90-1198 /� i C !C G/�/ /
0 1 � 7 d� e ' �` ' /`t•��. � r,..t.. / �� 4?
� � -� �i � Counc i l F i l e # �����/ C/
' Green Sheet # ���
� RESOLUTION -
CITY OF S PAUL, MINNESOTA ��
� � � �
r ,
Presented By
Referred To Camnittee: Date
Whereas, Raymond Heichel appeals to the Board of Zoning Appeals from a decision of the
Zoning Administrator pursuant to the provisions of the Saint Paul Zoning Code for property located
at 596 Portland Avenue, Saint Paul, Minnesota 55102, legally described as west 16.66 feet of Lot 7
and east 16.66 feet of Lot 8, Block 23, Weed & Willius Reanangement; and
Whereas, The purpose of the appeal was to appeal the determination of the Zoning
Administrator that the application for legal non-conforming status for a structure with five dwelling
units, including four efficiency units on the second level, be denied; and
Whereas, The Board of Zoning Appeals conducted a public hearing on May 15, 1990, after
having provided notice to affected property owners, and the Board, by its Resolution 10632, adopted
May 15, 1990, decided to denied the application based on the following findings and conclusions:
1. No record e�cists for building permits to remodel the building since it was built in about
1922.
2. The County Assessor's records show that a kitchen and a 3/4 bath were added prior to
1980 and indicate that the structure was still a duplex in 1981.
3. According to the Polk directory the structure was a five unit structure in 1969 but was
only a two unit structure prior to that date.
4. The evidence submitted by the applicant was not sufficiently clear and specific to
determine when the structure was altered to become a five unit structure, and such evidence
submitted by the applicant was also contradictory (see minutes and resolution of the Board of
Zoning Appeals).
Whereas, Pursuant to the provisions of Section 64.205, Raymond Heichel, duly filed with the
City Clerk an appeal from the determination made by the Board of Zoning Appeals, requesting that
a hearing be held before the City Council for the purpose of considering the actions taken by the
said Board; and
Whereas, Acting pursuant to Sections 64.205 through 64.208, and upon notice to affected
parties a public hearing was duly conducted by the City Council on June 26, 1990 where all
interested parties were given an opportunity to be heard; and
Whereas, The Council, having heard the statements made, and having considered the appeal,
the report of staff, the record, minutes and resolution of the Board of Zoning Appeals, does hereby
Resolve, That the Council of the City of Saint Paul does hereby affirm the decision of the
Board of Zoning Appeals in this matter, based on the following findings of the Council:
�� IG � i� ,� a � � � �0—��9�
��- The Board of Zoning Appeals did not commit an enor of fact, rocedure
Y P
or conclusion.
2) The Council concurs in the findings and conclusions of the Board of
Zoning Appeals in this matter, as more fully set forth in the minutes of the Board's
hearing and the Board's resolution.
Further Resolved, That the appeal of Raymond Heichel be and is hereby denied; and, be it
Finally Resolved, That the City Clerk shall mail a copy of this resolution to Raymond Heichel,
the Zoning Administrator, Planning Commission and Board of Zoning Appeals.
- --------- ------- ------
Yeas Na s Absent R uested
p�� eq by Department of:
Goswitz
Lon
Macca e �-
Rettman �
T une y
Ni son �. BY:
0
� ry Form Approved by City Attorney
Adopted by Counci l: Date ��� � t �.QgQ
Adoption Certified by Council Secretary � �/
� By:
�
By:
Approved by Mayor for Submission to
Approved by Mayor: Date �? ��� � 8 19� �°�"�;`
!�
.,C�.����/�`!/ By:
By:
�UBIlSNED ��►- 2 8 i y 90
� �=90-%9�
DEPAR'TMENT/OFFICFJOOUNqL DATE INITIATED
Cit Clerk's off��e GREEN SHEET No. 2 0 0
CONTAC,f PERSON a PHONE INI7IAU DATE INITIALIDATE
�DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR �CiTY COUNqL
Al Olson 4231 ��F� �CITY ATTOFiNEY �CITY CLERK
MUST BE ON COUNpL AOENDA BY(DATE� ROUTINp �BUDOET DIRECTOR �FIN.6 MOT.SERVICES DIR.
�MAYOR(OR ASSISTANn �
TOTAL#�OF SIGNATURE PAQES (C�IP ALL LOCATIONS FOR SIGNATUR�
ACT10N REQUEBTED:
Resolution denying the appeal of Raymond Heichel to a decision of th� Board of Zoning Appeals
which denied his request for 1ega1 nonconforming status for property located at 595 Portland.
RECOMMENDATIONS:Approve(A)or Reject(R) COUNqL COMMITTEE/RESEARCH REPORT OPTIONAI
_PLANNINCa COMMISSION _qVtL SERVICE COAAMISSION ANA�Y� PHOME NO.
_qB COMMRTEE _
_STAFF _ COMMENT3:
_DISTRICT COURT _
SUPPORTS WHICH COUNCIL OBJECTIVE7
INITIATING PROBLEM,ISSUE,OPPORTUNITY(Who,Whet,When,Whero,Why);
Resolution reauested by Council confirming action taken at Pulilic Hearing on June 26, 1990.
ADVANTAOES IF APPROVED:
DISADVANTAOES IF APPi�VED:
DISADVANTMiEB IF NOT APPROVED:
RECE{VED
��L1��� Council Research Centet
CITY CLERK JUL 09 �y�U
.. .
TOTAL AMOUNT OF TRANSACTION = C08T/REVENUE BUOOETED(qRCLE ON� YES NO
FUNDINti SOURCE ACTIVITY NUMBER
FINANGAL INFORMATION:(DCPWI�
dw
NOTE: COMPLETE DIRECTIONS ARE INCLUDED IN THE GREEN SHEET lNSTRUCTIONAI �
MANUAL AVAILABLE IN THE PURCHASINO OFFICE(PHONE NO. 298-4225). '
ROUTING ORDER:
Below are preferred routings for the nve most frequent types of documents:
CONTRACTS (assumes suthorized COUNCIL RESOLUTION (Amend, Bdgts./
budget exists) Accept. Grants)
1. Outside Agency 1. Department Director
2. Inftiating DepaRment 2. Budget Director
3. City Attomey 3. City Attomey
4. Mayor 4. MayoNAssistant
5. Finar�ce 8�Mgmt Svcs. Director 5. Ciry Council
6. Finance Accounting 6. Chlef Accountant, Fln &Mgmt Svcs.
ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER (Budget COUNCIL RESOLUTION (all others)
Re�nsion) and ORDINANCE
1. Activity Manager 1. Initiating DepaRmeM Director
2. Department Accountant 2. City Attorney
3. DepartmeM Director 3. Mayor/AasiataM
4. Budget Director 4. Ciry Coundl
5. Ciry Clerk
6. Chief Accountant, Fin&Mgmt Svcs.
ADMINISTRATIVE ORDERS (all others)
1. Initiating Department
2. City Attorney
3. Msyor/Assistant
4. City Clerk
TOTAL NUMBER OF SIGNATURE PAGES
Indicate the#of pages on which signatures are required and paperc�iP
each of these pa�es.
ACTION REQUESTED
Describe what the projecUrequest a�ks to accomplish in either chronologi-
cal order or order of importance,whichever is most approp�iate for the
issue. Do not write complete sentences. Begfn each item in your Ust with
a verb.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Complete if the fssue in question has been presented before any body, public
or private.
SUPPORTS WHICH COUNCIL OBJECTIVE?
Indicate which Council objective(a)your projecUrequ�t supports by listing
the key word(s)(HOUSING, RECREATION, NEI(iHBORHOODS, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT,
BUDGET, SEWER SEPARATION).(SEE COMPLETE LIST IN INSTRUCTIONAL MANUAL.)
COUNCIL COMMITTEEIRESEARCH REPORT-OPTIONAL AS REQUESTED BY COUNCIL
INITIATINCi PROBLEM, ISSUE,OPPORTUNIIY �
Explain the situation or conditions that created a need for your project
or request.
ADVANTAGES IF APPROVED
Indicate whether this is simpy an annual budget procedure required by law/
charter or whether there are spsciHc wa in which the City of Saint Paul
and its citizens will beneflt from this pro�icVactlorl. ,
DISADVANTAGES IF APPROVQD
What negative effects or major ohanges to existing or'past processes might
this projecUrequest produce if it fs pasaed(e.g.,traffic delays, noise,
tax increases or aseASSments)?To Whom?,When?For,how long?
DISADVANTAGES IF NOT APPROVED
What will be the negative consequenc;es if the promised action is not
approved? Inability to deliver aervice?Continued high traffic, noise,
accident rete?Loss of revenue?
FINANCIAL IMPACT
ARhough you must tailor the informatfon you provide here to the issue you
are addressing, in general you muat answer two questions: How much is it
going to cASt?Who is going to pay?
�-ya,���
C1TT O�
, ;�' �, � CITY OF SAINT PAUL
o a
: „_�;;'"; ,� OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY
�Cp AO
a��•
JANE A. MC PEAK, CITY ATTORNEY
647 City Hall,Saint Paul,Minnesota 55102
JAMES SCHEIBEL ����iVED 6�2-29s-512�
FAX 612-298-5619
MAYOR
,�u�051980
Juiy 3, 1990 C17Y CLERK
Mr. Albert B. Olson
City Clerk
386 City Hall
Re: Raymond Heichel 's Appeal
596 Portland Avenue
Dear Mr. Olson:
I have prepared the resolution whereby the City Council would
deny the appeal of Mr. Heichel from the decision of the Board of
Zoning Appeals. The Board had determined that the Zoning
Administrator had not committed any error in determining that the
structure at 596 Portland was not legal nonconforming five unit
structure.
Your attention is called to the requirement in the resolution
to forward a copy of it to Mr. Heichel, the Zoning Administrator,
Planning Commission and to the Board of Zoning Appeals.
I am returning also the City Council 's file in this matter.
