The URL can be used to link to this page

280475 WHIT - CITV CLERK ��(� CA Y - DEPAR MENT COl1[IC1I j/`�� BLUI - MAVOR GITY OF SAINT PAUL �File NO. '`�� J � � ' esolution J Presented By Referred To Committee: Date Out of Committee By Date WHEREAS, David Van Landschoot applied to the Board of Zoning Appeals for a variance from the strict application of the provisions of Section 61.101 of the Saint Paul Zoning Code pertaining to a mini�num frontage and side yards required to construct a duplex in an RT-1 zoning district for property located at 1244 Lincoln; and WHEREAS, Following a public hearing with notice to affected property owners, the Board of Zoning Appeals by its Resolution 9322 adopted March 22, 1983 varied the provisions of Section 61.101 so as to allow the construction of a duplex on Lot 6 , Block 5, Stinson' s Boulevard Addition, with a 40 foot frontage and a nine foot side yard except that the bay window area may project inta the required east side yard two feet on the property based upon the following findings of fact: (1) The request for a variance is based on the exceptional physical condition of the property. The parcel is unusually narrow and deep with unique topography. (2) Strict application of the code regulations would result in exceptional practical difficulty as distinguished from mere inconvenience by reason of the existing conditions of the property. A duplex structure cannot be built in this two-family residential district without a variance. (3) The request for a variance can be granted without sub- stantial detriment to the community or the intent of the Code. (4) The request for a variance could be granted without sub- stantial detriment to the neighbors' supply of light and air, health, safety or property values. The proposed development meets density and required number of off-street parking spaces required by code. The two-story building proposed would be architecturally compatible with neighboring structures. The major portion of the structure COUNGLMEN Requested by Department of: Yeas Nays Fletcher ceu� In Favor Masanz Nicosia scneibei __ Against BY Tedesco Wilson Adopted by Council: Date JUN 1 4 1983 Form App ed by C' Atto ney Certified Yassed by Council Secretary BY By /�pproved by Mavor: Date _ Approv y May r r Submission to Council By By PUBL{SHED JUN 2 5 i983 M�Hi�"E - CITV CLERK �{ {�-.Y��$ C.4�ARV - OEPARTMENT GITY OF SAINT PALTL COU�ICII ' , (��. ��Y}J BLUE - MAVOR File NO. � ' Council Resolution Presented By Referred To Committee: Date Out of Committee By Date meets the nine foot setback requirement and only a bay window area projects into the required side yard. (5) The request for variance does not appear to be based primarily on a desire for economic gain. WHEREAS, Pursuant ta the provisions of Section 64.205 James E. and Mary Long duly filed their appeal from this 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 said Board of Zoning Appeals; and WHEREAS, Acting pursuant to Sections64.205 through 64.208 and notice to appellant and other affected property owners, a public hearing was duly conducted by the City Council on April 21st and May 24, 1983 wherein all interested parties were given an opportunity to be heard; and WHEREAS, The Council having heard the statements made and having considered the variance application, 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 affirm the decision of the Board of Zoning Appeals in this matter and does hereby concur in the findings made and determined by said Board; and, be it FURTHER RESOLVED, That the appeal of James and Mary Long be and is hereby denied; and, be it FURTHER RESOLVED, That the City Clerk shall mail a copy of this resolution to James and Mary Long, David Van Landschoot, the Zoning Administrator, Planning Commission and the Board of Zoning Appeals. COUNCILMEIV Requested by Department of: Yeas Nays Fletcher � GaO� [n Favor Masanz Nicosia scne�bei � __ Against BY Tedesco Wilson Adopted by Council: Date J� 1 4 ��{ Form Appr v by City ttor y Certified P s e b} C uncil ret BY By /lpproved avor: Date JUN � 5 1983 Appro d y Mayor Submission to Council By � �� • BY PUBUSNED J UN 2 5 i983 (RETURN TO JEROME SEGAL AFTER ADOPTION) �'+HITE - CiTV CI.Ei+K ` PINK - FINANCE COUCIC11 p.�� CANARr - OEPARTr,�ENT GITY QF SAINT PAUL BLUE - MqYOR . Flle ♦'0. � .l\ Council �esol�tion Presented By Referred To Committee: Date Out of Committee By Date WHEREAS, David Van Landschoot applied to the Board of Zoning Appeals for a variance from the strict application of the provisions of Section 61. 101 of the Saint Paul Zoning Code pertaining to a minimum frontage and side yards required to construct a duplex in an RT-1 zoning district for property located at 1244 Lincoln; and WHEREAS, Following a public hearing with notice to affected property owners, the Board of Zoning Appeals by its Resolution' 9322 adopted March 22, 1983 varied the provisions of Section 61.101 � so as to allow the construction of a duplex on Lot 6 , Block 5, Stinson' s Boulevard Addition, with a 40 foot frontage and a nine foot side yard except that the bay window area may project into the required east side yard two feet on the property based upon the following findings of fact: (1) The request for a variance is based on the exceptional physical condition of the property. The �parcel is unusually narrow and deep with unique topography. (2) Strict application of the code regulations would result in exceptional practical difficulty as distinguished from mere inconvenience by reason of the existing conditions of the property. A duplex structure cannot be built in this two-family residential district without a variance. (3} The request for a variance can be granted- without sub- stantial detriment to the community or the intent of the Code. (4) The request for a variance could be granted without sub- stantial detriment to the neighbors ' supply of light and air, health, safety or property values. The proposed development meets density and required number of off-street parking spaces required by code. The two-story building proposed would be architecturally compatible with neighboring structures. The major portion of the structure COUf�1CIL1tEN Reqnested by Department of: Yeas ti ays Fletcher Galles In Favor Masanz Nicosia Scheibel __ Against BY Tedesco W ilson , Form Approved by City Attorney Adopted by Cuurei!: Date Certi;ie�d P�,s<<ed b•, Council Secretary - BY B�; . Approved b} 1�i�,v�r; Date _ Approved by Mayor for Submission to Council _ - -- -- , � - . _ -- _.._ . WHITE - CiTV CLE�iK � � �E,i.p��'�� PINK - FINANCE COUnCIl "- 'c,f�i: CANARY - DEPARTMENT GITY OF SAINT PAUL BLUE — r.�AVOR File NO. � C'ouncil �eso�ution � Presented By Referred To Committee: Date Out of Committee By Date meets the nine foot setback requirement and only a bay window area projects into the required side yard. (S) The request for variance does not appear to be based primarily on a desire for economic gain. WHEREAS, Pursuant to the provisions of Section 64 . 205 James E. and Mary Long duly filed their appeal from this 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 said Board of Zoning Appeals; and . WHEREAS, Acting pursuant to Sections64.205 through 64. 208 and notice to appellant and other affected property owners, a public hearing was duly conducted by the City Council on April 21st and May 24 , 1983 wherein all interested parties were given an opportunity to be heard; and � WHEREAS, The Council having heard the statements made and having considered the variance application, 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 affirm the decision of the Board of Zoning Appeals . in this matter and does hereby concur in the findings made and determined by said Board; and, be it • FURTHER RESOLVED, That the appeal of James and Mary Long be and is hereby denied; and, be it FURTHER RESOLVED, That the City Clerk shall mail a copy of this resolution to James and Mary Long, David Van Landschoot, the Zoning Administrator, Planning Commission and the Board of Zoning Appeals. -2- COUNCILI4EN Requested by Department of: Yeas NaS�s Fletcher Gatles In Favor Masanz �:icosia Scheibei __ Against BY Tedesco V.'ilson � Form Approved by City Attorney Adopted M� Co�ncil: Date Certified F'�,ss.ed by Council Secretary BY B�: Approved bt 'v+a�or. Date Approved by Mayor for Submission to Council ' r « �`'� .}. ' \ ��i+��A, ` _ � , ` , r ( • �'r �.} , _ - , , ti F rt; \ �: r `` i" I � • � �, , ;• . � - , , • $ �� , �#4 ,�,, �# ��:� _ . � . . . . ' . .R'.. � � .. . � . � . . ! f ;; . . � April 21, 1983 • � � --;, ; • - . � , , . . . - . . ' -:iS:.� . . � , ' ' _ . r ' I . . f � .. � ��}�;�, � - �'.�'. . � x # (�� . • .. � � . ' � - . - � � i . . S �..