The URL can be used to link to this page

85-290 M�HIT.E - CI7V CLERK PINK - FINANCE GITY OF SAINT PAUL FlecilNO. ��9p CANAI�V - DEPARTMENT BLUE - MAVOR� � � ,Co il Resolution Presented By � Referred To Committee: Date Out of Committee By Date WHEREAS, Randal Gegner, owner of the property at 318 Summit Avenue, Saint Paul, T�tinnesota, Lots l, 2 and 6, Block 69 of Drake' s Subdivision, �nade application to the City of Saint Paul, Planning Commission, for permission to change the existing nonconforming use of his property pursuant to Section 62. 102, subd. 5 (5) of the Saint Paul Legislative Code so as to permit him to re-establish a reception hall/catering use; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, following a public hearing held by its Zoning Committee on December 20, 1984, did move to deny this request at its meeting held on December 21, 1984; and WHEREAS, Randal Gegner did appeal this decision of the Planning Commission to the City Council requesting that the City Council overrule the decision of the Planning Commission; and WHEREAS, the City Council heard this appeal at its regular meeting on Thursday, January 31, 1985 and the City Council con- sidered statements made, the report of staff, the minutes and findings of the Planning Commission, does hereby RESOLVE, that the Council of the City of Saint Paul c�.oes hereby affirm the decision of the Planning Commission in this matter based upon the following findings and conclusions: (1) Section 62. 102, subd. 5 , clause 5, states that when a nonconforming use of a structure is discontinued or ceases to exist for 365 days that the structure shall thereafter be usec? in conformance with the regulations of the zoning district in w�ich it is located unless the Planning Commission finds that the structure cannot reasonably or economically be used for a conforming purpose, that the proposed use is equally appropriate or more appropriate to the district than the previous nonconfor�ning use, that the COUIVC[LMEN Requested by Department of: Yeas Nays Fletcher Drew In Favor Masanz NiCOSia schetbe� __ Against BY Tedesco Wilson Adopted by Council: Date Form Appr d by City At ney Certified Passed by Council Secretary BY sy , Approved by lNavor: Date _ Appr�ved y Mayor Eor ubmission to Council BY BY WHIT'� - C�TV CLERK PINK - FINANCE G I TY O F SA I NT PA LT L Council p�— a�b CANAIRV - DEPARTMENT BLUE - MAVOR � ; , File N 0. , �' cil Resolution Presented By Referred To Committee: Date Out of Committee By Date proposed use is consistent with the health, safety, morals and general welfare of the community and is consistent with the reason- able use and enjoyment of adjacent property. (2) The present use of the property is as a 10 unit dwelling, a legally nonconforming use in the present RT-2 zoning district. (3) That prior to 1972 the property was used for a catering business but the catering business was discontinued in 1972. (4) That the applicant has failed to establish that allowing the main floor of the structure to be used for a reception hall and/or catering use is equally appropriate or more appropriate to the Zoning District than the previous nonconforming use as a 10 family dwelling unit based upon the fact that a reception hall or catering use is first permitted in the less restrictive B-2 business zoning district. (5) The applicant has failed to establish that the structure with a 10 family nonconforming use cannot reasonably or economically be used for this continuing nonconforming purpose. (6) That the applicant has failed to establish that the proposed use as a reception hall/catering use would be consistent with the reasonable use and enjoyment of adjacent property. Much testimony was elicited at the City Council hearing establishing the fact that there is a lack of reasonable on-street parking and that the use of the subject property for reception hall/catering use would create extreme and hazardous parking problems for the adjacent property owners. (7) The City Council finds that the Planning Commission did not commit any error or mistake a fact in denying the application of Randal Gegner. -2- COUfVCILMEIV Requested by Department of: Yeas Nays Fletcher °fe1N [n Favor Masanz NiCOSfa scne�be� __ Against BY 7edesco Wilson Adopted by Council: Date Form Approve b City Attor ey Certified Yassed by Council Secretary BY � . B}, i 6lpproved by A�lavor: Date Approved by ayor for S ission to Council By _ BY WHIT.E - CITV CLERK PINK - FINANCE . G I TY OF SA I NT PA U L Council P�-�� CANARV - DEPARTMENT ` BLUE - MAVOR File NO. a 1 � Co cil Resolution . Presented By �.-- Referred To Committee: Date Out of Committee By Date and, be it FURTHER RESOLVED, that the appeal of Randal Gegner be and is hereby denied; and, be it FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Clerk shall mail a copy of this resolution to Randal Gegner, the Zoning Administrator, the Planning Commission and the Board of Zoning Appeals. -3- COUNCILMEIV Requested by Department of: Yeas .51�Miwr�dN y_ / � ,AJ£�(/ Drew In Favor Masanz � � scheibei __ Against BY Tedesco wilson i F�B 2 � 1985 Form Approve byj ' y Attor Adopted by Council: Date � 1 Certified Pa. d ncil , cr a BY ; By �,,�A p �� 1-IF►1� �- 1985 Approved by Ma�+or for Subm ssion to Council A► e y IWavor: Date . , By _� PUBLISHED i�lA� � ig85 . . . . . • '- �;�� f�._`� �� , j, R¢�GI�Y °";. CITY OF SAINT PAUL a �� DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT r �� a DIVISION OF PLANNING � h ,eb• 25 West Fourth Street,Saint Paul,Minnesota,55102 612-292-1577 GEORGE LATIMER MAYOR January 22, 1985 Albert Olson, City Clerk Room 386 City Hall St. Paul , Minnesota 55102 RE: Zoning File #9688 - Gegner CityrCouncil_Hearin��_rJanuary_31;_1985 PURPOSE: Appeal of Planning Commission decision denying a Change of Noncon�orming Use Permit to reestablish a catering/reception hall use in one of 10 units at 318 Summit Avenue. PLANNING+COMMISSION�DECISION: Deny (11-5) ZONING_COMMITTEE_DECISION: Deny (3-2) STAFF�RECOMMENDATION: Deny SUPPORT: 2 persons testified OPPOSITION: 4 persons testified ; 2 letters received Dear Sir: On August 14, 1984, the City Council determined that the property at 318 Summit had been used as a reception hall in 1975, but that insufficient evidence had been submitted to show that the use had been continuous since that time. The City Council therefore found that the noncon- forming use had been discontinued for a period of 365 days , and suggested that the owner or tenant apply for a Change of Nonconforming Use permit under the provisions of Chapter 62.102, Subd. 5(5) to reestablish the reception hall . On November 13, 1984, appellant submitted an application for the Change of Nonconforming Use permit. On December 20, 1984, the Zoning Committee held a public hearing on the application. Mr. Gegner and his attorney appeared and testified that it was economically infeasible to use the property for a conforming purpose; that the proposed use was as appropriate as the previous use since they are the same; and that the proposed use was consistent with community safety and general welfare and with reasonable enjoyment of adjacent property. Neighbors at 322 Summit and 312 Summit testified in support, stating that the income from the reception use would help Mr. Gegner maintain the property. Four persons testified in opposition. Their position was that the proposed use was incompatible with the surrounding area because of parking problems, noise, and litter. They also believed that reestablishing a commercial use in a residential area was inappropriate. � . C��`� 01/�� GEGNER (#9688) Page Two-ry�� At the close of the public hearing the Zoning Committee discussed the application. Some members wished to lay the matter over as requested by the Summit Hill Association. Other members thought that the Committee could not delay action for an indeterminate period of time until the Summit Task Force made its recommendations. The Committee voted 3-2 to deny the application, based on findings in the staff report and additional findings that the applicant had not shown that the property could not economically or reasonably be used for a conforming purpose, and that the proposed use was inconsistent with the health, safety and welfare of the community and inconsistent with the reasonable use and enjoyment of adjacent properties. On December 22, 1984, the full Planning Commission heard the Zoning Committee's report. There was additional discussion about laying over the decision, but the Commission voted 11-5 to deny the permit, based on the Zoning Committee findings. Mr. Gegner is appealing this denial on the basis that the Planning Commission's findings are inconsistent with previous findings and with Section 62.102, Subd. 5(5) of the Zoning Code. This matter is scheduled to be heard by the City Council on January 30, 1985. Please notify me by January 29th if any member of the City Council wishes to have slides of the site presented at the public hearing. Sincerely, i �---- ^ � ��/�(Id0 � Patricia N. James City Planner PJN:pmk attachments r � . . • • . �� APPLICATION FOR APPEAL ZONING OFFICE USE ONLY CITY OF SAINT PAUL _ .., .