Very truly yours,
�, f
J ROM EGA
A$s�:s nt City Attorney
t
JJ�:s
enc.
6-25-90 /,A" ��j/��
l:
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:
We the undersigned do NOT support changing the zoning for
596 Portland to make it a five unit apartment building.
Both the density already on this Portland block and the
size of this house are negative factors in granting such
a change.
The best use for the property at 596 Portland would be to
convert it back to a single family home - not the illegal
boarding house as it is now. This would bring it back to
it ' s previously intended use .
� - S--g�- ��,��Q�.d(
, s� Q�,� �
_ �
;;,
, . � ��a-�r��'
-��i7 0��. CITY OF SAINT PAUL
__,�� "a��.
;�� 'yr�, DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING A�D ECONOMIC DEVELOPME�T
r° '�' DIVISION OF PLANNI\G
'� �nut.�m� ,^
.',`,� '���� �'� �� �� 25 1�est Fourth Street,Saint Paul,Minnesota 55102
�.. � ��
- 612-228-3270
'� , '^��� Fax:612-228-3220
JA�IES SCHEIBEL
�tAl�OR
June 18, 1990
Albert Olson, City Clerk
Room 386, City Hall
Saint Paul, Minnesota 55102
RE: Zoning File #10649
City Council Hearing: June 26, 1990
PURPOSE: Appeal of the Board of Zoning Appeals decision to affirm the
determination by the Zoning Administrator that the application for
legal nonconforming status for a structure with five dwelling units,
including four efficiency units on the second 1eve1, be denied.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: To affirm the decision of the Zoning Administrator to
deny legal nonconforming status �or a five unit
structure.
SUPPORT: None.
OPPOSITION: A neighboring property owner.
Dear Sir:
On May 15, 1990 the Board of Zoning Appeals held a public hearing on this
appeal of the determination by the Zoning Administrator that the application
for legal nonconforming status for a five unit structure be denied. The
applicant testified. At the close of the public hearing, the BZA voted 4 to 0
to affirm the decision by the Zoning Administrator.
This appeal is scheduled to be heard by the City Council on June 26, 1990.
Please notify me by June 25, 1990, if any member of the City Council wishes to
have slides of the site presented at the public hearing.
Sincerely,
Peggy A. Reichert
Deputy Director for Planning
PAR:ss
Attachments
cc: Mayor Scheibel
File #10649
., . � ��y�����
APPLICATION FOR APPEAL ZONING OFFICE USE ONLY
CITY OF SAINT PAUL �EC�� ��� File � � ��7y�
MAY `p 1990 Application Fee $�oo.00 `� .�_
ZO NIN G Tentative Hearing Date
App 1 i cat i on i s hereby made for an Appea 1 to the (�, ti .�,�,�e, �
under the provisions of Chapter 64, Section �� Paragraph _� of the Zoning Code
to appeal a decision made by the � Board of Zoning Appeals
_ Planning Comnission on I'�'lCu� �S , 19�Ct
_ Zoning Administrator (date of decision)
_ Planning Administrator
Other
A. APPELLANT
Name =aSrmond �eichel Daytime phone 222� ��yc,�
Address �QF, �„��- �na -ive. Zip Code [510�
"t ��ul ,� �i nn
6. DECISION BEING APPEALED
Zoning file name k ; � �., .�,�t� �t � ��b�r � Zoning File #_io632
Property Address/Location 596 rortland �ve.
'�' 16.66 of lot 7 & � 16.66 of lot 8, Block 23, -�:eed °� ::illilius
Legal description �e..+�++�nrrcmont
C. GROUNDS FOR APPEAL (Use additional sheets if necessary. )
(Explain why you feel there has been an error in any requirement, permit, decision
or refusal made by an administrative official, or an error in fact, procedure or finding
made by the Board of Zoning Appeals or the Planning Comnission. )
3n �arli �i nn3,� ahaat pf ranP�r�ag 1)SPf; tn rnmrl PtP cPC�ti nn
If you have any questions, please contact: � t���c�1�-�
Appl cant's signature
St. Paul Zoning Office
1100 City Hall Annex
25 West Fourth Street :�a:� 3C, 1Q90 � . � ' �_-----
Saint Paul , Minnesota 55102 Date City agent
(298-4154) g�82
� ` . � �%o-i�y�
C. GROUNDS FOR APPEAL ( Aciditional sheet )
The St. Paul Zoning has recently approved a 20 unit apts. to be
installed into *_he building at Portland & Dale Str. (T.B. Building )
where none were before.
Here at 596 Portland, these four one room units, on second floor,
(liqht house keeping,furnished with stoves & fridgesl It's possible they
date back to 1930 . I was able to locate Matie Schmidt whom sold to me,
on July ist, 1964 . She said,those unit's were in place, when she boughC
in 1956 of March 15. Matie Schmidt is in the Birchwood Nursing Home, at
Forrest Lake Minn. She is bed ridden, one leg amputated, had two strokes,
leaving her left side paralized. Her last words were," I hope *_hey can keep
their stoves 6 fridges."
Her dauqhter, Judy Schmidt Joyce of 2778 Whi*_e Bear Ave. , St. Paul, Minn.
gave me a notorized statement, that these units were in piace on 2nd floor
as of March 15, 1956. The home, 1956 Portland was sold that way to me as of
July lst 1964.
With so many Home?ess people,the poor & needy, should have afordabie housing.
The Zoning Board didnot include the notorized statement of Judy Schmidt Joyce, I
have included a copy with my application.
You can readily see how the Zoning Boa:d picked apart the Statement from
Richard Christensen. In a phone conversation wi*_h him, he said they are wrong, as
he wenr. to school from 592 Portland at *_hat r_ime. He was angered about that.
The Statement from John Mastel was no*_ handled correctly, John renr_ed one unit
and when another came available, he rented i*_, (opened up *_he door b�tween the
two units, but the s*_oves & fridqes remained in place.) When John vacated, the
door was closed & locked, and they went back to two units.
Tt►e Board member John Hardwick seemed to be the worst in wantinq these units to
go. " I ask ? "Where is *_heir Christian Spiri� for the poor and needy ?
In all sincereity, I ask that these units, remain in place and continue *_o
serve SAINT PAUL as they have in the many years of the Past. I also ask *_hat
the city Council "Grandfather these unit's in." So that no Certificate of
Occupancy be nPeded." (These poor & needy have had to pu*_ out $270.00 *_o the
Zoninq Board Appeal and now 5200.00 to be appleaied to the City Council)
I now humbly lay Lhis matter in to the hands of the SAINT PAUL CITY COUNCIL.
ZOP���IG ��LE �o��+q
. . y �
� � ����
� MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
13th FLOOR CONFERENCE ROOM, CITY HALL e�NNEX
ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA, MAY 15, 1990
PRESENT: Mme. Maddox; Messrs. Osborn, Davis and Zimniewicz of the Board of
Zoning Appeals; Mr. Segal, Assistant City Attorney; Mr. Hardwick of
the Division of Building Inspection and Design; Mr. Bunnell and Ms.
Synstegaard of the Planning Division Staff.
ABSENT: Messrs. Horak* and Kirk*.
*Excused
The meeting was chaired by Dennis Osborn, Chairman.
RAYMOND HEICHEL (#10632) : The applicant is appealing the determination by the
Zoning Administrator that the application for legal nonconforming status for a
structure with five dwelling units, including four efficiency units on the
second level, be denied.
The applicant was present. There was opposition present at the hearing.
Mr. Bunnell showed slides of the site and reviewed the staff report with a
recommendation that the Zoning Administrator correctly determined that the
application for legal nonconforming status for a structure with five dwelling
units at 596 Portland Avenue be denied. He stated that staff received no
correspondence from District 8 or from residents regarding the variance
request.
Raymond Heichel, 596 Portland Avenue, stated that he contacted the daughter of
the previous owner and presented a notarized statement to the Board which
stated that from 1956 to 1964 there were four kitchenettes on the second
floor. He also presented an abstract showing proof that Herman and Matie
Schmidt owned the property between 1956 and 1964.
Mr. Osborn questioned Mr. Heichel regarding the Fire Department's inspections.
Mr. Heichel replied that there have been several inspections. He stated that
many of his tenants do not wish to be disturbed by inspectors.
Mr. Osborn asked Mr. Heichel how many bathrooms are on the second floor. Mr.
Heichel replied one.
Mr. Osborn asked if one bathroom meets the City Codes. Mr. Hardwick stated
that one bathroom does not meet the City Code.
Mr. Zimniewicz questioned the fact that there have been no permits taken out
on the property. Mr. Heichel stated that he did not do any remodeling and
therefore needed no permits. He stated that the kitchenettes were already
installed when he bought the property. He stated that regarding finding �7 in
the staff report, Mr. Leske may have had a hard time trying to remember
everything exactly.
Mr. Zimniewicz asked what is on the third floor. Mr. Heichel replied that
there are two good sized rooms but they are used to store items. He stated
that at one time his son lived on the third floor.
. , . � ��a-��9y
' File #10632
Page Two
Mr. Zimniewicz asked Mr. Heichel why he refused to let the Fire Department
inspectors into his home. Mr. Heichel replied that he does not recall
refusing entry to the Fire Department. He stated that the Fire Department did
not develop a good reputation during this past year. He stated that he wishes
there were more homes for homeless people and hopes the BZA grants him
permission to keep the four units. He stated that if the stoves and
refrigerators have to be taken out of the four second floor units the tenants
will improvise.
Mr. Zimniewicz asked what income Mr. Heichel derives from the four units and
if he is retired. Mr. Heichel replied that he is retired and receives $44 a
week from each of the four units.
Mr. Davis asked if the tenants have a separate access to their units. Mr.
Heichel replied yes, there is a stairway in the front and in the back of the
home.
Mr. Zimniewicz asked Mr. Heichel if he was aware that there were violations in
1971 that were not corrected. Mr. Heichel replied that he didn' t understand
why that was in the Fire Department report and doesn't recall any violations
in 1971.
