The URL can be used to link to this page

276246 WHITE� - CITY CLERK � PINK - FINANCE COU[IC1I � n C�1NARY - DEPARTMENT G I T Y O F S A I N T PA IT L BLUE - MAYOR File N O. � �� ' solution , Presented By Referred To Committee: Date Out of Committee By Date WHEREAS, Application for a variance from the minimum area- density requirements as they pertain ta the new dwelling at 555 Summit Avenue was denied by the Board of Zoning Appeals, as evidenced by its resolution number 8758, adapted November 25, 1980; and WHEREAS, The owner of the property at 555 Summit has appealed this decision to the City Council and a public hearing for this purpose was conducted at the Council's regular meeting on January 8, 1981, and the Council, having heard all interested parties and considered all of the files and records therein, does hereby RESOLVE, That the appeal of Dorothy Hosking for an area- density variance so as to per�nit the occupancy of the premises at 555 Summit Avenue as a 4-unit dwelling, and a variance be granted so as to permit such occupancy with the provision of five off- street parking spaces, the granting of said appeal being based on the following findings: 1) The strict application of the regulations would result in peculiar or exceptional practical difficulties to or exceptional undue hardship upon the owner as dis- tinguished from mere inconvenience by reason of ex- ceptional narrowness, shallowness, shape or area of the property, and by reason of exceptional or extraordinary physical conditions of the property. 2) The said hardship was not self-created. 3) Granting of the relief can be made without sub- stantial detri�nent to the public good and without sub- stantially impairing the intent and purpose of the zoning ordinances. COUNCILMEN Yeas Nays Requestgd by Department of: Hunt-• Levine In Favo[ Maddox nn�nnano� _ Against BY $howalter Tedesco �Ison Form Approved C' Atto y Adopted by Council: Date Certified Vassed by Council Secretary BY sy Approved by EVlayor: Date _ Appcoved by yo for Submission to Council By - BY WMITEf� - CITY CLERK � 4 �4. C PINK - FINANCE COURCII ��,ls��V CANARY - DEPARTMENT G I T Y O F S A I N T PA U L 9�LUE - MAYOR FII@ - NO. �� Council Resolution Presented By Referred To Committee: Date - Out of Committee By Date 4) The granting of variances herein will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property, nor unreasonably diminish or impair established property values within the surrounding area, nor in any other respect impair the public health, safety, comfort, morals, or welfare of the inhabitants of the City of Saint Paul. 5) The variance requests are not based primarily upon a desire to increase the value or income potential of the parcel of land. 6) The proposed use of the property as a 4-unit dwelling is a permitted use in the existing zoning district. FURTHER RESOLVED, That the City Clerk shall mail a copy of this resolution to Dorothy Hosking, the Zoning Administrator, Planning Commission and the Board of Zoning Appeals. 2 . COUNCILMEN Yeas Nays Requestgd by Department of: Hunt�� Levi�e [n Favor Maddox McMahon B snowa�ter - __ Against Y ..�.�r� wiisorr �AN 2 2 1981 Form Approved by C t A rne Adopted , cil: Date — C ified P• _ed b o cil Se�retar BY �� JAN 2 3 199� Approved by Mayor for Submission to Council v by ;Vlayor: D t �_ By BY Pt�ts�D J A N 31 19 81 . _. _ . _ ; ; � . �; � - .� � . - . . . . �-. r. ` ,.. ' . � � . . - � � , � _ - �` , . � _ . . . , �_. .� . . �� f - .. . � . . . . . . . . _ . . .`. � - ,. � � . . , � . . , , r . , . � . . �"... - _ . . . �, . � , . . .. . � . . . . � . . . . � �i �- . . . , ��. � . - , . ' _ � � . . . . �-' -� ' � � � .. � � � � � � . - .. .. . .. - . � ' - , . . � •. � - .. . . .. _ , � . , � - � . _ � . . . . . . . -, .'. � � . . . � � _ .. .' � . . . - � - � � ._ �. � _ . . � . . .. . . . . _ . ' . � � . � ' . . . ___ . _ . -� • � � � � . . . � . , . . . , . . � � � . � � . . � , , - - �Tal1W�i'y 8� 1981 � _ _ - _ ltr. Ed 3tarr ' - Cfty �lttoarney _�� - . R� �►?s City 8s11 . , � , , : Dear 3irt . , . . , , , The: City Council t.c�Q4Ys aft�er ynblic hsat�3,ng, sdopted a mot�.oa�� . '' � � . �t!4 grsnt m appesl ot Doroth�r �osking to a deciaio� ot' t� _ ' ; - - , board ot' ZoninB ADDe�tls afiee�Zn6 P�P�1► dt 555 stteoit�Awt. - _ - �u iatlon +siso :irialuded sn approval.ot a psrking�variance for tt� a+uos proper3y. Will you plesse, p�tpare tt�e pr�psr � � resolution imgle�nting t.b,is 'actioni � • . � Yours v�ery truly� ` , , � _ � . , ` Roae Miac " - , City q.erk . � , � , . - , , ABOsla � _ , _ .� � ' � . - . � -, � . .. � . . . . ;k � . , � . - - � � . . . . . . . . . � � . . . � , � -�. j . _ _ . . - � . ,, , 1 , , _ ; , �,. _ � ,^ - , - • ,!i . � • _ . � � . , ' � t0�i°� o,� CITY OF SAINT PAUL �o '� DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT � ii=1�111�1 � :° ^ DIVISION OF PLANNING '�, n'"�� 25 West Fourth Street,Saint Paul,Minnesota,55102 GEORGE LATIMER 612-298-4151 MAYOR December 29, 1980 Rose P+li x, Ci ty C1 erk Room 386 City Hall St. Paul , Minnesota 55102 RE: Zoning File #8758 - Dorothy Hosking City Council Hearing: January 8, 1981 Dear P�adam: ` This letter is written in response to the appeal of Dorothy Hosking to a decision of the Board of Zoning Appeals. The Board denied Mrs. Hosking's request for a variance from the Zoning Ordinance pertaining to minimum lot size per room in an RT-2 residential district to allow construction of a house with two 2-bedroom apartments and two 1-bedroom apartments on her property at 555 Summit Avenue. The house is properly zoned to allow three units for a total of 9 rooms. The applicant applied for a variance to allow completion of a 4th apartment which would bring the housing density to 10 rooms , one over the maximum alloaled in the Ordinance. The Goard of Zoninr Appeals held a public hearing on the subject on November 12, 1980. Seven letters were received from property oumers within 350 feet opposing the granting of a variance. Eight persons spoke acrainst the variance. h1rs. Hosking and P1r. Donald Lais, representing Mrs. Fiosking, spoke in favor of the variance. The staff report recommended denial based on the fact that: 1 . The density proposed by the applicant was first permitted in an RP�i-1 zone not in the RT-2 zone and therefore could not be granted without impairing the intent of the Ordinance. 2. The request was not based on a hardship due to the exceptional physical character of the property. 3. The site plan did not show adequate off-street parking arrangements for four dwelling units. The Board denied the variance on a roll call vote of 4 to 0. A formal resolution denying the variance was passed by the Board at their PJovember 25, 1980 meeting. �O city of sai nt pau� . bo�rd of zt��ing ap�eals re�alu�ion zoning file n�r��r 875E da�e NoWember 25 1980 WHEREAS, DOROTHY HOSKING has applied for a variance from the strict application of the provisions of Section 61 .101 (f) of the Saint Pau1 Legislative Code pertaining to the allowable number of roons in an RP�-2 zoning district; and 4JHEREAS, the Saint Paul Board of Zoning Appeals conducted a public hearing an November 12, 1980, pursuant to said appeal in accordance aiith the requirements of Section 64.203(a) of the Legislative Code; and �JHEREAS, the Saint Paul Board of Zoning Appeals based upon evidence presented at the public hearing, as substantially reflected in the minutes attached hereto, made the following findings of fact: 1 . The site plan does not show adequate parking arrangements for the required parking spaces for four dwelling units. 2. The request for variance is not b�sed on an exceptional physical character of the property and strict application of the regulations would not result in exceptional undue hardship upon ±he o�.vner of the property, and that any inconvenience that exists is self-created. 3. Since Minnesota Statutes (Section 462.357, subdivision 6, clause 2) and the Zoning Ordinance (Section b4.205(b)) prohibit as a variance any use that is not permitted under the Ordinance for the property in the zone where the effected person's land is located, it appears that the variance cannot be grarited w�ithout substantially impairing the intEnt and purpose of the Ordinance because the applicart's request �vould only be permissible under a minimum density first alla,�ed in the RP1-1 zoning district. N04J, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Saint Paul Board of Zoning Appeals that under authority of the City's Legislative Code, Chapter 64.206, the variance to allow ten rooms instead of nine be denied for property located at 555 Summit and described in the legal description of the application for variance and the site plan attached hereto. . m(��('� ��/ Mr. Peterson Decisions of the Board of Zoning Mr. t�Joods Appeals are final subject to appeal S�C�n�e� b�/ ___ to the Ci ty Counci 1 4�ri thi n 30 days �� faV�r 6 by anyone affected by the decision. ��a1�1St ° , F. MINUTES OF THE MfETIPdf OF THE BOARD OF ZONIf�G APPEALS Itd CITY COUNCIL CHAP�BERS, ST. PAUL, MINP�ESOTA, (VOUEtABER 12, 1980 F'RESENT: h1u�e. Morton; P1essrs. Grais, Kirk, Peterson and 6�loods of the Board of Zoning Appeals ; htr. Jeronte Segal , Assistant City Attorney; f4s. Lane of the Division of Housing and 8uilding Code Enforcement; P1s . Beseman, h1s. Daykin, Mr. Grochaia and P�r. Tedesco of the Planning Division Staff. ABSEPjT: f��iie. Summers ; Messr. Parrish. The meeting was chaired by Gladys Plorton, Chairman. UOROTHY HOSKING #B75II) : A request for variance in lot size to alTow two, 2-bedroom apartments and two, 1-bedroom apartments on property located at 555 Summit. The appellant was present. There was opposition present at the hearing. P1r. Grochala showed slides of the site and reviewed his staff report with a recorlr,endation for denial . Four ?etters were received in opposition. Donald Lais , Attorney representing the appellant, 4U9 h1id��est Federal Quilding, stated that the appellant bought the property with the intention of building a single family home; the Housing Authority and the Historical Society reyuired two-story structur�e. Because