- •--_: Fi le # �,�� - Application Fee $ J�y��, ��;� ': .. �.� �'!� Tentative Hearing Date �- �/—�35 �� R �' � ,,, , . ; =� . 4�. ,,s; . _ -� � � App 1 i cat i on i s hereby m`ade-for an Appea 1 to the ,.5t ��u� Cf/-� (G un cr � under the provisions of Chapter 64, Section Zc , Paragraph of the Zoning Code to appeal a decision made by the Board of Zoning Appeals - � Planning Commission on DEG� Z � , 19� Zoning Administrator (date of decision) _ Planning AdminisLrator Other A. APPELLANT Name /��-Nb�L �EC�:'"f� Daytime phone o��7— G'�' � k Address �j! Y St�l•y�,.y,, � �!/��,;r.e. Zip Code ��IO2. 6. DECISION BEING APPEALED Zoning fi le name �C��-1E"� Zoning Fi le #��Y� Property Address/Location 3��' .��n.�.,9�� Legal descriptio�S/ Z G ' /f�a�/� �7 d.� ��<K�S 5��/lt�lS��n 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.) f"/l�IC'�1i�15't' � ��C�L/YII NC �i�Y,trSS�d� ��!� II�J GLI�I s>S�G�'!� Gt/1�., Dl�i/luLsS �>�ilG�ie�1�c � �hCG�,SIS-f-Lr� j,r>.�� l�Il ��r»�c� �.r� S�c. C 2,�o Z� Sas�/ �' (s � � If you have any questions, please contact: r�� / �'-r�� . Applicant's signature St. Paul Zoning Office 1100 C i ty Ha 11 An nex � �� s,.,. � 25 West Fourth Street Saint Paul, Minnesota 55102 ate Cit ent (298-4154) 9/82 . ��,r��-�� , , -, �,Tr o, . . ,�v'' ; C1TY OF SAINT PAU�. � � a D�PARTMENT OF PLANNlNG AND ECONOMIC D�VELOPMENT � 1111IiiHil y r 11N I U ll b ° � ' 25 WEST FOUATH STREET�SAINT PAUL,MlNNESOTA,55102 •TELEPtlONE:612-292-1577 i..• r , GEORGE LATIMER � , ^ � MAYOR /�. _ �.. V December 27, 1984 Randal Gegner = 318 Summit Avenue Saint Paul , Minnesota 55102 - RE: ZONING FILE #9588 - GEGt•�ER Dear htr. Gegner• On December 20, 1984, the Zoning Committee of the Planning Commission held a public fiearing on your request to reestablish the previous nonconforming use of a reception hall at 318 Summit Avenue. At that hearing two persons testified in support of your request, three persons testified in opaosition and three letters were received in opposition. After reviewing the staff report which recommended denial of tfie change of nonconforming use permit, and afte.r considering testimony presented by you, your attorney and those other persons appearing and testifying, the Committee voted 3 to 2 to recommend denial of the permit based on findings 1 through 5 of the staff report, and findings that .you had not shown t'hat the property could not reasonably or economically be used for conforming purpose, and that the proposed use was inconsistent ►�iith the health, safety, and general welfare of the community and inconsistent with reasonable use and enjoyment of adjacent � property. On December 21, 1984, the Pianning Commission reviewed the Zoning Committee' s decision and voted 11 to 5 to uphold it. Your application for a Change of Nonconforming Use Rermit is hereby denied. You have fifteen (15) days from the date this letter is mailed to you to appeal the decision to the City Council . The fee for such an appeal is $170.00. If you have any q�xestions, please call me at 292-1577. Sincerely, " . �_---- 4 Patricia td. James Date Mailed: December �8, 1984 � City Planner ___________ _____________ ______� PtJJ :pmk cc: Wendy Lane, _Division of Housing and Building Code Enforcement Joseph Carchedi , License and Permit Division District 8 Plar,niny Council � Ramsey Hili Association , . -, . ��tu�r,lU Go►�(�ct�ssro�t luli� c�7�S I �.-z.i � 8� ��c�� MOTION: ��Ir. Pangal made a motion to approve the permit based on r findings 1 through 8, subject to the 6 conditions listed in the staff report. Mr. Levy seconded the motion. M�tion for approval carried vrith a unanimous voice vote. _ RANDAL GEGPJER {#9688) - Change of Nonconforming Use Permit for property�ocatea at 318 Summit to convert one residential unit to reception/catering use. Mr. Pangal noted that the request was to reestablish a nonconforming use. Discussion: Some Commissioners felt the matter should be tabled � until the Summit Hi11 Task Force has an opportunity to submit a - recommendation. MOTION: �Ar. Pangal made �a motion to deny the permit based on staff findings 1 through 5 and the findings that the applicant has not shown that the property cannot reasonably or economically be �used for a conforming purpose; that the proposed use is inconsistent with the health, safety, and general welfare of the community and is inconsistent with reasonable use and enjoyment of adjacent property. Ms. Tracy seconded the motion. 7he motion for denial carried on a roll ca11 vote of lI to 5 �P4r. Galles, Mr. Levy, Mr. Park, Ms. Summers and Ms. Zieman voting no). METROPOLITAN WASTE COP�TROL COMMISSION (#9695) - Request for River CorridorrConaitionaT Use Permit forrproperty located at 2400 Childs Road to construct dechlorination facility outside the flood �vall . h10TI0N: Mr. Panga7 made a motion to approve the permit based on r --r staff findings l through �. h1r. Galles seconded the motion. Motion for approval carried with a. unanimous voice vote. ACTION AUTO PARTS (#9687) - Special Condition Use Permit for property Tocated at 780 P9ississippi Street to expand existing automobile salvage operation. . i�tOTIOPJ: �•1r. Pangal made a motion to approve the permit based on � findings 1 through 5, the 3 conditions listed in the staff report, and the folloti�ing additional conditions : 4. That � the entire east, south, and west sides of the salvage '�� facility be screened from public view by the erection of an 8' high solid steel fence with a baked enar�el finish instead of the proposed galvanized steel fence. 5. The location of the access gate be placed as near as possible to the north property line to provide optimum site distance , for vehicles north bound on Mississippi Street. 6. The . access gate be set back from the P1ississippi Street right- � • of-way far enough to allaw a tow truck and towed vehicle to stand entirely on private property while the gate is being operated to a11ow access. 7. P!o vehicles desti.ned for salvage be parked on the public right-of-way at any time. 8. That no loading or unloading of salvage materials, � scrap, etc. , be conducted in the public right-of-way. , .• � . . � C/ �`" �T� MINUTES OF THE ZONING COh1�lITTEE IN CITY COUNCIL CHA�4BERS, ST. PAUL, 61INNESOTA ON DECEMBEft 20, 1984 PRESENT: Mmes. Tracy and Zieman; Messrs. Lanegran, Levy and Pangal of the Zoning Committee; Mr. Sega1 , Assistant City Attorney; Ms. Lane of the Division of Housing and Building Code Enforcement; ��s. Kelley, Ms. James and Mr. McGuire of the Planning Division Staff. ABSENT: �+Imes. Morton and Summers; htr. Galles. The meeting tiras chaired by Joseph Pangal , Chairman. - RAt�DAL GEGNER (#9688) Change of Nonconforming Use permit to reestablish a 'recep'tion��ia1T%catering use in one of ten units at 318 Summit. The applicant was present. There was opposition present at the hearing. Ms. James showed slides of the site and reviewed the staff report �,►ith a recommendation for denial . She stated that 3 letters had been received in opposition. She further stated that Mr. Gegner had submitted a cash flow analysis, operating statement, rent analysis, and an estimated cash flow for the proposed new use. Mr. Ray Faricy, attorney representing the applicant, stated he would like the Committee. to have time to revie►,► the documentation that Mr. Gegner had submitted to staff, even if that meant laying the matter over to the next Committee meeting.: Mr. Faricy stated that this matter is not new to the City. Ne stated that in 1975 or near that time the site had been used for receptions. In the City Council Resolution it states certain items to be proved, and he stated that some of them would be easy to establish. As to the statement in the staff report regarding consistency �,tith the health, safety, morals and general welfare of the community, Mr. Faricy stated he could not see any logic in the statement. Mr. Faricy referred to a study htacalester College did on Summit and also a book written by Mr. Ernest Sandeen, adding that there always has been and al��ays will be a problem with parking on Summit Avenue. He said that 1�1r. Gegner planned on using the main floor 4-5 times a month for receptions the way that some people do in their own homes - a living room concept. 1Jith reference to the Summit Avenue Study, Mr. Faricy stated that a full membership has not yet been constituted and he couldn't see waiting for a long period of time for the study to be completed. Ne submitted a petition to the Committee signed by neighbors in support of the permit who lived on Summit Avenue. He stated that Mr. Gegner is a good neighbor, and that he will help to preserve the property on Summit Avenue. After looking at the petition , Mr. Faricy submitted to the Committee, Mr. Lanegran observed that most of the signatures were from other streets , not Sur�mit Avenue as �Ar. Faricy had stated. �.. . .