Lorri Steffen, 585 Portland Avenue, stated that she has spoken to many people
in the neighborhood and everyone is opposed to the applicant's request. She
stated that the people �Ir. Heichel rents to are not individuals she wants
around her or her children. She stated that she is surprised that homeless
people can afford the $800 a month they pay to Mr. Heichel. Ms. Steffen
stated that she gets $S50 for her upstairs unit and it was completely
remodeled. She stated that Mr. Heichel does not take care of his property and
she seriously questions if in fact Mr. Heichel resides at 596 Portland Avenue
as she has never seen him. She stated that she has had to call the Police
Department several times because of various incidents at Mr. Heichel's
property.
Mr. Davis asked Ms. Steffen how long she has lived at �85 Portland. Ms.
Steffen replied S years and that there is a serious parking shortage in the
area. She stated that if Mr. Heichel fixed up his property, rented it to
decent people, and turned it back into a duplex she wouldn't object.
Mr. Heichel stated that $44 a week from four units does not add up to $800 a
month. He stated that if Ms. Steffen is concerned about the neighborhood she
should focus on the Apollo Club on Dale Street.
�Ir. Davis asked Mr. Heichel if District 8 has reviewed this case. Mr. Heichel
replied no.
Mr. Zimniewicz asked �Ir. Heichel if he lives at 596 Portland. Mr. Heichel
replied yes.
� � . � ��y����'
, File #10632
Page Three
Mr. Hardwick reviewed ordinance 62.102(a) aloud to the BZA. He stated that
the evidence that Mr. Heichel has supplied to the City has come in spurts. He
stated that the previous statements are extremely vague about the number of
rooms and the exact dates. He stated that Mr. Heichel's other property at 592
Portland has the same configuration as 596 Portland. Mr. Hardwick stated that
at the time he dealt with Mr. Heichel regarding 592 Portland Mr. Heichel also
submitted a letter from a Mr. Christenson that provided general statements.
Mr. Hardwick stated that the County Assessor's office states that the building
has been a duplex since it was constructed. He stated that the inspectors
have been inside the building and in 1980 they noticed an extra bathroom and
kitchen. Mr. Hardwick stated that the inspectors may have just noticed it
then and that it could have been there in previous inspections too. He stated
that in 1966 there were only two tenants and in 1968 there were three tenants.
Mr. Hardwick stated that there is a substantial amount of conflicting evidence
regarding this case.
Mr. Davis asked if there were any specific records from the Assessor's Office.
Mr. Hardwick replied no, that the entries he obtained were from handwritten
notes on 3 x 5 cards.
Ms. Maddox asked if the evidence presented by Mr. Heichel is sufficient to
prove his case.
�Ir. Segal stated that he cannot tell the Board if it is sufficient evidence.
He stated that that decision is up to the Board. He stated that the Board is
not ruling on a variance but deciding on whether the Zoning Administrator's
decision on this matter was correct. Mr. Segal explained ordinance 62.102(a)
again to the Board. He explained that the owner is trying to provide
information stating that 20 years prior to 1965 the home was used as a 5-plex
and the Zoning Administrator is saying that there is not enough clear evidence
to substantiate that claim and it is up to the Board to make this decision.
Mr. Hardwick stated that prior to 1965 the building was a two-unit allowable
use. He stated that if the Board accepts finding #5 in the staff report then
there were only three units on the second floor. He stated that the Building
Inspection and Design office shows no records of any permits. He also
referred to finding #7, stating that if the BZA believes Mr. Heichel's
comments, allegedly imply that Mr. Leske had a hard time remembering
everything exactly, then the Board should also critically examine the -
statements made by Mr. Heichel. ,
�Ir. Zimniewicz questioned if the Board should lay the matter over with until
District 8 has a chance to review it.
"ir. Bunnell stated that District 8 will not have legal council at their �
meetings to fully comprehend the complexity this case or the intricacies of
the Zoning Code.
*ir. Segal stated that the Board cannot ask District 8 to make a recommendation
for them.
L � /
. (;,�".�1D�'/��
File sc10632
Page Four
Hearing no further testimony, Mr. Osborn closed the public portion of the
meeting.
Ms. Maddox moved that based on staff's recommendation that there is nothing on
record as to when the structure was converted from a duplex to a five unit
structure. There is contradictory evidence regarding when additional units
first existed on the second floor of the premises. In addition, the applicant
has not provided clear and convincing evidence that the structure was a five
unit building since December 1956. Therefore, based on findings 1 through 7,
she recommended that the Zoning Administrator correctly determined that the
application for legal nonconforming status for a structure with five dwelling
units at 596 Portland Avenue be denied. Mr. Zimniewicz seconded the motion,
which passed on a roll call vote of 4 to 0.
Mr. Heichel stated that regarding parking for his building, the church in the
neighborhood allows residents of his building to use their parking lot.
Mr. Osborn stated that if in fact the BZA needed that information, they would
need a letter from the church indicating a shared parking arrangement.
Mr. Bunnell stated that the church is too far away to be considered for shared
parking for Mr. Heichel's property.
Mr. Segal stated that the issue here is not the parking.
Mr. Heichel stated that regarding Mr. Mastel renting two rooms, after he moved
out the units were returned to two separate units.
Mr. Hardwick explained the option of applying for several variances from the
BZA to Mr. Heichel and urged him to do so rather than appealing to the City
Council.
Mr. Heichel was unclear as to what the BZA's decision had been and Mr. Osborn
explained it to him.
Mr. Heichel summarized in saying that the BZA's decision was unchristianlike
and they have destroyed a lot in one day.
Submitted by: Ap o ed by:
/ 'ltc""'- �c,�-.�.,u.� ,
�
Marv Bunnell Dennis Osborn
. . � ��-��'����
CITY OF SAINT PAUL
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS RESOLUTION
ZONING FILE NUMBER: 10632
DATE: Ntay ts, t990
WHEREAS, Raymond Heichel has applied for an administrative review from the decision
of the Zoning Administrator that the application for legal nonconforming status for a
structure with five dwelling units at 596 Portland Avenue in the RM-2 zoning district be
denied; and
WHEREAS, the Saint Paul Board of Zoning Appeals conducted a public hearing on May
I5, 1990, pursuant to said appeal in accordance with the requirements of Section 62.204 of
the Legislative 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:
1. According to Building Inspection and Design Division (BIDD) records, no permits for
remodeling 596 Portland were taken out since 1922 when the structure was built.
2. The County Assessor's records show that a kitchen and a 3/4 bath were added by 1980
and indicate that this structure was still a duplex in 1981. �10 information was
available regarding whether access to the inside of the building was obtained by the
County Assessor during the last inspection.
3. According to R. L. Polk Directories on file in the Planning Office, 596 Portland was a
five unit structure in 1969, but was only a two unit structure prior to that.
4. The statement of Richard Christensen, 2682 East Maryland Avenue, Maplewood
specifically indicates that as of December 1, 1956 when he lived at 592 Portland
Avenue, the floor plan of 596 Portland was first floor occupied by the owner and
second floor with four kitchenettes. However, the 1955 and 1956 R. L. Polk Directories
do not list Mr. Christensen as residing at 592 Portland Avenue which raises some doubt
as to the validity of this statement.
5. The statement of John J. Mastel, 1842 St. Clair Avenue, St. Paul is vague as to the
number of units on the second floor and covers only the period of 1958-1966. In a
phone conversation, Mr. Mastel clarified his statement and indicated that he rented two
rooms on the second floor of the four rooms that were there. Mr. Mastel also indicated
that prior to moving into 596 Portland Avenue in 1958, it apparently had been rented
as 4 units on the second floor.
6. The statement of Ed Kral, 596 Portland Avenue, St. Paul indicates that neither a
kitchen nor a bath was added in 1980 and that since 1980 the structure consisted of
one unit downstairs and four kitchenettes on the second floor.
7. A telephone conversation with Mitchell Leske, Richland, Wisconsin, the previous
contract for deed owner of the property, indicated that when he sold the property to
Mr. Heichel in 1964 there were only 3 apartments on the second floor.
ry
� � ' �yQ�//�7
r `
� File #10632
Page Two
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Saint Paul Board of Zoning Appeals that
the Zoning Administrator correctly decided that the application for legal nonconforming
status for a structure with five dwelling units be denied on property located at 596
Portland Avenue and legally described as W 16.66' of Lot 7 and E 16.66' of Lot 8, Block
23, Weed & Willius Rearrangement; in accordance with the application for administrative
review on file with the Saint Paul Planning Division.
MOVED BY: Maddox
SECONDED BY: zimniewicz
IN FAVOR: a
AGAINST: o
MAILED: May 16, 1990
TIME LIMIT: No order of the Board of Zoning Appeals permitting the erection or
alteration of a building or off-street parking facility shall be valid
for a period longer than one year, unless a building permit for such
erection or alteration is obtained within such period and such
erection or alteration is proceeding pursuant to the terms of such
permit. The Board of Zoning Appeals or the City Council may
grant an extension not to exceed one year. In granting such
extension, the Board of Zoning Appeals may decide 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 filed. If permits have been issued before an appeal has
been filed, then the permits are suspended and construction shail
cease until the City Council has made a finat 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 original and
of the whole thereof, as based on approved minutes of the Saint
Paul Board of Zoning Appeals meeting held on May 15, 1990 and on
record ia the Saint Paul Planning Division Office, 25 West Fourth
Street, Saint Paul, Minnesota.
SAINT PAUL BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
Secretary to the Board
. L � �yo-�i��
�
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS STAFF REPORT
1. APPLICANT: Raymond Heichel FILE #10632
2. CLASSIFICATION: Administrative Review DATE OF HEARING: May 15, 1990 ----
3. LOCATION: 596 Portland Avenue (South side between Dale & Kent)
4. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: W 16.66' of Lot 7 and E 16.66' of Lot 8, Block 23, Weed &
Willius Rearrangement
S. PLANNING DISTRICT: 8
6. PRESENT ZONING: RM-2 ZONING CODE REFERENCE: Section 64.204 (a)
7. STAFF INVESTIGATION AND REPORT: DATE: May 8, 1990 BY: Marv Bunnell
A. PURPOSE: The applicant is appealing the determination by the Zoning
Administrator that the application for legal nonconforming status for a
structure with five dwelling units, including four efficiency units on the
second level, be denied.