the City rec�uired excavation by the appellant to remove all material and debris that was left from the previous home, it resulted in a much deeper excavation then was anticipated; instead of having 11 courses of block, the structure had 17 courses. He asked that -�he application be handled as a variance for townhouses whicPi are appropriate in an RT-2 Zone. He felt the appellant was il ]-advised to get involved in such a lar�e project when her original intent was to build a single family home. He requested the Qoard to approve the variance on the basis that the structure has three separate addresses and could be considered townhouses since townhouses are not defined in the Zoning Ordinance. Mr. Grochala commented that there is a definition of townhouses in the Ordinance which requires a different kind of building construction between the units than would be present in the existing structure. He also stated that it would not change the density. requirement for the site; the density limitations would stil� be violateci. P�1r. Segal stated that the variance request �NOUId constitute a use variance which is prohibited by statute. Also, in considering the application, a determination ►vould have to be made that a hardship pertaining to the 9and does exist. : f�1r. Lais commented .that since the project was started, interest rates and costs have gone up which were incurred by delays resulting from the Historical Society require- ments. He felt the hardship involved was because of delays which imposed a heavy burden on the property and the property owner and the elevation which the appellant had not anticipated. Mr. 4loods inquired as to whether a rezoning of the property to RP�-1 had ever been considered? Mr: lais indicated that it had not been looked into and felt it would be difficult to obtain the signatures necessary for a rezoning because of the opposition from the neighbors. H __ _____ ._.,....._.,___�. , ._. .�__ _.___..� ___ __. _ _ _ .___ __.__..�__�__,._ �. _ • DOROTFIY HOSKING (#8758) Page 2 C��arles Skrief, 552 Portland, spoke agair�st the variance. He said the nature of the project as constructed would have provided a duplex within a reasonable cost; any additional cost was the result of the appellant's monitoring of the con- struction and was self-created. The residents want to protect the integrity of the Ordinance and the neighborhood. He also felt there would be additional vehicular traffic on the street, additional density in terms of the number of people using public space in the area, and t•�ould be a detriment to the ho«ie o4vners in the neighborhood. Elberta (�1atters , 912 Lincoln , representing District 16 Summit Hill Association, spoke in opposition. She stated that there are density problems in the area wi�ich they are trying to soive, and more density without justificat�on would not be in the best interest of the neighborhood. Michael Hoffman, 405 Portland, meir�ber of the Ramsey Nill Association, stated that they support the City's Zoning Ordinance as it stands. He said the lot is not large enough to allow for the proposed 4 units , and also that there is not adequate parkin�. Rudolph Schnasse, 2Q Kent, said he endorsed the statements made by the previous residents who spoke in opposition and felt it would decrease the value of property in the area. There was discussion regarding the proposed parking and staff indicated that the appellant would have to meet the minimum width requiremen� for parking. Mr. Segal suggested that tt�e Qoard, in considering the variance, may want to determine whether there is sufficient parking on the property for the 4 units. Richard Veileu, 550 Portland, spoke against the granting of the varianee. Chris Ow ens , 820 Holly, member of District 8 Planning Council , reported that 3 years ago when the matter f�rst came up, there were se•✓eral pe�ple in�erestpd in purchasing the property. One of the reasons that there was support for P�s. Hosking's proposal was the fact that she was planning on building a duplex which would be more appropriate in the Historic Hill District. He said the original understading between h1s. Nosking and the community was that it would be a duplex and felt that perhaps there had been a breech of faith. He also mentioned that neither Ms. i�osking nor the Housiny Authority had natified tf�e district council of any changes that had been made. Donald 4Joods , 554 Portland, stated he supported the neighbors in opposing the variance request. Priscilla Farnharr,, 548 Portland, spoke against the variance stating concerns expressed by previous residents in opposition. Andrea Sond, attorney, 552 Portland, also representing the residents at 550 Portland, spoke in opposition. She reported that the Housing Authority sold the vacant lot to the present owner under a contract providing for the construct- ion of a duplex which was architecturally compatible with the area and its location on Historic Sumanit Avenue. She said the City has closely followed the progress of the construction to insure that the dwelling met the approved design in the HRA contract. She said there is specific reference to the obligation of the owner to remove any foundation debris that may have been left as a result of the demolition of a previous dwelling. Ar., hardship tha� may ?�ave beer �aUSed by the necessi'�y o` __._._____._. ._._- . .�___. ' ..__,..�._,....� ___-._____..�._.__�.��_. ..�,.._._�,._.._._ __. _ - - - __�_ ._. . . _.__ _ - �. . _. ___ .__ _ .�._ _.__. . ��. � UOROTHY HOSKING (#8758) Page 3 , of removing that debris and having left a larger excavation than anticipated, is clearly a risk that is on the present owner. She addec! that granting the variance would have a negative impact on the neighborhood and that parking was in short supply in that area. �1s. Hosking stated that when she bought the house, she had the right to expect that the house that had been demolished would have been torn down and hauled away. She said that she was not responsible for the changes made by the Historical Society and that it is now a house that she cannot afford. Jean Velleu, 550 Portland, asked the Board to respect the spirit of the Ordinance as it stands and the integrity of the neighborhood. Fieari ng no furti�er testi mony, P1s. h1orton cl osed the publ i c heari ng porti on of the rneeting. P�r. Peterson made a motion to deny the variance request based on findings 7 through 10 of the staff report and the fact that there is not adequate parking for the dwelling units. Mr. Gloods seconded the motion. The motion passed on a roll call vote of 4 to 0. Mr. Grais had previously left the meeting and u�ras not present for the r�oll call vote. Submitted by: Approve� by: __._ . � � ��'�� , `•^ �� , C�� '�� /�''l� ��c..� , > . ��.-�-c_ � �� ;� �; � ' Stephen Grochala Gladys Morton, Chairman _ � � _ _ ___._ _. _.. _ _ _. . ,... ._w._ ._ .._v_ _. _..._,.,---_ _ __ . . _ � . �:�;,:�=��a il :$ .,,,,� ,_ ��``'.'�sy� . . . CITY OF SAINT PAUL INTERDEPARTMENTP,L MEMORANDUM DATE: November 24, 1980 ' T0: Steve Grochala r .rt ' /' FROM: Mark Basten �;f /,j . RE: 555 Summit Ave. , Request for 4th Unit, Dist. 8, Zoning File #8758 Dorothy Hosking asked that I summarize the development of 555 Summit Ave. in order to show that she had only planned on building a duplex and not a fourplex. Apparently the pivotal event that precipitated the present configuration was when the elevation of the house was set. Mrs. Hosking was employing an architect by the name of Dick Krumm, who had prepared the initial set of approved plans. However, Mrs. Hoskings decided to have Capp Homes construct the building and to act as general contractor herself. In the transfer from builder to architect a vital piece of information was not transmitted. The architect had planned on cutting doti�rn the height of the entire site in order to set the house lower. Capp Homes did not pick up the discrepancy from the plan to the site and started construction with the existing grade level . In addition, the site had to be excavated �elow a previous foundation which in- creased the foundation costs. Since the house has ended up higher from street level than planned, the basement level is• much more exposed on the west side and was fitted with larger windo�vs. The basement then is a much more habitable space than originally planned. The bottom line of this is that: 1 . The deeper foundation required was more costly than a typical foundation would have been. 2. The error in setting the elevation of the building exposed more of the basement wa11s, allow�ng larger windows to be used. - 3. Mrs. Hoskings seems to be trying to use the potential of the existing building to offset the added expenses irrcurred because of the faulty siting of the house. I have worked with Mrs. Hosking on this project since the fall of '78 and my opinion is that she had not planned on a fourplex originally, but is now asking for four units only to utilize the building as it now stands to recoup her expenses. MAB:mw cc:File �� .� ,�-�. cc:Mrs. Hosking, 848 Nebraska _..,..,._.._._..,...... �::�=-�,�:�. .--°- r . .. .-�--�-�°�. ,�--� , .. ...._..._-� , � � „ f, �_ i, � � -�r b� a , .� � ,�� ,� ,�-�y �. • °`% a'`� ,`v��r��.�► .,�.--�--- � i, y�,.,, i� � � /�c--�=. � ,.�Z -//-l''r��t ,, a LU�� ?c:>>-L-c..,-� _ -1 1 .. . . . ,� ..! C.t � . ��1. ,;,�-�.�� C; -�- L�� , f � � � � - t-C�L L. _��-G-.=-� , , , ,,� �72 �..--�L.,E�'r�x_i:�..L_.- i��-' iG%-C. ., _'�Z-t__,._�.., �-�=-C-C.�.�� , L�� .] =) J- ,..-�►-,.�-�'y�'L7`7ZL..� GL-LL_r' C-�G-��--�-z--C-G-( -��.�c. ��- � � � �-'L�-'L.c r � � L{(� �i� ,L .��L�' f' s l___ , j�' ,,, `- y ;1 � Cr �'J�2.�s+L-!'�2.� .�-'�--- /��t.-c...�./ f/�c_-cv.�C:.[,v j �-- � � � �j�� _ LG'-�-.t�`�y't+ �"' [�-s1�G-c�.--v .C�_.� .��'�J��.�-�l-�C�7)-'Y)7�L��;� __Y'z��-�'L ./�' i�GL::..-,;.--►'Z_i��tY -J�-i'�.L.� • � .. /° � ,�1_<; �t--�(.--'--�-"��r C�:.�'��.,�Li�l�;[.�t�2yrC�s.�._ �"� Gi.. �J7'2.i.-a_' �/✓t/<� /� , � / � ✓1 /�L'�Lu-�/Le�=-G°Jl� '--��.Z%E'.� � �� .��"Z_c'..:_.t`- �,--�-c�-'�`.---�� ..+ .., � ' � _ � _ _.. .�c.h--�--�-C.�t....-C �� .�,,, �c..-�; _.c.t.�-�_:i r��-2.,� r�•z..,�, . E , _ . . J : ,; L : � . � ,: .