=� . . , � . . ��-a. �o RANDAL_GEGNER_(#9688) Page 2 � Mr. Lanegran asked Mr. Faricy what would the outcome be for his client, assuming the permit was denied, and. seeing that the unit is not economically easy to maintain. Mr. Faricy answered that he supposed P�r. Gegner would have to se71 . Asked by Ms. Zieman the size of crowd that would be entertained at one time, Mr. Faricy answered 120 at the maximum. . Mr. Pangal stated that with regard to the operating statement submitted, _ he felt it was a high amount of interest to be paying, and that he questioned the utilities, maintenance, etc. , 4ihich could also be used for tax write-offs. He stated that with 10 units the applicant would be � able to deduct from both federal and state, approximately 90� of the expenses. It was asked if the recepetion area was now a common area for everybody. Mr. Faricy stated that when the home was built the area was used to entertain. Mr. Pangal stated that the City Council found that in 1975 the property was not used as a reception house, that this use had been discontinued for at least 365 days, and therefore the nonconforming use was lost. Mr. Pangal. further stated that he felt it was infeasible to use the property for the intended purpose. Mr. Faricy suggested that the applicant would cut back on more of the rental units. Mrs. Sigford, 322 Summit, widocr of Theodor Tupa , spoke in support stating she would like to see the property used for receptions rather than as a residential home not properly maintained. She also stated . that as the seller of the property at 318 Summit, she could attest that the interest figures Mr. Gegner submitted were correct. Elma Cook, 312 Summit, spoke in support. She stated she didn't understand what all the hubbub was about and that she had had receptions in her home at one time. She stated that she is an artist by profession, and that no one can live in a mansion tivithout more than one income. She stated that Nlr. Gegner tivas a good neighbor, and she felt that apprnving the permit would improve the neighborhood. Mr. Gegner, applicant, stated that he is not asking to start up a new business but rather reestablish a prior use. Regarding the statement of the health, safety, morals and general welfare of the community, Mr. Gegner testified that he had contacted the neighbors, had meetings with them, and sent a letter out. The issue brought up is parking and he could see rrhere at times it could be inconvienent. He mentioned the School of Associated Arts on Summit Avenue, where they fiave 100 students enrolled, but he stated that most of the receptions ;�ould take place during a time when the art school was not open. With regards to the statement that the permit is inconsistent with the reasonable enjoyment of the neighboring property, he stated that the property owners came and testified today in support. Mr. Gegner stated that the issues had been covered very well in his opinion, and that he doesn't see where the � probler� is. • � � � ', . - C��9� RANDALrGEGP�ER (#9688) Page 3 Mr. Pangal stated that there tiras one more issue, that since 1975 the property had not been used for receptions. He asked asked how the reception use is less restrictive. Mr. Faricy argued that the reception use and fewer units were more appropriate than 10 units. hir. Segal , Assitant City Attorney, stated that the City Council made the finding that for a period of 365 days the use of the reception area had lapsed ; therefore a reception use now could not be permitted. He stated that whether or not the reception use was present in 1975 is not the - question before the Committee because the City Council determined that � it was present. Charles Skrief, 552 Portland Avenue and President of the Ramsey Nill Association, spoke in opposition. He read the letter he had submitted to the Zoning Committee dated December 19, 1984, further stating that the proposed use is not consistent with the neighborhood. He appealed to the Committee to protect the zoning of the area. In reference to the petition Mr. Gegner submitted, Mr. Skrief stated he had not seen the petition. He asked the Committee to please deny the request. Paul Johnson, 79 Virginia, spoke in opposition. He stated he had received the letter sent out by Mr. Gegner and that the letter did not inform him of today's hearing, only of u�ihat he intended to do. He stated that he is concerned with parking, especially in b�d weather. He stated that he lives next door to the art school and that he is continually pickin� up cans , trash, etc. He stated that the house across the street from him has 10-12 units, which equais about 20 persons, and has only a double garage. This leaves la cars on the street. The Cathedral nearby has cars parking all down Western Avenue; the McLaughlin property and Summit House all have parking on the street. He also stated that noise is a problem as the houses are close to each other, they have bands, and the next marning after a reception there are plastic cups and beer cans strewn over the lots. Mr. Johnson stated that he had spoken with Alma Cook who testified in support and that she had told him that she didn't want to get involved with the matter. Maria Girsch, 294 Summit, spoke in opposition stat�ng she had submitted a letter to the Committee. She verified that parking is a problem. She has a private drive, and many times people park in front of the drive. IVoise is a probiem, and many times people from a reception wander onto her property and when she tells them it is private property they say , they just want to look around. She stated she r�ould rather see the property used as a 10-plex. Larry t�ayman, 589 Portland, spoke in opposition, stating he has been a resident there for the past five years. He stated that traffic and parking are problems and that the property is not set up to accomodate p parking. He stated that the facility would create a disturbing amount ° of noise, and he urged the Cornmittee to deny the request. l , .. �7�-��- ��o � RANDAL_GEGNER_(#9688) Page 4 In his rebuttal Mr. Faricy stated that they 4�ere not out to commercialize the property and that the property would be protected. Asked by Ms. Zieman if Mr. Gegner owned the property before the City Council resolution came out, Mr. Faricy answered that he did. Hearing no further testimony, t�1r. Pangal closed the public hearing portion of the meeting. t�r. Lanegran made a motion to recommend denial based on findings 1-5. Ms. Zieman seconded the motion. � Mr. Segal stated that he did not tivant to confuse the Comznittee with what he previously said. He explained the process of v�hat happened when the matter went before the City Council , and stated that the issue before the Committee today is if it should permit the reestablishment of a reception hall as stated in Section 62.102. h1r. Lanegran withdrew his motion. Ms. Zieman made a motion to lay the natter over until the Summit Avenue Task Force issues its report. Mr. Pangal stated that the Committee should not do that, and he questioned the Committee's prerogative to lay it over. Mr. Lanegran made a motion for denial based on findings 1-5 of the staff report, and the findings that applicant has not shown that the property cannot reasonably or economically be used for a conforming purpose, and that the proposed use is inconsistent with the health, safety, and general welfare of the community, and inconsistent with the reasonable use and enjoyment of adjacent properties. Ms. Tracy seconded the motion which .passed on a roll call vote of 3 - 2 (Zieman and Levy voting no). Submitted by: �_ Approved by: � /��i�� • Patricia N.. James Jo ph Pangal , Chai n , . . . . � �} �umm�t ��01�� tGN,Ul�. �� ` `=�Paui� Nlh, 5E102. *� ,.�..��'''=�• � � �QI�Q�W1bQ,+� 2p� l°�QS� � '�;"' �"'� ��k��'`".�� „•�� °' � �3��i�l�� Z,�� (�y„rn�� PLANr�lNG Dii,�.•PED �� CITY OF ST. PA�II.. � H�a� �mr�wc �t�a�,J►. �n. SS102, �- - - �D EC� 2 0 1984 . �ea►r Nlerv�lax� c�'t'�.�?.ori�v� , _ g Cornrr�r�k.s.� - �►�'+�Q►�--Yhat we.►y+ow� ,�o� ba. ab1.a,i�ak� �zda�1's heu,s�ng �r�p,r�d►ro� 3►g�r�r�" �n �rsan,w�wdu�d I�ke � vo�t�,our� oQpos�h -1� �ardal E�ner'S u�t o '�h �,Je Irwv�rece ck�a5ec� 2q+� Svmrnt#-�,�u.� ��d � � �°� "�'J � . �3 daz�'b�.�rt�a��a�rd l�vt �1�xe we�'1n our{�irr►�I� c� � c1��ldlrc.�, �e a�a5z -�n,�.Fc�oy�,Ca��no� LL� � 31Q, Su�n,t�' �a �cuu� d� FCot�tS: C�� 1�06 Q1KAd� �p¢�¢.1� dtl,4�Ld �{�►r� G{y �►�Ct t �10�'"-wllS U5� IS V1�'4 tJ.Oo� ld0 A• � �1�cct 1�tr•�x ig �rww firt��ny -4� c� tv► -fram a�noNne�(' ddar'. � C,2) 1=!