B. ACTION REOUESTED: A decision by the BZA that the Zoning Administrator erred and
that the application for legal nonconforming status for a structure with five
dwelling units be approved.
C. SITE AND AREA CONDITIONS: Lot size is approximately 4,671 square feet (140.17'
x 33.32' ) . The site is essentially level and contains a large 2 1/2 story
building. Houses on both sides of the applicant's house are approximately the
same size. The rear of the property has a two-car detached garage with a
carport attached on the western end of the garage. Six garbage cans are located
along the western edge of the property adjacent to the carport.
Surrounding Land Use:
North: Single family and two family residential
East: Two family residential
South: Multiple family rowhouse
West: Multiple family residential
D. BACKGROUND: In April 1988 a Fire Prevention Inspector investigated a complaint
at 596 Portland Avenue and found that the owner was renting several apartments
without a Certificate of Occupancy. Over the past two years the owner has not
cooperated with City inspectors or the courts (see memo from Fire Prevention) .
As a result, the building was condemned to be vacated pending the applicant
exhausting his right to appeal.
E. FINDINGS:
1. According to Building Inspection and Design Division (BIDD) records, no
permits for remodeling 596 Portland were taken out since 1922 when the
structure was built.
, , . �'�ya'����
'File #10632
Page Two
2. The County Assessor's records show that a kitchen and a 3/4 bath were added
by 1980 and indicate that this structure was still a duplex in 1981. No
information was available regarding whether access to the inside of the
building was obtained by the County Assessor during the last inspection.
3. According to R. L. Polk Directories on file in the Planning Office, 596
Portland was a five unit structure in 1969, but was only a two unit
structure prior to that.
4. The statement of Richard Christensen, 2682 East Maryland Avenue, Maplewood
specifically indicates that as of December 1, 1956 when he lived at 592
Portland Avenue, th� floor plan of 596 Portland was first floor occupied by
the owner and second floor with four kitchenettes. However, the 1955 and
1956 R. L. Polk Directories do not list Mr. Christensen as residing at 592
Portland Avenue which raises some doubt as to the validity of this
statement.
5. The statement of John J. Mastel, 1842 St. Clair Avenue, St. Paul is vague as
to the number of units on the second floor and covers only the period of
1958-1966. In a phone conversation, Mr. Mastel clarified his statement and
indicated that he rented two rooms on the second floor of the four rooms
that were there. Mr. Mastel also indicated that prior to moving into 596
Portland Avenue in 1958, it apparently had been rented as 4 units on the
second floor.
6. The statement of Ed Kral, 596 Portland Avenue, St. Paul indicates that
neither a kitchen nor a bath was added in 1980 and that since 1980 the
structure consisted of one unit downstairs and four kitchenettes on the
second floor.
7. A telephone conversation with Mitchell Leske, Richland, Wisconsin, the
previous contract for deed owner of the property, indicated that when he
sold the property to Mr. Heichel in 1964 there were only 3 apartments on the
second floor.
F. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: There is nothing on record as to when the structure was
converted from a duplex to a five unit structure. There is contradictory
evidence regarding when additional units first existed on the second floor of
the premises. In addition, the applicant has not provided clear and convincing
evidence that the structure was a five unit building since December 1956.
Therefore, based on findings 1 through 7, staff recommends that the Zoning
Administrator correctly determined that the application for legal nonconforming
status for a structure with five dwelling units at 596 Portland Avenue be
denied.
� 1 y/�' �/i/- V/a-///f � i
� v� ���Il v � / ,
�.•
�
�., �
ZONING BOARD�Pp E p\� L� ZC,�, r N� Q��111.1$i'R�,T� {L'=
APPLICATION •FOR ZONING ORDINANCE �UJ��'� ' '
;
CITY OF SAINT PAUI a V v ! ' i
> i
A VARIANCE OF ZONING COOE CHAPTER�Q�,SECTION�O� PARAGRAPH 1A� r ,
IS REQUESTED IN CONFOAMITY WITH THE POWERS VESTED IN THE BOARD OF ZONING AP— �
PEALS TO PERMIT THE C�xT� ►-�v E� VSE � T+1� Y�'DC�ON PROPERTY '
OESCRIBED BELOW. 1�!�T � � �``,E���C7 V IV 1T S
A. Applicant; NAME: � Ay K� ND �E ( � H£� . �
ADDRESS ��(� ��7L1��'-� � �
DAYTIME TELEPHONE NO. Z ZZ— ��� � ZIP CODE J S�C � ..
1. Property interest of ap0���ant: iowner,contract purchaser,etc.)
�(1� ti � �
2. Name of owner (if differentl ����
B. Property Description: ADDRESS �C� � ��(L�)...� �
� �r /
1. Legal description: LOT�', r���f``'r� �OC,K `v 3� ADD.���[/`'%+//G;
�� �
2. �ot size: '�� �� L ��
� � � d �_
3. Present Use � �'A% '�� Present Zoning Dist. �'� �
C. Reasons for Request:
1. ProPOSed use ��i��✓ � � T�€ C� i 11�' � � � i,,S � C�"
�
-f{; r';ku sE w� 1 �'�s UN , ; ,�=� M41 iU �t�c�-IZ
Ar.� D �} �F F r L I E U G Y l��;1 r � ���Z�� �i.�t7Z
2. What physical characteristics of the property prevent its being used for arW of the permitted uses .
in your zone? (topography,soil conditions,size and shape of Ipt,etc.)
. � � .
3. State the specific variation requested,giving distances where appropriate.
/ v�
4. Expiain how your case conforms to each of the following:
a. That the strict application of the provisions of the Zoning Ordiance would result in peculiar
or exceptional practical difficulties,or exceptional undue hardships.
� = ' �`T-��±-1 E�
' - `CASHIERSUSE OMLY'` =
b. That the granting of a ��ariance will - ,__ " __ __ t„'- ?J';�>
not be a substantial detriment to -, -- ��^
-. � _ .._�,:,� �ti�
public good or a substantial impair• ,,-y . _ ,.
ment of the intent and -� ��^'
purDOSe of , '-��� _ -
the Zoning Ordinance. - - - - 't''-'� J
��.y �����
J '%� ,
NOTE: THIS WILL VOT 3E °RCCESSED WITHOUT A COMPLETE SITE PLAN!
Signawre �'t �C- •.� y-<_�/;•�
, - (�,/`9a--/�1�
� � � � ZONtNG FILE o�2
� APPLICATION
FOR LEGAL NONCONFORMING STATUS
SAINT PAUL LEGISLATIVE COOE� 62. 102a: For purposes of this section. a use will be presumed
legally nonconforming if it can be demonstrated by clear and convincing evidence that prior
to the effective date of this Ordinance (12-13-76) the use was established� converted, or
entarged pursuant to building pe rtnits issued by the City of Saint Paul ; or if it can be
demonstrated by clear and convincing evidence that the particular use had been in existence
continuously for twenty years prior to the effective date of this Ordinance. The burden of
proof shall be on the applicant for a permit or certificate of occupancy as the case may be.
FILL OUT COMPLETELY
ADDRESS OF PROPERTY Kq� p,,,..+� ,,,a A•,e S+� .�� ,=�,�,� ?ri;�� STln� , '
4 kitchenetts on
PRESENT USE OF PROPERTY lst fl �or mv resi�Pnca N0. UNITS ����lcc�r
NAME OF OWNER Raymond Heichel PHONE NO. ��_pgi�,0
MAILfNG ADDRESS �96 Portland A7e. _ St_ Panl _ Minn 55102
.�.
FI LL OUT A.. .Oft. B__ _ _._._ .
A. I AFFIRM THAT THE PRESENT USE OF TH1S PROPERTY AS STATED ABOVE WAS ESTABLISHED PURSUANT
TO BUILDING PERMITS ISSUED BY THE CITY OF ST.� PAUL. �
SIGNATURE OF OWNER
THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE IS PRESENTED TO S1IPPORT THIS CLAIM:
B. I AFFIRM THAT THE PRESENT USE OF THIS PROPERTY AS STATED ABOVE HAS BEEN IN EXISTENCE
CONTINUOUSLY PRIOEt T4 �ECEMBER 13, I�Sb. �
� ._
' IGNATURE OF OWNER
THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE IS PRESE��TED TO SUPPORT THIS CLAIM (ANY STATEMENT FROM /� PREVIOUS
OWNER, TENANT, OR NElGHBOR MUST BE NOTORIZED) :
I, Richard Christensen , lived next door �592 rort�nd� an�l ean q�� +h�t zs�f
necember 1 1 6 the floor
. 'f •� -�-��
Rich r C � PAULA A. OLSON
�`` WASHINGTON COUNTY
2682 East Maryland Ave, �:r�. /J
t T � MY COMMII�ION[XPIRii Jon. 16, 1991 U(
9t. Paul� Minn, � �/�/�O
� . . � ��r10--/f�� i
r
� � " 1 � . � , : . � ZONING FIL.E= co� :: .,. , . +
� � _ - .i
' ` . , � � .' . � . . •• ',. . . .� ' ' . ' . . •�. J ♦ �.. /�. . . , t ..t ...r . y . . . ' •� _` ..�
.�f .. ��ti :- _ � ;
� � . ; _ ��
; - : ,
,
� l°�, l`�`1'�_ _ __ ; - � � ;
���
� �� � ,6�. ; �
���� ---- ;
;
�
��e� � B� �h�� _ ! -._: � _ :
- �
G��;t� .��v � x� � ` _ _�
. � � - ;
.r�i �� � �. . _ =
. - - _ - ;
- � . _ - -- -
;
�o � ��. �;o�,�� - ;_ � . - ;
, � -- - - .