-�--7� ..� � , fi - , '�' O�� .�--��L-6 t�,�Z�2-.•--�,.' . ;i..-�L� --��L- C�e t-c�`.-+Z�<�. . ,G ��t-�'C., :% , c -� 4 / , ' � . . . , �/t . �- . > e � � . . . . . ../�7�L6�.:..-� �.�i..-.i,.ti�G'"�'1-c�L � �_t-L�L-.L'. .-�...y,u'�,,,i G"-7-�-� �c{-2.-��:..ia-:.G� ' 7 i %/ Y �' '/ �% ,�c,— '�1.,�- '�� .��-�--c"_�€,c.�..J-z__E_,,�-1c_-c:_�.__. ...•�.�t_�.z-:�c-L. __/�'-� .�L4�-�t; i7�7'��LLcl2!"�c'i �'''.-t'r�-'?-�-�"� r,G ��. ��C..yL_G' L.C�� ..�vL�t_�_"<�� ` ,�w%lr L�.G�t;.� �7 f' � // l � J ` - ��l�/ .� •� •� . ;/�-�t�2.--t`�H-G� .'9�-,d�--t�-' �� SZ.�-�•�.�-7'Z- .�<� G��r ,_!�L-t-a?i: U ^ / .,,C_/- y�� 7^/� . . .. . . . . �y:'�./ �L�C.� ..��c=%�YLL..��if—G�''�YL2�-•°l-L�,/L-a�L_,6a=-L.� �_,�-sU1-L C_.�i"C_ i'LG' . ... . . � �, /% ..�J1-1-_�y � �� /G� �2..'�-�.-�'�� E'-��./ ��-�=�" � 3rz� �^�--�" .,�G L� — �-L-' / ' �7�i7-�:L�. �'�- �"Y �L-tJ/ rG��-�,/�� / !�;(' �" �/ x � _ . . . . . '3'Z !2�`.z-'a�C.-c'��YIJ. r�""" ..- `� � -L L�� W �l�L��-C.C� ./��yyZ-E." ,�--�`�L•-�� . .. , �. I -' .' �"'� "j��' rly�. ^r��"`' L , . . . . ' . ..��'i..,-"L✓. ✓'��"L _�J �L-GL�YL_t".-l�✓ .i�L-Gi"-C.G.�.� , .w�,Gc .�-C,�-12/CC..�L[�L�li c �� C� CG 'Ld�1-�'- �e.-v-�..��✓,��-�'.r._ C��i�r � �.,-��i..,�z-�"' � � ' -� � � � : . ,,,„ ; , - � , . . l :�- .-�a'�-z �. �---� ��.�.�2- -��..::� � ��-�� __ _ .. _ � �� ,,, - � � _ . , , . ...__ � �- ,�t�z�s�: ,-�u�`��w. ; .. � ,,/' �- � _ __ .. __. /, � �� 'ir ^�',� ,�-z� �,�-�-c'� .��t t .-'��E�'.�[.,� �'... . .. .. . . . .,. . ..... .....:. . ..... . ^ , ^ � ? � � . ... . . . .G(fYt-t� =�/�'U�� d G.,[--t.".o C.�� G✓ �--� c.'�-- �,t�t�z.i ��..-(.� , . ' . , � .,' , � , � � / �/ -� / / � ,�iL�yL�s'--1� ��-L� C.J9'2ai .�- Gz..� "�l�� .�-G s.2��. .. _ .�w/_...��! �G�--�-�"�. ��/�� ..�...t�=-�� Lv .-'�`�. c.�- ��L�J�'e1J,c�,� _ ; . ; ;/ ; ? � % o r� �" �._ - L�_<%y�"��--d-t-r%�'.,.L*�'z--E�_c�_ ��C-�-v�. ,--�� , LC.�- � 7 /� � : �� U�c... ��-r�� u.�-�"Lc..�-L�.- .�-y2-�-6� .-�'r=-�., _ � � � � �� , • . �'..��.,c�(:..�C�� ,.-� . _�r.�r�-� ,j�`�.c.�-i,,.,.,z...�-� .. , , � �- � _ , • "�: � , � � l . �.. . ��`c�L' C�—'�—� ��u �� `�� .-��t-,�-rL-`�-- �`��c...,t� G�/ L-' �� > lt�t�t�-----�� Lu� ��`�'...�. � �� ' .��.e.., -!� : � � �.?-�� I c � / - �-�=� ��`� _tic.�l�-C.�� /�-�L�-Z-� �^�i'�n"z-�� `-7-�--�-'��., / , , �� / �/ �� F.��2t_{-�., _��t_._- �li�s �' �--C.i ��L�-�� r,2C�t��_...i!'.'-y�'Z.,-G.c� - (`�� -,jz��, c� ..1 �-�'_��, .,,�-� ! �r� .�7-1_-t�c.-�.� _�c.�'�z� � �r.��cn.�� .��°-� �-L ,��-�-..�—�.�� io-�.c�. .r�v-L-c�.C{� '. � y-- /� -�'- / - ' 9 _ + ��i!C,�-t'� ,,�-'=i �2L.Z��l.-- � iL..L' �-C;'-rL-'C_.(�t'--a-z_�_, ....�'.�X_/a. v � � , l � .,�2r2,i�,t.,�-C-��` ��2, iL-l.�-�L �i �.��G°��--'�-d�� -lf��-', .� � „ / �' � /� fi rt.I.s�i��...�� /�� v2.�i.2-LK�G(� � �,.L�-��'� ��-�°L'�' �[-L'Lc%cc..�.-��c..�, /� V� � //' / � � J (.�-�-''Z-�'LC2� L-�-r✓ �'✓ �'f��C i.�""L•c.''i ! ,'� ,_�.,/�_..- `�--i--K1 ��`""-�- `� r -[ � J/�`�'' / �i./'LGd"��r2� /�G"G�_. /:l-�'�L..�L-,�%C,� G�'7/�. G7-YZ---�� j"-""^�.� �.�-is's--iGC1 . . . .. .�-� C�� ..4„-[�2�Lt�`/ Q-')/j� ��[�G/Y'L�`csL.r�f �t.-4--�V i a--L�'�.•^L�./ • . / � 1 (.%,_ 3d �/i � �/ . .. �� _��,iGLC..- �C-�v Zz--✓ �� i�?.� f-^��-' ,--�zat-�/ c✓.�=�2��.�'� �_. J , (,,_ /�/ • y/� . _ � , . . .. ..r-E=�-Y�l/'. �,..�:'-� T /�iC..-C�.��t�,�'YZ. �,/��-'`�-'--E`/ `�� L�--L�,�"� . (� / � r� ,�,- t_�'"�j 1N�t.�-�-r— .�.�c-=-��--��.-�--�-t..- , , rJ`'� j� �j''' /j /� �' "� �' J i r J . . ... � G � '--C�/��'7�.. ` ��Z•�./� /L.�� .ti��....�i --!`�--v�-� . . � J `� I� � � / � / `'� � ' /, . ._ . . .�'�v�� / Z-"�L.a- � � �G<-� Z�, "c ..... ..... . ... . w/vl.�C�`�-�"` J � /'-�S ---I`L-�J��t.._,.._r-�LC� �t2/ �%��C"LL�y� ' � .�/!/yZ,,`/�:✓ � � ([`� �'�,_//. /,' // �, . � J - ..� V�--�-�G�`�`�'L��*�[� /J'��?'YC.-lG.�+� G�'YZ-�--' ,�C�{.L-'�LL.-C�"t/._iL�%1--G�,,,r .... .... . _ . ._. _ . . .. _ r . � J �1 � � L�' � � � �� , _ �.�'�,�it.--G+`-�--'s..+'t.�"- 'Z'�..✓ �`.1[r✓t� �:.� �3'Lt�/ l' ' , _ :, _ . _ ��/� ��. ��.�� ,l�C%� �� --��s .�—�' _ _ � /� . J � ///�/�� . ' ` � . . . .. . . .. . , L�/ �s / '�."�� K I� j�— •7�(./� N ✓f'�{/� . . � V - n . / � � � � ... .. . .. � �� / _ ��.{'�A_ 1 / � / � b'L-d �i C•�--� '."r7--�Lc" �� -�Z-�✓ � JY`c�S2�. _.. ._ _ ... . � ^ ` _' A y e �/�j't-r'..�-�"L�4� ....�'�i ,sL�l��E� �-°�'""- s_ �-� i ;< � _ _ . - 7 � �.. _ _ .�.t.�- �:� �� ' _ . ,�. �� . _ _ __ .__ _ ,/J�^�.�i TL'�G-rv.-! _ � � �v .� "�'ZGL� � �='� _ _ _ �.� c ` ' _ _ _ . _ ___ _ _ _ __ _ _ . _ _ __ _ _ _ _ . . `��t. �: ��.��.,, �, _ _ � � _ . __ _ _ _ i �. _ , , , .. _ - LA��' OFFICE5 � BRICs � S A ;vD MORCrAN CHARLES K�.RHIGGS!IOd�•19�81 R.$COTf DAYIES J.t�e[[.�SoRYOV PROFESSIO�aL ASSOCIATION Jwxes W.LTITLETIELD $wxvei H.?foxowv Jaa.B.C.tiv nt!doara,da. CuLe OEt[LEH . STCVY\Z.fiari.e.q � � A.LAUAF.vCC D.1\'15 RFCHAHD G.��A&IC FRAN% IIAMMO\'U AS:pBEW C.IjECHGB Leox.�an J.Keres - � 2200 FIRST NATIO\AL BANIi BUILDING . M.T.Fwez..vsae . B.C.HART JLHG�7F.�.iL15 lmix?t.5vc�.ivw� SAINT PAUL,bIIN!QESOTA 85101 Bos�ie L.Seaezovsar BI:RAlBD P.FIIIEL � $TECE t1.�R.�.vD gve-r E.S�;•vsov Mnaa ti.N'zsrns Dt.J.Ga�vtv,Je. r � Atd' A._�L�cuv D�vin C.F�'oesnEec Jerrse�F.Saew Joxx J.DfcNseLr 2432 I D S CEti TER Dev�n G.G88F.YI90 - GP�+i.a H.Swn:vso� Dect�B.S.�.vn D[cNe�r.V.SarKOCa,,.�R. � BETFY L.Hcx TP.HF.\CE N.DOYLE MIN:r'EAPOLIS,�tI�7\ESOTA 53402 Cnea:.es R.Her.rox� RICAeRD A.IZYLP. � A.��BEA�L.BOVD Jovarnev H.M.oeow�. Meeriy H.Ft�a ROLNSORUEti50NY HOA£8T L D zs (612) 291-1215 YY.TE@ H.Sr.ea Raceean fI.}�..arn PRILIP L.B2tUtiER � $Yf V8L I..RwHSOV TkCDY H.SCFIROEH � pTM� y� 'j (�Q Meat L.IYPLL RONALDE.ORCAAHD � NOVG1llAJe.L 1� � �.70o DA�'IDJ.ALLEJi iouv R.Xr.x�etcx . � Roa�L.Ha.vssx JUFIN R.Faianvav Dw�•tn J.SYr;vcia Meacsasr K.Sevecs DAYIHL J.COLE,JB. BHII�" G-BELISLH YFTEB W.$IygIYS � MABY$CBAf'Y?1EH EVIN6EB DOVOL�S L.SHOR DSIClL�F:L H.$7BfiATEH � MICRAF.I.H.JF.AOYIMUS RICIidStD D.A.\DEHSOY OP Cbl.'�SEL � Rccaeen E.�eea FR+.vx N.Gitsae!1 AEPLY TO Saint Paul Board of Zoning Appeals 25 West Fourth Street Saint Paul, Minnesota 55101 Re: Variance File #8758 Ladies and Gentlemen: On behalf of myself, as an owner of a single family residence at 552 Portland Avenue, and my neighbors at 550 Portland Avenue, I submit this letter in opposition to the request for a variance from the zoning applicable to the resi- dence at 555 Summit Avenue, the corner of Summit Avenue and Kent Street. HRA sold the vacant lot at 555 Summit Avenue to its present owner under a contract providing for the construction of a duplex architecturally suitable for its location on historic Summit Avenue. Other people were interested in purchasing the property. The City of St. Paul followed the progress of the construction to ensure that the approved design was followed. I am pleased with the result and think that the City has made a valuable contribution to the character of Summit Avenue. Now, however, the owner, who obtained the property in competition with others interested in purchasing it, has applied for a variance to permit four units in the building rather than two. Under the applicable zoning, the square footage will not permit four units. �--�--------------�� r r =� �''�� • � � � �-� �� ,� ;�,� �-��;; . � ., ,, t� � �;� , .,;?� ___-------^---"' ' ��'� ..,:i �i ' - -- .,,-.-*�:�»."""'.:. < _,,,,._,... . ._...._ . ......:....:. ..._._ _.. _ ,__,, . .�. ...__ ...-___..._ _,.., __ __, - _ - __. . . L BRIGGS ,xn DTORGr1N Board of Zoning Appeals November 12, 1980 � Page Two The criteria upon which a variance may be granted are straight-forward: undue hardship resulting from a physical problem of the property, and not from problems that were created by the owner of the property. These criteria are not met in this case. Furthermore, a variance would have a negative impact on the neighborhood. Parking is in short supply: four of the five single family houses on the corner of Kent and Portland, one block from 555 5ummit, have no off-street parking. Density and traffic will be increased; �Ehe character of the City-approved new construction changed. Most important of all, granting a variance in this cas� will create a bad precedent: both in the application of zoning laws generally as well as in their application specifically in the case of the development of valuable vacant property on Summit Avenue. We respectfully request that the request for a variance be denied. Yours very truly, �, �t'r ��. �Y �p�...�.�� Andrea M. Bond ._ .__ __---_ _ .. .._ _ _. . _ _ ,, _.._,. .�,_.. ..:_..., . __.. _ ..._ . ,�_.. __ __ :_ . -.- +/� SS4 Portland Avenue • St. Paul, PM1 55102 November 6, 1980 Soard of Zoning Appeals 25 Flest Fourth Street St. Paul, NI�i' S5102 �.: Zoning File ��8758 Zoning File Name HOSI:ING Gentlemen: I believe that an examination of all the records, correspondence, and minutes--there at City Hall (and also perhaps of the minutes of Planning Districts 8 and/or 16)--��;ill very likely show that the lot at the corner of Summit and Kent was obtained by the present owner primarily for the purpose of constructing thereon a d�aelling for the oc,mer. In order that the structure match the large scale of residences on Summit, it was decided that a "dcuble house" would be acceptable. I am not aware at what point the structure then became a three unit residence. idow we learn that the owner �aishes to make it a four unit operation. I am not in favor of the variance being proposed. 1. The structnre has already lost much of its protected status a� an owner-occupied d��elling and--in my vie�v--has become basically, just another rental property and should be judged as such. As a rental property, it has started out on a very favorable financial base--a large corner lot made available at extremely low cost. (There may also be certain tax breaks availahie to this new constr�ction, but I'm not sure of this point.) I make these points, for it does not seem likely that financial hardship would be incurred by the ot�ner if the request for �a variance is not granted. 