' ` y ' ;�. �� p ---- � .I_' , ; �� m�� - c __, , _ �, � . J ��) � 12) ��g)� / . - . .� � %" ` ` `' N �-->.{ 10 } --- '� 0 i 0, 0 i , \ '. / - �,,. , \ �� -- � �:r` y �, � , ,� j��,p '\� �\� ��.�� i , ,, �F�- - -- -�\ tio i i , r / � � . �� /: , ! j , -- - '�—'— ,% �(43) (42) \ \ � �'.�f � ��-':(�)� 01 �� '�t� ' � 0 ; : j� _- 2osa, � ; ; ; � _ , � � ; / :�'j_ �,. .:� � � � O�OiO: .. --.� . � _l. _ ._ i�z� e --=' - � --. : � ��. � �p ,, � __'- �-- � c� , x x �- a � � �, 20: � � _ .... m m -- \� ��_� , /T\ X /. `: ,�� j ,. ,� - � ;. : �\�� .;��. � �,-. , \ �/`\ \\ , \ ': , � .�, �- `� APPLICANT ��G�c'p� ��.Q 1 t(CL �CYI i ISC_K Pu��osE M a;� � 1, u-� re e.. FILE:t �n�/ � DAT[ lG'ZZ� P�i�G. DIS7 SCALG 1' = 400'� LEGEND ..��. zoning districl boundary %////////. . . ..- �pp � o one tamily � two tamiiy , b,�-Q multipte (am;fy nL orth�` • � ^ commercial ♦ r.,. industrial V vacant (�> � 9,�'� , zos2 y � o . �' c. 'rftn, .•'� °o ��-�� 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. SUNRAY-BATTLECREEK-HIGHW OOD I�1ZEL PARK HADEN-PROSPERIT'Y HILLCREST WEST SIDE DAYTON'S BLUFF PAYNE-PIIALEN NORTH END THOMAS-DALE SUMMIT-UNIVERSITY WEST SEVENTH COMO HAMLINE-MIDWAY ST. ANTfiONY PARK MERRIAM PARK-LEXINGTON HAMLINE-SNELLING HAMLINE MACAI.ESTER GROVEI.AND HIGHLAND SUMMTT HILL DOWNI'OWN Lz��i�G ��l.� �y j CITIZEN PARTTCIPAT'ION PLANNING DISTRICIS q� -� �� CITY OF SAINT PAUL BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS RESOLUTION ZONING FILE NLTMBER 98-146 DATE July 13, 1998 WHEREAS, JOSEPH & LAURA BENYSEK has applied for a variance from the strict application of the provisions of Sectioas 67.304 (3) & 61.101 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code pertaining to several variances in order to split off a lot and construct a new single family home in the R-1, RC3, TPD zoning district at 858 POINT DOUGLAS ROAD S; and WHEREAS, ihe Saint Paul Board of Zoning Appeais conducted a public hearing on 06/22/1998, pursuant to said appeal in accordance with the requirements of Section 64.205 of the I.egisiative Code; and WHEREAS, the Saint Paul Board of Zoning Appeals based upon evidence presented at the public hearing, as substantially reflected in the minutes, made the following findings of fact: The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use under the strict provisions of the code. The applicants have lived in this azea most of their lives and would like to stay in the area. However, there are few buildable lots left in the area and those that are buildable are too expensive for the applicants. There is enough lot size to split the property into two lots that would meet the minimum lot size requirements but that would entai] moving the existing house and garage. The construction of a house on the available portion of land is complicated by the slope of the property and the irregular shape of the lot. 2. The plight of the land owner is due to circumstances unique to this property, and these circumstances were not created by the land owner. The location of the existing buildings on the properiy which lunits the land available for development as well as the irregular shape and slope of the property are circumstances that were not created by the applicants. 3. The proposed variance is not in keeping with the spirit and intent of the code, and is not consistent with the health, safety, comfort, morals and welfare of the inhabitants of the City of St. Paul. The Highwood Small Area Plan adopted in 1942, requires that lots created after the effective date of the ordinance (1992) must have a minimum lot size of 9,600 square feet. This proposal does not meet the spirit and intent of that ordinance. a�-�c�� File #98-146 Page Three TII� LLViIT: No order of the Board of Zoning Appeals permitting the erection or alteration of a building or off-street parldng facility shall be valid for a period longer than one year, unless a building permit for such erecrion or alteration is