•����,�-7` .�C, " '
,���. ; :
:
_ � ���� 59� � ...SrIZ P��,,,�� __ ':
�x� � a,,�l ��'s� ------� -
� ,_
� l �.:-
;. - , .
;
� - - . _ 2 ,,�e�ata SQ2 �- S9lo .��e�c�e_------- s =- - _
. _ _ t �'� �_ _:
��/d�° ��.�� _ _� ;:
. ___ ' .Z�o ���.t � :. _ - .
�l�L,�� ,
��.a�. -- - -;:- _ - - .
�/��.t�• _ _- ------- ---;-� _ � . _ _ ,
E.:_,.: � � � -_ - .
-_�
_. ._ . .._ ..__.__. _. _ __ _ _. . ___._ _..-__'_.-._---_._ �...__ . -', .� '
' �'�. �
_ _� __ _�. �. 3 is 90 �� --- _ _ E -� � ,
� �
_ I � z� .2 �o� - - - - - - � _
; 1�� -
: : _ �t��� � � s��s � ���� - _ ; . ._ _
. � ,�, e� �
. .
: - _ � - - -- �;
. - - _ . ,
_ . . :- : . . - ,_;
yo-,,y� .
� � � � zo��N� F��.E �°�. �: � .
I, .. . _ _ . 2 -� �
i, , � . ;
;; � . _:
;. _ _ - - - - - - -- ------ ---_--
, �
�� - - - ---- - --- - -- —'
I� ��t Q�L� a,� ,t�✓ � �� '
„ .
.
�� -
, ; � _
.
�; _ U�.cc- -- - --. -- —------f
'' Guc � Z - - - ` .
�
:
r
- - i li �- ��lLf.—— --va�'L - - G�-�O—� `
------
, ,
, . , .
,;
-. __ ,;_ _ _i�2�=6-1�---ai�L- - - _- -— - -�---- --- ---: .
� �
�(} i!��%±� ��:�GB2� -QiLG_- .���_ --- �
i��ca�
_
, � .
;
: __ - - -- --- --- -
? /-
_ _ 'i �cQX �G���G�- ���'t.eGr--�------- -
,;� ���il�c �
. 2�� .
:� . - - - �?-__%�����---
� ' ,�-f ��•l e.---- — -- .-------
��
_ - i - - _ -- — -----
- .� ��� �u�'�� -� — — -
�- -
_
� � �
� #��3 —�__ -- - - - -�— -
-- ----r - -
i
. -
: . •
; ,/��,�, ,(J���
I r!v�!G.- __ _ - -17"v�.- - - - - -- - � -
'
— --4'�''t �O-��'yZ,l.� C�O- . i'�Q�� ��—�.— �
� ^�
_ .; G�C�a _ %�� __���__
_ -i �_ _ - ---- �_%��_ C��� _l o¢�e�e�-ro�=
;
' ' G� �� .-ta /Qvg t/9�'0_�c�._'
. _
- -:; _ - - - -- —��:��� _—
;
i /—
i ��
, � .
;1 _ .
- - -- - - —----- -
_ I' .
` ' �0���� ���� ��� �.
� 0�32
APPLI CATI O�V
FOR LEGAL NONCOrJFORM I NG STATUS �y�I���
SAINT PAUL �EGISLATIVE CODE , 62. 102a : For purposes or" this section , a use will be presur�ed
legally nonconforming if it can be demonstrated by clear and convincing evidence that prior
to the effective da�e of this Ordinance (12-13-76) the use was established , conver�ed, or
enlaraed pursuant to building permits issued by the City o� �aint Paul ; or if it can ��
demonstrated by clear and convincina e��idenc� that the par� ;cular use had been in exis.�n�`
continuously for t�.•�en�y years prior to the er"�ective date o� this Ordinance. The our�e� or
proo� shall be on the aoplicant for a permit or certificate �` oc�uoancy as the case nay be.
F I LL OUT COt1PL�i ELY
NDDP.��� Ur PROPE;TY �Q( ?ort]_an� rve„ :�t , fau7_, i°`inn. 5�1"2
� kitc'nenetts on
PRESE�T USE 0� PROPE'TY ist floor mv reclrjPYlOP �v0. UNITS 2nd floor
NAt1E OF OWNER �a-�mon.:i Neichel PHO�lE N0 . 2?_2_0840
MA I L I NG ADDRESS 50(� ?ortl�nd ave. , St, ra.0�, '�_inn 5�1�2
FILL OUT A. OR B.
A. I AF=i RM THAT TH_ PP,ESEPJT USE OF TH i S PROPERTY AS STATc� ABOVE I�lAS ESTABL i SHE� ?U�c�.;�NT
TO BUI :.DING PERt11iS ( SSUED BY THE CITY OF ST. ?AUL.
SIGNATURE OF OWNER
iHE FOLLOWING EVIDENC� IS PRESENTED TO SllPPORT THIS CLAIM:
B. I AFFiRM THAT THE PRESENT USE OF THIS PRGPERTY AS STATED ABOVE HAS BEEN IN EXISTE1dC�
CONTINUOUSLY PRIOR. TO DECEMBER 13 , 1956.
��j����
' GNATURE OF OWNER
THE FOLLOWING EUIDENCE IS PRESENTED TO SUPPORT THIS CLAIM (hNY STATEMENT FROM A PREVIOUS
OWNER, TENANT, OR NEIGNBOR MUST BE NOTORIZED) :
I Er� Kr�l, nresent 3!�t�T'c�SS �i�F =pY`tlaYl� S1TiCF Iq80� tpcti fv +hat i n +hat vaar nn Li+�hcr
3T1(� h3tYl coUl� of oeen ad�ed in tne house The h u e �ef' t��-� nnt a n�Px �, + �-,A , ;+
3o��m st3irs �n-� 4 kitchenetts on 2n� floor.
:�,d Kr=1
�r"�
�9E� Portiand =ve, r , ANTHONYJ.OINZEO
St. P?.ul, i�s nn. S�102 �?���OTARY PUBLIC--MINNESOTA ����
�-� RAMSEY COUNTv
- � . � ZONING FILE �°�3Z
,
� APPL I CAT I ON /��a`'//�
FOR LEGAL NONCONFORII I MG STA i US �, U
SAINT PAUL LEGISLATIVE CODE , 62. 102a : For purposzs o� this section , a use �•,ill be presur�ed
legally nonconforming if it can be demonstrated by clear ard convincing evi �ence that prior
Co the effective date or this Ordinance {12-13-76) the use �,�ras establis�ed , c�nvertec , or
enlarged pursuant to building permits issued by the City or" �aint Paul ; or i ; it can ��
demonstrated by clear and convincing e�iidenc� that the particular use hac `�e�� in exis'�n��
ccntinuously ror t�.�enty years prior to the e��ec.tivP date o� this Ordinance. The burc�� or"
proof shall be on the aooli�.ant for a oermit or certir"icate or occuoanc; as -^� case c'v be.
FI LL OUT C0�IPLETELY
huUFc.SS Oi= PP,OPE�TY 5q6 Portland a�re, , S± , :-��zl, �'inn, 551�2
� kitc'nenetts on
PRESE�I i USE OF PROPERTY !st floor mv resi�3en�e `d0. UN I TS 2,n� floor
NA�1E OF OWNER �a�,mnn� ueic`�el PHONE N0 . 222_08�0
MAILING ADDRESS 5q6 °ortland Ave. , St. Faul, Z•iinn. 55102
F I LL OUT A. OP, B.
A. I AF�IRM THAT THE PP,ESENT USE OF TNIS PROPERTY AS STATE� ABOVE 41AS E�iABL?SHED °U=.�::�NT
TO BUILDING PERMITS ISSUED BY THE CfTY OF ST. PAU!.
SIGNATURE OF OWNER
iHE FOLLOLJING EVIDENCE IS PREScNTED TO SIJPPORT THIS CLAIM:
B . I AFFIRM THAT iHE PRt�ct�li USE GF THIS PROPERTY AS STAIED ABOVt HAS BE�N iN EXISTE:':�c
CONTINUOUSLY PRIOR TO DECEMBER 13 , 1956.
� S GNATURE OF OWNER
THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE IS PRESENTED TO SUPPORT THIS CLAIM (A".Y STATEMENT FROM A PREVI �'.;S
OWNER, TENANT, OR NEIGHBOR MUST BE NOTORIZED) :
I John r?�ste1 , tive� on ?nr� f�n�r at KQ6 rnrl�anc� �ve. i n one of the 2n�? fl n�r �,ni t� -.-�+h
sto�re 3nd frid�-e. The 2n� floor had multirle units, the lst -1oor h�d onE unit. I rer.�e�
from rrevious owner, r�itc'nell Leske, r�tire� �tams°y Co. �^e~�riff Taho lives out of st=-�
+�r�av an� then I r=ntF� fr�m ��Ym�n� uF;�=,P� Dates reside�� there, 19�8 to iQ56
�'
John I�I�s, P - -.�+ ��� � re �ne this
1526 St.�:: � �, SAS. KORMANlK �~_-^yf��- ^ , ,f � , 19
.- N RY PUBLI�-h11NNESOTA
�t. Faul�;' . �A�IGTON COUNTY
. .. ....n........ �.,N.,,..n,.. � �nn� . i i. 1�1.�/. n i /
� . �= o--���
� . � ZONING FILE ��.=
APPLI CATIO�V
FOR LEGAL NONCONFORMIPlG STATUS
SAINT PAUL LEGISLATIVE CODE , 62. 102a: For purposes or this section , a use will be pres;;r.,e--
legally nonconforming if it can be demonstrated by clear and convincing evidence that prior
to the effective da[e of this Ordinance (12-13-76) the use was established , conver;.ed , cr
enlaraed pursuant to building permits issuea by the City or Saint Paul ; or if it can be
demonstrated by clear and convincina evidenc� that the particular use had been in exis-�n_e
continuously for t�.�enty years prior to the er";ective date or this Ordinance. The ource.^. o�
proor shall be on the applicant for a permit or certificate o` occupancy as the case �„ay ��.
