Loading...
88-795 WHITE , - C1TY CLERK COURCII �JG � PINK .-'FINANCE G I TY O SA I NT F�A U L � � ,.ANAR53 - DEPARTMENT ]�e � � tlLUE - MAVOR File NO. 0 - Counc l Resolution s - / / �.� Presented By v �/` r � Referred To Committee: Date Q�t of Committee By Date WHEREAS, Richard and Claire Allyn appealed a decision of the Zoning Administrator to the Board of Zonin Appeals, which decision determined that the hom� under construction at 2108 West Hoyt Avenue, Saint Paul, Minnesota, confoY�ms to the height restrictions of the Zoning Code and that the correct method of ineasurement of the height of the house is from the finished grade of the site rather than the ori inal rade of the site; and WHEREAS, The Board conducte a hearing on this appeal (File No. 10185) at its meeting on August 25, 1987, at which time it heard testimony from the owner of the house in question, Do glas Doty, from the appellant Richard Allyn, thei� respective attorneys, and fr concerned residents, the testimony primarily relating to the height o the house at 2108 W. Hoyt and the method of ineasurement applied by the Zoni g Administrator; and the Board laid over the hearing on the appeal for a pe iod of two weeks for the purpose of allowing the parties an opportunity to arri e at a compromise solution to their concerns and problems and present them at t e next Board meeting, which the parties indicated a willingness to so do; nd WHEREAS, The Board reconve ed the hearing on File No. 10185 at its meeting on September 8, 1987, at w ich time the attorney for the appellants requested that the Board lay over urther discussion until September 22, 1987, so that additional information req ested by the Zoning Administrator could be obtained and so that the parties c uld have further opportunity to negotiate a compromise position, which reque t was granted by the Board; and � COUNCIL MEMBERS Requested by Department of: Yeas Nays Dimond Lo� [n Fa or coswitz Rettman B Scheibel A ga i n t Y Sonnen �Ison Form Appro d by City Att ey Adopted by Council: Date � _�� Certified Passed by Council Secretary By gy. Approved by Yfavor: Date _ Approved Mayor for Submission to Council By BY .� � �� � . � � ���-7�� Whereas, The Board recon ened the hearing on F_i_1_e._#1Q185. at its meeting on September 2 , 1987 , at which time the Board was inforrned by the staff of he Zoning Admini�trator that a survey was done on the firont ard s�tback for the home in question and it was determine from that survey that Mr . Doty's home was built too clo e to the front property lin� than permitted und�r the prov ' sions of the Zoning Code and that to remain in that locati n a zoning variance must fir�t be grantEd by the Board, and hat the parties i-eque�ted further time to continue to w rk out their difference�, and the Eoard moved to continue t e hearings until October 13 , 19£37 ; and Whereas , Douglas Doty , o ieptember 24 , 1987 , made application (.t-i1_e.�tkl_02_1.7.).__._to he Board of Zoning Appeals for variances for the home at 210 W. Hoyt, tho said variances being for the building height, lot coverage and front yard setback; ar�d Whereas , The Board condu ted its hearing on both the . Allyns' appeal (File #10185) nd the Doty's appeal (File #10217) on October 13, 1987 , nd the following testimony was � considered by the Board: On �eptember 23, 1987 , t e Zoning Wdministrator notified Mr. Doty that h could bring his home into conformance with the Zon � ng Code provi�ions if he did three things: ( 1) o tain a building permit to move the h�me back from he front property line between 8' and 10' ; (2) liminate any deck on the south side of the home a ove the ground floor level ; and (3) keep the height f the home to a maximum of 30' as measured from the average finished grade . The neighbor , Mr. Allyn, objected to the home bc�ing moved bacLc fr-om th� stre t a� it would block the light and air from his o n adjacent home, and that he preferred that the ho e remain in it� pre�ent location if the roof wer reduced in height and no deck construct�d on the rear of the Doty home. That after much discussi n among the two appellant�- neigl�bors, the Board was advised that a compromi.:,e solution satisfactory to them was recomm�nded for adoption by the Board, the compromise as follows: 1) The home n t be moved bacl, firom the street. 