�. . : . . ' . �. �Staff, Zoniag Sec�ioa . ,, r, City Hall At�ne�c , ' ,, . , . , ;� ' �. ires . . , , � The CiCq Council todaq laid over untiY Maq 24th , the, appeal oi � : �_ ; Ja'�oea and Mary Lang to a decisiou of the Board of Zqniug Appeals - ahic� gran�ed tlie appl3caticsn of Dsvid Van Landschoot !or a var3.ance . i- ' at 1244 Liacoln Avenue. , _ . . � . . . � . . � , I . . . � , r . . � � � . ' � ��-. - � � ' ' _ V@l�t, Cxt�1y yOtitBs . . , . � ' , � ` � - �, , Albert B._.Ol�son � CiEy Qerk ; . - , �, ABOiba � , . , : . �•, . � . � � � .. � ... . � ' � . . . ' .. . � . . ' � . ' i.. � . .. ' . /. � . .. . ' . . . . . _ \ .. . . . . ' . ' . . � �. . . � � . . - ' , . . ,v . , . � . . .. . ' . . � R . ' \: . . . . � - - ''� . . . . . . . , . . � ... . . . . , ' . . . ., . . . . . � . . � . �. I. . . . .. . . . . . � . � " ' ' ' . , i ' � . . .� . � � . . ' ' . . . /: " . . ' . . . . : - � . ' .' .1 . . . . . . . ' ' . , . . . . . . . �\ � .. � . � . . . . � � .. � � . . . . . � . � . � . .. . . � . . . , � . 1 ' � . . , , • �. ��s��,� CiT! � � • . ., �� r ��f�� `R° �.°r� CITY OF SAINT PAUL ° ''`= DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT � � u um ,� �r,`r �__ �'� �e'-' ' DIVISION OF PLANNING 4� �, 0 25 Wesl Fourth Street,Saint Paul.Minnesota 55102 ��v�'� 612-292-1577 GEORGE LATIMER MAYOR April 5, 1983 Albert Olson, City Clerk Room 386, City Hall St. Paul , Minnesota 55102 RE: Zoning File #9322 - VanLandschoot City Council Hearing: Apri1 21 , 1983 PURPOSE: To consider an appeal of a Board of Zoning Appeals decision granting a variance of minimum lot frontage and side yard setback to construct a 2-unit structure at 1244 Lincoln Avenue. BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS DECTSION: Approve (5-0) STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve SUPPORT: Applicant testified; owner of property testified. OPPOSITION: 3 people testified - two petition letters (total of 23 individuals signed) . Dear Sir: On February 27, 1983 and March 8, 1983 the Board of Zoning Appeals held a public hearing on the application of David Van Landschoot to consider a variance of minimum frontage and side yard to construct a 2-unit residential building at 1244 Lincoln. The staff recommendation was for approval . The applicant and the owner of the property testified in support. Three individuals testified in opposition and two petition letters were submitted (attached) . The applicant based the variance request on the following three factors : 1 ) The physical condition of the property and relationship to adjacent property made a duplex an appropriate land use of the site. 2) The duplex structure proposed is architecturally compatible with the neighborhood character. 3) A desire to provide affordable housing at this site is better met with a duplex structure. The Board made these findings . On March 21 , 1983, James E. and Mary Long filed an appeal of the Board's decision on the grounds that: 1 ) Granting the variance violates the intent of the code. 2) The Board of Zoning Appeals was not made aware of District Housing Plan comments concerning the site. 3) No credence was given to the petition letters in opposition. 4) One Board member made affirmative statements even though he abstained from the vote on grounds of potential conflict of interest. 5) Past zoning history and City action. 6) Alleged that motive is primarily based on desire for economic gain. 7) Decision was arbitrary and capricious and conflicted with Comprehensive Plan elements. � � � • . , � ' Zoning File #9322 - Van Landschoot City Council Hearing: April 21 , 1983 Page 2 This matter is scheduled to be heard by the City Council on April 21 , 1983. Please notify me by April 20, 1983 if any member of the City Council wishes to have slides of the site presented at the public hearing. Sincer ly, � � Fred S. Haider Zoning Section FSH/mb attachments . . . . . . . . . . e; . . , � . . . . . . . . ..f . , . . . . . � � . . . � . . . � � � j� .. . .. ' � . .. , - . �- . . . . ". . . � f \; 1.. .� . . . . � � , • � . . 1 . . �. . _ . Jy/�//�� . . . .._�. � , . �' �� ' . , . � . � '. . . . �lI / ..�,�j �/ . . ` . , �/� �! �� . l G� � � o , - . ,�� . , . . , . . , � , , , , . , , , . � ;� , _ ; . • May 24, 1983 . ; . , . , Hr. Bd Starr ' ' , - � _ City Atta�nsq � ' �oo, 624, City Hall � �_ �: APF��of J�rmes s�nd Msrq Long to a�dacisipa af the Board , o�`fZo�tin$ ApPeala Which g�aated tha appl�cation of.Devid _ �"� Y�" Landschoot for a �variaace at:1244 Liacala �va. . ; `� , . . . , .� Dear,Sirt � ' , �,: , , ; , Prtpsratit�a of a reao�ut�4n denying Chs abo�►e•yc�!lsseu��d.ra� 1 , ,r:�ues.te�d bg ths City,Council at �he3r May 24th,_ 1�t83 :al�stisi�, ` � - � � � � , � , � � ' � �Ver�►�trvily� yr�u•rs, � ' � � � �� ' � , � ' �. � Alb4rt�.8. OTsoa . r ` . . � CiLy Clerk . , '. � , ' � MHS s l�a � � ' � . . � , , ; ' , At`Cacli.� . • • � `cc: Planniag S tsf f � . . , i J . . . f . . -, _ ' � /� . . ' f ' . � - , : . • ; , �� : � � . , .. , . - . - � � \ • _ . , — � � � � , " � . _ ' ` s . . p:: � . . �.. , - �_ . . . . ' ,/ r.. . � . ' , .. ,� � . �V' / xd�7`/ . " � . � � � ' . .. . , . . Q'�-(l . . �� . r ' , , , - . � , ` • . ; ' . / . �. � . • :� . • � . y�.. . . . ' � ' . - � - . . . . ' � . ' , , ", �• . � � . . � - . - - .. � � � � . . . � . � � .�.' .. . � . . � ; - . - . . . . � �, � � , .� � � - .• . �/' � . . � � 4 � . • � . � , ' . . ' . , `�r"� , Juns'1�, 1983 . . . _ . � � � , . , ;- , � . . , � . �� , . , � , ' � � . . , - � . Mr. Aav�id Vam Laurdechoot • � • � 124� L�coln Ave�uq ' • i - � St. Paul. Mi�esota- 55105 - : . . , Dear Sirs , � . . , . . , A��s�c�4d for your-i�fotmstio:t is a copy of Cota�ci� `F31e Na. 284475 p�rta�3�tg � to rn ag�eal to tha Bo+�ut'd of Zon g Appeal�.regardfng pioperty�st 12h4 Lin�ole : : ,, , Avenu�. � . ' " Viry Ls�ly pouxa, � . - , • ,. � - ' - ' � � , \� " ' . 1' r, ., � AlbQ�� 8. Olson , j . , , '. CiCy Cl�rk ` _ • I , , � . . , . . . ABOtth ' : , , ' , • ; . . , , . . .Attactm�sat _ � _ , _ , � . � ec: 3amea aud �1ary Long • I � . ; . ` ' . Zoning Administrator � ' ' . . , " plaaaiag Comoaiesion ; . • , '' , � . Bo�ra of Eiai3n8 APPesl� � � � , _ ; . , , �� ., � . � . . . . � . . . 4�. � � . . . � � � . . � . . . . � , . , . . . . . �. . , . . � . ... . . . '�V . . , . . .. � ' .. ' - . , . ' . � .� �. , . ' , � � � , . i , . ' � . _ :.� � , ;. , . .� . . . -; , . . :. . , � , , : _ ; . � , � _ . �,, . , , _ �, , - � � . ; , . ,. , . . . . _ ' . . . . . . . � . ,� .. . .. . . . . . � . _. � . � . ' �-i �t . _ . . ... ... . , . . � . . . . . . � . . � .,. . � . . . � � . . � ,�... .�. ' •. . . .. . .�: O• '� . ' . � . . ' . � . . . . � . . . ... . _ _ .. _ _ • _ . . _ ;�� _ . . ,.._ ,, / � � . . . _ APP�ICATION FOft APPEAL ,',� . . :_ p :,_,;'; ZONING OFFICE USE ONLY CITY OF SAINT PAUL P��'�,� '' _ � F i 1 e � i��3 .� � r �� ` �, Appl ication Fee $ ,�Q -CD�"'! " $ . L:, r s>� � � _`�•� 5� ,`4 � ..'�° ✓� i;'°'.�.-`'i Tentative Nearing Date A�p 1 i cat i on i s hereby made for an Appeal to the � �� t`�U f1C i 1 under the provisions of Chapter 64, Section , rar gra'h �f the Z�niray Code to appeal a decision made by the � Board of Zoning Appeals r�� Planning Commission on ��r`,�� 53 , 19�� _ Zoning Administrator (date of decision) _ Planning Administrator _ Other fi. APPELLANT -� hame ��C�i�'1� ; �_ . ��nd ��C�� / ��(1Q Daytime phone �'� `�-- 3'+�`�� P,ddress � '� �� GC� t"�iG�"1 •A �' �- Zip Code `��/n `� B. DECISION BEING APPEALED \/ ` Zoning file name YCc-(; �—Cl..f;�SCf1CGt Zoning File # �✓3 ��-� Aroperty Address/Location � � '-�-� L—( ��C�=� �� •� �`L • ' �� ! ��'� /�l J� Legal description LC;�� G: , '�IC�C-�< .� ��fJl i�Sc'!� } c n • C. GROUNDS FQR APPEAL (Use additional sheets if necessary.) (txplain 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 Commission. ) � C'_C-_ C L�C'�C I1 C-'t� ._.. ._�_._._ .,_. .._ ...___:- _. __ _._. ,. . _. _- , . �� _�_ �, _ < � , If you have any questions, please contact: � ` � �"�� ^" `� �4�i ��l�L�l- �I�� , ��Applicant 's signat�re '� � � St. Paul Zoning Office 1100 City Hall Annex � $3 ��i .?, 25 West Fourth Street �.�__ � Saint Paul , Minnesota 55102 Date City agent (298-4154) 9/82 .�s � � ��'� . Girounc3s For Appeal 1. To grant such a variance �,,�uld violate the intent and purpose of the Zoning Ordinance in that: a) It �uld be detrimental to the general u�lfare of the comrnznity. ' b) It would deprive the adjacent residences of adequate light, air and privacy. c) It �uld depreciate current property values. d) It �uld overcrowd the Iand with buildings. e) 1Vo consideration was given to an already serious and potentially hazardous parking situation. 