FILL OUT COMPLETELY
ADDRESS OF PPOPE�TY 596 Portland Ave. , St. Paul, Minn. 55102
PRESE�T USE OF PROPERTY lst floor my residence N0. UN TSetts on
2nd floor
NAME OF OWNER Raynond Heichel PHONE N0 . 222-0840
MAILING ADDRESS 596 Portland Av.P. , St. Paul, Minn. 55102
FILL OUT A. OR B.
A. I AF�l RM THAT THE �RE��^JT USc OF TH I S FROPERTY AS STATED ABOVE �.JAS E�TABL I SHE� °UP,SU�?+T
TO BUILDING PERMITS ISSUED BY THE CITY OF ST. PAUL.
SIGNATURE OF OW�ER
THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE IS PRES��TED TO SllPPORT THIS CLAIM:
B. I AFFIRM THAT THE PRESENT USE OF THIS PROPERTY AS STATED ABOVE HAS BEEN IN EXISTENC�
CONTINUOUSLY PRIOR TO DECEMBER 13, 1956.
GNATURE OF OWNER
THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE IS PRESENTED TO SUPPORT THIS CLAIM (ANY STATEMENT FROM A PREVIOUS
OWNER, TENANT, OR NEIGNBOR MUST BE NOTORIZED) :
I, Judy Schmidt Joyce, a daughter of Ma*_ie & �erman Schmidt, lived wi*_h my parrents
1956
a� 596 Portland from March 15 to July l, 1964. The four kitchenetts wir_h stoves & fridges
were in place on 2nd floor when my parren±s bought in March 15, 1956 and were sold tha*_ �ay
*_o Raymond Heichel on July lst 1964 .
, - .,
�
Judy Schmid*_ Jovice << � r_�_�'
2778 �tihi*_e Bear Ave. i , '_ • 1,� Q ,1/�.�, I �L
�ANE A. y!CHi,_ $�
S*_. Paul, Minn. 55109 ��'.���N6TRRYPUB!!C—MiN�JE�OJ ;
�,t' ^ _ �
� ftAMSE'V GOUNTY
_ � . � --yo--���'
�
ZONING FtLE ��63Z ;
- ?
property. That there is no one in possession claiming any right or '
title except the record owner. That affiant makes this affidavit '
for the purpose of inducing Lester A. Wooley & Agnes M. Wooley to
purchase said property; that affiant is not now and never has been
in the military or naval service of the United States or of any state
or of any nation allied with the United States in the prosecution
of any war, or otherwise.
----------------------------
The Minneapolis Savings & Satisfaction of "1186" Mtges 153
Loan Association (Minnesota Dated March 15, 1956
corporation) , by Pres. & Filed March 21 , 1956
Sec 'y " " Sats.
83 -to- File #1392982
Lester A. Wooley & wife —
------------------y---------
Lester A. Wooley & Agnes M. Warrant Deed
Wooley, husband & wife
84 -to- Dated March 15 1956
Filed March 21 , 1956
Herman O. Schmidt & Matie " " Deeds
T. Schmidt, husband & wife, File #1392983
as joint tenants and not as The W'ly 16 2/3 feet of Lot
tenants in common, their Numbered 7 and the E'ly 16 2/3
assigns, the survivor of said feet of Lot Numbered 8 of Weed
parties and the heirs and and Willius Rearrangement of Block
assigns of the survivor 23 of Woodland Park Addition to
the City of St.Paul , Ramsey County,
State of Minnesota acc.
Except the unpaid balance upon a mortgage of record in favor of
Minneapolis Savings and Loan Association.
- -----------------
Herman 0. Schmidt & Affidavit
Matie T. Schmidt Dated blarch 16, 1956
85 -to- Filed March 21 , 1956 -
The Public " " Misc.
File #1392984 �
That they are the grantees in that certain Warranty Deed
dated March 16, 1956 which conveys the following described �
property: The W'ly 16 2/3 feet of Lot ? and the E'ly 16 2/3 feet �.
of Lot 8 of Weed and Willius Rearrangement of Block 23 of Woodland �
Park Addition to the City of St. Paul , Ramsey County, State of
Minnesota. That a continuation of the abstract of title covering
said property prepared by the Abstract Clerk of Ramsey County shows
following judgments : Albin H. Morrill & Edith M. Morrill vs Herman
Schmidt. Address : Fergus Falls, Minn. , Aug. 14, 1954, $?13. 64 ,
#288281 . Herbert G. Benz vs M. A. Schmitt , Nov. 4, 1937, $136. 24,
#227893. Address: 53 5 Ashland ?ve. That your affiants are not
the judgment debtors listed in above judgments, that they have
never �lived in Fergus Falls, Minn. nor at 535 Ashland Ave. & that
there are no unsatisfied judgments against them in any Courts,
State of Federal .
That any judgments against persons with same or similar names are
not against them. They make this affidavit to induce the passing
of the title to the property herein described free & clear of all
judgments,
------------------------------
Herman 0. Schmidt & Matie Mortgage
T. Schmidt , his wife Dated March 16, 1956
86 -tO' � Filed March 21 , 1956
Twin Citv Federal Savin�G -� ���� ,-, �� ,.�___ � ��
�:.. - •, . . � � - - . ^ ���0�/.14P�'
�. --- -._---._ ...._._�..��......� -- -
� �=,��f.�1, �; ;;�, r Z4NING FILE �o�3Z
' , � ` i :�� , �I i r � ; . ,.� � ; _' ' (' � 'l'' I 1.�1't.F
, .�. 3 � 1 _
, �� �
i Twin Cit9 F'ederal Savings and Satisraction of �86 & �87 �
� Loan Association, U. S. Corp . , Dated June 24 196l�
� by Vice Pres & Asst Vice Pres CS i912dRCR1739 1964
( to
I Herman 0 . Schmidt, et ux ,�1622389
' Satisfies 1212 Mtgs 353 and 1800 RCR 862.
i, _i
i
1 �
I � .
Herman 0 . Schmidt and Matie T. Warranty Deed
� � Schmidt, husband and wife . Dated July 1 1964
' to � Filed July 2 196I�
; Ra9monc� E. Heichel --- 1912 RCR 7l�0 -
, ,�1622390
� $1 e tc Rev enue 13•25
; State Tax 13. 25
� The Wly 16 2�3 ft of Lot 7 and the Ely 16 2/3 ft oP Lot 8 oP Weed
and Willius Rearrangement of Block 23 of Woodland Park Addition to
the City of Saint Paul, Ramsey County, State of Minnesota.
' Excep t taxes , if any, and excep t such incumbrances as may heve been
� caused to be placed thereon by parties other than lst parties hereto,
; iF any. � : ; � - -
,.. .' �
.� �.'C �.
�. 1�M� � �
�T. \
�': - `.- . :i ._:.,. :�. . : .. . � :t.'-,�, �����, �;1 j':'il��..`I ; _ �.:� • . -:- . • ::'• _ _
t:� . ;. . � . �.�.� , �,� :y = � � � -
� .� , _' •" •' �.'t "� � ���I* ' ".� : ' �%�, v�-
l:.�� ' a..l�4 ':Ll.. .:��ii�'.:►r-. �.J ��_� ,�.-.�.��� J _ �Li:1 s�.[ � . �. . .
'"'� ' :z- �-.t'i�C�e-..-._r.ts i_r rt._c- -C�I� .r.1'� S^t•il� .s�� ��.�r..
Yk�-.-'% :.i:ti'� .r�i` � . _ .� . . .
w_ c��_. _ _ ...-�r,
��-•��+_•._ �`_:.�'�.. , �
���.�:::.--w: =�,;.�- a.� a,.,� a ��,�.�- C��
�. . .;._ ':_,.�� � . .
�i.+��'���_�' �:_`,��.�''tw �.�.�.� v(..�
i��-��� `��•� .�'� /
t�.3+�!%R'.' " ="
f�'.,`�- �'}`�;i t� /
r�•_ ' � � �' V�
.� . . � . .. . - � . � . . .. � I..y;. �. .:�r�vis��;�fi.+ `...�ss� .r . .; _
� - t . � '.� r .'� • � � , �',+� �' la g< "wY
� � . . . , p ...�w`. � . ,. ' ' , . �... . .-. �. ��y pi ��,` � �{' :
. �-� .. . _, .. :-" �•` ' . . . � ds�M`z ' - i l...i
. _ _ . .. ., r.:� . • :.; y. .4 7�
. .� � .� -.r . ' � .
-. . .� ' ^Y ... -. _• , �' r .'- "� � ' _ � �,r/�� '
.. - y .����� �
. . .. _ , "- . .- ��
. , �.. � . .' _
. . ' . . � '.• =� i�... � . ---' •. "�`t�1Lb� 4 ,vy-~�
. �'� . . ' . . ¢ -' .� v ..
. _ ~ ` ' . , ' • ��S.�i!�C � x��"M1•� ` �' +7��
� . - �.:,.., -.. . .�� ' - � �- �� � �' �f,h� '+�,r ': -.
�� x't'
_ . _. _ .,�.. -:. ,�. . .. , _ . _ � � � . l:.
. . ;` �~ y t �.
' ' , ` � " . . -.�.- . .... '_.. ; „ . s J.
_.
. ' � .,,.��F, . r ,,,,��,���� � .
-' ' ' , x ,}. z R�����-z�.x�' s _
. . . —-_�_._._�.__._.�. '.' �`y� '.''k�,ry�!,�,� . ,� �;
�� ,�- ,r +;-�� � i
� � i � ���A � �. .
. ,'"i w�'-=-�-� ,�s t.:, t
. . j�' � �i� �I
. , ��r�%�G"^'"- _ ' ' �;
' �
, ' � �.
� �� ` _ �� �O �F C .. . �
j Y ; �
7��- 4� `�� � � �
. ���' �� �t u,e�� _ _ . - - ;
��`�..` '
�
;
i
i
� �� � ��� ;
z� � �� ;
�-`�'"''`� - - ;
��� ;
�
�
ZONiNG F�LE �`'-= � _ -
� �
. + i
.' - _ - " i
. .