2. There are only three garages provided on the property in question. The streets in this part of town cannot acco��.to more street parking and the zoninb laws, requiring appropriate on-site parking for new construction�would seem to preclude a fourth unit in the structure. The process of .expanding a dwelling into a four-unit rental property has apparently been a gradual one. It is now time to call this process to a halt. A triple unit is questionable on many counts. A four- unit status should not be approved. Yours truly, ��,z-�.�� ..-..�...-�... _ `C� s�: '�'� :� 9 �ry ':. ' �-�' T�_., ��v 2 .y � ;9 � y�� r��y<i '� �st /� w.a .x..z� t I .,r:-sa � Donald Z. 'oods ` `_/� NOVEMBER 7, 1980 r�1R. STEVE GROCHALA ZONING DEPARTMENT CITY OF ST. PAUL ST. PAUL, MN 55101 DEAR STEVE: AS A�NEIGHBOR LIVING 4JITHIN 350 FEET OF THE REQUESTED VARIANCE ON THE �ART OF MRS.. DOROTHY HOSKINGS I WANT TO GO 0� RECORD AS OPPOSING THE VARIANCE ON THE FOLLO'rJING GROUNDS: -- I DEPEND ON THE CITY TO UPHCLD ITS ZONING ORDINANCES TO ALLO'✓J FOR NEIGHBORHOODS WITH CONSISTE��T STANDARDS THAT ARE DESIRABLE. --I CAN SEE NO LOGICAL REASON WITHIN THE CURRENT ZONING ORDINANCE � i0 LEGALLY GRANT THJS VARIA�iCE. TH� PROPERTY O��Jf�ER HAS EXCEEDED THE ALLOWABLE PERMIT AP�D SHOULD NOT NOW BE GRANTED A VARIP.NCF., SINCE THE DECISIONS �1ADE WEP,E OF TH� OWNERS OWN CHOOSING. --I AM CONCERNED ABOUT THE DENSITY OF THE NEIGHBQRHOOD. --THE ALREADY CROWDEC PARKING COi`JDITIONS WILL BECOME WORSE. --THERE 4JILL BE AN I��lCREASE IN Ti-!E TRAFFIC If�! THE �JFIGHBCRHGOD . --THE UNIT IN QUESTIOh ORIGINALLY PLANNED FOR TWO DWELLINGS WILL NOT ALLOW FOR ADEQUATE PRIVATE SPACES FOR ITS RESIDENTS�. IN VIEI�J OF THE ABOVE MEfvl"IONS FACTS AND THE CONCERN OF MY hEIGHBORS I URGE YGU TO RECOMMEND AGAIPJST THE GRAPdTING OF THE �RIANCE TO MRS. DOROTHY FIOSKINGS. SINCERELY, U'� ��~ �..w,�,-�-,,,,.,.' -�a =. -� � JEAN VELLEU '� ° '`� � r� ` '' '��° 7� �� - . 9, R�:�� '�� ;� i._x�i i3 !,1 k::l,:� �'..--r+""�_._...._..>_. -�J y� ti� �� :+.�rwM-:�.'�"r . . . . � �`� -��,�� - � �. � � y � � � � _ _ .. . ._ _ t __ _ _ _ ... ___ _ _ �_. _ _ . _ _ _ . V_ � ._. _ _ _ ___ _._ _. . � �/'j ' '_ y�L .�� . c�o i.• 11C"li Fj l� • � S�. ;'�:�u�-� -��t1 ,�510?_ i�i�ve:�'��el �� l��C Boa,c, �f Zonin� A�c�eals 2; �:e�t ��urtl: St. 5�.. r'�!21 :��i,I �j102 t''iC- i r��11�1� �''ll_8 :1�. ��7�j �G�!11:1� T''1�@ s';ai_1E I-��S:':1!i%� L�,�ries a.z�! �:entl:�:;1en �i �}le L�el'dd ':i'i�an�� ;��u f�x as::inzi �:a�� nini�� ab�ut t,.e h�use i:::«iecii��;;el;r s�ut�n �f �urs. �::e h�tiT� t�,atc=?ec , �i;;en t:itl� be?�;ilcier:�ent, th� sr}�racic pr��r�ss tx�ere sinc� �YCaVaLi�n ue,�ari a��ut a ;rear a,:�. �ut ��e �ls� �•:�atc�e�� i.� ca?:_ilj Y�ecaasc z:�� 'oe7_�:;ve� tl�a� a �er.:�i� h�d been �rani�F�r, t� aaild a tt�:�-:.�'� :iily ::�::ie and c�n- �'zc;euf; t��,t �t.e rules z��i.l1 'r,e ;cher�d t�. �.:e still have �h�� idct.ce beca�lse �A;e bel:ieve ��at the cit� �f ��. ra�;l Z�.iI_� a'bi:�e by i�s ;��:n rules. ��.�e �bjcct t� t�ie request;ec va��ance t� al1�c�:= ��<<r (�� tnr�r-.,�} �l i11 i;S G l, J�� ',�'J�Li'-A LI 1 t'�, lY v E. �'.�X' t:�P�� n T�c�S��iS: (1) T;:_ere t�t�uld be an increas� ab�ve �e; ��_ 1i:lits zn �he t�iz:lb�r ��' �e�r��L livi�� i.r� a c�:� ^�t�ed a�e:� . (2) 1�he��e 1•:��.�7_d �;e J_ac� �f priv�� s�ac� "�r L!:�� cc?tpa�z�s �f 75:� Sv:.i_:�it �1v�. , beca��se tf_� ��ruc� a.re itsel� �ccu;�zes �i�e .r:a;;�r. ity o_f �h� av^ ilable larzd . ` t3) I��'��ands on �;ity servic�s c�.��;1:� als� increase. (4} ?=�rr�i:�J spa ce� already a 7�:�r�o�e:a, �a�?ild be a�grava ted • t��e �ar'�ii�� si^ace at 5�� Su:.l:ait i�ve. is inadeq�a �e. ir� a?r�ady �pus;;� Lrafzic ?�r�uld li�iet��ise incr�ase. (5) Tt�e charac��er �f �his nei��^�r'n��d �;�ul� ch�n�e U�it�� in- crease� a�pulai,i�n der�s;ty �u� �_f ��eepin� �:�ith �1�:; �n�e�� f z�nin�l la��:s. :�i^;t �f us durin� t�� t�ast �"etti� years nav� t-:��'�_eu cs:tre:�ely ha�d '_� ��ir�`� �ur �0-�J.as-��ear-�lc, F_o..1es i�� .,�:,,;� ia�ce ,:z�h z�.:in; at�u� bai; din�; c�des.Ji�le li'ae.•lise ��ect �i�� these c�des ar�c'� �r•�:irarzces t�li7_1 be r�spec�eu in ne�� c��:nstructi�t�. :•�xs. i��s;�i��, has s� �ar ch�sen t� i��re ��e z�ni�� rdin�nce , evex� th�u;�h shc :�ZUSt have r��e:s full;T ati�.�are of its ir.iplicati�ns a11 al�n�;. as uirec� �ei�:-�b�rs t�ae feel tr�� :tr ri�h�s and c��cerns sn�a�� :e res�ected , particu�.arly sir.ce t?�ey han bee� s�e7_led o�t in the �rd?na:�ce r�f�re �he fac,. =•;e tr±t�t tha t ,�;�� i�;z1I ta:�e o�zr objec��i�ns irzt� seri��s c�nsice�� t?�n as v�u .;tei;;h th� f:;c�s in thi s rnu �i,er. Sincerely� �` / - ^�-----�.e.-...,-...._....,..—..,....., _.,_,._.."'^..4._.....-.-....� . . fc.-��GL� �� "✓/2-e,.L%1 !.J-� �.�`-1/F"s 2�C -� � �� ^;� � ,� ,-�, ,__�.�__�..�.i RaU�l," an� Eva ScY�nasse , ..� �'_� y� fe �'��e �s � i '..� �� / � � . . � x ': t} `^'^'°..n•-...�»��, ..—.�..�.i .�� '°""�....�w . _ .�:,-. ... .._. _._.. _,.___......_. ., . _ . ._.,... ..._'•-_._�.......,�.... __,_.. , �., . � .. ..__ ,__..,,.._.....�...._....___.,.�.___�..-�.__.-._.._....___.__.. .. � . . y_ . . . ... _..._......"",._.,,_'._._.._...„......_-,.._,�.._....,._.__ . _ , . �..ww u.. :::...�.��;.�:� . _�.._.� _ . .� `_� 548 PORTLAND AVENUc SAIiVT PAUL, MN. 55102 • . � � .y: `�� 1� f } 'r�_ ,� R.�� .s � � ��p r��' - . ' 1r';'�;�'�!! [` y�5 T0: Board of Zoning Appeals 25 West Fourth Street � Saint Paul , Minnesota 55102 FROM: Priscilla G. Farnham � , SUBJECT: Variance Fi1e #8758 � DATE: 10 November 1980 In response to a notice sent to me about a hearing on application for a variance, zoning file #875$, by : Mrs. Hosking at 555 Summit Avenue, I wish to voice opposition to granting such a variance. Since we have lived in this neighborhood for 18 years, we have seen it progress from many multiple-unit dwellings toward single and double-unit housing. This trend stabilized the character of the neighborhood and greatly improved it. Even with this positive trend, parking is still a problem, as the number of multiple-unit houses in � the area is still too high. Granting a variance to allow 4 units instead of 2 would reverse this desirable trend, as well as increase our parking difficulties. I strongly urge that such a variance be rejected. ;�. �.�:` ' ,'f�� f ., fs .r� �� .��Y . . i�a�>,,�i,�� . . . . . :i',''"4: �� i' . . �,..a+�+°'� ".►��"""" � . � . . .. ('�_ �� ..�+..'�"'"°`��,.�" � v�q� � . �{�,...�- �ti � . ... a 3 � � y V ,� �"� k:r.aZ � y �.i T%'`j iT t +��•�'� . � . , . �� ' -�� 5 p� r � �j � . . . � � � . . � . . � .S . . . . . . . . . � . . .. �,.�..�..... ...._ _....._ _.. .....,._.... ..».......-.....,.�........��..... �...-•--.....�-.�.�..-..�.s...n�:.......,...+...m-:.�.�.��..r...�w._... ' .� �� .. . � . . . ..........�...--........+�..-�+-,.�---. ........,.... ._.T-.._�a...�_..�..-�-....+.-�»�-+..-.-_...... - � ... � . f :� . . .. . • episcopai perish of ;,�---= '� -�r�;��, ":. . W` � ;,, .,�;. - �� a f �!,� s ;'�"� c,. ,p'�� *a� �„� " .s�: .4.u:;�. ,.-.- . St � .�O H l�l the evangelist November Z0, 1980 Boa.rd of Zoning Appeals 25 West Fourth Street St. Paul, MN 55102 Dear Sirs, The Parish. of St. John the Evangelist who own the property on the west side of Kent Street between Summit Avenue and Portland Avenue do object to the granting of a variance requested by Dorothv Hosking for 555 Summit Avenue. There is so little off-street parking in the area now that in the winter it is frequently impossible for all those at-' tending church services to find parking space in the Parish parking lotsjas the space is filled with cars of those living in the area. The problem is further aggravated when trying to clear the lots of snow. Should Ms,. Aosking provide. adequate and convenient off-street parking fox foux units at 555 Summit Avenue, the. Parish would withdraw its objections. Yours truly� , � .- ��t� �;- Parish o St. John the Evangelist by William Plummer, Treasure.r WP/dr Enclosure. � ��;�,�a.--�---"""�--� 's � �-X� �'"---- ,�r��; �s �� t ..�.,�:,.'a=' .� <;.� k+._. , _�� , fr �w,� � 7 �;. '1 `?a� _.'.:., �� _.. . t � ,wV �c:, ♦ a;:„?+ ` �v,..��_„'.-;--:':.:� � ..�"r}r . . . . SIXTY KENT STRE�T ST. PAUL, M1NN. 55102 TELEPHONE 225-7651 552 Portland Avenue St. Paul, rLinnesota 55102 November 12, 1980 Board of Zoning Appeals 25 tJest Four�h Street Saint Paul, Minnesota 55102 Dear board members: As the owner of a single family residence at 552 Portland Avenue I wish to state my opposition to the granting of a zoning variance for 555 Summit Avenue (your file ��8758) . The application for the variance fails to meet the legally prescribed requirements for the chanoe: the physical character of the lot in question does not pose an "undue hardship" to the owner, nor is any problem encountered by the owner not "self created." The increase in the number of units in the already constructed builda.ng from two to four, as the applicant requests, would adversely affect the neighborhood. It would increase the density of persons living i.n the area, exacerbate an aZready difficult parkin� situation, create additional vehicular traffic an residential streets, and, m�re geaerally, retard the stabilization of the neighborhood. In the past several years many multi-unit d�vellings have been returned to single and, double-unit housing. To permit the construction or, more precisely, the redesign of a duplex structu re in this area from a double unit to a multi-unit would conflict with this desirable trend. It would certainly aCt to discourage the many persons like myself who have invested considerable money, time, and vast quantities of "sweat equity" to create and maintaxn an attractive resi.3ential area. I strongly request that the variance request be denied. Sincerely, �� /=� � ; � ?`G°'� �i' �`l, Charles Sk`rief -....,____� � r ��-�--_."`------r_,._.,,�`�—.�.�,� . . . � ..� . r`:� t�,t� ? �'. � r 9 "'^..'r+.. . .. . . . . � a.�.se '+,�/ _ � ;,x ....""'-„�°�"'^' . ... . ?H��, �. ._ f , m �� :�' -:�� . .,,,,,,.-.._"�'.,,,,w.. � '1..�-a:_'a ,....�,�e...,. . ^a..�. . . � �..�„� � � . . _.. �� -___._ _. ...,,.. ...... .. ..-.....�.�,._.._ �-._ ._ _.._t,._. ._...._._. _.�._...,.. _._.... -.�...�,.- " ' _ _'_ ' ..�.. . . . � . r_ . .. �... ._.......,.......,...:-_.................. __ ....._:__'_'G._,.._...-....._....__..v. _-_,_� .. . ..... .. .. ...�.._ . .._..,.-.-. . .......