2. The Board Of Zoning Appeals did not bring out the fact that the District 14 Housing Develo�xxrent Plan which was approved by the City Cauncil stated that the lot at 1244 Lincoln Avenue was too small for a house or duplex on this property. We, in the neighborhood�w�re not aware of this plan until after the variance had been grantedo (See Attached) 3. Ne credence was given by the Board Of Zoning Appeals t� a petition signed by 23 adjacent property owners opposing the variance. 4. The same variance appeal has been turned down in the past by }�oth the Board Of Zoning Appea7.s and the City Council. �o One rrezr�r of the Board Cf Zaning Appeals abstained from wting en the variance on the grounds of conflict cf interest as he was inwlved in the sale cf sai� property. However, before the wtE was taken, he made several affirmative statements in favor of the variance. 6. According to Zoning Ordinance 64.205, "No variance shall be granted where the request for the variance is based primarily on a desire to increase the value or income potential of the parceZ of land." 7. The decision of the Board Of Zoning Appeals was arbitrary and capricious and conflicted with the Distxict 14 Housing Development Plan which had been adopted by the District 14 Co�lunity Council and approved by the St. Paul City Council as part of the city's Comprehensive Plan. _....._. ,._.. . ....:.__ . ._.._ . . _ �_ _ � .., . ' �� ` i ; � , � -`p° �.r � .. .. ..._ ._ . � :��:� f;�i!':,�� ;' 1 j�� .:J I.,��`. . � . :��3 �7 � �t_ . . i:�-' t'f..p,.. ._ .. .. :. l ��:BC Q . . . . , ��.Y��-'�� . � DIST�r2i C i i 4 i��+L :_ -'�;, _ :�u NCUS?FWa D�1'�'�G�'��r i GF�'OKTU4ITY FvR �HE i°80'S C�d F�S'. �:�;,;-: ^-,;. VA�."�'v i Lt.�'J SiTES District ; '� i�,c� �:et:.re��ce ;,urren± De��e'c;.�Ter.t Recc�r�enC�d �eve i e:,. ^nt ," a� - -; ' � � 0` '� ? Ca�'�1tY ��' n� �' -c `. '\, �_ 1' � • •. � � 2. . 1 i 3. " } G, 1 1 ; ,,-• �;—Y 7 ,�� t�.��,�:i 2 � � > ' p, i T�r °l(!l<:t�-t'iiJ Z ;, 7. � j _. 8. 1 —._l . To*al ;�umber . 12 units 7 units 12 X .60 = 7 units m�nimu� .. _ ._ _ : _ .��.�� f � _ .> i---�. �� " :� --1 00 V Q1 � 3 �-h� � cT ro r � -z m -z r� � � n � � - � � r' r v� ro., , �. r-- cn �. ' cn A x .s� cn c. .� a � � o �• n. ' O < �• O ct C O < f7 N . f� c-+ !'J • (D � l0 • —+al (D O 1� SL !D � • U] ...+• N • � 1� t�' c-t ct (D � � �. ..... O c+ 01 O G+ � .A � --.+ G a � c� �� .�� rn -�� rn °i _, C") N C7 � I I V J � V N —i+ C O -� .� �"f C � Ol � � � C �--�O -S J. tD "S t'_ � � o � o � o � � Q, Q, I �. ...�. �. � �n n � � rr rr a. ! � � � � H � � ` . �. . � � N , -h '-h -fi < V1 ct ct c-h c-t (D c'f' fD .� � N O c'S � � � SL`� C t�JI J _, NI�--� --� ��W -� C � J. N N tn O c+ 1� ct . !D � (D � � � D D � � � � ca N C � Z z z Q' -' � A � v' _' J^�t' 4` L7 � z Z Z � n a n -�•� a.-s � �c -<-v -� -� � rD -s lD (D O N �. v� tn p . O -S 'S -�•� C7 rp ..... - �`C N c-t . � �" J� Cn N 1 --� O C1. • � .�.� �C � c-f� L � �. �, � � J �.__� n � . .. � � n 0 � J J � LL �D �D � C � � C C� fD GL � � n � � J. J. �• O C�' � � �� . O• l'� n .� � � C'} 1 - �+ f o, r n� ( -� � -.•� o S Cl. -�� fi � C (D d. fD = "''• I � � J � � � n � .. � � `J• � � � �� j 'Z C� -fi N O Q+ 7c' fD �T ..J. � c'f' � N � Q"n tn O G� � ---� � LL -� � fD � � � "S tn n. C� O O O � - • c-f C � "� . � � (/1 V t17 (D ` � I ��c: � • � � . + � � � � � . ��#��r�� ; . . . ' � � ci��y of saint paul . b��.r� of �on�ng a��ls re�olu�ion - zo�ing fil� n�mber 9322 (�� `March 22, 1983 WHEREAS, DAVID VAN LANDSCHOOT has applied for a variance from the strict application of the provisions of Section 61 .101 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code pertaining to minimum frontage and side yards required to construct a duplex in an RT-1 zoning district; and WHEREAS, the Saint Paul Board of Zoning Appeals conducted a public hearing •on February 22, 1983 and March 8, 1983, pursuant to said appeal in accordance with the requirements of Section 64.204 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 followirg findings of fact: l . The request for variance is based on the exceptional physical condition of tr�e property. The parcel is unusually narrow and deep with unique topography. 2. Strict application cf the code regulations would result in exceptional practical difficulty as distinguished from mere inconvenience by reason of the existing conditions of the property. A duplex structure cannot be built in this two-family residential district without variance. 3. The request for variance can be granted without substantial detriment to the community or the intent of the code. 4. The request for variance can be granted without substantial detriment to the neighbors ' supply of light and air, health, safety or property values . The proposed development meets density and required number of off-street parking spaces required by code. The two-story building proposed would be architecturally compatible with neighboring structures . The major portion of the structure meets the 9 foot setback requirement. Only a bay window area Grojects into the required side yard. 5. The request for variance does not appear to be based primarily on a desire for economic gain. PJOW, 1�NEREFORE, BE IT RESOLUED, by the Saint Paul Board of Zoning Appeals that the provisions of Section 61 .101 be hereby waived to allow construction of a duplex on Lot 6, Block 5, Stinson's Blvd. Addition with a 40' frontage and 9' side yard except that the bay window area may project into the required east side yard 2' on property describe as 1244 Lincoln, in accordance vrith the application for variance and the site plan on file with the St. Paul Planning Division. �'jQ�/�d b�/ Mr. Peterson ��c�nded by �ir. Woods _ E n �avor 6 � �gainst . � SEE REVERSE SIDE FOR: TIME LIPfIT/APPEAL/CERTIFICATION ��iai 1 ed hlarcn 2.5, 1933 � v - • _ _ ��!��`��_ MINUTE$ OF THE MEETIPlG OF THE QOARD OF ZONIPdG APPEA.LS I�l _�-- CITY COUNCIL CHAME3ERS, ST. PAUL, MINPdESOTA, MARCH 3, 1983 PRESEfvT: Mmes. Morton and Summers ; Messrs . Grais , Kirk, Osborn and �loods of the Board of Zonin� Appeals ; P1r. Segal , Assistant City Attorney; , Ms. Lane of the Division of Nousing & Building Code Enforcement; � Ms. Beseman, Mr. Ford, and h�lr. Haider of the Planning Division Staff. ABSENT: hlessr. Peterson. The meeting was chaired by Gladys �1orton, Chairman. DAVID VAN LA�JDSCHOOT (ri9322) : Request for variance to constru�t a duplex at 1244 Lincoln Avenue. The applicant was present. There was opposition present at the hearing. htr. Haider reviewed an amended staff report with a recommendation for approval . A recommendation that a landscape border be provided alona the east and west side of the duplex was dropped in consideration of the applicant's intent to excavate and remove excess topsoil . A letter received after the fi•r-st public hearing was closed was accepted by the Board and placed in the record. �•'.r. Grais moved approval of the variance based on findinqs 1 throuoh 5 of tne starf report. Mr. Kirk seconded the motion. Tre public hearing was reopened by the Board. J�n Long, 1249 Goodrich , stated the residents are opposed to the duplex. It is basically a resider-ial area, not rental type housing. Glithin one block of the site there i � more than adequate rental property sitting vacant. °eople have tried to purchase the lot for a single family dwelling 5ut the owner felt it would 6e to his benefit to sell the parcel for a multiple family dwelling. He stated concerns about parking, the need for a retaining wall ,� and the fact that the site furnishes a certain amount of areenery to the area. Mary Long, 1249 Goodrich , testified in opposition because of the narrowness oz tne lot and its proximity to the deadend turnaround. The intent of the code is to protect the residential character of the neighborhood, not to dc�r�ngrade the neighborhood for monetary reasons . '1elvin Volkenant, 1256 Lincoln, stated the proposed duplex would be a detriment to the community. There is not adequ=:±e on-street parking and a duplex �rould add an additional 4 to 5 cars . David Van Landschoot presented pictures that were taken on a Monday morning at 7:00 am.m indicatinc� that there was ample parking. They are addinq parkir:�� in the rear of the lot for 3 cars . He stated that whether a sinqle famil;% house were built or a duplex, it a•rould not be the same as a vacant lot. They plan on building a 51?_5,000 duplex which �vill be owner-occupied. There will be a retainin� wall because the lot slopes to�rards the street. He felt that any impr•ovements along the street would benefit the entire block. The lct, as �t c�arr•ently exists , is over;ro:��n :�rith !