2) The roof on the Doty home ould be "hipped" rather than be a "gabled roof" . ` 3) The deck. w ld not exceed 4 2 �� � � � � � � - ���-r�s 1/2 fieet in he ght from gr-ade. 4) The necessa y lot coverage variance would be granted. Whereas, based on the ab ve cc•mpromise agreement and the proposed acceptance thereof b the Board , the ap�eal (File #10185) of Richard and Claire Allyn was withdrawn by the said appellants; and Whereas, Based upon the estimony received by th� Board and upon the recommendation o the Planning �taff , the Eoard of Zoning Appeals did adopt i � final action on the application for variances mad by Douglas Doty, based upon the following findings made by th said Board and as contained in its resolution #10217, adopte October 27 , 1987 : 1) Mr. Doty, the appli ant, is building a 3-story single-family house at 2 08 West Hoyt Avenue. �t. Paul 's Building In�pecti n and Design Divi�ion is�ued a building permit for the hou�e in March 1987 and work is currently in progress. The house has been framed in, includin the roof . 7he building division ap roved the height of the house based on plans and elevations submitted to them by the applicant wh n he applied for a building �ermit. The buildinq di ision followed itJ Jtandard practice and made its initial determination of the height of the buildin� b measuring from the architect's scale drawin s. These drawings ir�dicate the ground level with a ashed line but do not specify whether this is n existing grade or a proposed change of grade. Although it is not apparent in the drawin�, the dashed line indicating proposed ground level i� about 6' above the existing � grade on the site on the east and front side of the hou�e. 2) The height of the uilding when measured by staff in September was 3' 6" measured rrom ti�e current grade to the mi -point of the roof base�� on the average of all four sides. (The height measured on the west and back si e, where the lower level is at grade, was 35'4" ) . To meet the height limi of 30' ��t by the Zoning Code the grade would ha e to be raised 3'6" on all four sides. However , i is not possible to raise the grade significantly on the west and back side because of the location of doors .and windows so most 3 ' ', • r ��V '��� f the grade changes wou d have to occur on the firont and east side. 3) The Allyns' , neigh ors to ttie ea.:.t, appealed the decision of the bui ding division to grant the building permit to Mr. oty, saying that the building height �hould ave been determined from the grade that existed on �ite before construvtion began rather than the propose grad�s shown on the architect's plans. Thi� appea:l was later dropped as part of a compromi�e be ween Mr. Doty and the Allyns, which is reflected in the c;onditions of this variance. The building division re uested more detailed information from Mr. Dot in August about �xactly how he proposed to grade the site to meet the building height limit but this was not submitted. 4) Mr. Doty is requesting a variance for building height to permit a building 33'6" high. He still contends that he can meet the 30' height limit �et by the Zoning Code. How ver, he is requesting a variance for two reason�. First, he says that he r lied on advice provided him by the builCing division in determining the height of the house and that he would suffer undu� hardship now if the BZA now overt rns that advice after the house has been largely b ilt. Second, i� the BZA uphol � the building division's determination, Mr. Doty ould like the option to lower the grade from wha is shown on the plans if this is what the neighbo s want. 5) Mr. Doty is willing to change the existing gable roof line to a hip ed roof line at his own expense. This would les en the impact of the building on the Allyns' roperty. When �tanciing close to the building, t e roof would not be visible: the righest pai t visible would be the eaves which would be 26' " above the existing grade. It would also lessen the mass of the house when viewed from farther away 6) Mr. Doty is