-._. .. :_..._._-•-_,,..... �_.... • ZQi�JING STAFF REPORT 1 . A!'PLICArJT: DOROTHY HOSKI�JG , DATE OF NEARING 11/12/80 2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CLASSIFICATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CURRENT PLANNING & ZONING COMP�ITTEE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS Rezoning ❑ Variance [X7 Special Condition Use ❑ Administrative Review ❑ Determination of Similar Use ❑ Other ❑ Change of Nonconforming Use ❑ Other � 3. LOCATION: 555 Summit Avenue. 4. LEG�iL DESCRIPTIQ�l: Except the N. 4II' , Lot 11 , Block 22, Auditor's Subdivision 11 . 5. PRESENT ZONING: RT_2 ZONIPdG CODE REFEREPdCE: Sections 61 .101 (f) & 64.205(b) 6. STAFF INVESTIGATION & REPORT: DATE 10/31/80 BY Stephen Grochala A. PURPOSE: A variance in lot size from 11 ,000 required by the RT-2 schedule of regulations to 10.076 sq. ft. to allow two 2-bedroom apartments and two 1-bedroom apartments or a total oft�f rooms. _ � B. SITE & AREA CONDITIONS: The applicant's structure is a ne�v house built on a lot sold by the Housing & Redevelopment Authority. The site is on Summit and Kent, the northeast corner. Other uses in the area �nclude the St. John's parking lot across Kent, a large house with apartments to the east, and a duplex to the north. Across Summit is a single family house, a 6-unit apartment building and a vacant lot. C. ORDINANCE CITATION: Section 61 .101 (f) provides that in an P.T-2 zone the total number of rooms permitted shall not be more than the area of the parcel in square feet divided by 100. Section 64,205(b) states that the Board of Zoning Appeals cannot "permit as a variance any use that is not permitted under the Ordinance for property in the district ��here the , effected person's land is located.° D. FIfJDINGS: 1 . The applicant purchased the property with the intent to build a duplex. 2. The applicant did have to meet Housing & Redevelopment Authority development controls designed to-make the new structure more compatible uiith existing architecture on Summit Avenue. 3. The size of the applicant's lot in square footage (10,076.18) arould allow use of the structure for two 2-bedroom apartments and one 1-bedroom apartment for a total of eight rooms. (Nine rooms would be allowed. ) 4. The RM-1 zoning district density schedule t�oulc; allow 11 roons on this site. Rezoning to RM-1 would permit use of the site for 4 units with a total of 10 rooms. 5. The RT-2 district allows a maximum of 4 units on any zoning lot if the lot also meets density regulations in Section 61 .101 (f). 6. The applicant's request constitutes a request to build more habitable rooms than is permitted under the RT-2 schedule of regulations. 7. The request constitutes a request for a use variance because the use requested ��ou1d only be permissible under a minimum density allowed first in the RM-1 zoning district. 8. The Board of Zoning Appeals is prohibited from granting such a variance. 9. It appears that the strict application of the regulations would not result in exceptional undue hardship upon the owner of the property, and that any inconvenience that exists is self-created. 10. Since h1innesota Statutes (Section 462.357, subdivision 6, clause 2) and the Zoning Ordinance (Section b4.205{b) specifically prohibit as a variance any use that is not permitted under the Ordinance fior the property in the zone �!here the affected �erson's land is located, it app2ars that the variance cannat be granted without substantially impairing the intent and purpose of the Ordinance. 11 . It appears that the variance requested Hiould not impair adequate light or air to adjacent property, or unreasonably diminish or impair established property values within the surrounding area. . � DOROTHY HOSKING (�8758) STAFF REPORT PAGE 2 D. FINDIPlGS CONT' D. 12. It appears that the variance request is not based primarily upon a desire to increase the value or income potential of the parcel of land. E. S7AFF RECOMMENDATION: Based on findings 7 through 10, staff recommends denial of the variance request. �. _ ;. - _:_-.. . . , . _ _ _.. ,:....... _ �„_.._,. . ._ . , � .,. Y, .J.- . �; t . ; �.',•� � ,�-'''-�f �� . ; : : ._- . ; '� ., � . .. . e t : tr,,r�' , J i , , . . � J .r � ` . -- • ' •- f �_ � !, . . _.. . `1`. . ' . r�yr:=, s'",=.-S � - . ' . \ . � � • `. . .� . .. . �� .� � '. Y/ �._..... ........._..__.. .. ._ __ ^._ __....�__.__-......_._�.�.._— ._ � � t ...' 4 ."_"' � . -} . . y� - �� ! . ... ..� .. ...__,. . '__.'.'_'_ '...,'"._-�.�.�.__.«�.__._.._.�_.__._...___...-�-.-._._. . � . . . v.._ . � . � , \�t _._._., � ,�� . .y�.• �J:��. _ . � \. } �' l\ _ 3 G'.� - . J r � ?. r ... . __. _: � - _ � � : . _ � __ _ � t . � _. `,, ,,.� `. , � i , 1 . . s ; , ' s : `�.c . � _3 ' . ___ ... � .- r ? i , . ;,� '., _ , . . �� _ -- _ --- -._ . _�..� j t . ,i , . � ; -.. _ __. _ _ _ .__.�_ __, ---- ------ � � � } ' - i�-.�........--...--..._.. : � � i ' " - f.- . +—�, t� =:: -.,ox 1„ J..cL.e'. . ` -�, .` ..�Y �....J` ' � � � ' - . . . � - � ` � . .�IV.�.._ . � � f �; . � t, � � � ' - � . - . - _ . . R � �� ' . 7 �,-� . i'..�i�F.irr� � � � ! --------- �ri' . , � t . C� � w _q � . • � , ' 4 �'j �� .�� " `~ t , • y —� - -��. _.._._`�'��` • i �_C � .`T-�. . -_._. _".�'j .. . � ' . � � . . � � ' I . � 1 . ' - � . . � � . �u � � L�J[: \..: _1•-1 ��.�TVr�� . � � � , , � . , • �s_ . __�� . . ✓ . ' ` • . � � � �.. . . - .� .. . . . + • • . � - . f ' ' .� � . � .- � .. -' _ . .. ~ {I . . . . : - �t . f . . - ' . ' . .. . �_......... �.. - ._.,.... ..�... . .r. .. .. �... . � . . . !.�-...._.l-.. .�.,- 1 r ,- , .. ,. � .. . . . .. ._.. _ _..... ..�.�.._....-_� � � ,. �.. _ . � ., . . . - . � - : i_i � � - . ': - � ._ ' ' � . _ .. . _ '. . ' t. . . . . • . ' {. �i . ' .i ' . . . . . _ _�__ . . . . .. - . � i .. 1 � . .� . . ., . . . . � � - . - - . • ' - 1.16E.��J r6�: . . .. it ; — ._ . . . . � ; .. . . , . � . . . . . . . ..�;—tis1�.�...� � _ � T , . - . . �_,_..-' ' ' ' . • , s: )? \�� ` � ' _. ' ' ,� _. 1-; . ' i'�c-:.�� _ , ! . � j ' � � _. . � y "� .� .. .L.. r . . . .r ^- •- •.r. a •� _J , i . �� . . �. 'jt � . . ..� . .:� ----- �� "';��_�...: r. .--G:.-�'y::. ;"5''�>r�r. ,_=-f'�- -- � ��r� �` � '" { { � �4 - - . . . .. _.._.__. __ ... . . _ . _..�."-_'� F i 1 } ;.- ` _ . � • . ' • � � �t - � - • ---1 - --r"'f"� ',�° _, . . ; . ' . i - i �. � -� �. ' � . : . . ' ' ' 3 . , _. . :_ , _ _. _ _ _� , , . ,: . - , , � . . . _ , -- —� , , . �. Y-s= ---. _ ---- - _ �__ _ . _�_----�"i ; . �. � � . � . : _ . �� _ -� � , � ` f( � ' .. - . . j � -.y. : � . . • : � . ` . . i �. k..� -.. . . . . •Y.� , : `\ _ .�+�.. � �r>L F _,C7��.:.. . Y . y t • , ' � ... . i� `wr../ . � .�'.sLi..i,. , A..s . . ' . . i 1�/ / � � � . � . . , . . . - � .. _ .. - , �.... � � . , .�S . .�, • � . . . ' _ , � � 1 . . : � � . ' � .. . . . l✓ .. A� '.> . . ' '- f � '. . � - � . { f . ' .. . .. . . . . . . . i } - • .; , r !:r:v c.�..�:;_ } i • '� � � '�.+� � ,.., �:H�_.-�. � ( ` �IzJ� �- : . - . �� •`•'-, ,- +�`�.o. [ • ` -j"' • - • _ �., - - _- --- - - . __._�_..._ -._.,,�.�,,, . • . . � . . 3',G,x ,-o�, i t 4 F � r t , ' !, . , . , .__ :_ __ . � . � ...+. :�.. � -- -- — _ ...-. ._.� � C= ..�.�...,.._.�...�..�,c:...c_� � r � � '_'-.yw..Y_.._..�_� . . _..___.....�._�-.. �...., _ 1 � �.w • i I J . �. � . . . . � . . - . �1 . . . .. . ... - ' � . . 1 �. . _ . . .. K.} - . - . . . - . . 3 1'� � l . �- . .. . ` t " . . . . " . . - . . .. . .. . j i .� �.. ` .� . ^ j .� �. . . � . . . . . . . � . . _ .....-� �,_, �- �- �_ . 'i i :1 .. . . � . . . .. . , . . . � � I RT. ' _ . . . . . . . � . . . . !j i 'L, . �. _ . . . � . . f � . � . ' . . � � � ,I : � . � � � � � ' ' � ..._. I. � . . _ - . - � .f! � , ..._.._......_..__�._., .. ; �. .. , .: . - .. . .. ._... _ ' . .,.. ._...,,...._ _. ........,._. _ _ ._..._..-. ._..,...... �.-_'.. � _,..._... . _. ,r_ ......_ ' .. ._ . . . . '• .... '. _._....,-...,_.._. ... ._..,..._._.__ ... . �> ._ ..- � � . _ .. . . .. . . � � \ . _ . _....._..-. __...�...-.... - '�(� S E' {� f r�c !1 S . C{ C °�-�' x • a � �_:_ � . � ,, � _ - - - : :,.; , .,.k . . _. ::_ _ _ __�_ _ . ._�. �___�_.....�r_ . _. _�_.. ... .�,.._.�-....r_.___ . _. ._.. v "_ ., '..� ..4 : � �� , ; � , ; � ; ��_ � � ; ; � � ; ; ► �� ;� j ► , � ; � �out�::�.a -� � i �_.i` ` � j i ; � i i ; i I v :;�� v v '� I v � � � �t�A�`�'t� �1 � ,� , ,,�1,��; � l.C� � ► �i�.� � �� .� : � o�, o O, ! � . ��-(� : G I (� � - i 7 j / 6 5 ��" �4� . 6 6 ; �� M i i �. � ��UREL AVE. F ��- 6 � � � (� ,,�" U�;Q'Q�C�i v � Q 'f T � U —,�-- 8 �� I � � � � T i�; � '4� I � � � ' , � ' � � _� � OI i ' i � � 1— -�—_1____.l— '.�_ ` -i_L I _ � � ��B � � � _�_ : _ , y, j � —_r_ � � ----- - -- - -_- _- � - , , : �� ` ► i�_—�_-�— � i �' AB� � t A� � ' � 1v v v v�v' � � � o � o� �,� I � ' � �, �o ; o �:�. � I � I t �' � � � •� �. ..�� ._. ; i � � �-- � � °�SHI..�i�� `�'`� � ' Jo►!/E. . `-�� ' I (� ��l P— 6 s i� 6 I �-- , V � T V V s'�-�(�; � '_ � 6 � T � G v ��`� --- - 1'�I � � Y "' �---- -t?- � " � � � �A i � � � AB :.�. cc I � --�_v ST.PAULNO�EURCH '.�� ' _`_� �r— .: _.r_ -�-T �-- � I i F`~ f �� a,8 A8 �� - � � �`• �, � I . { � ' � �� O � ' ' _ � � r � , g ; � � o 0 0 0 ��; � ' ' s; Q ;��, �� c► �o ' o: c . � __ 4� � 8 �� 7 � .,. i �,, �-: �: . � �LL`� � � �;- � RECTORY � / �: 9 � �a i 13 R H I � � � _ � � o �G� �`, � , ; � , , , o � , �-� �, t ; �; ; � � I � Io , Q �� . � � .v' � i , ' 2 0 ��, - :'-' — _ -- - — -- i � �V� �L � i i f �— � �— � i a�-. a � � I� j � R H� �{ � k_;, � �; I t �i �1, ' � , �� O� � � }� LJ � Q (� 1) � � � `� 5 IG f � `�' 21 � 20 /� -�� O � � V � � � �{ R N � ! u � � ,„ 1 ��1`� V ��W� ' Row ��. ��' , i z � v � , iiiii h � � � � �� r� - �-� � � � � � � .{ ��.� ;� , �Y � ._... , `�j -�,S"'•< T Y I � � I � g: 6 � � � � E � I I i ; �_+ � �1 � � V � - 1 � � � � � � �—I.!_—' - ,� --- — _ � _ � o, _ � � � � �, � ( U � I � i i 1 � v � �� P �� _ -�- v Q i o � ; ; kj f C� �; � � o , , O � I 1 I 13332 IIS �� I �� i� V � � I i ROW �' ROW ; 2� t26�',` i9i II 6 I � � I ( � ( I ; l �, �..; a i� � �, , � C�- � Q I � I � � j� �,;; � � I � , C] , u� � , � o , pi I�t ! -��; � � � i � �, v � , , i � � � ?i , `` � r � i � I I i i � r� � ' � � C.