•!eeds and brush and is a hazard to the community and should be cleaned up. Ms . Long commented that it is tiie responsibility of the owner to cleanup the lot. The residents in the neighborhood take pride in keepinn up their property, the homes are not run-down. � � � �;�'°�� David Van Landschoot (�9322) Page 2 Hearing no further testimony, Ms . Morton closed the public hearing portion of the meeting. There was discussion regarding the alley used as a turnaround for Lincoln and Goodrich. Mr. Haider reported that both streets deadend approximately 2 houses east of the site because of the Short Line Road. ��1r. Grais amended his motion to include a variance for the bay window that projects into the required side yard. Mr. Kirk seconded the motion, which pass�d on a roll call vote of 5 to 0. Mr. Osborn abstained from voting. Submitted by: Approved by: Fred S. Haider Gladys hlorton , Chairman ; � � �� , ` �'��, `'.1�1�- t � ' �,��c��! { �� i :; - � � , ri � � : � . • ; � � � . �(�� , u ��`-�o�L� ; �` I `'�J�� ; ZONING BOARD � � ' "" L� ��7 l/ � ! ��-� ��'#��! . . ,; • `'' �(� U I+/� r� `,�j'�� .... � ` ' APPLICATION FOR ZONING ORDINA ,1�gI�1V�/�1/ � . � �,�l� � � 9 ; . . � J CITY OF SAINT Pq�t.}t'.V � l�'� � i , tiIl� PI ' ..... . �-�i/'��1')/�,�, ( ..;: ,�':,� A VARIANCE OF 2UNING CODE CHAPTER.�L,SEC�'Qt�'t��P'�AG��f��,}j�— I ::�.i -"rr t��ll;fTf�_.. �l.! � : . IS REQUESTED IN CONFORMITY WITH THE POWERS VESTED It�•Ti�O�RD�F`�ZONING AP- I I •':�:•.;'r,..,, I I i .;. PEALS TO PERMITTHE f�(;;�<<�,�j J,t ( �� :r� Cl i �J G;�Ii 1� �`'xON PROPE Y � ; 's� DESCRIBED BELOW. ' '. � .'1� ..:_ , ' � � A. Applicant; NAME: M ^�'- �'�� — ^ �`"' � '; ;_� ADDRESS �� L/� -� l�''� �� A�� J. ..c�.�r%�:.� NE N0.�� ( � k;L/2 ZIP CODE �� / l�j � . .. I DAYTIME TELEPHO . I � 1. Property interest of applicant: (owner,contract purchaser,etc.) i ; � ( � 2, Name of owner (if different) • � � �'� a � 8. ProPerty Description: ADDRESS /� �-� L.In( �,,�� .� I+ I � � BLOCK � ADD. �� ...; 4 ` I � ;{ 1. Legal description: LOT �+ � ' �, �,f�c-( . ji,��,r � .�n x -�j�-c� � ��r�� °' . ; � , 2. Lot size:T_ , I 3. Present Use �( �p��1� � _Present Zoning Dist. t''1� � � � • . . � ; i �•� C. Reasons for Request: �`_ j � 1. ProPosed use �;�7 », , __----------------_--__._.__ � '; /, if' , ;; � ' ,.• ' - � �+ -� ` _ 1.�,�G. ' 6 '�: f� ��:l ' .`µ �\'� , °; �u(�te X �_ :._� ►�,,.�: —_____---- ; , ::�::r ; 2. What physical characteristics of the property prevent its being used for any of the permitted�uses � :•.::;i in your zonel (topography,soii conditions,size and shape of lot,etc.) i � 1 1 J�:� � �br i � � •::� �J %�� 3. State the specific variation requested,giving disjances where appropriate. , � i �� L�� t,U��J-4-f�: �/ti. � i�� v 1 c �� ' Y"P c�i r e c�, �v� • � . ' � ct'tJ a.�� l G��e.. . � � � � ' ! ' C) ��c�e- e(G v d sP4-h��.t 12 �la-��.� ,,,c_:t �f � j Y� , 7 ; : a � �. � � � 4, Expiain how your case conforms to each of the following: �)��(�`,��, � � /- i a. That the strict application of the provisions of the Zoning Ordiance woulc'result in peculiar - � ar exceptionai practical difficulties,or,exceptional undu hardships. s ' ,l- �;,�� .,�.;';�%"��: .-�,�:��--z...�, ;�c'-L ,(.l' , � � C. � L/ . � _--/ f'�,'-!�`.,l'�G,,-,�,.v.�..�.c,G� `� ��wi-�-L` 4� .Z- � '.5 > ��-L. � .t , . '..-,,.-,�Y,..-�..,. ,c � .��--�-�a = :t _ , � �FISHIERS US�OfV1..N- - � b. That the granting of a variance will ,� r, - - i not be a substantiai detriment to �'�`" • - �'_ '�• ' r�_-�i ' �: . I pubiic good or a substantial impair- �!� � . ;,��''_ I .� ment of the intent and purpose of _�`-i'l ' the Zoning Ordinance. , � ;� ' , { - � /� �CL �(j'� '' 'p .f �J! - - — . . . .� i i .i ..y. .L ,1. � V ( i j : �;; (�-1 i�;,�r �;�-�-�-�'<<.G� ! i � . � � ! 1 L�✓ �(��n'..L. (1�i'�.'.t:_�"i� .l I 3 . . � •- NO�E: THIS WILL NOT BE PROCESSED WITHOy T A COh1PLETE SITE PLANI ,.' Y�•� , / > i� � -i , .�f �> � �;?,,.1., -'� +7' �•� l { L �::-,_ G�,,:�.�a-f` G;<��;�� Signature y. � � . f � Date Received � _ --- � i '�r.i i F , ,J - �I �I ' . , . � i t . . . . . . . . � I . . � � . 1 � . � .. . . � � , , , . � . 1 ' _ . . . , � , . , .. .. j • , . . .. �� . ...�t>�:.: � . i . . ZONING STAFF REPORT 9322 � � ��;`�� • l . �APPLI�/1i�T: DAVI� VAN LANDSC�100T DA7E OF HEARIP�G 02-22-83 2, ; , , , , , , , , , , , , , CLASSIFICATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CURRENT PLANNING & ZONING COMMITTEE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS . Rezoning ❑ Var�ance � Speciai Condition Use ❑ Administrative Review ❑ Determination of Similar Use ❑ Other ❑ Cha�nge� of Nonconforming Use �Q� Other 3. LOCATION: 1244 Lincoln Ave. (South side between Syndicate and Short Line Road) 4. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot 6, Block 5, Stinson' s Blvd. Addition 5. PRESENT ZONING: RT-1 ZONING CODE REFEREP�CE: 61 . 101 6. STAFF INVESTIGATION & REPORT: DATE 02-08-83 , BY Fred S. Haider ----------------------- A. PURPOSE: To consider a variance of minimum frontaqe and side yard requirements of t�Zoning Code to permit construction of a duplex structure. Code requires a 50 foot frontage and 9 foot side yard. Applicant proposes a 40 foot frontage and 7 foot west side yard setback. B. PARCELS SIZE: 40 foot frontaqe on Lincoln X 150 foot for 6,000 square feet of total lot area. C. SITE AND AREA CONDITIONS: The site is vacant and has alley access. The topography of the site is flat approximately 1� feet above the grade of Lincoln Avenue. The surrounding land uses are primarily moderate density residential with some commercial one block north on Grand. D. ZONING CODE CITATION : Section 61 .101 , Schedule of Regulations sets minimum standar s for a RT-1 zoning districts to require 50 foot frontage and 9 foot side yards. E. ZONING HISTORY: On March 4, 1971 the Board of Zoninq Appeals held a public �earin� and voted to deny the appeal to relax minimum lot width requirements. On April 15, 1971 the City Council sustained the Board of Zoning Appeals decision. F. FINDINGS: 1 . The request for variance is based on the exceptional physical condition of the property. The parcel is unusually narrow and deep with unique topography. 2. Strict application of the Code regulations would result in exceptional practical difficulty as distinguished from mere inconvenience by reason of � the existing conditions of the property. A duplex structure cannot - be built in this two-family residential district without variance. 3. The request for variance can be granted without substantial detriment to the community or the intent of the Code only if conditions are attached. The site plan illustrates a gravel covered area on each side of the structure . Landscaping the areas would improve stormwater retention of the site, improve the aesthetics of the site , and would be consistent with the intent of the Code. 4. The request for variance can be granted without substantial detriment to the neighbors ' supply of light and air, health, safety or property values. The proposed development meets density and required number of off-street � parking spaces required by Code. The two-story building proposed would be architecturally compatible with neighboring structures . The major portion of the structure meets the 9 foot setback requirement. Only a bay window � area projects into the required side yard. . � ' •+�a;.7��r1.� ! ZOPJIPdG STAFF REPORT APPITCANT: DAVID VAN LANDSCHOOT Page 2 5. The request for variance does not appear to be based primarily on a desire . for economic gain. G. STAFF RECOMh1ENDATION: Based on findings 1 through 5, staff recommends approval of the variance with the condition that the applicant provide a landscaped border (not less than 2 feet in 4ridth) along the east and west side of the duplex structure. __ .----- ----i . � � C . ZL-O � 4-0 `+C:�\�7��'��,�+'► � � � j �-o xto '�-� � il-o x ti-a X��i�oX4-c� � /`----! � G - - - - p ! , �, i � i • �� • , • • � i � � � , I � . . . ..� . . , . i I � i � . I ' < � � � � i . ��- - �..��/-..��,� . ./.. , . /� . ` •. i ( - . _... ' � � . . " - - -�/�:-. - � / j I I � � � � � 2•Ox 3-o�4.G.r7°a , /�F;f �7lON r-_--- --— � 0 � � N —.._ _� . N r�� ; • ' �w�r-� �,ev �m-o� +— - --- I i � � i I �•r+Y ��F'✓�i i I � I, �XY�TI r1C� I i i � � , I • I • , � j � � i • _— v� .-- - � � ' -__---- � I _� ' - - __ � � � I �- � � ,� � - . , Q � � �� :, f � ; �.sn�•..Q�� -,�,�.,�N. . � � �', ' . �, _ ,�,,,�,; ; �; - , ^ ci z � �� o � i � � ~� 2 ; � � � ; � Y i � •^:aN�ii��EV�IALK R�G;Jf� \� ; q G•p � �-4 ;r - �� r _ . _ ._ .._ . .'__.-'_ __ . - ' _ . _ M •O�s�sM __ �/ ;`3'.�E� ��I i�/F{�c -- ---j i �-'I i � , � —.--— -- ---------- --, -- -�------- 294 �'NCGi,N ------____ ��`�'i�� i►�. . - . ��a��;�� S� . _'�.�i? , :�;inn°ost�. J:�!'_l�',.r'J 23 , 19a3 I%:r . David :�. V=.�nL�r_dschoofi • - i`;�, �; `;� Ju,r•in Pronerty Con±r��c t;in�,� Inc . �i� �_ � ' - � -� � � � . 314 ;:Fnnt University tiVE;TZU° � ; . ;.• , ,-;., St . Paul, i%'_innesota 5510.3 �;;'4'�< ... ,; C'_:.