obtained within such period and such erecrion or alteration is proceeding pursuant to the terms of such permit. The Board of Zoning Appeals or the City Council may grant an e�rtension not to exceed one year. In granting such e�rtension, the Board of Zoning Appeals may decide to hold a public hearing. APpEAL: Aecisions of the Board of Zoning Appeals are Cmal subject to appeal to the City Council within 15 days by anyone affected by the decision. Building permits shall not be issued after an appeal has been filed. If permits have been issued before an appeal has been t"�led, then the permits are suspended and construction shall cease until the City Council has made a final determination of the appeal. CERTIFICATION: I, the undersigned Secretary to the Board of Zoning Appeals for the City of Saint Paul, Minnesota, do hereby certify that I have compared the foregoing copy with the original record in my office; and find the same to be a true and correct copy of said origuial and of the whole thereoF, as based on approved minutes of the Saint Paul Board of Zoning Appeals meeting held on July 13, 1998 and on record in the Office of License Inspection and Environmental Protection, 350 St. Peter Street, Saint Paul, Mimiesota. SAINT PAUL BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS Noel Diedrich Secretary to the Boazd q�,�c� .iltly C,j� 1YY£i Dear City Gouncil Memoers, I am sending you a copy or the home that we are prapossng co build, site plan, our application ror a variance, a copy ot tne szarr repori from the zoning inspector ana his recommenaataon ot ap�rovai� a petition signed by over one hundred and tnirty or the ciosest neighbors, a summary oi the t-lighwood Development Policies and aur answers tn them, Zoning Board's reasan for deniai, and pictures oT tne property before the State acquired a part or our property tor t-iighway improvements and to con'tinue service lane to }iighwaod Avenue. Joe and I would appreciate you looking over the information. We have our hearis and dreams invested in this matter. It was quite disappointing to have the BoarG of �oning tleny our variance request. Especialiy because they seemed to deny the request ior a variance ❑aseo on the fact that we needed a variance. The Board of Zoning's reason tor th�eir denial was based upon tne i-lighwood Development Policies adopted by the �ity Council in 1992. in the plan right after the lot size requirements listed tor North Highwood the City Counci2 added they're reasons for increasing Iot size requirements was to preserve the waaded area's and the bluff. We will not be building inip the biuff or will we be removing any tree's to build our home. (]ur lot that we propose to ouild a home on would have been large enough if it wasn't zor the state acquiring a part of our land to improve Highway bl and to make the service lane continue across our property to Highwood Rvenue. 4�ie are being penaiized for it today. 1 believe unfairly. I have lived in the Highwood area far over 30 years. My husband Joe has lived here since our marriage in 1989, pur chiidren go za schopl at St. S'ascai's. Our son will tra 5tartinq his final year and our daughter is starting kindergarten. We love tnss area and 'nave aiways tried to iook out for its best interest with crime watch and volunteering, and neighborhoods ciean up. i'hank you for your time, we will appreciate tne chance to appeai the Board o Zoning's denial. aircerely, � � �, �� / � J � Joe and Laura Benysek 8S8 So. Pt. Douglas Rd. District 1, Ward % Joe. �- l..aura �Q�.ys�� 58 So Pt �ovg (as �d S-�. �Pa.ul, YYtxt 5� I 19 �31-l03�2 - �om� `13 S=:!�425 - U)ork (,t�.u,�� - � �� ,�.._ ,..... �� ,.,.. � '' � . . �a.. �I a . •_ - - w.� �ropose.d. �lome ASFILEY lI �MP ^y� � . � 1 � D9 � � � _ �,. � � � � � � �+ � r � 09'. Q2-21 \ � � AL'VFlNCE SUrt1EY]NG 6124746267 P.62i02 � ��, �,^.,' r �j '~ r l� � `%�'r I � 1 gr- -- �--� L_ L. L� �� r� � ^� —� ( � �— �' '�^ ^^� ` � + � N � t O u j l Y o� O j � a ° �'; `�� <y � "i" � � ''� � n u i � � �- v r�.' �� y p5'38'19" w• �' `' X � _ � _..g0.11-� .. r�J 67 56-� � i v ,°� o -,' V � . 