�= � � �., � i . °� � t i � I i.i � � � � � �.._� ��'-J'-�r ; -o- --j _ �QN ' F:. (�, -- — _ I I i `' . -------- -- —� �-- --• --� ��. � �_ ! I I � ,�� '� i 1 I Q( ,. . . . ' ` I 1 I �; # ' � -1--__ ___ � I I � �_ I _ -1- � �: � , AR�A �tA�' APPLICANT �ROTHY HO�KTNG LEGEND — -- ZONlNG DISTRICT BOUNDARY 555 Summi t Ave�►�y,e � SUSJECT PROPERTY PURPOSE Conversion from 3-plex to • O � ON� FAPVIILY PLANNING to 4-pl ex � D1STR{CT TWO FA�1LY FlLE �JC�. 8758 ___�, 8 & 16 �ii U LT i�L.� �FA{L�t l.Y DATE 11/12/80 � O �► � n CO�+if�ERCIAL SCALc � i" = 200� �VO�TH � � � �NDUST'�IAL MAP N0. . 20 SAiNT PAUL PLANNI�VG 80AR0 V VA+�A�iT . • . i ' �/� � . . , �� y . &48 l�Iest l�ebraska Avenue J�L Saint Paul, P�innesota 55117 ��"� � November 22, 1980 cr--' I%iembers of the City Council City Council ?dministrative Offices Ci ty Ha.11 Saint Paul� Minnesota 551fl 2 Re: kppeal from Zoning Comm. denial of �iensity variance request at 5�5 Summit �;venue. . . 2� �7�� Dear P;embers of the City Council: I am herewith appealing the decision of the Zoning Cor�missio n ta deny my request for a density variance on the above propert;� wl�ich was intended to be a duplex and which now is a 1ega1 3-plex. rIy reasons for appealing the unfavorable decision are: 1. The Staff report - which was unfavorable - stated that my problem was "self-created" and would not result in any, �zndue hardship upon the owner. The truth is that I have plenty of evidence, including a state- . ment by the Aistorical Society people, that I did not �ow about the chang�es and there was nothing T could have dons about it. Also, I ara now facing banl�uptcy because the c��a.nge� from the original pla.n has more tl�an doubled the cost of the construction and money is just not available to bail me out because the banks say the building will not support such a loan at today's confiscatory interest cha.rges. Al1 the changes, which have caused numerous red-tag and other delays in construction, have bee� very expensive and ha.ve pushed me closer to the brink of disaster. l�lthough the City ha.s ha.d millions of dollars for changing present apartment buildir.gs into condos I have been unable to get one penny to help me build what is now four new units which would help the housin� crunch at least this much. 2. Althoug�'eome of my enighbors did not receive notification of the zoning hearing, tYie people who did receive notice and who did write letters and appeared against the variance, were there with what I would con- sider as "dirty hands" inasmuch as they are the same people who ca.used �o much delay in my building schedule beGause they wanted to build garages on the lot on Summit Avenue. Yet they w�re permitted to testify tha.t their only interest is to keep the "integrity of the neighborhood". �lso, Mr, Niichael Hoffman who .said he represented the Summit group known as R2msey-_ Hill Association, did not have a specific mandate from tha.t group to speak against it. � immediate neighbors are v.er�r ha.ppy with this building. For the above reasons, and many more, I want to appeal tYiis decision. � Sincerely yours, �,c� ' �_ �� , Dorothy �. Ho '_ 'ng Enc. 1 I ara enclosin� a check for M5o.00 which I ar� told is necessGr�•. . ,,, __.. _ . _.. _ --_. _ . _ ______ �...._ .. _. . . .. ..._. _ ._ .. -- ._,._....� . _ __ _ . ___ .._ _ __ _...__.,-,...�,,. , . . . . �i.. � � . . � . . . . ... . � . � + �',; � �=�v' i. � � . s �J�!, , . . q. � � ',� . _ , . ` . � , . . . 5'. .'� y.. . . , . ♦ . . �. .•r } .. ' � �• � fu " , � .. /' � � ' f , . , ,� - .�x �! , �- . , .. . . ' : . - Y%1 _� . � - �. . . . . - . . . . _ .. � i,��, ` �� k�� . . . - a. �: . �- ,- .l � - . . . . .. . , � . � .. . : . .:, ... .�., ., ��.,:�.�� .. ..�, .^ � �; . . . � . . � _. - � . . . ., - . � . ' . ., ,_1 � � � ' . . �� . . I . . . � . . ' . . ' ' . " � '�" , , � , � , .�� , �� . , : . ; r'� : , , _ % . . . • __ . . ' . , \ �,. � . , -� ' . � . . . • 4 � _ , { .� . � _ „ : , , ' ! . . . _ ; _ _':V � , , De�ember 9, �980 . _ y , . , • . _ _ ; - . , ` - Mr. Paul Desc:h , ' . � , . De�t. aP P'i:�ance , . , . , Rc�o 21$� City H,a].1 : . : - : , - ` Dear �i�': � - . . . The City Council bas ae� ei date of hearit�g; tbr Janusry �, 1,981 � , . � . ., ` to coasider the appeal of Dorothy Hosk�tg to a decis�,an �.p �te ` Board of ZoninB APPeala�affecting pro�iert,�r at 5�5 Summit�.Av�n�. - �> ' � `Will you pleaea' aend notices tc� p�bpe�ty oNntra as requix�! by _ _ iaw? , � ._ . _ - . - _ V�ry tr�ly �oura� � : «+r,: � , '. . . � ' : : . , _ , _ . Rose M3x , , , � .: City Clerk . � , ; A�'t.ach.� ` _ - , : - . , ; � °ABOslB � � , , cc r P2.anning BtatK, ZQr�ing 8�s�ti.cs� � °- _. - �: � , � I�ousing b �18g. Cod� Satorae�Mat Dap�t. � � , ,, ' � , : : , . , . - . . _ ��, _ _ . _ . ,` _ - , � �� . . - , , ` �, , . , , . ' _ , ,\ _ . . , __. . ., � � � . . ; ' � ` , y . - -. , ; ; ' . � : � - �' ., r - , ' , - ; ,. . �•� .. _.. � . � .'. � . � � . . . .. , . .., , ... : . ..._`'. .. �fM� .. , . � I . . . . � . . . . . .. � .. .. . .. . "` � . . � . . . - � . � • \' � . .. � . . . . � . .. ... . / �I .. " . . . . . .. . - � . . . , . . i .. � , �' . .. . . . `�\ � .�. r' �� . �� t � 848 West Nebraska Avenue '7�J�� Saint Paul, Minnesota 55117 p November 22, 1980 � Members of the City Council City Council Administrative Offices City Hall Saint Paul, P�Ii.nnesota 55102 Re: Appeal from `Loning Comm. denial of denaity variance request at 555 �t Avenue. Dear Members of the City Council: Z� c�7 S`� I am herewith appealin� the decision of the Loning Commissio n to deny my request for a density variance on the above property which was intended to be a duplex and which now is a legal 3-plex. My reasons for appealing the unfavorable decision are: 1. The Staff report - which was unfavorable - stated tha.t my problem was "self-created" and would not result in any undue hardship upon the owner. The truth is that I have plenty of evidence, including a atate- ment by the Historical Society people, that I did not lrnow about the chang�es and there was nothin� I could have done about it. Also, I am now facing bankruptcy because the �'axi�;e� from the ori�i.nal plan has more than doubled the cost of the conatruction and money is just not available to bail me out because the banks say the buildin� will not support such a loan at today's confiscatory intereat cha.rges. All the chan�es� which have caused numerous red-tag and other delays in construction, have been very expen�ive and have pushed me closer to the brink of disaster. I�lthough the City has ha.d millions of dollars for cha.ngin� present apartment buildings into condos I ha.ve been unable to get one penny to help me build what is now four new units which would help the housing crunch at least this much. , 2. Althoug�some of my enighbors did not receive notification of the zoning hearin�, the people who did xeceive notice and who did write letters and appeared aga,inst the variance, were there with what I would con- sider as "dirt3r hands" inasmuch as they are the same people who caused so much delay in my buildin� sehedule because they wanted to build gara�es on the lot on S`ummit Avenue. Yet they were permitted to testify that their only interest is to keep the "inte�rity of the neig�hborhood". �lso� Mr. Michael Hoffman who aaid he represented the Summit group known as Ramsey- Hill �lssociation, did not have a specific mandate from tha.t group to speak against it. I,Zy immediate neighbors are ver� happy with this building. For the above reasons� and many more, I want to appeal this decision, 3incerely yours, �� -_ r Dorothy D. Ho 'n� �ic. 1 I am enclosin,� a check for �50.00 which I am told is necessary. .,.,�-==°� ` t._. " C CITY OF ST. PAUL DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE AND MANAGEMENT SERVICES ASSESSMENT DIViSiON L 1 H CITY HALL 5T.PAUL,MINNESOTA 55102 December 19, 1980 File X "1671 Page 7.oning File 8758 The Council of the City of St. Paul will hold a public hearing in the Council Chambers of the City Hall and Court House (third floor) at 10:00 A. M. on January 8, 1981 to consider tt�e appeal ot Dorothy Hosking to the decision of the Board of Zoning Appeals affecting the property at 555 Summit Avenue; which denied Ms. Hosking's application for a variance of said property; legally described as: Except North 48 feet; Lot 11 , Block 22, Auditors Subdivision ��11. If you would like further information about this hearing, contact the Current Planning Section of the Planning Board , Room 1202 City Hall Annex -- 298-4154, While the City Charter requires that we notify you of the hearing, we want to help you to learn fully about any improvement that could affect you or your community. Therefore, I sincerely hope you can attend this hearing, so that you can make your views about it known to the City Council, whether for or against. J. 4?ILLIAM DONOVAN VALUATION AND ASSESSMENT ENGINEER . � ` . . � . . ., � . . . � � . . . ' . . . . '. . . . .. . .. � .. . '. S � - _ � �.� . , .. � � �� . . � . . \ . . ... . � w . . . . . ` . . ' - . . - � . ��' . . ' . . .. . . . , / - . . �\ . . ' . . . ' . . . ,. . . . � � � . � � ' � . . . � . . . .. . . , . . , . .. . . . � � . . � . . i . . - . �.. . . . . ' . . .. .. . �, . . ." ... . . . . .. . . , . � i , . . . _ . . .. . � : � �. � ... � � � f � , .. . . .. � .--'_ .,-� _ \ January 23, 1981 ' , , � . _ _ . • � , _ . � . , . \ � , . , � � . � ,. D�rot�ry� �osking� � � . ' g48 Nebraska - • . � . ' � 3t�.._Pau1, Minaesota 55117 .� • ` / -� : : - � , � � Dear- 'Ks. B�akiuga.a ' ' , � � J . ' �ciosed ia a�capy _of a 3t. Paul Gity C�uocil Resoluti�on, C.F. No. ' 27624b� adopted by tl�e Caumcil on .Tan. 32, 19$1 8rsatim8 3rour appe�tl tq '' - , • , :a decit�ion of the Board of.ZoniaB Appesls for,parop�rty at S55 8vmmit Ave. � 1 . �- Very.,trna.Y �ours; . - _ ,, . . , . • ', � ' ;, ' �,'"' . � ;� � � � ��. ��:�' ;� w . _ !S�j . . C3ty;Glerk . . : . ; � At�tach. � , , . s�h � , � . . . � , i , Cc: �Zoning Admiaiatrator, GY�na Eri�kao� , - -, - % Platming Co�miasion � • ' �oard of �oning Appeals , _ '; � .: , , � " _ � � � � , ; • . � ;, ,; , �: __ ; - ` - e`: " . , � � - 1''�r , . . ' ,, � � �� ,, ; t � � . . _ , ` _ . . ,�' . � - �, � , _ .