� �:�:v De�.r I�:r . V�.nLandschoot : �i ' ,' ' '�``e + j��nt r-=., . �t ' irFe received ,your 1°tter of J�.nuary 20, . i^y33 , concernin� four pl�ns for buildin� a duplex on the vac�.r_t lot 12�4-�k6 Lincoln A�.renue . A few com�ents are in order . Considerin� the size of the lot ?.nd the number of duplexes alre%dy present on this block, :•:e :�rould find a house r�ore appropril.te for this lot . Because oi the na.rroj-rness of the lot �r_d its proxi�aity to the deader_d �turn�.round , -�re hope th�.t you are plannin� on buildin� a double ,�a.ra��e a.t the alle.y. a duplex can easily brin� four �ore cars into the nei�hbarhood � and a dou�le ��.ra�e iaould serve to ;et tvro cf th°� off the str°et . Your desi�n looks nice . Is the drawin� rr:is-laoel°d? (`1'ne street side of the lot iaces north. ) Th�n?� you for your considerat�on of th°se nractical aspects . of buildin� on this lot . „ '? '�� /; , L..�: % � %� S i n c er e l y, —l�-��.�� j c' l,,�,�:�---�`:.� �" �C,f�n„�.°� ,- �=- -'' l-%` � ,. ,._, � � c . , ... � . _ -- . _ci.' � �'")• ;�; G�_c!_ _ .._.___ � '' _ t'` .--,'-�� - - _� .%��--�— . , I - /• . c;!— / r � /� '/ �I�t�-� 1 C._; �L � •�� ,(..L� �r ;L,� � � /��-'�� ./ j ;a `��' ` . �-� �v�' - -•� �� 1.� . -- - :/;_ G ,L -'` � i J'��f� �/`�i/,i;�/ - ;r �j �;�� Ivs S' ��,�c�v�' %1:�= . � ,'� ��- � , � .,;r,,. �: �,:�.� , -' `�. � -� � ., , .. _, ',,- ,; fy �,. � l "', " . ' �G/.�� !� '��'�%��/C. „��'_',�/ �! ��,.;� .Y� �,L �, �-C O t ��__ � ,,_ 1' ; ?1�� /c ��_�� _� �,' �� %�4:"�� %�/ � CC��,�1_.� ` ,'r. '-�?`:i; 1 t�'L.>} , .�. t ' ;.�!��J.�.�� __J i '� ,��'Z1J—�� J y� � �. �c.�.1L—L�� ' ' J. , ��_. ' \ _ ,_ ;''' r::,�`L -� -) - - � �/ ' •'i',r "^%�C.�:. ( i� r� � � - � .... l L� • , _. -�i� � � • �' i � - `"- ( . cc Dan Dolan 3ealtors �istrict 1�� C�?�:�unity Covncil . i:o�r.c� of �onin?; Arp�-�.ls � . , Febru�-�ry 24, 1983 '�*��^� Gladys A'IOrtenson, Chairrn�zn �a.rd Of Zoning Appeals - City Of St. Paul � . , , - l' � . '�� L•.� �� ._ � ... . . . . -'�:��... .. Dear r1s. Nlortenson: . � We are writing you concerning the proposed variance for the pror�erty at 1244 Lincoln Ave. (Lot 6, Block 5 Stinson's Blvd. Addition) , The }�uilding of a Duplex is planned on this pro�..rty if a variance is granted. It is hard to sc-� how a Duplex can be �uilt on this narrow, uneven lot. The foilowing c:onsiderations cause us to l:��ievc u�at a Dup1E:�: w�ald be detrimental to the neighborhood conu�uunity. l.) The Duplex on either side would certainly suffer in both air and light due to the proxiunity of the proposed structure. 2.) Parking is currently a serious problem. Another �lti-dwelling structure in this area would naturally lead to m�re cars and to even mQre serious parking problems. Because of the dead end turn around alley where Lincoln I�venue must exit, parking spaces ai-e severely restricted. 3.} Goodrich Avenue, the adjoining stxeet, also is a dead end with a turn around alley. This leads to relatively heavy traffic for an alley and certainly increases the accident proba.bilityo The alley peaks at the d irect rear of the lot in the proposed variance. Because of the blind curve and severe rise of the alley, winter driving is already unduly hazardous. 4.) l�lso to be considered is the aesthetic impact of squeezing a multi�-family dwelling on a narrow lot that is 20� less in width than city code requises. We definitely feel our property values would be depreciated by t-�is building. 5.) Since �he Zoning Board of Ap�a�s saw fit ta den� a si��ralar r�ues� in 1971, and since the city ordinance specifies larger lot requirem�nts for such a building in ttlis zoning area, we strongly feel that this variance should be denied. CC: Distxict 14 Cornmunity Cotuzcil n " n 1 11 ^ , ,, ` '1 n vI 1 t C'"l'�'" ��''�l�' - � `��t l `i��U-'��-- ��./In1�� - � .�IJ�P• �/ �� " � � � � /f -✓ j Y .I �( �i .c,-/�-,'C.�_.. �'_%�e�°L��.�fFvL' �� ,� �l� ` / �`� � l �r <<:�% �I v / ` �^�'t �, ��i � L i �7 �U/� ��--(�� ,��/ / � � �, �.� J � � ;. ' , �1� C'�/� �-^-� � �� j� � _ �--.� --� _. / n ., ,j / / � /7 ��.� �/ � / �`/ ! '�.''��n�`� -�l,` v"l��'�.�,t'a. / / L!-__"--�il:�C..L.::'�l�G L,(�Z."L� �,^ „ � i { �� C��L�� ,% �Cti'�"'� J��'�'�lL��'vZC� ��5 � �/1��'�s'�✓ G' � � . � L. % �-� - � ��✓/ /�z.�-��nr� ;�,�?z'� , . � � � i ��t /� r c.-c`_��-z� _�_ ✓ (/�L!'�-L,�. C � f/"'� •�{-�`J-�"�� ?',� _%)C/h-C�%��z!;' �tiC:"C° ( � / ' '.i-? ' �, _ � _� \- � —� � , , �_. . � , - • � � - < _ �`-:� �____,r-----._� i - - �' ' �-- ,_,, - ,.`/ � ��- � . / l . • ,.�, .. � � ;. i�1�.e' l. c� t� , � �/i, iZ<,' .� / j i C � Ic, /' - ;' � i < �<' � _i� - � � - � �- " � � '� � -. � �� . - i - .. � _ j , . � - �I i � 1.� .: ? ��l . , /v. ,�'j i ) i �"' l! i . r. . ` . / /• �ic�� . /�,� ":�,� '.J-� ( i�) r �� , L r .��f � , � t � � � � February 24� 1983 s � rd� . ' ��s^a Gladys Mortenso�z, Chairman Board OP Zoning �peals City Of St. Paul Dear Ms. Mortenson: , We are 4rriting you concerning the proposed variance for the property at 1244 Lincoln Ave. (Lot 6, Block 5 Stinson's Blvd. Addition) , The building of a Duplex is planned on this property if a variance is granted. It is hard to see how a Duplex can be built on this nanrow, uneven lot. The follo;a�ng consideratior.s ca�use us tr �elieve tha� a �aglex �•�uld be detrimental to the neighborhood. conaroanity. l.} The Duplex on either side would certainly suffer in both air and light due to the proximity of the proposed structure. 2.) Parking is currently a serious problem. Another �lti-dwelling stxucture in this area would naturally lead to irore cars and to even more serious parking problems. Because of the dead end turn around alley where Lincoln Avenue must exit, parking spaces are severely restxicted. 3.) Goodrich Avenue, the adjoining street, also is a dead end with a turn around alley. This leads to relatively heavy traffic for an alley and certainly increases the accident probabilityo The aJ.ley peaks at the di�ect rear of the lot in the proposed variance. Because of the blind curve and severe rise of the alley, winter driving is already unduly hazardous. 4.) Also to be considered is the aesthetic i�act of sque�zing a multi-family dwelling on a narrow lot that is 20� less in width than city code requires. We definitely fe�l our property values would be depreciated by this building. 5.) Since the Zoninq Board of Appeal.s saw fit to deny a similar reauest in 1971, and since the city ordinance specif ies larger lot requirements for_ such a building in this zoning area, we stxongly feel that this variance should be denied. CC: District 14 Conantuzity Council . � -�� ? �j j � � � • ;' ,��. �-Cr��--�--��,� ,/�/• `''.'�°�� _ � , �� ` �._- . / �/�t� �-�2'ue��--�I%-��' G�t-z=-� , / � 7 � `�—�--.� � � �_ _�lz,��'�J �� .> •� � � � � �. � � � -, � . /�� -��E �ti E_,�J ,._. � , �21�f �uu=� �✓� . �' f^ • (� � t� �,�� . �.- ,: ,,,�/,�� . ..� - ��`•�-L��„wr:+.�..i .� � r � z,�, t'+ .'"f(i>^'.rr ��:��. �` n,: f /� � � ! . �`.f / ' '� ,: '�^, � �� t ,.. • w . . -.a- �'' p �°% �'==• t � ,�r�. ,� �i ,�..�,,; � � -^'° � -°`,,�^.��r�:.�;�.�';.�.. ,.�,,, � ,P.>`X ..!4�.f / �G_�---*�J � �/ Z � � � f - � � �%� <:f� ��-�1 d� /11�1 ; ��,� t��L�� i 7-L� -` �,-��'�� t�'--- � � � � '�� _ L'CARD OF_ZONING REPORT AND ACTION �iarch 4, 1971 .,, .� „_ ,.�� .. ;k12 � ' Acting under Legislative Code Chapter 60 thru 64 � R � __._.___.._ passed August 22, 1922, as amended to January 27, 1971. 7116 II i .'': __ '.,;'f ';:, ,..'i� . David Rolland _. �.t,:;��: ......Ii'i;� , ��w.� r;;endm�nt � E�ppeal � ?ermit � Other X-1013 .; ., . '�;;�;;��?; , Relax the lot width u � ;:')��y7�iJ1� South side of Lincoln Avenue between Syndicate Street and the Short-Line Railroad � . I,��r:A:. DES�.:cIP11�7:I ; Lot 6, Block 5, Stinson's Boulevard ' Addition to St. Paul c. P:<i,SI�:1T Z�IdiH�:;; "B" Residence -- '?U:Z;;;,:'a: 'i 'i:7 <;�r.in:; Ccd� Ch�p�era 64 Sec.ticn; .03 F�ara�raph, i 3 . S'I'�.f'�.' TiiV�ST1;t�TIOPJ F_ :�C?02T: Date; 2/25/71 3y: PLR A. HISTORY: There is no zoning history for this site. B. PROPOSAL: The applicant proposes to build a duplex upon the lot. C. NEED FOR APPEAL: The subject lot has a width of 40 feet at the setback line. D. PRESENT STANDARD: A duplex in a "B" Residence District requires a lot width at the front setback line of 50 feet. E. VARIEINCE: The existing lot is 10 feet or 20% short of the required 50 feet. F. AREA ZONII�?G: The north 1/2 of the block in which this parcel is located is zoned "B" Residence along with the north 1/2 of the block adjoining it to the west and the south 1/2 of the two blocks across Lincoln Avenue from these blocks. There is "A" and "B" Residence and Commercial Districts along Grand Avenue one block north of Lincoln Avenue. The remaining area is zoned "A" Residence. The Comprehensive Plan calls for low-density residential south of Lincoln Avenue and medium density north of Lincoln Avenue along Grand Avenue. G. SIT� CQNDITIONS: The lot is vacant and approximately 5 feet above the grade of Lincoln Avenue. It has an area of 6,000 square feet. H. AREA CONDITIONS: The 40-foot 1ot is typical for this area and there are a number of duplexes along Lincoln Avenue. Dwellings in the area are in very good condition and average about 40 years in age. Lincoln Avenue dead-ends east of this property at the Short-Line Road. The adjoining alley is passable but unimproved. 