3 . v � � ( - e 1��1 ^ O r � N e O . �� '� .,:=. � , •' � . Jol tD W ri M �. � E t N t7 � � ��N � Z Q � � � M � ¢ U � '�t M M x 1__ ' .__ * ��NDS Z�L`� � �1��2�d d%�,J��I� H��iO s�s£ s-�: � x�deias /`� 4 , 1¢ WINNI{ ��Z/ Kr £ � p �Ol �� _'_^��o�\\� �.c t� I < .'�. c ° 3m L6'8 y�� . .. +re+e�7 Ol � � o� � MtNNII.' U� ��N C o � z � 4 SE're ;C � i'B � . n 4 � � _... u--;--Z£'L9 -i�_�_��_�.._ l Q� � "' � ' — 00� �� 8 � `�-� �o Dei�,<a ��57.�9 f„"r- M p � ri M �►n rr7'� � � 63 � � �w N < N t�i. N�L�Od � � , XI � � . � � , � ' M , se�� VI i � � �� a� �� •^� f� j M'1 ~ � X 1 F f t ' 1 � 1 + /�"� N � �� ; � � � , j,�y: , � , TOTFY. P.02 �0 �?b6 � y o�� . �d � d' W � � 'i o• r m 2 � N � O > 1 � . ' X � ,_ , � - �°' -„ ad ��- � � � � �° � � � ------------- --------• � � .� �$ _�� . �( 35.20 � ��'IN�",�'`II�.�' 47.18 � 9.16 }� 33.86 " • �3( 41.Ot ` � � , . � � � { . � ' „ X 33.49 `�'' � � ^ n 33.88 �' � i_ � :, �RI�� e� �6.88 DG38.28� it_7 , e�s vuv[ 5 8990'1 ' W . x 47.99 .: __98.6. -- 0 e _ .�4�.@.� � � ! � 36.85 wNMUW 90E o� o��_� -J � �� ,a,-� - . 4 � s* . � 1 � � i � � ' � O � � � � .. �0 _ . • � � � 35 � a ,o,_'" -... � I � I = i 11 i '�1 ' ! � y � i Z! �` ' J 'y � V J�N^�I.�, I �' I : '°u . �_�25.6 � °m c� � n' � � i o ' I�� j� r V � � � �' 25.�_r � I 3�� ;� V � n�` S � �/ O � � ' �� g � Y 17.8 � SC7BA __85 � z ' S , �� I �I I I A + N 89'10'16" E J( 45J \ � . � e 1 X 6.58 X�1.02 S 89'10�16' N� '_ I � — — - 4�.0�. ►S� �'- --+V5.12-- � � I 33.96 L � I X 33.#0 IO I � � � � °tl � � �� _. �� A /��, � PNW � A O . ' N r\� ``{ �, ' \ l � � � ` �/ i — — � f . � I �� " L _ �. �� J � `ii.i;.�J. t ' I � J �K � 2 S70RT i DECK 1 ° � FRAME ;1858 � � 1 ' � v ' 1I.6� p� � • I � � '�e 8.J � i � t� �� -1 � u.e � ° ,, , I l; _ -- -- -� --�� R�� _ _ _ ._ — �–I G f� S pv�� SQ ; 1 ° ^a 1,`� 1 � n i � "� � L � c�n, � a � Z� o u i� J3.6 0� N "' T �,, n � , � � v m�. i ✓ � � I � f; i � . ; � C . , � �� - ----------� � �� ° g Guiac¢ R l C , � ; � , � �\3 � � �r � � a ; � � a; -- 6 N HMARK• ; t � TOP �I{JT HTpRM1T � ' � ^ � 30.59 . . . . ... . . � 27.SI � �� --133.38-- ... N 89'70'16' E _l._� �, , � `� ___ � z 5 '1 C' � _ ' �ZoNng�otfice,yse,oniy ,°.,,.°;-'° <... _%af_� APPLICATION �Of� ZOJ�fNG VARiANCE OFFICEOFLICENSE, IA'SPE4'T{O��ND ENVIRON,�fEA'TAL PROTECTf01V b 350 St Pe�er S[reet, Suite 3U0 _�--- ' � SairttPaul,111N55702-I510 �"i � J ;{= 166-9DU8 L. �� __ �; , � , . . .. . . APPLICANT I Name T.r ,.�,��= 1 �_ r.,•; R C%�i��,c�.l� T ompany -- J�O ' .L �l_ _� _ _ J 1 PROPERTY Ciry '�f . r��1liL state l�j_zip �� DaytimeFnone '��iS-L1C>2.� Property interest of appiicant (owner, contract purchaser, eta)!'r',ir �r,�1�ti _fE1�� n r/,« �_� c �,(- � -• �..� � ; . . ' ' . '� . J r� Name ot owner (if difTerent) i� i)Jc (' i`� ,(� v.�l f � _ i r� legat description i 1,} �('11 t' 11 4- 1 G ii 11 T3 �� )t -'t ( IL`'t' h�tY� k �» � i•� `� f Z 3 �� (atiach additional sheet rt necessary) � i cs�cl.ti,��11 t � � Lot s¢e :!, `� X i�' Present Zoning �Z -� present Use J��C�') l, �ti � ProposedUse _4l.ti �Cl Yi `�C'"�l•=� CYl It 2 • t• `• :. �:' 1 i.i. . c:c:.:: je 1. Vatiance(s) sequested: - � iv� M�uld li�;e to s�.2it Irt 1 fma 3, 3 aa,: 4. 2. What physical charecteristics of the property prevent its being used for any ot the permitted uses (n your zone? (topogrephy, size and shape of lot, soil conditions, etc.) 7Y�e size of the lot 1 falls short oE the recuir�: I,�t size for R-1 zaning . 3. Exptain how ihe sirict appfication of the provisions oi the Zoning Ordnance would resuft in pecu6ar ot exceptional practicai diificut�es or exceptional undue hardships. kith the cxvs+ent za�inq we wuuld not be able to b�i7.d a home an the land asxl we oould nct affani to build a home on a lot that we +aould have tp �ase, _ MY P�ts have gifted to us ?nt 1 of the � ��,..