� , , i, % ' : _ � i , . . . � � . � . . � � - . . i . � .' . . . . _ . . . . . .. . . . ,�r;�..�: ��°°�m,� �� j°/` "��' CITY OF SAINT PAUL -__.`�,T.,,s� �;i�� E I.� �R 1� °� � x� DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENI� �� a� �i 'i�i�i'ii ii �� -� ��' DIVISION OF PLANNING '�r°"m�� 25 West Fourth Street,Saint Paul,Minnesota,55102 GEORGE LATIMER 612-298-4151 MAYOR RECEIV�D December 29, 1980 DEC 3 p �g� CITY ATl"ORNEY Rose Mix, City Clerk Room 386 City Hall St. Paul , Minnesota 55102 RE: Zoning File #8758 - r7orothy Hosking City Council Nearing: January 8, i981 Dear Madam: ` This letter is written in respor.se to the appeal of Do:^othy Hosking to a decision of the Board of Zoning Appeals . The Board denied P�!rs. Hosking's request for a variance from the Zaning Ordinance pertaining to minimum lot size per room in an RT-2 residential district to allow construction of a house with two 2-bedroom apartments and two 1-bedroom apartments on her property at 555 Summit Avenue. The house is properly zoned to allow three units for a total of 9 rooms. The applicant applied for a variance to allow completion of a 4th apartment which would bring the housing density to 10 rooms , one over the maximum a1loNred in the Ordinance. The Goard of Zoninr Appeals held a public hearing on the subject on November 12, 1980. Seven letters 4�ere received from property o�rners within 350 feet opposing i:he gra��ting of a variance. Eight persons spoke acrainst the variance. P1rs. Hosking and P1r. Donald Lais, representing Mrs. tiosking, spoke in favor of the variance. The staff report recommended denial based on the fact that: 1 . The density proposed by the applicant 4ras first permitted in an Rf�-1 zone not in the RT-2 zone and therefore could not be granted without impairing the inte��t of the Ordinance. 2. The request was not based on a hardship due to the exceptional physical character of the property. 3. The site plan did not show ade�uate off-street parking arrangements for four dwelling units. The Board dznied the variance on a roll call vote of 4 to 0. A formal resolution denying the variance ylas passed by the Board at their Fdovember 25, 1980 meeting. . �� . _ _ .._ _ _,_. __...,__ �..._.._ ______ . .. ...._ . _ __ _._._ _. .� -- __ _ _ ._.__,__ . . _..._.___. ___..__ ._ .._ .,. .____-__ .. _ . � � ��r�� December 2�, 19II0 - 2 - Subsequent to the Board's decision, one letter supporting the variance was received. In addition, Mrs. Hosking requested a statement from Renev�al Division staff who has worked with her on the project. These two letters � and the previously n�entioned correspondence is enclosed with this letter. htrs. Hosking's appeal of the Board's decision has been scheduled for a public hearing before the City Council at their January 8, 1981 meeting. If you have any questions , please call me at 29�-4154. Sincerely, �"..__,' / ;� /' � l� , ��''� � /\_�.! Stephen Grochala `-' Senior Planner SG/mb cc: P4embers of the City Council � city of saint pau4 board of zoning ap�eals resof�iion z�ni��g file n�r��r 8758 �� November 25 1980 IrJHEREAS, DOROTHY HOSKING has applied for a variance from the strict application of the provisions of Section 61 .101 (fi) of the Saint Pau1 Legislative Cod� pertaining �to the allowable number of rooms in an RP4-2 zoning district; and I�JHEREAS, the Saint Paul Board of Zoning Appeals conducted a public hearing on November 12, 1980, pursuant to said appeal in accordance �rith the requirernents of Section 64.203(a) 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 attached hereto, made the following findings of fact: 1 . The site plan does no� show adequate parking arrangements for the required parking spac�s for four dwelling units. 2. The request for variance is not based on an exceptional physical character of the property and strict application of the regulations would not result in exceptional undue hardship upon ±he o�<<�ner of the property, and that any inconvenience that exists is self-created. 3. Since Minnesota Statutes (Section 462.357, subdivision 6, clause 2) and the Zoning Ordinance (Section 64.205(b)) prohibit as a variance any use that is not permitted under the Ordinance for the property in the zone where the effected person's land is located, it appears that the variance cannot be granted w�ithou� suilstantial�y impairing the intent and purpos� of the Ordinance because the applicar�t's request ��ould only be pe;�missible under a minimum density first allowed in the Rf�1-1 zoning district. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Saint Paul Board of Zoning Appeals that under authority of the City's Legislative Code, Chapter 64.206, the variance to allotir ten rooms instead of nine be denied for property located at 555 Summit and described in the legal description of the application for variance and the site plan attached hereto. . ��/�(� b�/_ Mr. Peterson Decisions of the Board of Zoning Mr. Woods Appeals are final subject to appeal s�c�n d ed by _ to the City Council within 30 days i� ��r 6 by anyone affected by the decision. against � r� MINUTES OF THE MEETI��G OF THE BOARD OF ZOPdifdG APPEALS I�l CITY COUNCIL CHAPIBERS, ST. PAUL, MINPJESOTA, NOVEf�BER 12, 1980 PRESENT: Pime. Morton; P1ess rs. Grai s , Ki rk, Peterson and 4�loods of the Board of Zoning Appeals ; P9r. Jerome Segal , Assistant City Attorney; t�s. Lane of the Division of Hausing and Building Code Enforcement; Ms . Beseman, h1s. Daykin, Mr. Grochala and P�1r. Tedesco of the Planning Division Staff. AQSEP�T: Mi��e. Sununers ; Messr. Parrish. The meeting was chaired by Gladys P1orton, Chairman. DOROTNY HOSKING (,�875II) : A request for variance in 1ot size to allow two, 2-bedroom apartments and two, 1-bedroom apartments on property located at 555 Summit. The appellant was present. There was oppasition present at the hearing. P1r. Grochala showed slides of the site and reviewed his staff report with a reconmendation for denial . Four letters were received in opposition. Donald Lais , Attorney representing the appellant, 409 htidti•�est Federal Quilding, stated that the appellant bought the property with the intention of building a single family home; the Housing Authority andthe Historical Society required twa-story structure. Because the City required excavation by the appellant to rei��ove all n�aterial and debris that was left from the previous home, it resultecl in a much deeper excavation then a•�as anticipated; instead of having 11 courses of bl ocl:.r__th.�,structure had 17 courses. He as ked that :the app t-r a'�'r�ri 6e �1 ed as a variance for own o se ich are appropriate in an RT-2 zone. He felt the appellant was ill-advised to get involved in such a larc�e project when her original intent was to build a single family home. He requested the Board to approve the variance on the basis that tFie structure has three separate addresses and could be considered townhouses since townhouses are not defined in the Zoning Ordir►ance. � Mr. Grochala con�mented that there is a definition of townhouses in the Ordinance which requires a different kind of building construction between the units than �vould be present in the existing structure. He also stated that it would not change the density. requirement for the site; the density limitations would still be violated. P•1r. Segal stated th�t the varianc ,rould constitute use variance which is rohibited by statute. lso, in considering the application, a determination 'would have to e ma�e that a hardship pertaining to the land does exist. Mr. Lais commented .that since the project ti��as started, interest rates and costs have gone up which were incurred by delays resulting from the Historical Society require- ments . He felt the hardship involved was because of delays which imposed a heavy burden on the property and the property owner and the elevation which the appellant had not anticipated. Mr. 4loods inquired as to whether a rezoning of the property to RP�-1 had ever been considered? Mr. Lais indicated that it had not been looked into and felt it would be difficult to obtain the signatures necessary for a rezoning because of the opposition from the neighbors. -- � �� . DUROTI-IY NOSKING (�875F3) Page 2 Charles Skrief, 552 Portland, spoke against the variance. He said the nature of the project as constructed would have provided a duplex �vithin a reasonable cost; any additional cost was the result of the appellant's monitoring of the con- struction and was self-created. The residents want to protect the integrity of the Ordinance and the neighborhood. He also felt there would be additional vehicular traffic on the street, additional density in terms of the number of people using public space in the area , and 4�ould be a detriment to the home owners in the neighborhood. Elber�ta t�1atters , 912 Lincoln, representing District 16 Summit Hill Association, spoke in opposition. She stated that there are density problems in the area which they are trying to solve, and more density without justification would not be in the best interest of the neighborhood. Michael Hoffman, 405 Portland, member of the Ramsey Hill Association, stated that they support the City's Zoning Ordinance as it stands . He said the lot is not large enough to allow for the proposed 4 units , and also that there is not adec�uate parking. , Rudolph Schnasse, 20 Kent, said he endorsed the si:atements made by the previous residents who spoke in opposition and felt it would decrease the value of property in the area. There was discussion regarding the proposed parking and staff indicated that the appellant would have to meet the minimuni width requirement for parking. Mr. Segal suggested that tF�e Board, in considering the variance, may tivant to determine Urhether there is sufficient parking on the property for the 4 units. Richard Velleu, 550 Portland, spoke against the granting of the variance. Chris Owens , B20 Holly, member of District 8 Planning Council , reported that 3 years ago when the matter first came up, there were several people interFStec� in purchasing the property. One of the reasons that there was support for P�s. Hosking's proposal was the fact that she was planning on building a duplex which would be more appropriate in the Historic Hill District. He said the original understading betu�een h1s. Hosking and the community was that it would be a duplex and felt that perhaps there had been a breech of faith. He also mentioned that neither Ms. Hosking nor the Housing Authority had notified the district council of any changes that had been made. Donald Wood� , 554 P�rtl-and, stated he supported the neighbors in opposing the variance request. Priscilla Farnham, 548 Portland, spoke against the variance stating concerns expressed by previous residents in opposition. Andrea Bond, attorney, 552 Portland, also representing the residents at 550 Portland, spoke in opposition. She reported that the Housing Authority sold the vacant lot to the present owner under a contract providing for the construct- ion of a duplex which was architecturally compatible with the area and its location an Historic Summit Avenue. She said the City has closely followed the progress of the construction to insure that the dwelling met the approved design in the HRA contract. She said there is specific reference to the obligatian of the owner to remove any foundation debris that may have been left as a result of the demolition of a previous dwelling. Any hardship that may have beer cz.