9. BOAKD ACTION: To Recommend � Approval Xa Denial Council Letter Dated: rloved by . Mrs . Cochrane Yeas Nays 3/30/71 x Ames - Ch. Date of Seconded by: Maietta x Cochrane Hearing: McPartlin Secretary's remarks : x Maietta 4/1/71 � tij�;;`; Mansur Council Action: x Benshoof V��^�� Dooley Date: �ll�� Prifrel __i.�__1_.�.� `� � i � �� : --�� --� �� I�I"I -�-I ° J"I I°I I � �;�--�i o ___ _____-� - � ::��:�� `� � � ___-_—� . _� . _ _ _ � . -_ _ _ _ _ - -- � ' � ________-_ ._____..� C----__ _�� +!'`.�, �r �� . i�—��'��; �•.� .._ � �•�~.�. '!'. � \�.. f \ �.•.V%,•}�v��lt. I ' � � �•''�. � l ��.:::::��'��:.::.;::::;:::. � Q ��• ¢ � 0 I i 0 � P � �: I ( i i I , i . � � � � � � � . �a �: .: _ .. ._. I i i p ► �;��-�• _ _ _ . ,�:,,a..�.��:��, �--- ,��, -- — . � �i .!1 � 1� � � � ,.��; :1 � , , � ( ,I I I � i .F �� ' ,::::. :�� b �c� � � , �:- � �::: a P� �o �� 20� a 2 s�:::::::: .��.::� � o 0 0 � � , � � ,. . :�:��;�� _.�._...�... . �.,.�,.: ��'�� - O � ...�.�.°� , � , .� ' O O O O v v ��:� �� ;i� 1 � O„a 7 Q �� 19 � 1�:,�., � � :� �' � Q � t ' �, � ` .�� `:�:``.'�� `�� , �t- � � . `:: ; � � �,; t.. ._.�..E.,.�.._..�..,� ._..��.... — x_ . _ _ __--_ •.� � -" �r..u�HW�w�:s � -'i«�. , �� - br'. v�u�1Gi�..`yP [Y .•:��:„:�ia�-��'t w --� ♦ T i_ ; :� _ \ � C. I �' � r � ...s.� � � �::.. I � ' � 1�'w �`'��'A �; � �':•:::�:�'i':.[;`:'iE�:`::� '� ,l^'�. o�o 000 ��$ o,� � �� o � \ �:::::::<.:;::...::::.:::� �000 � oo � o � i ��::::::::.< � ; - �.��c��.�� - _____ _ ___ _ _ �,� ��4 � . � � . �..:..� � � , . � �o ¢ o o� c� ¢ o 0 0 � o 0 0 0 0 �' '� 4 0 ��:::��::�:�:��:;:�:�'�.� �o 0 0 ¢ o o.o�¢;c � ��:�:::�::�:::::;:..: .�. : ,:.. � I I ...i.{>�:;::::�:::::::.1 I , I � i, ' - - -- -- �;:;��. :1� � � i . �ra-� .�._ _,�.. ,.,�,�.,-— . —.- --— -—- �-..'.__. .__ . �� •. ...�.� __ �.--e. �... �. ...., n _ ,�•-• . . —T� 1---T--. . — .. � �� : r . 1 I �� I I � I I � 1 : , � , �::. ' � I � ' � ! i -y t.:: :::..•::;:::`:1 i i � �G � � 0 � � � � � � � �'0'� � � Q'� �� ' � t�;i'::::t:i.::}::<{i.;}:.`` ll.J 'J'V I�!� �I�I�� :::� , ; � ,�::_;. �. , , c,J'� ..�:.:.:..�:::::::::: � , . �t::::°��.::�::::°�:::::`::::. . � �„ t::::�:.:`:::::::::�:.::..:::. ��'�� :.. !o 0 0 0 0 0 0 � � o�o 0 0 0 0 0 0 �::``'�� ..�```�:`�':`':�`' � i I0` O O O e3 �7 ��0 p�C� O O�O i I � � � . � ` .:� :.., I i ' � � I � � �:�� I i ��• � �� ;�, ��.1 , ! � � � . ; ; _ � 1� t�� _ � � �- , ; , � � "� � ` �:::::;:::;:: , , i�.::: .�.a , � � � � \,.::..�:ti;:::�:;...::.:::1 � ..,:.:.:.::,�:::r;::: � i I j � �� ' ; I i �" , � I , I � ��:.`;..:�.:.::.;:.:;`�;.`::1 � ' I � O �Oi0�00 O ..- �;.;�,:�::;;::;:;:::� O;O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 � o 0 0 0;o 0 0 � �:::`:: r:::;::::;::;:;;:, � , � ��....: �� ':��`'::'. ' � �; :_�:::�;.'::��'`�`��. ��f��.L�� t� � ��;�r � , -1 r �'� � � �� `:� � � I ;o;o oIo oIo 0 0 0� � �o o a o. o oi;o 0 0 0 0 � ' �� :..::.�o o� o �o;� ; , , ; � 1 • t � �� , ► � �� . , � . � .. . � ��b '�� ' , : ,; �:. :;, , , � � APP�ICANT ��.�f� ��'�� -,� �'��'a+��'�� LEGEND � � � �°°- ��t�I��G �fSTfiIrT �OUt�Dl�RY � � �l///a S�.1E�!cCT PF4PEP,TY PURPOSE ��' ��'��''�.�^ ` O Oh1E FA1�91LY PLANNING DISTRICT , ¢� TWO FAP,�ILY FILE N0. �� ''�� . �� .�� , � � ��' O MULTIPLE FaMILY � DATE � �� n co��RCia� SCALE : 1"= 200� NORTH �' � � �NDUSTRIAL MAP N0. ��if�T PAUL PLAP�t��If�;G 80mR0 ' V VaCAP�dT �.�� C_.ew,e.� ., - w��...r�...w.r Th ' ' � �� e D�str�ct 14 C�ommunit � Council Y 1523 FAIRMOUNT AVE., ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA 55105 • (6TZ) 69&7973 SERVING THE MACALESTER-GROVELAND AND RANDOLPH HEIGHTS NEIGHBORHOODS OF ST. PAUL , , . . Apri 1 20, 1983 _ . , Victor Tedesco, President •� St. Paul Ci ty Counci 1 Ci ty Hal l • , St. Paul, MN 55102 • " Dear Vi ctor, This is in regard to the appeal to the City Council to overturn the granting of front and side yard varian�es for 1244 Lincoln Avenue which would allow the development of a duplex on that site. While the site is zoned properly . � for a duplex, it is too narrow for anything but a single family home. The Distract 14 Community Council 's 1983 Annual Meeting passed a` resolution supporting the neighbors of the site in their appeal. The neighbors oppose the granting of variances for the site because they believe that it should ::nflt be. developed as a duplex but as a singl� family home. � Attached is the resolution that was considered and passed at the March 24 meeti ng. ' 1 , Sincerely, • ' ' `�c��GUt,il�-[�c�<L-+�-t� . • V� � . Kathie Tarnowski Community Organizer . - � ' r . . � �� Th ' ' � � e D�str�ct 14 �C�mmuni Council � 1523 FAIRMOUNT AVE., ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA 55105 • (61Z) 69&7973 SERVING THE MACALESTER-GROVELAND AND RANDOLPH HEIGHTS NEIGHBORHOODS OF ST. AAUL _ . , .,_„_�_,��____---r-_ -----------___._�..��.�.��__-- �. ' `��r�:�. RESOLUTION FOR CONSIL`ERATION AT THE 198� ANNUAL MEETING _ .► BE Y'� RESOLVED �hat the 1983 Annual Meeting of the District 14 Co�emunity Council aupports the residents of the 1200 blocks of Lincoln and Goodrich in their appeal to the St. Paul City Council to overturn the variances. recently given to 1244 Lincoln Avenue bq the city's Board of Zoning Appeals. Without front and side pa�td variances, this lot is too narrow for anything but a single family hame. . (It is a 40 foot lot and'the zoning ordtnance requires a minimum of 50 feet for a duplex.) The Annual l�eeting supports the position of the neighbors that thia � lot ahould be �developed only as a single family home and not as a duplex. 1. To grant such variances would violate the intent and purpose of the city's zoning ordinance in that: r � a. It would be detrimental to the general welfare of the community in that property values would be depreciated. b. It would deprive the adjac�nt residences of adequate light, air „ � and pr ivacy. • c. It would overcrowd the land with buildings in that the buildings on . _ either side �of the lot are duplexes now. � �d. It would aggravate an already serious parking problem on the street Because t�f the dead end turn around alley where Lincoln Avenue must extt, parking spacea are severely restricted. e. Squeeeing a third multi-family dwelling on a narrow lot that is 20X less in width than city code requires will have a: negative : aesthetic impact on the neighborhood. 2. The� Board of Zonin� AppeQls did not take into considezation the. District 14 Housin� Development Plan which was adopted by the District l�i Council as an amendment to its District Plan and adopted by the St. Paul Citq Council as part of the city's Comprehensive Plan. _ That Heusing Development Plan rpcommends no developmer_t �st :iil or. L•:c.� lot in question because of the narrok�ness of the lot. ' The deCision by the Board o� Zoning p.�peals conflicts w.'.rh thQ city•s own Comprehensive Plan. 3. The Zoning Ordinance in aection 64.205 states that no variance �hall be granted in order to increase the value of a parcel of land. T�:e neighbors in opposition to the variances believe that i:he owner of the property ehould_sell the lot for single family development even if that means that the value of the lot would be less than for a duplex. 4. The same variances were denied by both the Board of Zoning Appeals and the City Council (on appeal by the owner) in 1971. Circumsta��ces have not changed since: that time. • -.�-�y y�_.__ ' . M '_�____..__..�......�.._Y.._...___�._� - Y.' -_'._._. �O � � ��.rJ�� RESOLUTION FOR CONSIDERATION AT TIiE 1983 ANNUAL MEETING BE 2� RESOLVED that the 1983 Annugl Meeting of the District 14 Con�unity Council supporta the residents of the 1200 blocks of Lincoln and Goodrich in their appeal to the St. Paul City Council to overturn the variances. recently given to 1244 � Lincoln Avenue by the city's Board of Zoning Appeals. Without front antt sfde= qaRd variances, this lot is too narrow for anything but a single familq hame. � • (It is a 40 foot lot and'the zdning ordtnance requires a minimum of 50 feet for a duplex.) 'The Aanual l�eeting supports the position of the neighbore that this lot should be •developed only as a single family home and not as a duplex. 