� • ' 1 s�S�66'T'pC�V`I'CSl�YR!1 4. Expiain how the pranOng oi a variance wili not be a substantial detriment to the pubiic good or a substantiai impairment of the intent and purpose oi the Zoniny Ordinance. There is roaa on the lot to build a Ysame. There are other homes �in the srea k the saroe zc�nin9 chancJes. All of a�r neighbors appruve of a hocae being t�uilt cn ��P'�tY• � the hiil behini 2ot Was dea.�sed to be CAC�c�a��o��r,�l�„>�a��° �e ai,e3 wvuld mt look c=o� ��••-:<.. Appiicant's , _- ; , ,,. Z .� ',� '�� . - _ _ ii o�.. . � �� SUHTTL C3�CK Tt� CtIAWGE il ':."y_ � . �;:.,<� � �t.:. . � � :. . . . .:... ... _-,/ . � �.:::_ `': ":s ��5. C30 ��5. C►� ■.00 �L�� Date S�t-�-4s( .. ° . �i . . � , `� BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS STAFF REPORT �" /� 1. APPLICANT: JOSEPH & LAURA BENYSEK , ROGER OEHRLEIN FILE # 98-146 � 2. CLASSIFICATION: Major Variance DATE OF HEARING: 06/22/98 :� � � . . 3. LOCATION: 858 POINT DOUGLAS �OAD S: .�, 4. LEGAL DESCRIPTIOPI: Subject to Highway, the Follbwing; Lots 2, 3 8c 4 and Excepi the East 35 feet, Lot 1, also Vacated Alley East of and Adjacent to Lots 2, 3 and 4, $lock I4, Burlington Heights • � 5. PLANNING DISTRICT: 1 6. PRESENT ZONING: R-1, RC3, TPD ZONING CODE REFERENCE: 67304 (3) & 61.101 7. STAFF INV�STIGATION AND REPORT DATE: 06/I 1/98 • BY: John Hazdwick 8. DEADLINE FOR ACTION: 07/28/98 DATE RECEIVED: OS/28/98 A. PURPOSE: Several vaziances in order to split off a lot and construct a new single family . home. .. . B. ACTION REQUESTED: 1). A minimum lot size of 4,600 square feet is required and a lot size of 6,732 squaze feet is proposed, for a variance of 2,868 squate feet. 2). A&ont setback of 30 feet is re�uired and a setback of 25 feet is proposed, for a variance of 5 feet. 3). Side yard setbacks of 1Q feet aze required and side yazd setbacks of 8.9 feet on each side axe '� proposed, for variances of 1.1 feet on each side. � ��,a�y C. SITE AND AREA CONDITIONS: This is an irregular pazcel of about-�t;569 square feet. The applicants aze proposing to split off a portion of the property with an area of 6,732 squaze feet and construct a new single family home. Theze is no ailey access to the property. The entire properiy slopes from the east to the west and the easterly hzlf slopes quite steeply. Surrounding Land Use: Primarily single family homes to the north, south and the east with Highway 61 and railroad tracks to the west. -ti D. BACKGROUND: The owners of this pazcel are giving a portion of the property to their daughter and son-in-law, the applicants, so that ihey can construct a house. The property owner, Roger Oehrlein, has a refuse hauling business and has legal nonconforming status to 0 File #98-146 Page Two E. FINDIIVGS:' ,_. , i. The property in question cannot be put to a.reasonabt� �se under the strict provisions of the code. . ' � The applicants have lived in this azea most of their liv�s'and would like to stay in the � azea. However, there are few buildable lots left in the erea and those that are.buildable aze too expensive for the applicants. There is enough Iqt size to split the propertx into � two lots that would meet the minimum lot size requirements but that would entail moving the exisung house and garage. The construction o f a house on the available portion of land is complicated by the sloge of the property and the uregular shape of the lot. 2. The pli�ht of the land owner is due to circumstances unique to this property, and these circumstances were not created by the land owner. ' The location of the existing buildings on the property which lanits the Iand available for development as well as the irregular s:�ape and slope of the property aze circumstances fliat were not created by the applicants. 