also se king a variance to permit a front yard setback of 13' . Again, tlie request for the variance is based on the assertion that he - checked with the buildin division on more than one occasion to verify that is plans were in confiormanca with the set ack requirements and was � 4 , � . � . � . �� �-"��� . . told that it was. Mr. D ty claims that requiring him to move the hou�e ba k at this point would cau�e him substantial hardship 7) The variance for fr nt yard setback is also justified by the fact th t the lot is v�ry shallow. The lot is 93' deep comp red to 125' fior a typical St. Paul lot. �) Mr. Doty is requ�st ng a variance for lo� coverage so that he can ake changes to a deck which will l�ssen its impact o the neighbors . This variance was not ne ded fior the house as originally planned. How ver , in di�cus�ing the hou�e with the neighbors both sides agreed that a deck proposed fior the ba k of the house would have ��JJ impact on the neigh ors if it was lowered and moved away from the prop rty line. However, in order to move the dec�. i will be necessary to builcl a landinq off the door i to the house and steps froRi the landing down to the eck. This would increase the size of the deck eno gh to put the house over , the 30% lot coverage lim ' t. 7he Allyns' and Mr. Doty agreed to a height of 3.0' for the lower level of t e rear deck and that the upper level would not pr ject more than 4.5' be�,�ond the rear of the house. Whereas, Based upon the bove fiindings the Board on October 27 , 1987 , by its reso ution Numb�r 10217 , granted the following variances for the p operty at 2108 We�t Hoyt Avenue and legally described as foll ws: south 93 .55 feet ofi the north 123.35 feet of Lot 10, uditor's subdivision: ( 1) a maximum building eight of 33. 5' subject to the applicant modifying he roof to "hipp�d" roof as shown in attached Exhibi A; (2) A front yard setback of 13' ; (3) Maxim m lot covera�e of 120 square feet mnre than 30% subject to the lower level deck proposed for the rear of the house not being more than 3.0' high(a� me sured from the surface of the deck to the bottom of the windows on the west side of the rear of the house as they were built a� of October 13 , 1987) and the upper levol of the deck not projecting more than .5' beyond the rear of the house. Whereas, Pursuant to the rovisions of �ection 64 .205, Elizabeth M. Solem, 2117 Dud1e Avenue, �aint Paul , Minn. , on November 11 , 1987 duly filed w ' th the City Clerk her appeal 5 : . : . . ��-7Q�- from the determinations made y the Board nf Zoning Appeals, requesting a hearing before t e City Council for the purpose ofi considering the actions ta en by the said E3oard; Whereas, Acting pursuant to Sections 64 .205 through 64 .208, and upon notice to ap ellant and other affected property owners, including th Allyns and Doty, a public hearing was duly conducted by the City Council on December 22, 1987 where all interested par ie� were given an opportunity t�� be heard; and Whereas, The Council , ha ing hear-d the stateme��ts made , and having considered the var ance application , the report of staff , the minutes and findin s of the Board of Zoning Hppeals, does hereby Resolve, That the Counci of the City of �aint Paul does hereby find and determine tha the Board did make an error of fact and law in granting the ariances relating to the lot coverage and maximum height o the building as set forth in the Board's resolution number 10217 , adopted October 27 , 1987 , fior the following reaso s: 1) Granting of the lot coverage variance is not su�ported by the evidenc . The provisions of the Zoning Code restrict the development of the lot to 30 percent of the square footage. The subject lot is not unusual in size o topography and a house of reasonable size could be built on it. The owner proposes to build a deck onto his home, and that is the cause for requiring he variance. 