1. To grant such variances would violate the intent and purpose of the city's zoning ordinance in that: Y ' a. It would b� detrimental to the gereral welfare of the community in that property values would be depreciated. b. It would deprive the ad�ac�nt residences of adequate light, sir ,. - and privacy. c. It would overcrowd the land with buildings in that the buildings on . _ either side �of the lot are duplexes now. � d. It would aggravate an alreadq serious parking problem on the street j Because of the dead end turn around alley where Lincoln Avenue must exit, parking spaces are severely restricted. e. Squeeting a third multi-family dwelling on a narrow lot that is 20X less in width than city code requires will have �: negative � ; aesthetic impact on the neighborhood. _ ' r 2. Tha Board of Zonfn� ApgePls did not take into consideration the Distri�t 14 Housing Development Plan which was adopted by the District lh Council as an amendment to its District Plan and adopted by the St. Paul City Council as part of the city's Comprehensive Plan. _ That Heusing Development Plan recommnnds no developmer.t Rt :iil or. t:;t�� + lot in question because of the aarrow�ess of the lot. � ' The decisiott bp the Board o� 7oning p�peals con�Elicts w.'_s�:� tha city's own Comprehensive Plan. ` 3. The Zoning Ordinance in eection 64.205 statea that no variance shall be , granted in order to increase the value of a parcel of land. Tre neighbors in oppoeition to the variances believe that the owner of the property should..sell the lot for single family development even if that means that the value of the lot would be less than for a duplex. 4. The same variances were denied by both the Board of Zoning Apper�ls and � the City Council (on appeal by the owner) in 1971. Circumstai�ces have not changed since that time. � � ' The District . 14 . ' -k C�ommunit Council Y 15Z3 FAIRMOUNT AVE., ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA 55105 • (612) 69&7973 SERVING THE MACALESTER-GROVELAND AND RANDOLPH HEIGHTS NEIGHBORHOODS OF ST. PAUL � , April 20, 1983 Victor Tedesco, President •s St. Paul City Council Ci ty Hal l • . St. Paul, MN 55102 � ' Dear Vi ctor, This is in regard to the appeal to the City Council to overturn the granting of front and side yard varian�es for 1244 Li'ncoln Avenue which would allow the development of a duplex on that site. While the site is zoned properly ' . for a duplex, it is too narrow for anything but a single family home. The District 14 Comnunity Council 's 1983 Annual Meeting passed a` resolution supporting the neighbors of the site in their appeal. The neighbors oppose the granting of variances for the site because they believe that it should not be developed as a duplex but as a single family home. Attached is the resolution that was considered and passed at the March 24 � meeting. . � + Sincerely, ' � � � ` •zz��L�..��r;L/��,/r�:4-T,c:—ri-+�{.� :. ti Kathie Tarnowski Comnwnity Organizer . • � - ' � . r_ - . ' • �r�;'3;a�r-� a�� .RESOLUTION FOR CONSIL�ERATION AT THE 1a83 ANNUAL MEETING BE IT RESOLVED that the 1983 Annual Meeting of the District 14 Com�unity Council supports the residents of the 1200 blocks of Lincoln and Goodrich in their appeal to the St. Paul City Council to overturn the variances. �ecentZy given to 1244 Lincoln Avenue by the city's Board of Zoning Appeals. Without front and side yard variances, this lot is too narrow for anything but a single family home. (It is a 40 foot lot and the zdning ordtnance requires a minimum of 50 feet for a duplex. ) The Annual Meeting supports the position of the neighbors that this lot should be developed only as a single family home and not as a duplex. 1. To grant such variances would violate the intent and purpose of the city's zoning ordinance in that: a. It would be detrimental to the general welfare of the community in that property values would be depreciated. b. It would deprivE the adjacent residences of adequate light, sir and privacy. c. It would overcrowd the land with buildings in that the buildings on either side of the lot are duplexes now. d. It would aggravate an alreadq serious parking problem on the street Because of the dead end turn around alley where Lincoln Avenue must exit, parking spaces are severely restricted. e. Squeeeing a third multi-family dwelling on a narrow lot that is 20X less in width than city code requires will have a. negative aesthetic. impact on the neighborhood. 2. The Board of Zon�.ny Apgezl� did not take into consideration th�e District 14 Housing Development Plan which was adopted by the District l�s Council as an amendment to its District Plan and adopted by the 5t. Paul City Council as part of the city's Comprehensive Plan. That Hc�sing Development Plan recommends no developmert �� :xil o�: t:;.� lot in question because of the �arroc��ness of the lot. The deeision by the Board of Zoning p�peals con�Iicts w.'_r_;, tha city's own Comprehensive Plan. 3. The Zoning Ordinance in section 64.205 states that no variance shall be granted in order to increase the value of a parcel of Iand. T�:e neighbors in opposition to the variances believe that i:he owner of the property should sell the lot for single £amily development et�en. if that means that the value of the lot would be less than for a duplex. 4. The same variances were denied by both the Board of Zoning Appe�ls and the City Council (on appeal by the owner) in 1971. Circumstances have not changed since that time. �� AGENDA BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS PUBLIC HE�iRIP�G TUESDAY, MARCH 8, 1983 1 :30 P.M. CITY COUNCi� CHAMBERS CITY HALL & COURT HOUSE SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA S . I . Af�PROVAL OF MIN�TES OF FE6RUARY 22, 1983 II . APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION: Bream Quilt, Inc. (#9321 ) III. OLD BUSINESS A. Applicant - DAVID VAN LANDSCHOOT (#9322) Location - 1244 Lincoln Avenue (Ss between Syndicate and Short Line Road) Zoning - RT-1 Purpose: VAPIANCE - Construct Duplex IV. NEW BUSINESS A. Applicant - IdAYRE L. CARLSON (�9328) L�cati on - 9D,ci r�2S t''.Ci1 i flSt21^ ��,�°S 4 S�G�e k.'°tW°a`1 V�r•� and Sims) Zoning - RM-2 Purpose: VARIANCE - Construct 6 Garages B. Applicant - PONTILLO'S PIZZERIAS, INC. (#9329) Location - 358 t�lhite Bear Avenue (East side between Old Hudson Road and I-94) Zoning - E.S. Purpose: VARIANCE - Restaurant V. ADJOURNMENT �� . �.��4�� The District 14 Communit Council Y 1523 FAIRMOUNT AVE., ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA 55105 • (61Z) 698-7973 SERVING THE MACALESTER-GROVELAND AND RANDOLPH HEIGHTS NEIGHBORHOODS OF ST. PAUL April 20, 1983 Victor Tedesco, President St. Paul City Council Ci ty Ha71 St. Paul , MN 55102 Dear Victor, This is in regard to the appeal to the City Council to overturn the granting of front and side yard variances for 1244 Lincoln Avenue which would allow the development of a duplex on that site. While the site is zoned properly for a duplex, it is too narrow for anything but a single family home. The District 14 Community Council 's 1983 Annual Meeting passed a resolution supporting the neighbors of the site in their appeal . The neighbors oppose the granting of variances for the site because they believe that it should not be developed as a duplex but as a single family home. Attached is the resolution that was considered and passed at the March 24 meeting. Sincerely, "i2(.�'��G�./`�tZ D�cR-G��.-�.� e Kathie Tarnowski Community Organizer .. .._ _ _......__.. ._. _...� . ,.,.,�._,.�.�..,.___ -- _ ___ ._ _ _ ...---- _.. . . .. ___ - . ---__ , ��'4,�� RESOLUTION FOR CONSIDERATION AT THE 1a83 ANNUAL MEETING BB Y'T RESOLVTD that the 1983 Annu81 Meeting of the District 14 Co�munity Council supports the residents of the 1200 blocks of �Lincoln and Goodrich in their appeal to the St. Paul City Council to overturn the variances. recent2y given to 1244 Lincoln Avenue bq the citq's Board of Zoning Appeals. Without front and sfde ya'!d variances, this lot is too narrow for anything but a single family home. • (It is a 40 foot lot and'the zdning ordfnance requires a minimum of 50 feet for a duplex.) The Aanual P�eeting supports the position of the neighbors that thia lot should be •developed only as a single family home and not as a duplex. � 1. To grant such variances would violate the intent and purpose of the city's zoning ordinance in that: r a. It �ould be detrimental to the general welfare of the community in that property values would be depreciated. b. It would deprivE the adjacent residences of adequate light, air „ • and privacy. c. It would overcrowd the land with buildings in that the buildings on . - either side �of the lot are duplexes now. �d. It would aggravate an already serious parking problem on the street Because of the dead end turn around alley where Lincoln Avenue must exit. parking spacea are severely restricted. � e. Squeeting a third multi-family dwelling on a narrow lot that is 20X lesa in width than city code requires will have a; negative ; aesthetic impact on the neighborhood._ 2. The� Board of Zonin� ApgePls� did not take into consideration the � District 14 Housing Development Plan which was adopted by the District l�f Council as an atnendment to its District Plan and adopted by the St. Paul Citq Council as part of the city's Comprehensive Plan. _ � That Heusing Development Plan recommends no developmer.t A t :iil or. r.:c.