3. � The proposed variance is in keeping with the spirit and intent of the code, and is consisfent with the heaith, safety, comf'ort, morals and welfaze of the inhabitants of the City'of St. Paul. The desire to remain in this area, close to family and work, and to develop a portion of •� ' unused land with the construction of a new single family home is in keeping with the � spirit and intent of the code. 4. Tl�e proposed variance wiJ�. not impair an adequate supply oi light and air to adjacent � property, nor will it alter the essential chazacter of the surrounding azea or unreasonably diminish established property values within the surrounding azea. Tfie west and north sides of the proposed new home abut stteets. The east side of the lot is steeply sloped and wooded. There will be no unpact on the supply of light or sir to the adjac�nt properties. ; '��.There are several lots in this immediate azea that do not meet the minimum lot size - reyuirements. A home constructed on a 6,732 squaze foot lot will not be out character with the neighborhood. The applicants have submit[ed a petition signed by several of their nei�hbors stating thai they have no objection to the proposed variances. 5. The variance, if granted, would not permit any use tliat is not pemutted under the provisions of the code for the property in the district where the af�'ected land is located, not would it alter cr change the zoning district ciassification �f the property. a�' �`� `�' '� File #98-146 , . a �, , � � � Page Three � .� � The proposed variance, if granted, would not change or alter the wning ciassificalion of the property. 6. - The requesf for �ariance is not based primarily on a d@s�re to increase the value or income potential of the pazcel of land. � ' ..�, F. DISTRICT COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION: As of the date of this report we have not received a recommendation from District 1. _ , i G. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Based on fmdings 1 trirough 6, staff recommends approval of the variance. , � , . e � � {. . . ,. �3 . _ �-� . , � , . ,. ��_ �� e�ition 1 have sesn the proposed site pian that is shown on page 28 of the Board of Appeals Staff Report investigatian datEd June 11, 1998, ! agree with the staff r�cammendation fhat is dn pag� 23 of this report. Si�ure Address Dale PMne Number � / ' t i . �,; • � ° � / � � L � ��d -S 3 5 / „ e_ ' 3 _ 3� c�C� �, Q 2 ./- . _ z.Z • fF'" 7 9 �7�G !3$:3317 '39� t ,�� y-9y��_ 7a-�ze I 3c� 6zb 1 i �3 � i I4 � ZCC� Z� ZZ Z� e >2 � ,� F� � f4 �Y�. �-Z`l' � �3g - S`� 2 7/4� 9`� �9� 7�9-srE� ��3 9S57p� �,�73S-C35'� ��1d� . �..� �s g ��s-�� i � 6 -a.5'i�'` S� ?3S-S'9�7 � 735-7�1/S �X �%/��l ZZ a �,�� Petition i have seen the prapasesf site plan that is sfioum on page 23 of #he Soard af Appeals Staff Report tnves#igation dated June 11, 1998, 1 agree with the staff recotnmendation that is on page 23 of this report. s� naa�ss o�e . � H� aa� � ,� Z S�-� s b-z� ��5� �� ov 5. �f-. nu �Q r��29�9� �g-a�s3 a�> � -..� �_ ` �' � �/ o y,S' �� s � 5 �a —z� � zi . _ .. , . ., _ _ . � - ._ _ . .,,�� _ , d �-. _,� � -j _ �3�- `� / �� .��o� � � 3> � ��I � _ �s� 3°) 3�� 3�� 39� yu} vr), yL� �{3� � ,,�_ ,, !r /� .a � -�/ Y� - � i�� r"sJ`at.fi�'�'` !�f_"`i'. � .i � _ r� � � t/ C( " � � rr u ( �, ;s. s�a „ „ _ ,. > _/�f'� n ir i( �� 6 �' �"� � 5 -3�-b - 6��"�(�'-7.Sl-�.�5`- u,� 23��7,aZ. %�....-Q � 3 r-�rR�.-, 'r ��'�� Petition I have seert the proposed site plan that is shown on page 28 of the Board of Appeats Staff Report Investigation dated June 11, 1998, I agree with ifie staff recammendation that is on page 23 of this report. ��1€ Sl�� L 66) '��r, �- r �, .-� Laa�-I P�, r� �rra�jo� F� S. �� f 9 I ;o-ra� G�� .�- �'� %. v T' i��=�=�-�r3 (t� S SS f l� 7.30 r�� G2� Rr76G�-T T t-(�R�wna b��t- �� rovrr..� r� �� I�G �O�-�2�-� .� �� / r , � ►-. ' . � , ,. •; � . Petition �1�' �� I have seert the proposed site plan that is shown on page 28 of the Boarc! of Appeals Staff Report ir�ves#igation dated June 11, 1998, i agree with the staff recommendation that is on page 23 of this re{�ort. Sinature Adc#ess Date Rhone Number . , � �� Petifion t have sesn the proposed site pian that is shown on page 28 of the Soard of Appeals Staff Report Investigation dated June 11, 1998, f agree with the staff recommendation that is on page 23 of this report. �� $� $� s� �� s� s� s� 9> �� , G� � G� �� °� � Si�ture Address tlate Pfio� tSumber n (1 n . .. , . i i .. f 0 �� S ��, � I� � 3� �ossa :o� Q � _ aa13 ?