' . - i
- ' _ .�
} ' . C/ya--��'��
�<<_= a, CITY OF SAINT PAUL
=-~� '• � DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY SERVICES
?° ��
���.; '������������ �' BUILDING INSPECTION AND DESIGN DIVISfO�
J � `� City Hall,Saint Paul,Minnesota 557u:
'•••
612-298-4�.=
�AMES SCHEIBEI
MAYOR
�farch 15, 1990 �ON1NG FILE OL�._�..�
Raymond Heichel
596 Portland Avenue
St. Pau'1, MN 55102
RE: 596 Portland Avenue
Dear Mr. Heichel:
Your application for legal nonconforming status for 5 dwelling units at the
referenced address has been denied for the following reasons:
1. The city directories list only two occupants at the referenced address
through 1963.
2. The County Addessor's records show that a kitchen and 3/4 bath were
added in 1980 and still indicate this building is a duplex in 1981.
At this point you have several options �vailable to resolve this situation:
1) If you believe ou� determination on the status of this property
is in er/�'or, you may apply for an administrative review before
the Boa�'d of Zon�ng Appeals by submitting the enclosed applica-
tion along with the appropirate fee to this office within
thirty (30) days of this letter.
2) You may apply to the Board of Zoning Appeals for a variance
of the minimum lot size requirements in order to legally
establish five (5) dwelling units.
3) You can reduce the occupancy of this building to two dwelling
units within 30 days of this letter.
If you have an}� questions regarding this matter, you may contact me at
298-4215.
S�ic ely,
/ ' .
�f/2���
/ fj�-`�!i% ( �
� %� John Hardwick
J Zoning Technician
JH:krz
enc.
, . � �yo-,���
. �
,
. .Q�
CITY OF SAINT PAUL
INTERDEPARTMENTAL MEMORANDUM
April 16, 1990
ZONiNG FILE �°�
T0: FILE — 596 Portland Avenue
FROM: John Hardwick �'��'._
�) .,
On April 13; 1990, an application was submitted for an �dministrative Review
of our decision to deny an application for legal noncon�orming status for
5 dwelling units at this address. Along with this appeal, two additional
statements were submitted in support of this use that :�-e�e not submitted
with the original application for legal nonconforming s�=tus.
The statement from John Mastel is vague as to the numbe� of units on the
second floor and covers onl} the period from 1958-1966.
The statement from Ed Kra1 states only that a kitchen .•:a� not added in
1980. The county assessor's records indicate that somet_-;e between 1960
and 1980 a kitchen was added, not specifically in 1980.
�tlr�`J��;,o-(. �_
The statement from ?'.ichard Christensen is s ecific as _o the exact number �' f�"''"'��
P ;5/
of units as of Decembe� 1, 1956. Ho��ever, when Mr. Ne;c:el applied for ��K�,,,,,1;�
legal nonconforming status on 592 Portland, the statemezt he obtained from `�..�,�-G� ���`
Richard Christensen (who lived in the building) was va�ue and contradictory. ��� ��„C.
Thus, i : my mind, casting doubt as to the validity of this exact ..etailed � '
stateme.it made about 596 Portland where he did not live. /5���"' '
Mr. Heichel has known about the requirement of a certi:icate of occupancy
since at least 1987 when he went through this same procedure for
592 Portland, yet he has not attempted to resolve this :aatter until now.
l.>' �
/kr z n(��`.1 �� l�Q,�n,,'r5 � �"'�./ ��
� =.��� � � �f
� i yss � /y�� �� �/1�� .
�,
�.,`S� �2 Ei�"/'��PiN b�f: �'J ��" l����
. �yZ "
, , � �'d�/��r� :
C�
"� � ZONtNG FILE °L.�Z �
. ZONING WORKSHEET �
i
ADDRESS�: �Jl� l9"Y�ILL��LV�� .
PIN: (� � - Z,�� �3 - �� ���1�;� � �.U�l� 7 /�1J1-���
BUILDING CARD INFORMATION:
CONSTRUCTION DATE: PERMIT: TYPE OF STRUCTURE:
PER�`tITS COUNTY ASSESSOR' S RECORDS — LICENSE RECORDS CITY DIRECTORY
�- . . - ' � :� ��s� 2 r�a w��
. . ; _ � . �.�.. , f . � _ __ ���� y��-x �s
� ' �`1-1 I - e� _ �".c C . . , � ��
_ _ .�� _ . .� :: _� �y� , L,���s
— _ I Q J� / Nsry. c
. � �
_ ___ _ ' _ _� - . f 9� S _ T`.., �.,« -es
•j •i �,��� _- t � `v�" ---- V _ �. ,.�i �
<�_ , � /9G G _ � -
� �� � - � .�. . . .- _ ./�I ' � .� � 7 NI' "'r.l .
/ `/l' �
_ °::, ' i
•.� =, i. ,
ha f= -- ,. , r- #-�:,_�-.;r�l.� ;.�._�_, _�•�. .-{� ._ -.__ , . � .
�� �� � � ��
�
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: (����� � (�l `�-I Li S �-.� `'� l`= '�' - t:�� �� ' �- � -�-�%�
�
� i� �' �-i �1 f' (-;�� G �=-K �.S
LOT SIZE: �' �� � - !' - _ - — _ -__' '-. �
�i p �� �i .J��
CROSS STREETS: �%/�� — �1�L� �
ZONE USE UNITS REQUIR�:D LOT SIZE
(C/NC) PERMITTED LOT SI�E (C/�C)
X C C
1922
1960 .
;1 ' "" �
�
19 64 `�! ' �� N L,..
; . :�
1975 � v �
ROOMS: !;�-�( i
� � �-! UNITS: I I
COMMERCIAL USE: PLANNING:
ZONING STATUS FOR � (,( �;-._ y�j
`����_�_��RESIDENTIAL USE: ZONING :?�E
LEGAL - CONFORMING NO RECORD
LEGAL - CONFORMING USE WITH NON-CONFORMING LOT SIZE
(for residential)
LEGAL - NON-CONFORMING USE
`� ILLEGAL � j�i, � f`'
. . � �������
V_A���,�.,, ,
CITY OF SAINT PAI.!L
DEPARTME�T OF FIRE AND SAFETY SERVICES
�;: � i�llm ,
;; � STEVE CONROY, DIRECTOR
�.•• JOHN COLONNA, ACTING FIRE CHIEF
IA:titES SCHEIBEL 100 E. Eleventh St., Saint Paul,MN 55107
h1AYOR
�
April 2�, 1990 �ONlNG FILE � °-
TO: Marv Bunnell
Planning - llth Floor City Hall Annex
FROM: Pat Fish �
Fire Prevention ��
RE: 596 Portland
On April 5, 1988, a Fire Prevention inspector investigated a
complaint at 596 Portland from a tenant in the building and
found that the owner was renting without a Certificate of
Occupancy. Several code violations were noted, and the �
inspector sent an appointment letter to the owner for an
inspection of the entire building. The owner, Mr. Raymond
Heichel, refused the inspector entry to the building and
missed several appointments. Failure to comply resulted in
the owner being issued a citation, which eventually resulted
in a court-ordered inspection of the property on August 17,
1989. A written report of the inspection was sent to Judge
Shumaker on August 22, 1989. Since Mr. Heichel still did
not allow me access to the first or third floors, I was
unable to determine what existed there (occupancy type) ,
therefore I could not give Mr. Heichel orders on code
corrections.
Mr. Heichel was scheduled to appear at a hearing on
September 5, 1989, for violation of probation. On September
5, 1989, at Mr. Heichel 's request I inspected the basement,
but he still refused me entry to the first and third floors.
At the hearing, Judge Shumaker issued a bench warrant for
Mr. Heichel 's arrest because he had refused to comply with
the court order. Mr. Heichel was arrested in late November.
Mr. Heichel filed an appeal to the Property Code Enforcement
Board on January 5, 1990. The hearing was postponed until
the March meeting, at which time the Board denied his appeal
and instructed him to appeal to the Zoning Board for
permission to allow four sleeping rooms and one apartment
unit in the building, and return to the Property Code
Enforcement board to appeal leaving the kitchens in the
sleeping rooms.
� � ,
� �i� _ �o /l9�
ZONING FfLE �°-
Marv Bunnell
Page two
April 27, 1990
596 Portland is in a residential neighborhood, and consists
at this time of four units on the second floor, each with
their own stove and refrigerator but a shared bath on second
floor. Mr. Heichel occupies the first floor, and the third
floor appeared to be a unit with a stove and refrigerator,
and a bathtub in the middle of the room.
The building was condemned to be vacated by March 30, 1990,
however, we are postponing taking any action to vacate until
Mr. Heichel has exhausted his right to appeal.
The file dates back to 1971, and in 1971 several of the same
violations were noted, however, it seems that Mr. Heichel
has been able to postpone any action on vacating the
building. The Health Department furnished us with copies of
their file dating back to early 1980 's, when they
investigated what appears to be the same occupancy.
PF/cs
� ` � . � �yo i���'
CITIZEN PAR ICIPATIO DI RI S
....� � ,� ± �
- - ''� �E ;
` ; 10 - - - s � E .�, 2
..o....
, _ - 6 � r 5 � E . �
12 '
- _ �
; _ g ��.o .� v.�e`
i • ~ �
i
- i _
� w5E t ♦ UY R
t � eE4[ . ' � f � �Y�RFM,
t E T 5�
S � s.,_wr� �
�.�,. � 11 t _ _ ,
,,,q # ? ,�,E„ « . 5• �..E�.
wi � - � - c e. s*
~ _ � - ' 4 E � �
� z ,�Ea.... - - � �
_
: : � �
3 i $ a
i
� aw6 +�
.n�..r �Vo
_ E�T m
� yS' 4' �P :�� •i'�
.M�� •e
C'` � �
16' _ _ �-, � '� ; ;
a ; �
� ^ J 3 _ � � ��S �„o°
1� 4s.sc5u� •� �,� � �`-. s tP'�Ew
o..ua�.. „E - � _I � - Y<. 1 � ?
j + z � s # - s - F - _ - Y =_�'\.� , �t' C f
" _ ; _ ..c = a. � �r. - - -
' .R - o.w• �� : -.E `
- - 15' - ; ��.