� lot in Question because of the aarrok�ness of the lot. � � ' The deoision by the Board of Zoning P�peals conflicts w!.r_h the city's own Comprehensive Plan. ' � 3. The zoning Ordinance in aection 64.205 states that no variance shall be granted in order [o increase the value of a parcel of land. T�:e ne3ghbors in opposition to the variancea believe that the owner of the� propertq should_.sell the lot for single family development eti*en i� that means that the value of the lot would be less than for a duplex. 4. Z'he seme variances were denied by both the Board of Zoning Appeals and the City Council (on appeal by the owner) in 1971. Circumstan.ces have not changed since that time. • � � � `��4�� n �. , �--� - - � ��4"�� `��► The District 14 C�ommunit Cou�cil Y 15Z3 FAIRMOUNT AVE., ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA 55105 • (61Z) 69&7973 SERVING THE MACALESTER-GROVELAND AND RANDOLPH HEIGHTS NEIGHBORHQODS OF ST. PAUL ` , April 20, 1983 Victor Tedesco, President •• St. Paul City Council Ci ty Hal l • . St. Paul, NW 55102 � ' Dear Victor, This is in regard to the appeal to the City Council to overturn the granting of front and side yard varian�es for 1244 Li'ncoln Avenue which would allow the development of a duplex on that site. While the site is zoned properly ' . for a duplex, it is too narrow for anything but a single family home. � . • The District 14 Comnunity Council's 1983 Annual Meeting passed a' resolution supporting the neighbors of the site in their appeal . The neighbors oppose the granting of variances for the site because they believe that it should not be developed as a duplex but as a single family home. A�tached is the resolution that was considered and passed at the March 24 meeting. �. _ Sincerely, � � � � � �.•cL�LLZ....,r-/�LC��',/i�-t-��-�Z,+L-C� w , Kathie Tarnowski � Camwnity Organizer - ' : . I . � . ' JUSTIN PROPERTIES 314 West University Avenue St. Paul, Minnesota 55103 _ - _ MANAGEMENT DEVELOPMENT CONSTRUCTION FJ�Z ZZI �:�fS41 Gross square feet . . . .850 per floor(includes area above stair) Gross, less stair. . . .807.5 per floor Net finished per unit . .732 per floor , • . � a ` �` � � ,(��'"��p��:,`� + LAW OFFICE ' �E��zs,on, �o�.ov%e�, �nuf�,on_ C� ��i�nn PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION FRED N. PBTERSON,JR. 345 CEDAR BUILDING • SUITE 800 PETER 8. POPOVICN ST. PAUL. MINNESOTA 55101 JAMES E. KNUTSON 612•222-2811 JOS6PH E. PLYNN PAUL W. NETLAND PETERBON &POPOVICN ROBERT A. XUGNES f947-1D52 PAUL C. RATWIK May 17 � 19 8 3 JOFIN M. ROSZAK PETERSON, POPOVICH& MARBDEN THOMAS M. SIPKINS 1952-t960 THOMAS S. DEANS PATRIGlA A. MALONEY FRfiD6RIC W. KNAAK FRANCES N. 6RAHAM JOIiN M. MAAB.PX.D. DAVID 5. BARTEL CONSULTANT SUBAN J. SCHOELL PATRICK J. FLYNN Mr. Albert Olson City Clerk City of St. Paul Room 386 City Hall St. Paul, MN. 55102 Re: Zoning File No. 9322 Zoning File Name: Van Landschoot Dear Mr. Olson: I represent the petitioners, James and Mary Long, as well as various neighbors who are opposed to the granting of a variance on property located at 1244 Lincoln Avenue, St. Paul, Minnesota. It is my understanding that the City Council will be taking this matter up at its meeting set for May 24 , 1983 . I hereby request that I be allowed a very few minutes to address the City Council on behalf of my clients. Yours very truly, � ,�� _�� a �"i . ��n PJF: jt <> = r� --4 , ....,�. i''`%,y,7 ..._.D r- -n �r� � r" ..:,:-ri: � �t1 ;J� -.,1 � �i�-� � - �T� w C7 C`K7 rn � _ �_ "_� ' �� -'' , `__,�___-�`'' 1�.�.._'�.=..J�::J " ► v v� ��-, � � � � � i �`" . ., ►, _ I !' 1 ' � _''. � _.�_.� —. ��_ --�- `.' S` . Z . � �........___ .�: . '.. \ � :,__ _,_..u.__..._� +'. "` ' _ .. ...... . . __ �_ ,_�l��Il.�wt�..Ml��.. . , t..�,� �`, ..__ __.. _.__�.. r..—.M ` t1 , �' 4YYMIM��YMW�M++�+1�'�w« .--; ; ,-. ��-,..__� _. - � r. �,, . � -- - - ��==-�- �.��<!��`��`11 D - _._..---- --'--ti— � r� ..,�,�� i -'� --\ ..--.^ /� \ �c�?:<�. '.�� ... �._. � -\ . 1 � l�''?�`::`�.��''.�`��:�`':�::::.. ( i �._ '`�� h � b:•::.'.•: . ..�..:... I .Y�,. � �W ��;;•;�;:,';•' , ,\' i,�,c� '�::;:;:.�.�::',;�,:�•�.'�:':•.: O � � ��r �'�� J!�I� {' • O �O' � � O I � O ` � � �..�``" � . L P � ��°,��'' �;��''i�`�'•� I � f �, {�':.:.,.:..;`..�`,:;•.'::;',:':i;': � ' � � � � � ti....,...-,.�—°—"."'""""�..R.� I I � � ; ( 4 � . ......:.�..: � i -. ti��,,,,._._�.�-"'°°,�: — /�- �:��:;��';.<'::��.::;:::. � � i � � � .�.. .. -'::.s't""W`,s'r .i�.: �,.-rscw;��.F,t4'•'.cter.��: ��.+:.��., ee-_:-rc.�_.r..q•..� .,y _� L ' .. .. �. �T A ,�. .. . %.`YTYiR...�ff^' ..��'� — _ --f �_-�� - �-�r_ — =i� � :�1 �,.- fi � .;::� �::. f ( � i 1 � t''�. � t � .,i� � i � � � i � F 4��; �, Y� ; -�� 3� ,, ;(� � i'� I�-'� � �`-t'� � ( � i ' `:; �t .;�:::� �'-�� O ';�'�.a� � �' ;A I 20� 0 2 t � i I I , s:::::::�:r:- �:::. ;�� r�� o 0 0 �¢ ( � , � � �. - � � �v-4'L�'.;�� +...J....I.r.� ��l �� =� F:..z..,�:..::�..^�- : .:��.,.�� ~ �, � � j +(: i I I�� 20 �, �� »��;�� a1+' 7�'� �� 9 ��"_°`` � �� :, ; � •::.....k. :;.:::;::��:::: f � �. Q��.�� c�f, �, .�� ; o � o o v �� .....#..;:::::.:.::::::� � � � :. � :. t �� t =1 � '�I. �� ' �, � . :..:::�: ��:::::::::: :�c� �; � �t '' � � i ` `'`, �:::;�.`::�::;:::'::��:� ` �� , , ; /�; . —J�_1.�1— i � ! .\ 11��. �•:��'.� {n �� t��' . '- .._ .._ . :..,a.'. . .. _..___ .�._.�.. _ . .. ,_.,.� — — :.... :._�,_.._......i.--.. ._-_..;.�._..m-. __�,.. �,,,,,,, . ..- - _... ... , ._:."w . . ,� tw-. -' ' " �*:' .... . _ . '«. ..- - . . _ ,. . . ..... _\ �� ...r.,.� .. �` '---4 � .., _ T � � � 1 ��,1�° '- � � �� . � . I } r� r � .� j: �� 1 ; � S !. . I � i ; � � \ �.�k. ' � c; � ., 4 , ' �`'� �� '� ` \ �' � ;.� I � (:4� �a ,�,i �'a a:o�oo �' �' �� ¢ � � oo �{¢ � � �.�..:.;:�:::::��:��:��::;� ,000 � � oa � c ._! �_ I I� �� \ , � �� ,.�.�.�.._ ._..a. ' ,.��?..��..' _ 4_ _ -- -- — . �a ,1 �it t: , f ' � _ ` t � �: .C f 1'�'�:�:f; .�� _ -- `1,� �,::�';�:: :.�_�.,�.,= _.�, , `�' ; �.��; � o� a o 0 0 � o 0 0 0 0 � _ o o ��::�:::��:�:��:�:'::;�.��;:':;::�, �01o�.,c o �o�o'� i i � � 1:::.::::. I �� , � ..:,:: �:::;' ;:`: �� , 1 � � , � � � '• x r ! ' � : i i � ,..'.;'} � ' I i ; I I , ... •, 1 1 . , __i __ _—�—_i__-_.�_ __ i. _� - — -- __., � _ ��:�:: _� : !--I 1_�i�: ; I _ _ . _ _ .-- - -- . _. _ _ __ _._ _. w__..--=�..._..,--- .. ..µ. . �. � _ ._ . __:. . -�. _-•-- -- - - -T- -:. I � � �'� � °�` 1 i—, i �-- i I -� -- � � � � �� - � � � � � � � 1 , � ; � ; � .:_;;o�o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0!0�0�0 0 o c�on�1� �,`...,L=:::.�:::: ::`, ;�-:� o;o'o;o;�,c. ..._� I � i i �_� , c� ,� ��::...,:#:::.: �a.._i._, � l.__.:_�. ,r �z.;�•.:'.'..•, � � , � � t ir�.�:`�:�`::�'..�'; r�'1� �t`�� - � �� \ �� ..��.��`��c t1('�,; �;: -e, �=�� . � � �. .� I � n `�i`" � �' I �� ;� -�---�-- i ,. �:��o�o,o 0 0 0 � � ��`- o;o 0 0,0 0 0 o i � � 1 , , ` � ! : , �,- , , , , o�o o�o o � � 1, :? :: �o oio�o;o;c ; � , , � I i � I � , � �� ; � '�.. ., , , , ; . : "1' � ' , - _'�:-_ .�`� i'` 1 � i ' ; � _ '! _ I I � ,��•�, � 1 i ��,�� , l ��t � ��_ ; i � ..__ _` _ • 4 ��.�.� "..�.:. .,.�.:�.:..��.::� —� � � �_.�. � ,. � l � .. .- �--- — T- — � ;._� i � r, z � �', � � � .. / � I I �� T ..,, I � � � L �.e ; I ' I �t r i I � � i i i�� , , , i � �p��0,0 � �� '.,`�,ti`.. `1 � � � � , ; � �- � ,� :�.� �,� � ��o o c� o 0 o ac� o�o 0 0,0 0�0 � � � �� .:;.�:� ::::::::::::�:�:�. ' � °I ...� � �!..�. ' `, ';;;!j:�::::;,::.;;::: L.. . & �. 1� � �_. �.:..... . r � � �.:..�.:•.. .. (/' �` 2'Y �� t I.y `� `�.11i (I[��b�x�f�'l�i. (` 1`' �,` 'F '�t . .�.,..i .�....._.s_i�.Y�...�.I �.. I �.� I r� ( I � � ,1 �k y �,,'�'I i i�'^,`__-... � ,��o;c�;oio;c;o;o 00 � �o o �c-� o o �o!,o 0 0 0'o c.1 �', 1! '� i � I � , I �t ,�- � ,� ofo� o �� i � � I � � I I f � I i� i I I I � +� i � � 11...,,:.,.: �:;� � � .. ,.,._..�.. __.....�.,�._.�..�_ f-��l�� (��f-�C' w._...__._._.�.,____..._.�_.�.�..._�...a........._,....�.,.�......_..�........._ � � � `.,� i.r- ' I. ,� �...� ��. t j� A'S t�l`�� f�� l� E �F �'�`f'`�`�r �' �..�Li_.1\�� r��_icar�T YI 4 - tj r��TR �( � � ' �.s, ,Pns..I�.G ��lS j?=:,�°i �:Ut,�'��•.;;`; � ! t � ' '�t �,�t�;.�!��:.i" �t:;u�i;r=;TY P U f?P 0 S E �f�-�� E'1�` �-, ' O Of;� Ft!!��(LY � P�A�.tt�t�G D{Sl'ftICT � �`'� �-� '�, � ¢� T1'd0 F�f:�IL.Y �� i FILE f�0. _ D F �•r � `. . � , � � D A T E ._��>�;5, � ��' �,i�* � � �-¢— (� �,�U LT i P L_C FA t;f l�`r' �-.. � `..�.` l . � �_ � coc;<<,��`,c�� ► � �� % r-:� �' :., Ii:DUSTRf�.L t,!AP t�0. � � SC��. : i = 200 _ r,OE:TH ', F•' ' ,..-_ .., ., � _ �t r.. � I� r ��;. . % � 1 '' :, . � � ,�.UL r._�.�:';'Ir�C E'.:U:;(�D . • �! � ._,!',�.� � �