- is c�-b�►�#-�lnact�4�1�v,1�c�e ahv� at 3��d ' ' . ts vuri,t r.c�vc u�- Zi5 Suw►rv��}-�� °� Surnn►�'1ou� M�I�e. 1�Icl.t�u9�nt�h � sh�1 ta►��t 1+�, ulc.l.av�n��ns- �3��naxc.a,re al� er,our�ln c.a�tex.+r�'h�mn oc�f►�ckt�n cM�yyt�-�le.+wt�. . ord�.C:o�.�ara�• (a� y90 Sumrrr� b ��. , ��twt.e.v►.l�tuc.kub�n Ca)Su+m„r;� t„��- � �+- n�ex�h�Gub C�)�'Ine.�dk��' N�uSC. (�}) t�C�CI¢.d��l1nQ, aic� mcaMus�td �1a(�s has ad�t�dC � t • ��;n�c.�,y,9, �� ,u►rilnsrx, C-�rrt�r5�'a�ark�,as we�l as �ts ��r�edta�c_ v�c.tghbtlt�5� c�xc rnuli�i-utn�' d�,�e.11�no�g �-t'�n�x�a►nx.cb��o 3o t� ak-�14+0��-41nxu.addA�e�� aca�p►n w�ri► vto �'x'dV�tah -�ar a�ai� aEf-�a� ��n,o . �to) �l ho�� Irtouse, is�A�n a�nd sim�is� a -�-uffic-9e►�er�afi�g� �,r mult�,�I�,r-�- Car►m+exti�al �� . gumm�* � da� v�t r�j a� rnoy..�x�u-h buh�v��Ls . , —TF'°'"�►tc �„�-��uc.,n9-t�.-hn�s,-4a �cad--�t,�►s. �. �� - y� w�i� dQUds�..�a d� t.�,r. 6�cc�v�ax'y ��t" cleu,rl,� �.d -fc�a . � Sst�� M�A �� e.�: Patr�uA7arn� . �-�� . . ��mr�ts� h�l� ��c�a#i on 18 December 1984 Res Zoning File ��9688 To Whom it May Concern: As a general policy, the Summit Hill Association/District 16 opposes zoning changes along Summit Avenue that would allow greater density, changes that would create additional parking problems and changes that would commercialize Summit Avenue. It appears that this request would be opposed on all three bases. However, since a summit Avenue Task Force is currently being established to propose overall policies regarding zoning issues along Summit Avenue, we would hope that all these re-zoning proposals could be withheld until that task force has completed its study and made its recommendations. Sincerely yours ��,�/L2-c� I Nancy Down,�y, Chair 'Loning and Land Use Com ittee Summit Hil1 Association/District 16 �� . Pl��s��1+�G �3�. -P�� ,TY GF 5T. P�t��, .._ . - ,. _,,.,� rL/C l�, �i � ��U�T summit avenue ramsey . � e �� district 16 � c ev � a� ��➢`��J�*�� S"� N Q�eaya� return address: 928 lincoln avenue, saint paui, minnesota 55105 , . - . . . � ��d , � - - a�s�y �� A�s��i�� .Shaping the futurQ of Q historic nei�hborhood in .St. Paul December 19, 1984 _ Zoning Committee 25 West Fourth Street St. Paul , Minnesota 55102 RE: Fi 1 e #9688 � � �� .� �,� �� aa.��U��'�� . '-�� Dear Zoning Committee: The Ramsey Hill Association wishes to express its determined opposition to the application of Mr. Randal Gegner for a change in nonconforming use for 318 Summit Avenue. We base this opposition on several arguments : 1. Mr. Gegner has not proven as he must under Section 61.102 Subd. 5, that the nonconforming use for which he seeks approval (a catering facility) existed at the effective date of adoption of this code (1975). Until he does so, his application is improper and ought to be dismissed. In an earlier application (See Zoning Files 9544 and 9554) , Mr. Gegner failed to establish that the catering use existed after 1972, the year in which a catering license for the property lapsed. In fact, persons who rented the apartment in question from 1974-1976 denied through affidavit that any catering occurred during those years. The City Council acknowledaed the importance of these affidavits by rejecting Mr. Gegner's earlier application. Since Mr. Geaner himself admits by his current application that the catering use was discontinued, it is reasonable to assume, in the absence of any other evidence, that the use ceased in 1972, fu11y twe1ve years ago. To repeat, until Mr. Gegner can prove the use existed in 1975, his application should be rejected. 2. Even assuming, for the purposes of argument, that the use existed in 1975, Mr. Gegner has not demonstrated that the property "cannot reasonably or economically be used for a conforming purpose." On the contrary, he has demon- strated only that the proposed use would improve his position. No one other than Mr. Gegner can seriously argue that his information constitutes an economic assessment of alternatives. He has made no effort to consider any use of the property than his preferred use. He argues simply that the use to which the , property has been put for 12 years cannot continue; he submits on1y one alterna- . tive, an alternative with enormous cost to the neighborhood. If Mr. Gegner wishes to argue economic impossibility, he should permit an independent evaluation of the property for a range af uses. Since Mr. Cegner asks for public endorsement of his nonconforming use, the public should have an -1- Ramsey Hill Association, 596 Holly Avenue, Saint Paul, Minnesota SS102 . . , . . . . G�� December 19, 1984 Zoni ng Co�ni ttee -2- opportunity to investigate and study the issues. It should not be stampeded by a vague and selfserving complaint. Tellingly, he has also demonstrated that he purchased the property in the last several months in the expectation that the city would accomodate his intended_ i71ega1 use. The latter expectation, if encouraged by the Zoning Committee, will _ lead to additional speculation in the Ramsey Hill neighborhood and elsewhere in the city. - 3. Again assuming that the catering use existed in 1975, Mr. Gegner has not demonstrated that the proposed use is "equally appropriate or more appropriate than the previous nonconforming use." The caterina use, with its hundreds of cars using exclusively off street parking, with itsvnoise, and with its traffic cannot be said to be as appropriate in a residential neighborhood as the existing lOth apartment. To say that "previous nonconforming use" means the 1972 catering use is to argue the principle that any use made of any property at any time in the past can be retrieved for use in this section. As will be described below, the language of the Code specifically prohibits a change from a more restrictive (10 residential units) to a less restrictive use (9 units plus a catering facility) . 4. Mr. Gegner has not demonstrated that his "proposed use is consistent with the . . . .generai welfare of the community and is consistent with the reasonable use and enjoyment of adjacent property." He has instead introduced evidence that some people enjoying nonconforming status for their own property are interested in more exceptions to the RT-2 zone. By contrast, the facts speak for themselves. If we assume that Mr. Gegner is successful , the neighborhood (and this includes the streets perpendicular and parallel to Surrrnnnit) can expect battle for parking each week with hundreds of cars headed for 318 Su►mnit. (Not incidentally, Mr. Gegner's visitors will also be battling the 9 tenants of 318 Summit who have no onsite parking for themselves.) The traffic c�enerated by these cars looking for parking will dramatically alter the numbers of cars on adjacent streets. As has been the case in other catering facilities on Summit, the noise from the house at all hours of the day and night is aggravating if not intolerable. Experience demonstrates that there are few, if any, uses which will as surely cause a deter- ioration in the attractiveness of the area for residential use as will a catering facility. . Any argument by Mr. Gegner that his intended use will be modest ought to be rejected as personal and selfserving. The Zoning Committee ought to consider the worst case authorized by the nonconforming use because, likely as not, that will be the reality now with Mr. Gegner or later with another owner. 5. The Zoning Code specifically prohibits the planning commission from changing the property's classification from the current nonconforming 10 unit residential classification to the less restrictive 9 units residentia7 and catering facility. The Code states, "Where a nonconforming use of a structure. . . .is changed to a more restrictive classification, it shall not thereafter be changed by the planning commission to a less restrictive classification. . . ." The Code clearly intends to bring properties more into conformance with the zoning area, in this case RT-2. To grant Mr. Gegner's application would not continue the trend forward, but would permit the property to slide backwards to a commercial use. , , -, . . � �c�s�� December 19, 1984 Zoning Committee- -3- The Ramsey Hill Association and others have previously written letters to the city in opposition to Mr. Gegner's proposal . These dozens of letters are included in Zoning Files 9544 and 9554. The letters are almost uniformly from home owners in the area who purchased their property in the expectation that the city would enforce its zoning code. We earnestly request your assistance in accomplishing exactly that. _ For these reasons and for other reasons which will be developed in our testimony before the Zoning Committee, we request that the Zoning Committee deny the application. -, Si nc ly, Charles W. krief President CWS:bp cc: Councilman Bill Irliison Councilman Jim Scheibel . . . . . . - �'F��d ZONING COMMITTEE STAFF REPORT FILE #9688 • #9554 #9544 1 . APPLICANT: RANDAL GEGPJER DATE OF HEARING : 12/20/84 2. CLASSIFICATION: Change of Nonconforming Use 3. LOCATION: 318 Summit (So. side between Western and Kellogg) 4. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lots, 1, 2, & 6, Block 60, Drake's Subd. 5. PRESENT ZONING: RT-2 ZONIPJG CODE REFEREP�CE: Sec. 62.102 Subd. 5(5) 6. STAFF INVESTIGATIOPJ & REPORT: DATE 12/12/84 BY Patricia P!. James A. PURPOSE: Change of Nonconforming Use permit to reestablish a reception hall/catering use in one of ten units. - B. PARCEL SIZE: 70' (Summit) x 170' = 11,900 sq. ft. C. EXISTIPJG LAND USE: 3-story brick structure with legal nonconforming status as a 30-unit residential building. The rear of the site is a bluff that drops steeply to Irvine Avenue. D. SURROUPJDING LAND USE: North: Multi-unit dwelling ; reception house (RT-2) East: Low to medium density residential (RT-2) South: Bluff; low to medium density residential (RT-2; RP4-2) 4Jest: Medium density residential (RT-2) E. ZOPJING CODE CITATIOP�: Sec. 62.102 Subd. 5(5) states : °4dhen a nonconforming use of a structure, or structure and land in combination, is discontinued or ceases to exist for 365 days, the structure, or structure and land in combination, shall thereafter be used in conformance with the regulations of the district in which it is located, unless the planning commission, pursuant to a public hearing, finds that the structure, or structure and land in combination, cannot reasonably or economically be used for a conforming purpose, that the proposed use is equally appropriate or more appropriate to the district than the previous nonconforming use, and that the proposed use is consistent with the health, safety, morals, and general welfare of the community and is consistent with the reasonable use and enjoyment of adjacent property. Where a nonconforming use of a structure, land, or structure and land in combination is hereafter changed to a more restrictive classification, it shall not thereafter be changed by the planning commission to a less restrictive classification under this clause." F. ZONING HISTORY: On July 22, 1983, the Zoning Administrator denied applicant's request for�egal nonconforming status for 9 dauelling units and a reception house/caterer. On January 8, 1984, the Z�ning Administrator reaffirmed his previous decision, and applicant filed for administrative review. On April 24, 1984, the Board of Zoning Appeals determined that the building was y legally nonconforming for 9 residential units and a reception area, but not for a catering business. The Ramsey Hill Associat�on appealed this decision to the City Council . On June 12 and June 21 , 1984, the City Council determined that the Board of Zoning Appeals erred, and that there was insufficient evidence to sup�ort a finding that the reception use had been in continuous existence since October 25, 1975. The Council directed applicant to apply for a change of nonconforming use permit to reestablish a catering use. � � ' � � � � � ' �� RANDAL GEGNER (#9688) ,, � Page Two �, ; G. FINDINGS: 1. The Zoning Administrator has determined that the site is legally nonconforming for 10 residential units. Applicant proposes reestablishing a reception/catering business in the main floor residential unit and retaining the 9 other units. 2. In order to approve the change, the Planning Commission must make specified findings. 3. The applicant has provided no information that the proposed use is equally appropriate or more appropriate to the district than the previous use. 4. The proposed use is a reception/catering business , which is now first permitted in the B-2 district. It would not appear to be consistent with the health, safety, morals, and general welfare of the community nor consistent with - reasonable use and enjoyment of adjacent property. � 5. The code prohibits a change from a more restrictive classification to a less restrictive classification. In this case the change would be from a use first permitted in an RM-2 district to one first permitted in a B-2 district. 6. The City Council has requested the initiation of a study of land uses along Summit Avenue to determine how best to preserve its character and to address problems associated 4vith parking and institutional uses. The Summit Avenue Task Force may come up with land use recommendations that would affect this case. ' H. STAFF RECOMMENDATIOP�: Based on findings 1-5, staff recommends denial of the change of nonconforming use permit. �� a �� a �.� _ . C�� , � �`E�� /�� ,�;o� APPLICATION FOR CF�ANGE O NONCONFORMING USE PERMIT �ONING OFICE USE ONLY CITY OF SAINT PAUL Zoning File ��_ ��; �� , Application Fee $ '�, p s� Tentative Hearing Date �,� r9�� Number of Lots or Size of Parcel: A legal nonconforming use of structure/land is one which lawfully existed on October 25, 1975, the effective date of the adoption of the Saint Paul Zoning Code. Appliction is hereby made for a Change in Nonconforrning Use Permit under provisions of Chapter 62, Section 102, Subdivision 5, Paragrapn (5) of the Zoning Code. A. APPLICANT Name Jl/-,'i!%J'Y=1�_f��`�/�� _ time) :�� `" � _��, — �_ Phone �Day , , 7 -��< <;��--- Address_��` �,t��^�^>7� ��x.r.��1 a�- - Zip ��%'C L Property interest of Applicant (Owner, contract purchaser, etc.) �;,,1,.�� -----__T Name of owner (if different) B. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION Address/Location �lf' �i •=��',fl ' �...� -----�-`-----��` —;-------�--------�------ Legal Description: Lot_/¢Z Block � i Add. �r;-/�a,S `:,yl��_•5��;,, ��_____ �� (�d-/J`��.«� � i _ ~ _.,�_.----Y--� Present Zoning ��_7� Lot Size ~� C. USE INFORMATION Previous Use (Attach supporting documentation) __.��-!'�-�--(,�'�,�;� — ___ _� ---------- Proposed Use (Attach Site Plan) �' �..,_i-�:---�.��;-�_ -- ----.��_--_ --- ------ ---��` % �•?�'_�h� �1.-=t� �_� __ ------------------ ��{��,,s ----------------- ------- ---- ----------------------- �� v �� '�. . ------�------------- - ----- ----- --- ------------------- If you have any questions, please contact: � Saint Paul Zoning Office 1100 City Hall Annex 25 W est Fourth Street � Saint Paul, Minnesota 55102 4102 =� (29s-41s4> 1/1/s2 ' , ' , G/ ��7 � � c 'Decemben l 0, l 9 84 �ean Reeen,t.�y my w�,�e and I puneha.s�.d �nvm Mn. Theodone Tupa :the .ec�vc�.�y _ Ca�b G�.2ben.t de��.gned hvu�e a.t 31 k Summ.i.t Avenue. �4ar�y Xveak ne�.�der�t�s have d�seh,i.bed .ta ws the joyows evev►t�s --weddi.ng�, an�i�.ven3an,i�s, 6�.nth- - day�, e,te.-- �hey have a�tended aven �he yea��ca whert �he Tupa� �huv�.ded �he {�C1t�5.� �j.QUGh G{y owe hame �vn en.teh.tcu.wing. Th.e Tupa�s mcu.r�#:a,i.�2ed �he �ca.cGi,ti.�na.e decun c,� ou�c hvme, mah,ing .i� an �.dea.e be,t.t�rig ��n �eop2e � �a be "h��-bvn-a-day" �o �h,�.end� a�2d ne.e.cc,t.i.ve�s �.n ari e,2egan,t Sumrn.i,t Avev�ue ma��.an. K.�m and I cuce en1 a y�.ng outc "new" hame, .�ec�.n,i.ng abai.c,t .i.t� h�.��t�n y, and n.2a.nvi,i.ng �a eavr,t�i.nue .the �}cud,i�t�an be.� by the Tupws �.n the wse o� �he 5-vus� �.�aan. I�t .i�s vun .��.neelce de�5�.ne �a be an �i�titegna.�. per�;t a� �he ne�.ghba�eh.aad an.d we �shc�ce a lzeen �.v�te�ce�s� �,n �h.e �he�envcLtti�n o� �he hame� an �he Avenue and gene�ea2 c�ua,Q.i,ty o� .P.,i.�e. Gie w.i�sh �to wa�clz ut.i�h #he commun.i.ty and e.i,ty ��.e,i.a.Y�s �o .i,n�u�ce �'h.i,�. G1e wau,Cd appneei.a,te hean,4ng �nam yuu any �s�ec.i.��.e concefcrus y�u ma.y have aboe�,t �un p:eccna and wau,ed be �.�ea�sed �a d,i�se.u�sb �hem w-i,th yvu. P.2ea�e da �ee�2 bnee �c, e.a.Y.2 a,t 297-0808, on c�ieop ws a na�e. Thanfz you. �� S�rieene�y, RANDAL G�GNFR 3l8 Swnm.i.t Avenue Su.i,v�t Pau,2, h�.i.nn. , , • , >+. .. , - . ' �� . � ��:-�JC CASE OUTLINE � I'� 1 According to Section 62 . 102( 5) , three conditions must be satisfied for a catering permit to be issued for 318 Summit Avenue . The first condition being that the property cannot reasonably or economically be used for a conforming use . Even with the ten rental units , 318 Summit is not economically feasable . A conversion to five units , which would make the� property conforming , would be neither reasonable or economical . Second� y , the proposed use must be equally appropriate or more appro- priate than the previous nonconforming use . Since the proposed use is identical to the pre�tious use , this condition is automatically met . Lastly , the use must be consistent with the health , safety, morals , and general welfare of the community : and consistent with the reasonable use and enjoyment of adjacent property . In the twenty years that receptions have been held on a regular basis , no complaints have been registeP�ed . The adjacent property owners both support the continued use for receptions . Based on 318 ' s meeting the above conditions , we ask that this committee v o t e z o a 1 1 �.ei c��:e(rT rr�g� t o� c o'r�=�i'n a:e,. . . ��.,�',��;��`� �' � � _ _ � � � � � ;�� . , - . :�---- . . � �� -=�-�� . . ,, OPERATING �STATEMENT 318 SUMMIT Income B1 $165 .00 62 Caretaker M 700 .00 1 175 . 