(aY/9Q 73D �-z�-�k °23fr-bn�� °a 9� 73(-sa�. � �3 � a.�/�a' 7�i - airo •��- 4£� 73�-7�I� l> �,�q�-q�-Z3 5 ° C��r'/f i -ia ° �3s� =�-S%7 - 9� �3s =s s�, �$? 3�-s'4g �� r� � 8� �S76sF� ��1�� i � 3 � � `� z3'� � �. s � , �� . , ' 6 . . t^� . �p��bb 0 Petition �" � � � lc �L /1 /� i� � �. G1 C�� 3 ! have seen the proposed site pian that is showrr on page 28 af the Bcard of Appeals Staff Report Investigation dated .lune 91, 19J8, I agree with �e staff recommendatian that is on page 23 of this report. q�-�� Peti#ion 1 have seen the proposed site plan tha# is shown on page 28 of the Board of Appeals Staff Report in�estigation dated June 11, 1998, I agree with the staff recommendation that is on page 23 of this report. Sinature A�ldress Date Phorta Number !�� 12� 130 /31 t32 �33 )3Y /35 IiG �3� � 3�' �3 f �� yye !v ( !y 2 . W !YY � rys IYL t9? le /Y9 fso i II''1�'� CITY OF SAINT PAUL � BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS RESOLUTION ZONING FILE NUMBER 98-146 DATE July 13, 1998 --_ � � � .✓,ot� �� WHEREAS, JOSEPH & LAURA BENYSEK has applied fqr a variance from the suict application of the provisions of Sections 67304 (3) & 61.101 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code pertaining to several variances in order to spiit off a lot and construct a new single family home in the R-1, RC3, TPD zo�ing district at 858 POINT DOUGLAS ROAD S; and , WI�EREA5, the Saint Paui Boazd of Zoning Ap(�eals conducted a public hearing on 06/22/1998, pursuant to said appeal in accordance with the requirements of Section 64.205 of the Legislative Code; and WHEREAS, the Saint Paul Board of Zoning Appeals based upon evidence presented at the pubtic hearing, as substantially reflected in the minutes, made the following findings of fact: The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use under the strict provisions of the code. The applicants have lived in this area most of their lives and would like to stay in the azea However, there aze few buildable lots left in the azea and those that aze buildable are too expensive for the applicants. There is enough lot size to split the property into two lots that would meet the minimum lot size requirements but that would entail moving the existing house and garage. The construction of a house on the available portion of land is complicated by the slope of the property and the irregulaz shape of the lot. 2. The plight of the land owner i5 due to circumstances unique to this property, and these circumstances were not created by the land owner. The location of the existing buildings on the property which limits the land available for development as well as the irregulaz shape and siope of the property are circumstances that were not created by the applicants. 3. The proposed variance is not in keeping with the spirit and intent of the code, and is not consistent with the health, safety, comfort, morals and weifaze of the inhabitants of the City of St. Paul. The Highwood Small Area Plan adopted in 1992, requires that lots created after the effective date of the ordinance (1992) must have a minimum lot size of 9,600 squaze feet. This proposal does not meet the spirit and intent of that ordinance. �� File #98-146 Page Two . 