7h� hardship, in thi� case, is self cr ated and is not in keeping with the spirit or inten of the Zoning Code. 2) Granting of the bui ding height variance so as to permit a height of 33 6" , which is 3'6" in excess of the CoGe requirement� is also not supported by the record. The er.cess eight will impair tMe neighbor 's adequate ligh and air and will al. ter the essential character of t e surrounding area. The owne� has indicated tha� he ea� meet the Co=�e hei=�ht restrictions without thi variance, and if any hardship exists because f the way the owner has proceeded in building th home the hardship was created solely by the ow er thereof . Further Resolved, That t e Council of the City of Saint Paul does hereby affirm the f ndings and conclusions of the Board and does h�reby ratify he granting of the variance for the firont yard setback so as o allow the structure to b� 6 ; ' , �. .. . ��_7ls. located only 13 feet from the street subject to the following conditions: 1. The roof of the house be reconstructed so that the top, peak, or ridge is no more than 5 f et above the underside of the existing uppermost eaves. The altera ions to be complete prior to the occupancy of the dwelling. 2. The chimney of the house be reconstructed to be lowered to a height which is two feet abo e the highest point of the roof as indicated above. The altera ions to be complete prior to the occupancy of the dwelling. 3. The existing patio door ave access to a landing and/ or stairway not to exceed 54 inches proj ction from the exterior wall. The hand and guard rails for this la ding and/or stairway to be turned spindles and wood rails stained to m tch the siding or equivalent to minimize visual impact from adjacent properties. 4. There shall be no above grade deck in the rear yard space. Any improvement shall be by gro nd surface patio of concrete, brick, stone or similar materials 'n direct contact with the earth at its approximate existing grade r a wooden platform not to exceed 8 inches above grade without perimet r rails, fencing or other treatment above the deck surface. 5. The landscape plan inco porating the following is attached and made a part hereof; the pur ose of the plantings is to reduce visual impact of height, mass and educed front yard of the existing structure. a. vertical evergre n screening at west and south property lines. b. permanent planti gs in front yard. c. front stairway a d landing details and retaining wall details. d. foundation plant ngs with trellis's or equivalent vertical elements at west wal south of the entry door against existing bricks, or replacing brick with siding at upper level of west wall to reduce the amount of solid brick wall. e. other indication of surface treatments and plantings for remainder of lot are . 7. WMITE ;•- CITV CLERK COl1I1C11 G •/O� •PINI! � =FINANCE G I TY OF SA I NT PA U L � �CANARV - DEPARTMENT ��j / � BLUE - MAVOR � Flle NO. � Counci Resolution Presented By Referred To Committee: Date Out of Committee By Date The plantings and construct'on indicated above shall be completed within one year of occupanc of the dwelling. The Zoning Administrator shall strictly enforce the onditions 1 through 5 above as a condition of the granting of the fron yard variance to allow the structure to remain at its existing loca ion on the lot. FURTHER RESOLVED, That the ity Clerk shall mail a copy of this resolution to Elizabeth Solem, Doug as Doty, Richard and Claire Al1yn, and the Zoning Administrator and the Bo rd of Zoning Appeals. 8. COUNCIL MEMBERS Requested by Department of: Yeas Nays Dimond �ng � [n Favo Goswitz �b— e� U _ Against BY Sonnen +ii(ilrrYr Adopted by Council: Date MAY 2 4 Form Approv by City Attorney Certified Pa •ed by Council ecretary By — r � �� B}, A►ppr by 1+lavor: D e � MAY 2 Approved Mayor for Submission to Council By �1l�1.ISNEO J u N 4198 + 4 . / Re ocate 5" Locus C�`" ����!`5 • ' from backyard . ' • ' � , t SprPading Sod e err � 24" Yews 24" � Keystone . . � . . Retaining � � Wall ' � ' d Dogwood 5 * Globe Arborvitae 36" t Pyramidal � I Arborvitae � (+ 8-10' . � . � + • Trell s w/ Boston ivy � + I t I+ � + � t Glob Arborvitae 36" i t � + I � Colorado Spru e 10-12' � Sod � � -F- � + ` Pyramidal I � Arborvitae � NORTH "�' 8-10' L- — r � � � ( } �t } __ _ —{ Scale 1"= 10' .,..,,.,�,� r 'olis ���..M _- __. ,,, g ��_ :A�i,N _ Brothers � �;y�` �� La dscape Contractors ' ''`�''' 1171 Wes Larpenteur 488-7258 """` Ros ville, Minnesota 55113