00 " 2 165 .00 3 175 .00 4 425 .00 5 245 .00 7 240 .00 8 325 .00 $2 ,615 .00 ( $31 ,380 .00 annual ) Eit�enses Interest $19 ,350 .00 Taxes 4 ,929 J8 Utilities 5 ,916 . 00 Insurance 1 ,348 .00 Accounting/Legal 250 .00 Advertising 115 .20 Maintenance 2 ,400 .00 Water/Sewer 648 . 00 Trash Removal 270 . 00 Totals $31 , 380 . 00 $35 ,226 . 98 Annual Loss : $ 3 ,846 . 98 , . ` • ',•„ ".. . , � „ ��j��`/G December 10, 1984 ��I ; Re : Analysis of operating statement for 318 Summit Avenue The attached figures represent the current annual operating state- ment for the property at 318 Summit Avenue . For the sake of this analysis , a fair market rent of $700 .00 has been assigned to the main floor . Substantial alterations would , however , bz required to create a main floor apartment , Expenses are based on the last 12 month ' s operating records . It should be noted that the interest , which is at 9� is substantially below market ; and no allowance has been made for repairs , Funds needed for necessary repairs and refurbishing would have to be provided by outside sources , or borrowed ; resulting in yet higher interest expense . The current budget also allows for no reduction in debt . Additional hardship would be incurred when the present 9% financing expires . Based on the above facts , it is neither reasonable nor economical to operate 31$ Summit Avenue as a ten unit rental dwelling . The use of the main floor as a reception area has , in the past , assured 318 ' s remarkable preservation . Conversion of the main fioor to a rental unit would result in the destruction of architectural features . In short , it is essential that the reception/catering use be allowed to continue to insure the cash flow necessary to restore and maintain the property for posterity . , � � � . Y � �� ,� � � • � . � �'�r.Y,J �J �- ,� � December 10 , 1984 Re : Proposed cash analysis of 318 Summit Avenue Attached is an estimated operating = statement for the property at - 318 Summit Avenu� as a reception/catering facility with rental units _ upstairs . The $2 ,Q00 . 00 rental income for the main floor represents between 4&5 functions per month . We feel this is a realistic minimum . The income generated by this use would be used for needed restoration and reduction of debt . � :s� � � „, � � ,W. � �w� 4% �: :� ,<.,� �l ; � �°° .� .(�-�� z�y � :� i m � �,.;� �"' �,;., � _».... _.......�.......►_..-r,.�......� _<....n._,-_.,-.,.-....-.ti,.....�,,.,�. '� ��-. ,., . . , . . , , �ic=�'� ��4 ,. , , PROP.OSED USE 318 Summit Income 61 $165 . 00 B2 Caretaker M 2 , 000 .00 (minimum) 1 175 .00 Z 165 . 00 3 175 .00 4 425 .00 6 245 .00 7 240 . 00 8 325 .00 $3 , 915 . 00 ( $46 ,980 . 00 annual ) Expenses Interest $19 ,350 .00 Taxes 4,929 .00 Utilities 7 , 000 . 00 Insurance 2 ,400 .00 Accounting/Legal 1 ,200 .00 Advertising 1 ,200 .00 Maintenance 2 ,400 .00 Water/Sewer 800 .00 Trash 40q .00 Totals $46 ,980 . 00 $39 ,679 . %8 Annual Cash Flow $7 ,300 . 00 (minimun) s . �;: ,; . _ _ �.r..,.�� , . � � � �� ecem6en l, 14k4 Re: an�.ey�.� a� nen,t�s a� 31� Summ.i,t Avenue 7o Glham .i,t May Cancenn: � Hav�.ng necev�y cam�.2e�ed a �s�udy a� �he nerzt� nece,i.ved �an �he apatc,tmerr,td cr,t 3 l 8 Summ.i,t Avenue, I am a� �he �}�,i.vu.�n �ha,t �he y ahe c�t, an �s::�ci.gh�2y abave �he malcfze.t �a�. �he �vc.ea. 7h,i�s evncews�,on -us ba�ed an �h.e �ac.t �hc�,t ma�,� o� �he a�utc,ttmewt� ane ph,i.mcUr,i,2y g.�an,t.5�,ed �s.2ee}��.ng n�am�s - apa�r,tmev�t�s l,2 � 3, even �hcvice a comman ba�h, Apa�r.tmev� M wou,2d neqwi.�ce cavca�.denab.2e nemode.�i,ng .to gevte�e $700.00 petr. mav�th ne,n�. The nemcci,n,ivtg uri-i t�s asce. a.t ma�cFie.t newt. S�.n ceh. y � / � /� i" ° -- . ' �'�ji°"_.i"�� c_�C" _� � . � JAM�S �. COGGINS � JAhi�S �'. CUGGINS R�AL �STAT� 4�3-�88k � _.�.,.� 1 if.0i ��+. +� r'. .�h. �.K: 4 �r9 I �� F_ �..; _. , -: :.� , / , . � _ Y. Y y.0 ! ..:t �""� .`� ��.�r.. . . �M�/�Mr�rilt wHITE - C�rv C�EkK . . . . PINK - FINANCE � �COUIICIl w [.4N.ARY . DEPARTMENT , � C I TY O F SA I NT ��U L } � /��r � BLUE ' 1 MP�OR , +�y�� .�.n� � . . F1lE NO. -- �- � �{,//J�� 1��7`Q'� /i�C.� S%//�JL� • • � �� '�• �� - `�� ^ 'N �w . ounc�l Resolut�on � a��' -, � . � �_ Presented '- � Referred To Committee: Date Out of Committee By Date WHEREAS, The Zoning Administrator has determined that the property located at 318 Summit Avenue, Saint Paul, Minnesota, (legally described as Lots 1, 2 and 6, Block 69, Drakes Sub- division of Lots 14 and 15, Block 69) was not entitled to be . classified as a legal nonconfvrming use as a reception and - catering hall, the property being located in an RT-2 zoning - district; and • _ WHEREAS, Randal Gegner had appealed this administrative determination to the Board of Zoning Appeals, which matter was - heard by the Board on April 24, 1984; and WHEREAS, Following a public hearing with notice t� affected property owners, the Board of Zoning Appeals by its Resolution No. 9544 adopted May 8, 1984 found and determined that the Zoning Administrator did not commit an error in denying the application to use the property at 318 Summit Avenue as a legal nonconforming catering business on the basis that there is no showing that the property had been licensed as a catering busir�ess at the time that the zoning classification was changed in 1975, and the Board further found and determined that the Zoning Administrator did err in his decision and that the property should be determined as a legal non- conforming use for nine residential units, plus allowing the first � floor of the property to be used for a . reception area where the reception does not include preparation of food at the premise or the food is provided by a duly licensed off-site caterer; and WHEREAS, Pursuant to the provisions of Section 64.205, Charles Skrief, President, Ramsey Hill Association, 552 Portland Avenue, Saint Paul, Minnesota, 55102, duly filed with the City Clerk an appeal from this determination made by the Board of Zoning Appeals requesting that a hearing be held by the City Council for the pur- pose of considering the decisions made by the said Board as it COUNCILMEN Requested by De.partment of: Yeas Fletcher Nays °fe1H In Favor Masanz Nicosia scneibe� __ Against BY Tedesco Wilson Form App ed by City ttor y Adopted by Council: Date Cerli[ied Passed by Councii Secretary BY B� Approved by Vfavor: Date Approv d y Mayor f r Submission to Council By� By W111TE - C17Y CLERK � .. . PINK �� FINANCE � �?ANtyRY - OEPA(77MENT ` � ITY OF ►SAINT ��AUL Council -BLUE y,- .�.�.vON ' � , File N 0. ��-� Council �Z�solution ��' Presented By Referred To Committee: Date Out of Committee By Date affects the use of the property at 318 Summit Avenue for receptions; and WHEREAS, Acting pursuant to Sections64.205 through 64.208 and upon notice to appellant and other affected property owners, a public hearing was duly canducted by the City Gouncil on June 12, 1984 and June 21, 1984 wherein all interested parties were given an oppor- - tunity to be heard; and WHEREAS, The Council having heard the statements made, and having considered the applicatian and the appeal, the report of staff, the minutes and findings of the Board of Zoning Appeals, does hereby � RESOLVE, That the Council of the City of Saint Paul does hereby find and determine that the Board of Zoning Appeals ' finding and determination that the property at 318 Summit Avenue constitutes a nonconforming use as a reception hall which nonconforming use would be allowed to continue was an error based upon the finding made and determined by the City Council that there was insufficient evidence presented to the Board and the City Council for the purpose of estab- lishing that the nonconforming reception use of the property subse- quent to the October 25, 1975 zoning reclassification has not been discontinued or ceased to exist for a continuous period of 365 days, and that if the owner and/or tenant of the property wishes to re- establish the nonconforming use as a reception hal.l pursuant to the provisions of the Zoning Code, Section 62.102, subd. 5 (5) , they shall be required to make application to the Planning Commission for a determination that the structure cannot reasonably or economically be used for a conforming purpose, that the proposed use is equally appropriate or more appropriate to the district than the previou5 nonconf�rming use and that the proposed use is consistent with the health, safety, morals and general welfare of the community and is -2- COUNCILMEN Yeas Nays Requested by Department of: Fletcher � Drew In Favor Masanz Nicosis scheibe� � Against BY Tedesco Wilson Form Approv d by City Att ney Adopted by� Council: Date Certified Passed by Council Secretary By By ' Approved by Mavor: Date Appcoved y ayor for Submission to Council sy �y " illll ' ' � . � I �I � � � � � I � �� a�� ; . . . �n � , �� . _ _1 �---- ',"" p ' v�� - -- - �� i _ _ .