� ..,�., .4 � �
_' , � �
E�:.,.� - - �.
_ � - - �• -- �
� ' - �
_ ` �
� _ _ �
__ — =—� . �' :vOC +�100 �]0�EEt
����
�KE
CITIZEhJ PARTICIPATIOP� PLANNI��G DISTRICTS
1. SUNRAY-BATTLE CREEK-HIGH'�IOOD
2. HAZEL PARK HAYDEN-PROSPERITY HEIGHTS HILLCREST
3. 6JEST SIDE
4. DAYTOPJ'S BLUFF
5. PAYrJE-PIiALEN
6. NORTH END
7. -DA
. SUMMIT-UNIVERSIT
10. COMO
11. HAP1LINE-MI DWAY
12. ST. ANTHOPJY
13. MERRIAM PK.-LEXINGTON HAMLINE-S"JELLIPJG HAMLINE
14. GROVELAND-MACALESTER
15. HIGHLAND �
16. SUMMIT HILL �;s�l � a :; , � ,�
17. DOWNTOWN .r- f : :' �' ' �� /�
" ` 'F . • _
/
� � ���-� � �
��� � � •��.����
'�-�,� � � � ��� ��
� �� �'� �
� � � � � �
-- - - -- --
� � �-����_
�'�� � ���
- - _ - -- __._;
_ . . _-.._-- � - _+_ --
- _ _- _
� � - �- - -
I - - ' � r�
�I . ___' !_ .
-���! -� � S .
_.--- ___- -
� �� � _ ■ ■ ���= _ �_ _ — =� � �
. .. ��. ,�
� �. - _ _ ■ . .��_ _ �� �
u�cn�
� � — — � . .
� — � —
__' __— —
� � ——
_
• _ � � ■ ■—— — — _ , �/
� ■ ■ �'r/ �
■ �C � � � � �� ,..��-� �-� �:�� �
■ � C � �:�=� �� ��:�:�'�= :" ,:
■ ��� �-� � � � �' �` ���'■� ��'
. _ �r �� � � � � � �a! �
��_�;��� �:� ���� � � � '" ,
� , -�"�-�-� �� �� �� � � �' :
". � ;
� � �� ��t �� �� � � � � � ♦ .
� �� � ����,,., - '.
,. r7 � � �
� ��-�� � `
� �� ��� -- --�-�� A� - � A�: : �
■ -_ � �"`
..� ■ .� � � ._ , . _ _
- _�.--- _ — _ :�'�r�.�
■ _ � � � � �
.�� - . ._ .
_ _. _ _ _ _. _. � , s• � �� ,
� � � ■�� �� � � = €�. � �`� -� �
� �-� - - - �
- - , .�1��iii1�1l1:
� � � • : b . .=:...:_::_.___
-,.�-- -- =-.-,---
. s�-�,-
;�'r-: � - - , �_ .
.` -
�� ��,
� ��_
�� � � ��
• • � � � � � � �
� . • • • • � • • • • • • • • • • �
n � � � � � � � � • • �� .� .
uDu •
• •Q • • i . � �Q� . . . . . 1,1
. . � . . . . . . . . qc� fl► ,_ ► . �/ � - - -� �
� �
• �� _��. � s� ' I�, / �
•
� � m • • • • • • � � �y�Q • • • � • • •
. . . . . a
. . . . .
_ . _ . , .
.
. ---n� ,, A . , voaoo . . . . . . , .
. ^ � . . . . . • ����
. . a . . . t' I �/ ` • � - ..
• �� � �
� - - - ----- - �
� • II�"'� � • • • • s .
� • • • • • � • • • • ^�.�. • .
� a�c�_�.: -
_
—
, �
',, • • • • • • � • • �� � � � � � � �
r
-���� . � ��� - . . --�...
� i.� ` ��� `�' c. �-.:...;,: _
�----- -�- - -- - - - �
: f,�: . � C� � ���
. .
+���+� �' • • • • ` ',� � , • • ' • . . . . . �
Ll��� r � L�� ���� � � � � ��D , � ,
■ �; ;�•� '
:'-'!3 ! ���� . . . � • . .
':�I�j �� w�: � � . . � . . A� •
� � �� • • • � �'�' •:
� � _ �_ � . � �y �y •�s • �, . - .
_ _r . � .: .
� � � �; • . Y�-�
, � . .
. . . . . . o • . . • . . . . • . � . .
I� Y� '� 1 ' d ' d . � .
.�
. •
. . , , . . . . . . � . . . . . �
� • � i � � � � ` -
--- - �� - . .
� .
- .,
. . . . . . . . . . . . . - . . . . . . . .
� � �
.
- • � . . . . . .. ._
� , � • ' • %////////. . • . . . - .
� •
.
� • • •
. . . • -
�. �
- - - � .. . .. .,
�
. ���, � �yo- ����"
,
$�ITYro�. CITY OF SAINT PAUL
�� ° DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
� x
` ���';";�� � DIVISION OF PLANNING
y a 25 West Fourth Street,Saint Paul,Minnesota 55102
m h
612-228-3270
'e 6+ Fax:612-228-3220
JAMES SCHEIBEL
MAYOR
May 30, 1990 RECEfVED
1�-��� ol�990
Mr. Albert B. Olson, City Clerk �:��5`: ��,�}�p(,
Room 386, City Hall
Saint Paul, Minnesota 55102
Dear Mr. Olson:
This letter is written to confirm the hearing date for:
Applicant: Raymond Heichel
File Number: 10649
Purpose: Appeal the decision of the Board of Zoning Appeals
Legal Description of Property: 596 Portland Avenue
Previous Action:
Planning Division Decision:
Zoning Committee Recommendation:
Board of Zoning Appeal: Denied, vote 4-0, May 15, 1990
In order to allow time for the mailing of appropriate notices, please schedule
the hearing date as soon as possible after �-�$-�9�9. Our preference would be
6-28-90. �-�(r-�j8
I will phone you within the next few days for schedule confirmation.
Sincerely,
��% ���
Daniel K. Bayers (3390)
Zoning Section
cc: file # 10649 � 7
cc: Tanya � q�
v,.�
�\
. ; _
' . � � 1�:7 �
,. ' ` , _
�
� _
, Jtily 2� 1990 ,
NL�. Jane McPeak . �
C�ty Attorney .
_ Room 647, City Hall ,
� Dear i�la. tycPeak: .
. After public hea�ing on`Jun� 26. 1990. the City bauicil denied the ' �
appeal of itaymc�nd Heichel to a de�isto�`o� the Hoard of Zoning Ap�eals
whi� c7ertied his request for legal no�nconfocmi.ng status �or property
� ` locatecl at 596 PortlarK7 Aven�,e.
- �:;;
Tdil.l you p�`eas� prep�re`ttw pr�er ra+�olution imple�aanting this act,ion.
..
Yery truly yours, . � �
, >..�
Albett B. Olson �
City Clerk ,
.ABO:th .
. . , ` ��
: �
� • �
�
' - . .
�
, _1�
; j � � ,
. . ... _ , S . . . . .„�. . . , . . � . � „ . : . . .� .._.;
.. . . . . . . . . . ' . . . � \ .. . . ,
� -.: �. . . . . . .. - � . � � . . . � . - . .. . . . .. . . .
. . . . . , . - � � . � � � , . . - .. �f .
� . . . .Y . ' ' � . . . ' . � . . . . '..
' � � , ' - . . ' . . . w1'. . . � .
+
..F ... . ' . . ' . . . . � ' � . . . . ..
' . � . . . ' . . 7:�. . . „ .. . . . � ,.. . 3. . . .
. . � . � � ' . - .. . ' . - . � � � . ' - � . . �. . P,� .. . ... '
- � . . � . � . .. . .. .. . . . . . . .. . . _ . � '�. _ . . . . �
... , �. - . . � .. '� _ , . , . . -. ,. � � � l . .. . . ' .
._ . _ . . .- . . .. . . �
�,. . . . . � . , .
# '..... , . _ . . � . . .�. . }. . � . � :. . _ .. . . � . �� . � . �. . .�.,.�.
,�..�. .. .� . � .. - � ' ,. . � . � �� -. . '-, � . . . �. . -.. � . . . ....�.
. . _ - . " _ . �� . � , . � - ; . � . . . , - . � �.:
, � t . . . ^ . , .• '�M • . � ., .
� . . . . . . � ' . . .' � . . ' . . . . . . . � . . .. f.-
.� . . . .. . . . . .. . , . .... ... . .. '.
:: .. • . � . � ,.� . . ' . .. ' . . . � . . . . . . .. .. . . . � ... '.
+ _ �
.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . � . `N.,. : � . �. ,
. . . . � . . . � . ' . . . • . ' . .. . • .. . / . . .
. . . , . . , . . . . . . . _ . . . . . ;a ,::
� . . .. . . . . . .. . . . . . . ..-.. �
. . . . . . . � . . . . . .. . . . �. .: . :.
. � .. ., -� . _ � - . �.� � � ,
. . . .. . . . .. ...
.. . .. . � '.. - .. � : � . . .: ,
. . t . . ' � . ' .. .. . - � , � .� . .\�� � � � . ;..
. . . . ' � .. � , � _ . , :�, • , - � .� - . . �� - - _ - .
,
�. � . . -• . �:r .
, �,..� . . .. . . . .,
.. . . . . � - .. ��: � 2 z w
.
. .,, .. . .�....., �. ._.- � __ . . __�, ._ ..��� . ...��.�. � __ �ti._r.� ,� .._. .., '. . :, :; .. _..� .,_- .. . .. .._,. . . ,.. .s,.z.,. ....