4. The proposed vaziance will not impair an adequ�te suppl}� of light and air to adjacent property, nor wili it aiter the essential cHaracter of the surrounding area or unreasonably diminish established property values within the surround,in,g azea. The west and north sides of the proposed new home �but streets. The east side of the lot is steepiy sloped and wooded. There will be no impact on the supply of light or air to the adjacent properties. , There are several lots in this immediate area t�at do not meet the minimum lot size requirements. A home constructed on a 6,732 squaze foot lot will not be out of chazacter with the neighborhood. The applicants have submitted a petition signed by several of their neighbors stating that they have no objection to the proposed vaziances. 5. The vaziance, if granted, would not pecmit any use that is not permitted under the provisions of the code for the property in the district where the affected (and is located, nor would it alter or change the zoning district classification of the property. The proposed vaziance, if granted, would not change or alter the zoning classification of the property. 6. The request for vaziance is not based primazily on a desire to increase the value or income, potential of the parcel of land. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Saint Paul Board of Zoning Appeals that application to waive the provisions of Sections 67304 (3) & 61.101 in order to split off a lot and construct a new single family home is hereby denied, on property located at 858 POINT DOUGLAS ROAD S and legaily described as Subj to Hwy, the Following; Lots 2,3 & 4 and Ex the east 35 ft, I,ot 1, Also Vac Alley E of and Adj Lots 2,3 and 4, Blk 10, Burlington Heights; in accordance with the application for variance and the site plan on file with the Zoning Administrator. MOVED BY : Morton SECONDED BY: wi�son IN FAVOR: a AGAINST: a NIAILED: July 14, 1998 Fi(e #98-146 Page Three �� TIME LIi�IIT: No order of the Board of Zoning Appeals permitting the erection or alteration of a building or- off-street p3� g facility shatl be valid for a period ]onger than one�year, udless a b�di�g permit for such erection or alteration is obtained within such period and such erection or alteration is proceeding pursuant to the terms of suci�•permit. The Board of Zoning Appeals or the City Council may grant an extension not to exceed one year. In granting such extension, the Boasd o�Zoning Appeals may deci@e to hold a public hearing. . APPEAL: Decisions of the Board of Zoning Appeals are final subject to appeal to the City Council within 15 days by anyone affected by the decision. Building permits shall not be issued after an appeal has been fded. If permits have been issued before an appeal has been filed, then the permits are suspended and construction shall cease untff the City Council has made a fmal determination of the appeal. CERTIF'ICATION: I, the undersigned Secretary to the Board of Zoning Appeals for the City of Saint Paul, l�iinnesota, do hereby certify that I have compared the foregoing copy with the original record in my office; and find the same to be a true and correct copy of said original and of the whole thereof, as based on approved minutes of the Saint Paul Board of Zoning Appeals meeting held an Jaly 13, 1998 and on record in the Office of License Inspection and Environmental Protection, 350 St. Peter Street, Saint Paul, Minnesota. SAINT PAUL BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS ��" ��C; ' C � �� Noel Diedrich Secretary to the Board ��.��Y '�ity �ouuci2 �i�mbers: I believe tt�e members on ihe isoarci of Zoning i�ppesis wna voied against our reauest for a variance did so not fuitv understandmg tl�e wav �me property in c�uescion at 8iR South Point l�ou�as itoad and the h�me tF_iaz we wotvd Iike to buil� corr�iciec� svith tt�e "Iii�hevooci L�eve2opn2e� PoL�ies". 1 wot�d like to g� through esch af the F1aas ihat are apglieabte to our situatian. The fallcwin�are Ceneral Plaas far the I3ighwoad Area: GI. ilie woaded r,u in Highwood especisjIIlv alon� the frr�ile btuIDine_ shoulci �ie preserved and pmtected. We will not be removing �rry trces #'rom ttss lot eithPr in xhe grocess of bcutdiag the hame ar cnee the h�me has been t�uitt. �Ne LviZt in fsct be �dcting trees to the Iot once the home is finisEicd. G2. �'�ppIic�Ie guideIines and stancI:u cls for Iancls within the bouncitlries of the �vlississippi I�Iatiai�ai River ruca Recxe,arion t�res skc�uld be endarsee�. The River C;orridor St�ndstrcis prohibit residential developm�ni c�n sl�pes of � eater than I8 percen� The slope of the lsnd in quesFion is 9 percent on the soutt� side of lot and 12 percent on the north side af t�e l�t. I do belie��e that ��e a.