-_ _. - �� - — � v 6�.AB ! - -� - �3 � A 8 V � F -- ,-�_t- Q�- V A�,Q- Q -a- AB � J Q - NE/L L APTS � � Z V PUBLiC HOUS/NG ' � � 24 z2 � o ;�o �-�-� v z v Ae �C� �. �v R.� �.. � s O '� ,� C �i �o v v o c� 2� 5 �� v __� �.o - � o � o� Z I �I ----- - - �" �� 9 —�"'''� 1 n, . � ...,1'.� „- utr c�t^ COUflClI pINK. - FIN6NCE � GITY OF SAINT ��ALTL. Fi.le N0. ��'/�9'�' QI�NARY — OEP/�QTMENT . � :BLUE — MAr�p � � - - � ..j� � � � � Council Resolution ��'-�� Presented By Referred To Committee: Date Out of Committee By Date consistent with the reasonable use and enjoyment of the adjacent property; and, be it FURTHER RESOLVED, That the appeal of Ramsey Hill Associatzon _ be and is hereby granted; and, be it FURTHER RESOLVED, That the City Clerk shall mai1. a copy of this� ' resolution to Charles Skrief, President, Ramsey Hill Association, Randal Gegner, the Zoning Administrator, Planning Commission and Board of Zoning Appeals. �, . -3- COUNC[L;�lEN Requested by Department of: Na s ,� J Yeas �tetcher �=LYN� � Drew [(1 FdvOi Masanz Nicosia �^ B scr,etbet _ Against y Tedesco Wilson Adopted b}� Council: Date AUG 1 � 198� Form Appr ed by City Attorn y Certified P� s_c by�-�Council S tar BY B , �. `�✓� —�-``�w- � � ��{� Approved y Mayar or Submission to Council ppprove }� `lavor: Date ""V � b � � . By. i _ By Pt;BUSHED AU G � 5 1984 ; _ / t- � �, , �,�� /�� ST. PAUL CITY COUNCIL PUBI.IC HEARING NOTICE ZONING Property Qwners within 350' ; FIL E N 0. 9688 Representati�ves of Planning District 8 & 16. PAGE PURPOSE Appeal o� Planning Commission's denial of a Change of Non- conforming Use Permit to convert 1 residential unit to reception/catering use (Change from 10 residential units to 9 residential and 1 reception). Present Zoning: RT-2 L 0 C A TI 0 N 318 Surr�nit Ave. (South side between Kellogg and�Western) PETITIONER RANpAL GEGNER H E A R I N G Thursday, January 31 , 1985 lo:oa a.M. Citv Council Chambers, 3rd Floor City Hall - Court House Q U E S TIO N S Zoning 298-4154 (patricia �ames) Contact the Zoning Section of the Planning and Economic Development Department, Room 1101, City Aall Annex, 25 W. 4th Street, St. Paul, Minnesoia 55102 _ . Legal Description: Lots 1 , 2 & 6, Block 69, Drake's Subd. of Lots 14 & 15 Notice sent 1-18-85 �%��-;� �a The following were in the Zoning Committee's Gegner file. The left side is a. current operating statement. The right side is a proposed operatin� sL2tement if he had 9 units and a hostess house. CPF.�iATIhG STATEr�T OPERATZNG STATENSEn'T (p�oposed) 318 Surrmd t 31R Surruni t (Proposed G se) IA COI�� IPdCOr:E - 31 $165 31 $165 , Caretaker �2 Caretaker M �0 ii 2000 �*1r,irm�m 1 175 2 165 2 165 3 175 3 175 4 425 4 425 6 245 ., 6 24�5 7 240 7 240 8 2� � 325 $2 15 ( 31,380 annual) � 3915.00 (�46,9�0.00 annoal) EXPEtiSES EXFE?�SES Interest (at 9;�) �19�350.00 Interest (9�) �19350.00 Taxes 4 929,78 Taxes 49�9.00 Utilities 5 916.00 Utilities 7�00.00 Insurance 1 34s?.00 Znsurance 2400.00 Account./Le�al 250.00 Account./Leeal 1200.00 Advertisin� 115.20 Advertising 1200.CC Maintenance 2 400.00 t?aintenance 2400.00 ti�ater/Sewer 64Fi.00 1•�ater/sewer R00.00 Trash 2�0.00 Trash 400.00 �35,22 .9� �39, �79.7R �ti!�?�uAL LOSS �3846.98 AI�i2CAL CAS�:�L(.�r) 3�300.00 (minimum) ---------____ __-— - 3 O IZ 3 yb 9� �oo 320 t o2o try�o ht'1� �lE �l� 1��'-} ��S ts �1'Ini. c�e �re. �"�'Yt�d" -�ar c�-e.� 5�- �"�1na- �1 tl�1�-. �s nc.a�,�,lcxtid , �t.11n� bu,� �k- 'b�ti.-W�.� �rob�anrv� a�n.. �d1vc� �'. ��s� 9� The following were in the Zoning Committee's Gegner file. 'I'he left side is r. current operating statement. The right side is a proposed operatin� st2tement if he had 9 units and a hostess house. CPFRATIhG STATEI�T OPERATI�+G STAT�MEA'T (p�oposed) 318 Surrnni t 31R Summi t (Proposed li se) IrC01�� Iracor:E - 31 $165 �1 �165 , Caretaker 32 Careteker M ?0 � N 2000 :�.ir.imum 1 175 2 165 2 165 3 175 3 1?5 4 425 4 �25 6 24.5 : 6 2c�5 7 240 ? 240 8 2� £? 32 5 $2 15 ( 31,380 annual) 3915.00 (�46,9R0.00 annval) EXPEtiSES EXFEtiSES Interest (at 9i) �19,350.00 Interest (9�) �19350.00 Taxes 4 929.76 Taxes 4929.00 Utilities 5 916.00 Utilities 7000.00 InsYrance 1 34�?.00 Inst:rance 2400.00 Account.�Le�al 250.00 Account./Leeal 1200.00 Adverti�in� 115.20 Advertising 1200.00 Nisintenance 2 400.00 T:aintenance 24�00.C�0 'v�ater�Sewer 64�£i.00 �'�'a ter/sewer R00.00 Trash 2�0.00 Trash 400.00 �35,22 .9� �39, 79.7�? �A!�?�uAL LOSS �3�46.93 AI�I�LAL CI'S?;�LC;�;i ;,'7300.00 (minimum) ----- _ 3 O I2 3 yb 9� �oo 320 102o vy�o r►t'h �1�1E �1� 1a��{ ��S ts �f1�. c�.a�e �¢. Cvv�."tY�G� �ar c1�.e.c� 5�1Q �-1'1�a- 41t��-. wr�►s t-�.a�l�,Icac�cd . W1n� bu,� �- � -1'1�. � �robtanr�o a�. �b1•K.d �', ��,��=�-��a The following were in the Zoning Committee's Gegner file. T`he left side is a current operating statement. The right side is a proposed operatin� sL2tement if he had 9 units and a hostess house. CPffcATIhG STATEI�T OPERATIhG STATENIEI�'T (p�oposed) 318 SuTmnit 31R Surrunit (Proposed Gse) In COi�iE IPd COr'.E - B1 $165 B1 $165 . Caretaker 32 Caretaker M �0 2; 2000 m.ir.imvm 1 1?5 2 165 2 165 3 175 3 175 4 425 4 425 6 245 : 6 245 ? 240 7 240 8 2� � 32 5 $2 15 ( 31,380 annual) 3915.00 ($46,9�0.00 annaal) EX PEti SES EX FE?�SES Interest (at 9A) �19,350.00 Interest (9�) �19350.00 Taxes 4 929.78 Taxes 4929.00 Utilities 5 916.00 Utilities �000.00 Ins�rance 1 34f?.00 Znsurance 2400.00 Account./Le�al 250.00 Account./Le�al 12Q0.00 " Advertisin� 115.20 Advertisin� 1200.CC Maintenance 2 400.00 riaintenance 2400.Q0 'vJater/Sewer 64£�.00 �,'a ter/spwer �00.00 Trash 2�0.00 Trash 400.00 �35,22 •9� �39, 79.7�? ti!�?�"vAL LQSS �3F346.98 AN1vCAL CF c��L,L:; :,7300.00 (ceinimum) �___ 3 O �Z 3 b 9� �oo 320 1 02o vy�o h11� �E �, 1�1.$y ��s ts �1'1�. cLa:�e �re. C,o�"tYaGr -�ar cl�.e-� �¢- °F"I'1�°- 41b�.t�-�. wu►s ct�t�kx�cd . W1nv� bu� �k- � -�.� p�ror�,w�o o�. �o1•K-� �'- C��j ��1� � � �� tP �� ' �� ° � \ �� _ � , U= / • � W i r � II / ;,:. f ; r i U � � y ; < � _ � i i � , I I � � R �; �aaurv � -- 3nv NF131S3h1 ____ j � �'�•ps� �- . ��t_, � -o i � •.�, 4°0 0� 1� � � I � � "- f f,�� O� � `,r 2 � �� •.` ^ �1S VINI�FfI� ,� � . �`� � ;A. �� * � _ .J - - �. � r � � � r� � ��"'�" � � � 1S NO1JNtbtiVj � G �'_' _ � � I��i � -- � � � � � .� ' e�' � ' . W�:, C1 � _ 'J ', � N -- � `�N\ � �4:{.�� 16 1�M�� .� . � � � �` �[�, � ( !^ , �/ -'� � \�( W I r �'� �'� -;; � � . ,; � �� ; � ; � , s �� ' �� : :��.� , � �_�� i �� R _ � �, �- � ��. �. � . y\ � � °� � � � � 9 � n 3 , � � � � 1 dC1 � � � �� ,�5��%d � � � �� I U �Z i Z I + • � y r � � d � < I ' � I ' 1 1 I !� • � -- y I 't __J j a�rc � 3l�V Nl131S3M ( � � �_�--' . . .�,`�- I �� C� -O '.�2 ^ o � �• � � � �j � . � � ' \ Y, f �7 Q� � 1 ;f � ` �� . . � I � 92 ♦ � � C1 � � �..£ �� 1S VINI`JFiIA � . � �� d �� - � •� - �► � - � - � � � cc�!! � � �1S NOI�JNIbdyj G �� '"�: ..� � , � � � . � L � �� V'J .. �� .' � -__ N 31 - 10 �a �� , , � � � �,. � [� �"' \�, J, � � � .a �\ '�' ��; � � � � :.�; , -� ��- � � � �� ; �'�, ,� � �� r «,� � f � � � ' � .-.� � ` I � � ni-.- . , � �-�. \ � � . � � .. ...:;� � T N � � � � � �� ° �� =��a ._...;��-.-�-- ,�/ � �� C�� N J � �� b��- � 2�'� s �°�'''� '�� _ o�� 1 Ur;�� i4 »- ,�� , � �-�,,�,�-�� 1s s�� '� ,��;�� „�,,�- �� _ �� 5��'� � � ,.� : �� . A�� v /� '� � � � L1� �/� ��v�`��y' �j . �� C��',�,� �/�ti ` � � �� 4 S �1 ��. ,��1 z,� � ��,��v � ,; �' /� �2� �- �� A-� ��p—��'� ��-� �0/� ,�.�or�� p�,�,v��' �� ..: � , �y� .��,�- ,��'� �1 �� ', �� J " / �lA/�✓ l� �or�� p �� ?_� A� ��;� �'� � v� , N�' �3�� y?�� 6 C�' �� c� �,�� . y �� l��z� �� a�� a�;�,�� -�� ;� �,��'� . .. � � � ��-�-� ��" �s�� z��-��►�? 1�'� � �5�� l�l�� . � � �� . � � �� y � , � �- ,�. �,�� 2�`� ��J�'" 'd� '-. � ��L , �� ` ��t � �� 6 - - •uopeqs�u�wpdr uo�un l!(�+�I�NWd 041 �Q 000'oott�t pa+nsui s��unox>e iaqwau y� � �NW 'El�1S3HJOkl S619 X09 'O'd "—� �1V 33111WWO�Jl!lOSI/1d3dfiS 3H11�d1N0� '1N3W31V1S • • l�V!!4 3dVHS �lf10Jl �w31V1S StH1 HlIM 33liDV lON Oa S3afiJld af10A�I 3�NV�ve no�d�� ol � �3alAOHd SI WHO� SIHl � 1V101 � - -:�� ' ' �^`, s �vaa�v��i�a�nr� � `' s 1V QIVd flN3(SMIQ x �". '_r . �, ,� , .. , . . -F UUV ' ��`.��. `..�_'"' "�,. , �'; � 3�f�9�1b1�8 � b..s � � .s-" ^,�* . -. -��:�„'�► �,�„�'"��,�; , .� :a��vfw r�o +s� � ; �N3 3Hl 1V.S��6iI��T�Of �'Idl�l� .. ..-. .�. .. '" � �..,Y' ,.�t .Z � ... .... . ... ..�.w�� ... ..a . . .- , _ . . . . � . . � .. . � w� '1+.•'. . . . �� , . ` .� .��'�� _ ` ._. , , .. . x � ',, ��',��"�'� _ �..�. ��, . ; ": .. �'`� f�Nl� B,.I+fla �� .. a'` �.: ` _:ti w.! � ., , f�.,;� +W�.��'w` Ip��,�g,. , �A�� ' � � S '��'1�.d� . ;- $ � �: s � , d� � S fANV�Il 1N3W31d1S SIHl NI 0311a3ti�lON SIISOd3a '' +aa1/ S 1N3W31t/1S SIHl NO WMQHS..��NY��JNION�-_,._ _. _. : __ _ __ g .ON . � 6L H1NOW • 1Nf10��V Ol a3CJlidH�lON—JNIONH1Slf10 S1.�Vda � �apew ueeq sey ;�sodaP eUl lou .w.taylet�ut 3�o pu�;ol y�gZ-88Z-L09-1 3�ello��e��(ew no�(elosauuiyy ui a�e no�(;i ao '�gg�-�-ppg-�;e uo�;oag iGinbu� �3 ay;��e�ug�na(��(uedwo�ao uosaad ewes ay;woa;s�(ep pg�(.iane aouo igea� le (s)s�uno�os 3;eap aasys ao e�eys mo�(o;sl!sodep;�eaip aney oi PaBue��e aney no�({I — s3�sodsQ PazNoy�nQa.�d BuMlaaab s��qu�aW o1 a�1WN •uw�eB�lsenui�no e�e�d -woo ol sn'sa�e3 3!ew��ay�6u��np�(auow ayl;o asn aney II!nn no�(;eya os'ao�aa ui si�uiyl no�(iunowe ay;ao{;uno��e ano�t;ipa��e� � ��iM ar► 'siy;op ol s�(ep ssauisnq p� uey� aaow a�e; ann ;� •�(�;dwad ao�aa�(ue l�aaao� ��inn pue �uie�dwo� ano�t a�eBi;senui ��inn eM •�oaaa pei�adsns ay��o lunowe aelloP 843 sn Uel (E) •uoi�ew�o;ui a�ow paau no�(�(ynn�o �aaa ue si a�ey;anai�eq no�(�ty�n uso no�(se�(��ea�o se uie�dxa pu�'lnoqe aansun a�e no�(�a;suea;ay;ao�a�a ay�aquosea ,(Z) - ��aqwnu;unoo�e pus eweu�no�(sn ��al (�) •pe�eaddg wa�qad�o�o��a ayl y�iynn uo;uawa�els 1Slil� ay� no�t lues ann�aue s�(ep pg uey�ae;e�ou no�( i.uoa; ` asey�snw aM•;uawa�els ay�uo�a;suea�e�noqe uoi;ewao�ui a�ow paeu no�(;i ao Buann si luawe;els�no�(�uiy3 no�t;i 'uso no�(ss uoos se �06SS NW 'aalsayooa 'S619 xoe •p•d .uoiufl 3!Pea� I�aapa� saa�(o�dw3 e�uawy P!W W91 le sn elunn ao g£SZ-88Z-LOS-I ie uoi3�eS ti!nbu� �3 ey;auoydelel Sli3�SNdal �INOal�3l3 aftOJl 1f108d SNOIlS3f1� a0 Sa0lia3 �O 3Sd� NI , \ ;'�.. . � , . • . ��-�� -�,� -� y �-v�-��,�'-�r. ; �, L2-� =-�.,, �(. ; � _ � �d� -� ��zopoau Z �y _�' -,� � -�-,�-��'� `�;��. jJ <J C� � ` "� yf ;I'-�" _> ,_ �� :��, �� / �/ . i 1py��e �o� - \,.�' .-� 1 '� I i' -- \ �.a .a �.,y��, �. � ; '1CI��.z��, ts �� U � .��,� � _ � Tau .�uzaq uo r_?_d:a�a.z � �_r.cu�T.n sc.�d .z�ali � ��z, dzu�:.zou�+no :llt! `�L?T.7Tl?� vL(.Il �. OL? _l_'� ° S?t01.-`�C�7��.I c��},:LT:-[ .�0,�. S��?(1�CT11.T'"iLIT` tJLi';; :��(�YIO.:C`� STiOTa�?li • C`_?_ .ACO �_S.Z1 � `1,_ ��3;-t��.Z 3GITT '."��,T_;. %'lIT.�Y? ' S.Z?3�3[� ��f�_U . T� . .� LI 1= . �- - , . Q C'i� ZO;� 81'1L[?^�f �T_TilU:'c1� C�T� :�.=3 1�`_?..Xc^�C�Ci.TC� "vi,{:�. �`c�tTl�`O �)�.�;Lt gT,%C�ri.iL ��.�O�:�Ga��T� � Z 10 Z a C i�;"1 �-C t�.'�d �-S `i_c7�.z;-S u�rfi�� 1;�3�� . Q��d �78b� �y ��znl� p��=.i�' --'r�� 1 �°�-�ay� ' PARTII-------------------------------------------------------------------------- , REALVAL PRO-FORMA OPERATING STATEMENT 31$ SUMMIT AVENUE --------------------------------------------------------------------------- ' YEAR 1 z 3 4 S _^_ ^ POT. GROSS INCOME ..9000 30450 31973 33571 35�30 VACANCY S COLLECTION 1450 13i3 1399 1679 1762 , EFFECTIVE GRO55 INC. ?7550 �89�6 30374 31893 33487 OPERA7ING EXPENSES 14008 15400 17000 17708 17786 OPERATING INCOME 13550 13528 13374 14193 15787 , DEBT SERVICE 46843 46843 46843 46843 46843 LEASE PAYMENTS 0 0 0 0 0 PARTICIPATION 0 0 0 0 0 AOOITIONAL FINANCING 0 0 0 0 0 , BALLOON PAYMENT 0 0 0 0 0 POINTS 0 8 0 0 0 BEFORE TAX CASN FLOW -33c^93 -33315 -33469 -3�650 -310Sb ' ---------------------------------------�----------------------------------- OPERATING INCOME 13330 133�8 13374 14193 iS78� LEASE PAYMEN75 0 0 0 0 0 PARTICIPATION 0 0 0 0 0 ' INTEREST 4S$3� 4571b 45360 �►5383 45181 DEPRECIATION 3�306 3�308 3�500 3�500 3c^S00 AMORTIZED POINTS 0 0 0 0 0 ' TAXABLE INC4ME -6480� -64688 -64686 -63690 -61894 fEDERA� INCOME TAk -91480 -6469 -6469 -6369 -6189 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- ' TAX_RELATED_CASH-F�04t5_/_OPERATIONS_ONLY___________________________________ BEFORE TAX CASH FLOW -33293 -33313 -33469 -3�630 -31056 ' FEOERAL_INCOME_TAX-__-__=91480 -6469 -6469 -6369 -6189 AFTER TAX CASH FLOW 56187 -26847 -�7000 -�6^c81 -24866 ----------------------------------------------- TAX RELATED CASH FLOWS / OPERATIONS AND REVERSION ' BEFORE TAX CASN FLOW 141?88 16$938 1980�4 ��9657 2b3736 FEDERAL INCOME TAX -y079 74753 6878ti 6314� 57814 ' AFTER_TAX_CASH_FL04_-___145286 94185 1�9�38 166515 c^899s^2 ----- --------------------------------------------- PROFITABILITY MEASURES --------------------------------------------------------------------------- t6EFORE TAX IRR -,'�6. 07 -14. 27 -9. 67 -6. 99 -5. 09 AFTER TAX IRR -�3. 93 -1t. 91 -6. 77 -3. 15 -8. 81 AFTER TAX NPV -SS�18 -54334 -5457� -55073 -55339 ' --------------------------------------------------------------------------- ' ' 1 ' ��--�,��,.,�9�i --------------------------------------------------------------------------- ' REALVAL REVERSION INFORMATION 318 SUMMIT AVENUE --------------------------------------------------------------------------- ' YEAR _1__ ` 3 _____�__________S__ -^-------^- SELLING PRICE 366508 5948�5 6�4566 655793 688384 SELLING COSTS 33990 35698 37474 39348 41313 ' MORTGAGE BALANCE 358009 35688� 355599 354139 35�478 PENAtTY / PARTIC 0 0 0 8 8 BTCF FROM REVERSION 174501 �0�253 �31493 26�388 �9479� ---------------------------------------^-------^--------------------------- SELLING PRICE 3663A0 3948�5 6�4566 635795 688584 SELLING CO5T5 33998 35690 37474 39348 41315 ' ADJUSTEO BASIS 517560 476580 435500 394500 3S3S00 TOTAL GAIN �R LO55 13810 8�636 15159� ��1947 293769 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- RECAPTURE - SEC 1245 0 @ 0 8 0 ' RECAPTURE - SEC 1�58 8 0 0 0 0 CAPITAL GAIN 13010 8ib36 15159� c^�1947 293769 ORDINARY L055 0 0 0 0 0 ' TOTAL GAIN OR LOSS __15010______8_636_____iSi59�_____�21947_____293769_ UNAMORTIZEO POINTS 0 8 0 0 8 ATCF FROM REVERSION 87099 1�1032 156�36 19�796 �30789 ' --------------------------------------------------------------------------- , --------------------------------------------------------------------------- , PERFORMANCE MEASURES __318 SUMMIT AVENt1E ---------------------------------------------------------------------- YEAR 1 2 3 4 S ' ----------------------------------------^---------------------------------- MORTGAGE BA�ANCE 358809 35688� 335399 354139 332476 EST. SELLING PRICE 566500 594823 6�4566 655795 688584 ' DEBT COVERAGE RATIO 0. �9 8. 29 0. 29 0. 30 0. 34 LOAN BpL lORIG VpLUE 0. 65 0. 65 0. 65 0. 64 8. 64 LOAN BAL /CURR VA�UE 0. 63 0. 60 0. 57 0. 34 0. 51 ' BEFORE TAX CF/EQUITY -0. 17 -0. 17 -0. 18 -0. 17 -0. 16 AFTER TAX CF /EQUITY 0. 38 -0. 14 -0. 14 -0. 14 -0. 13 CURRENT VALUE / PGI 19. 53 19. 53 19. 53 19. 53 19 . 53 O. I . / CURRENT VALUE 8. 0� 0. 0� 0 . 0� 0. 0� 0. 0� ' MARGINAL RETURN -�3. 93 8. 14 6. 78 6. 58 b. 81 REINV. RATE OF RETURN -0. 86 A. 07 0. 90 1 . 47 1 . 9� LENDER' S R. O. R. 1�. 79 1i. 79 1�. 79 1c^. 79 1�. 79 ' --------------------------------------------------------------------------- ' , ' --_ � �,F,yJ �� --------------------------------------------------------------------------- REALVAL DEPRECIATION SCHEDULES 318 SUMMIT AVENUE ' --------------------^------------------------------------------------------ LAND VALUE i5: .c0000 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY INFORMATION FOR ALL DEPRECIABLE ASSETS IYEAR------------------------i----------�----------3----------4----------3-- ------------------------------------------------------------------------- ' TOTAL TAX CREDIT 85880 0 0 0 e ITC RECAP. POT. 0 68000 51000 34008 17680 TOT. OEPR. NOT ALL4WED ' IN_YEAR_OF_SALE--------------0----------0----------0----------0------------ 0 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- REALVAL DEPRECIATION SCHEDUlES ASSET M 1 ' COST BASIS 190008 ----------------3-- YEAR 1 � 3 4 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- ' BEGINNING BASIS 190000 177333 164667 13�000 139333 DEPRECIATION CLAIMED 1�667 12667 12667 1�667 12667 UNOEPRECIATED BAL. 177333 164667 iS�000 139333 1:6667 ' BASIS FOR SALE 177333 164667 152000 139333 126667 INV. TAX CRED. TAKEN 0 0 0 0 0 ITC RECAPTURE 8 0 0 0 0 ' --------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------- ' REAIVAL DEPRECIATION SCHEDULES ASSET N 2 COST BASIS 3�►000� ' ----------------------------i----------�--------------------------------s-- YEAR 3 y --------------------------------------------------------------------- ' BEGINNING BASIS 297500 �77667 �57833 �38000 218167 DEPRECIATION CLAIMED 19833 19833 19833 19833 19833 UNOEPRECIATEO BAL. 277667 ?57633 �38000 ?18167 198333 BASIS FOR SALE 328167 �91833 �63500 �35167 �86833 ' INV. TAX CRED. TAKEN 85800 0 0 0 0 ITC RECAPTURE 0 68000 51000 34000 1�000 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ' ' ' ' � ��s�-�� ------------------------------------------------------- REALVAL SUMMARY LOAN AMORTIZATION SCHEDULE 318 SUMMIT AVENUE ---------------------------------------�----------------------------------- YEAR 1 � 3 4 S --------------------------------------------------------------------------- INTEREST 4385^c 43716 45568 43383 45191 ' PRINCIPAL 991 1127 1�83 1460 16�2 TOTAL PAYMENT 4b643 46$43 46843 46843 46843 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- ' ' ' --------------------------------------------------------------------------- REALVAL PURCHASE PRICE SUMMARY 318 SUMMIT_AVENUE ' PURCHASE PRICE IS ---s---------------------------------------------------- 550000 E4UITY INVESTMENT I5= f 191000 ' --------------------------------------------------------------------------- , ' ' ' ' ' ' ' , '