*e f�Iloti°ing the Ri�cr Canid�r Standards. G3. The e�tisl.ing matwe stand of t� should be preserved, a�x�T the natural canogy c�f vegeiative c:c2ver on vaeani and occ:upiec� Iots shoutd be rnainir�ineci. Again we wauid nc�t be ciisturbin� any existing w�?cxleci arer+. c�z natural canopy of vegetz3tive areas. G�. Trcc� r.�h a dia�:�:,: ir c;cccss of i^ in:..'�cs r�ot:i �C ^y1'�t cetcd. Again we will not be remuving any irees :ii all. Gy. A tandscape p�an shautd he required far a1i subdivisions. ��-'� ��' �te have a Iandscape pIan made. Ne eaould apprec.iate a Iitde Iead way witi�, the exac:i placemc�t of the trees and �rubs fhat we int�d to actct to the home site. The reasan for this bein� aEter the home has be� buiii ii wilI be mur� easier io imagine the landsc:aning. We will be doing the Iandscapm� ta t�e lot ourselves. G6. throu� tsi3. Ate Not Applica�te_ G24. Hnmeawners stiould be require3 to h�.ve c�' street paridng f�r i�vo ca�-s per househald. There is ample off sireet gari�ici�. an bath sides oFSprinrrsicie Drive and i�oth sides nf Ft. Dougtas Roacl. GIS. All utilities shouId he tmdergound. We have included undergrouad utilities ia the plaas far tE�e home. GI6. Is Nat Applic:able. The_pla�s for North Hi�hwood are as follows: NHI. `�'he mixlimmiun !ot size for unptatted reside�al Iots with mare ttcan 5t� gercent nf th� tot at a sloge csf less than I2 gercent should be 9,(i0Q sq�re feet. 1�e miIIimut� �ot �ize f�r unglattcd resdartial lots �vith mc�re ihau 50 percertt of the Iat ai a slope af IZ percent ar greater shauld be FS,OOQ square f�et. When detern�ining Iot size, the "base case" sIupes should be those ui exist�ce at Ihe time af preIirninary plat subdivision. Eslteraiians to t�te slopes should naY be allowed tttai would lower tt►e "base case" slope from 1 Z percent nr greater ta Iess tfi�an l 2 percent, P}atieci, �andersized lots wo�ild be consideir,cf non-c�anforming. This subject is tfie r�an fc�r us agglying f�r a vaziance for o•rer a111at size. Wc wi11 not be atterfng the �Iope af the tand in ordcz t� bui�d aa it �i2. Installation �nci ixnpravemeni of the water Iiues, �:uiiiaiy �nd storm sewers, pgvecl streets aud at�proorie#e liQhting shoul� be c:c3niinueci. We intend to have cily water installed and there is existing city sewer on Springside Drive and a Metra sewer vn Pt. Douglas Road. a�� tfI3. �riva#e domes�ic weIls 3houtci be gradiiatly phaseci �ut with the u;traciuclion of ciiv water service. We wi�t have city water service. NH4. t�sraugk NH8. Are Not Apg�icable. On page S of the Highwood Plaa iT cIearly sKates the f�llowing: The City Council's sspproved policy is c:ansisient with a Highwood Task �orce compromise solution based on pubIic comment during the review period. Since the Ari� in#ent of increasin� ihe miinimwm int size is to protect the environmemal resources in the area (includin� waoded areas and areas wit� hi�her sla�es) t�e ccrm�sromise is geared to a distinciion based on �ove. In addition, sitc rcview is re�uirea far arry residentzal deve3ogme�t on siopes 22 percent or greater. The palicy cancerning alteraiions to "base case" slope is to avoid the situation where a developer ftattens a lb gercent slope f� a o percenfi slope in arder io deveIop ihe entire subciivision wifh 9 square foot lots. ...,_ ,. � :.�; � � F ; �r�_ � ` �_ . � �; , �� , :� � �: s. 0. '. 4 �� ° a��;i -,�,��`r�,� �a �, +� + �� r .. y . ..a '*" , .._' � �� r �a, "` `.,;.-.,, _ w'�s � _ 5�4e �.. :, �;�� ,. ' �. n�,��' � � ° � � : y i `F �� 6 �:. �.,- �� .' �� _.� ' ° �-.-x^ u . ,.