�;sed by the necpss��*�� or , __..__.. _ .._..__ .__.�_ _._.__.. . .. �., _.__.__.._._.. _._._ . .__,. ._._ _ .. _ . __�_ _ __.._ _ -- _ _ __ ..,_._..�,_�.._. ._,.-- _ , . t; � � ' ��`��6 RflROTHY HOSKING (tt875B) � Page 3 of removing that debris and having left a larger excavation than anticipated, is clearly a risk that is on the present owner. She added that granting the variance would have a negative impact on the neiyhborhood and that parking was in short supply in that area. P1s. Nosking stated that when she bought the house, she had the right to expect that the house that had been demolished would i�ave been torn down and hauled away. She said that she was not responsible for the changes made by the Historical Society and that it is now a house that she cannot afford. Jean Uelleu, 550 Portland, asked the Board to respect the spirit of the Ordinance as it stands and the integrity of the neighborhood. Hearing no further testimony, P1s. Morton closed the public hearing portion of the meeting. Mr. Peterson made a IllOt1011 to deny the variance request based on findings 7 through 10 of the staff report and the fact that there is not adequate parking for the dwelling units. Mr. Woods seconded the motion. The motion passed on a roll call vote of 4 to 0. Mr. Grais had previously left the meeting and was not . present for the roll call vote. Submitted by: : l Approved by: _ _ � `, -;�C.t ..�!_, , ' :�:��.�� .-�J ��>'z� �„2� , � ; ;' � �,�_ ' Stephen Grochala Gladys Morton, Chairman � #.�,..,��. � . �, �i� �' ( . . °�i,: Lt�q^ .3 . . ��.,�'�' ti'!�i��S ' CITY OF SAINT PAUL INTERDEPAR7MENTAL MEMORANDUM DATE: November 24, 1980 T0: Steve Grochala ✓ FROM: Mark Basten �;i��,�,�i RE: 555 Summit Ave. , Request for 4th Unit, Dist. 8, Zoning File #8758 Dorothy Hosking asked that I summarize the development of 555 Summit Ave. in order to show that she had only planned on building a duplex and not a fourplex. Apparently the pivotal event that precipitated the present. configuration was when the elevation of the house was set. Mrs. Hosking was employing an architect by the name of Dick Krumm, who had prepared the initial set of approved plans. However, Mrs. Hoskings decided to have Capp Homes construct the building and to act as general contractor herself. In the _transfer from builder to architect a vital piece of information �A�as not transmitted. The architect had planned on cutting down the height of the entire site in order to set th � house lower. Capp Homes did not pick up the discrepancy from the plan to the site and started construction with the existing grade level . In addition, the site had to be excavated below a previous foundation which in- creased the foundation costs. Since the house has ended up higher from street level than planned, the basement level is� much more exposed on the west side and was fitted with larger windows. The basement then is a much more habitable space than originally planned. The bottom line of this is that: 1 . The deeper foundation required was more costly than a typical foundation would have been. 2. The error in setting the elevation of the building exposed more of the basement wa11s, allowing larger windows to be used. - 3. Mrs. Hoskings seems to be trying to use the potential of the existing building to offset the added expenses incurred because of the faulty siting of the house. I have worked with Mrs. Hosking on this project since the fall of '78 and my opinion is that she had not planned on a fourplex originally, but is now asking for four units only to utilize the building as it now stands to recoup her expenses. MAB:mw . cc:File �� 8�� J �� cc:Mrs. Hosking, 848 Nebraska ..,.,._._..._�... �4._._} _ p � ��v � ..�+° � y L/'�_ +. j�a.N:a �'��„'�� -� . `'r�, , �t .�� . 4� �.� ~ ��V t� `��`� a��'�'� ~ ~ C "�� V� �l i.7 �i�-�-. � � -�y� _ , , 4 L�c_�� ?�,,L" L- �f � �„ �� , .__�!r :�G:-i_` � �L�)� `' r , _ _ � . _ � ._ � �i ., _, . _ M1� i . . C�cL�c�-' ---C-�i �, . - . r:i� l , � � a° � /� ` �-.� - � "Z ,,.'z,_e'. ��./�_-t �. �..�_.:i"'` �-.L-�L C:_... _' �c'_..c:_._.�_.... _`C-Gt..�E� � '_ - - � . . �, � „ � �-~� J � �j ____ --�r�2�7"L�-�� L�-G c�_r'. G c.,�.�--�-�[�.( Y.C��,; _ , � �L.'_� _ r�� , � � ~�G�--�c�- �-1---�Lr-��` , �-'''} / S J �--7 �- �i._� ✓ ', c.- -7�'Z..-sZ��'c::_. .��2-- //Z-t�_-�.L., /�o_-,��., .J � % ��: � �-�u-,-�_ �-- �-Z,�. .c°�_:� .5_��_��-- t��vv�ru-��✓y _-,-z--�--/�-� r .��. �_��:.�,-z.�._-<._;�--- -�u-�..�.,:�....c� . � � � ''1 L' l..J ,�L�L-� ��-2.G��"� -.!�r-��-2rrL�� '� CL� �J•�'Z..�_i�<-c-z^ 1 9 /�� /� � /-L�G z-�:�.�/��G4-'�t- ..�--f:.��-c��E...� ; � �,�`-�i�2-c-�--��`- .-y-�--L..L�.c��. ' k ., �-,( , / - �� ., --{-.- " ° • _. � _ .�►'ti--L:.., G� ' C_t..� ,�-C._ ..��d-:2� t'-Z�-�i Z�'. �/'' (f `cy"�c�,'z--E��.iI,.Q---Ls�.i,�c_.��, ��`�iL-�z-'� ,C c�, Gie�-c�c..�.t-J<��c / � �/�,� � . . . . . . . . +/j��26=-��'/ .�:_...c'..-.i+-G-�.-L'r�./G.L_�iL,-G'. � :..�r'�"'�:% G"-vc.. �c�-�C..��-L{�-'�G"� . 7 L �c./ � y / Y -y-- ".,�� ,..�C�L--�-C?-zL...t.�:.'✓--��'it.fC_.-�,'G.C:�'..��-=-G'--u LL�. `'' '� ��4'--Gi � j � � � ' � JJ • � iyYLL=--T.�/V �✓..C..�?'YL-��-l-L� �.''- .��1._[��L_- �'G-L-�_.-(�t, e /�Lt 1� Jr, ' � �" ' ..��'. �� t��il��-L J �� i:_�-,�./7'L_J-�C..c.l�,��._-G� �r _��Lc?./ . „ �L ��Gl'/ �L�:--��-=-y��-^l�i 2�� L�E�-G'7'f'LLI--'Nt/../�/L!�-T�LL`'d'l-c=�C�i,1C��LG� . , � . .�-�--��•_�� L--2J /G� �J-�2._�'�-C�-°C� -4-� E-YL/ /�-vt...�c-�' /CL-C1_�Y�'ZC� iL.�"-� i = r ., , ✓ / � _, �L� t� �72�:i . }�,/�-�-- � s� ,..e..t�t-o/�,�t��,r i� — ,' �, / �/ ' � ' ' . � ,- / -° ' ' � ' � �� >: /, ..t . , r�-�-v ;.�° -G ' L . s.-G�-- G G2� -�-�GG'--�-�-'L� .i�2z°'�J2.�',.L✓t_1--�_, �� .�� -� % �'- �-�.e.... ,��. ��,,.�,_�.� �64�-�-�---�-d :,��.�,�4:.�, , ; �_ �,( �� ; / �. �--ai�J'�iZ r- -s'�:/�-`"'a j �2--c'�� G��7-z-�'/ �' ✓c-tf:`L.,¢--(`r __ _ � � �,- ' •1 � ,. � . i �: ,�i 7 � i.2�r2�L� � ._�L.��!%Z .r � �-'�"'~`<`'��'�.�=-L'it1 �L.F•:� �- ""'--��Z-:.-.�� r, ., , , •s . r � �� `��--� � � � `�-1��.,'''_ _ _ _ _ _ _ ._ � . � r, � � � , � , ...�z-�--�.c-t= ,,�.�-� '� ��__.��-c: .��-t-�--��t�-� �--�--- -- � . _ � ,Gi�s-r�- ��Z-C�=' ,�t.-t--C�2..�� _c:.. �=-�" �� .;.,..�- R �(��:. , a /� /- � „ � ,�f.�L'yL ��L, /��(,�./�y�.f..�L.�)Z�t�i ,ia'-LU- �LS �F'/--1�Z ..---G�� ._ : a . , , , � � __..lt-)�L-G��.� ��..�� GG1 ��wj�� , . ___ �4-�— �� ,.��..� . . , . , � - .�. : _ �. ', ' :..-v�-��"��.��.Z' �.-�-�,� c� ;`.��"LL�,,.t._ .E�_��, �� _ . ., � . l ..__. ._.. . f7 �L'z.ti..=LcL.-G� �:��Z.,�,-t'� ,rui—G"LLt'��t.� 7�}Z�-s'- ��.� ��-z_� . ` , . o CJ� , � ' � ( . � _ .�..,�..-LL��•�� ,��z=z.�;..-Lv. ..�"�z.,�--�-�.- ��,t�-��-.s� � t/ i1 . .. _ __. .___.. .. .,_ _ . _ ._ _.. _. . . . _.. ____ _ _,,...� , . - � . l- . �_ � . .. � . .. .. . * .j . � . . . . . . . . . . .. . •� ` �, � C �t�� .. � , ��,, . i�:.� �.��--� ��/j' ��.. ��-�-�-�- .x��'� - � (� � � ,9 // ,�'/�� `�-, a � .�C.��1..4,-?,'c-� ��c-E%. J�`�C_C.u� ,��c._-�.. �"[-t�-+c.�cz_,;L /�-�' � ,z.tJ-�� /..t��--t� ��i'�rz�=� � � � ° � /� ��- - �� -2�. �.�,� ti�-� �� c'ti ,�l�;� c�;�_.�" .-�'—f"�—:n-l� /, i G' J , , ., � � ,��L..Ct✓ �' --'"/ ��c�,-_.t„�• � � �yyl �'�.-�iZ/L+�_:.� .�C�'�L� N ` / / � fpg ' ��lC.�'Y,,�� L.(,�:_�s-c�.�C.G'�i �� ,�iL/t..z`��-�?-'LYr-j SF-� /"✓)'L.��,i �.L.2�"'t'-C.�.�.� /LL-L�, /�.t'-`-��-��y--�-s"�.. ,!"" �ea--Z�='l.� � �' ��C:'��-(_t,c�-c-�.; ...�z.r'-`�--k,J.�, �/-�x I//,L-E'•-�.�G-c-e_�� i.�, �i.-LL-�-t.� i�r /L��--2�2��J G"-y:��- 1�' - /F� /�� , (i /� . . . �L�L�L-� ��i�Gt.fZ/J7��G' � _ �C.�.4Z.G-� ��-lG-�f..� �' '7 T''��G-L�C�LC�J C,ti'i/Lir2L/Li ../�'2-�--z.i '✓ �=f��f.�t..Z"t..'�✓ �i_i� C��vc..� �.C.t�`'_ �f � l��..� ,� / �('�`//�� / �� /J/� r `A,�}/ p �/',,, � ^ . L�.-�"��4` '�'s✓ J —li G�/ /�+-i ✓��---c��6�` � G~�z.�i �G ,(�.J G �^'\� �� f//] v')' (�./..y� � 6 � . . . . . . .. . .�.+�i�� C�-'""�'t/ �Z-4r�Z-�C��/ v"l�l./ ,�!'L��K �L- i i l�t--�1/'YZ�I.�"YiL' -fc/ � � � ^ / �._ _ _ ��' _ ' �"� �, LL- F�v'Z�..2J �� T�'.-2�- �.�er-�-t�-�-li. �Lt-�' cv' �=�2..-�-C'�.1� . �//,� � / . �G �C� ��f`'.� �"/Q.,✓C��'oti�,�, ..-C-�--�-'�-��l Q�-�'�--c_• Gi.�yx...�� `� � l� . L t�� /e-iL�✓�-C �.�1.-=--�[.-eC�i'it t-.i'--C� 1 / � ! / t . �1 G GC t'✓r �2.-C�t/ �6+.-�.� �J�L.��E=� �' �L'°.%-�� J , `) r ," . . � �Z�., Z.Lr,x'�._/ �� .J �/�'-L3-"C+--c,l�c�� ,"_"r✓ I �� .�.a y c",7'�� —�"�R ..--^a�Li/[�/ .//L�'�--t2./ .��C".Lf. . _ .�-Z;��. _.�'v'YL_-`1�--�yU✓ -�`-� , `-t ��L� � % ; ,�j _ _ _ _._ �Z� ,� • , 7-i.;.�; G�-ri-C'-� .�c.-c,�--��G��., .�fc-�.. ,, - 7 - � /J ,/ - �j _ /��C'�L-G�-�'2-�t-G'�-t+-Z�� `�.ZL-,�ci�L:.�Z-- �• L �.��.Ly� �:��. � _ _ _ _ . ; , ^ , . , , _ ., � � - � � _ . . _ ��u..,�/� �� :.�.-�� ;�.�%,� � -�--� - _ � � �- /�� _ ' "L,��_:��-G-Z-Y-z.�, K �.�i�r-z--�-a,_�� ..�..-�.c-� __ _ - - /, / � ,. _, /� ? � N�-dir�'_�_ - e�.--- _. 6 ' �Y��Z..��L`'�, ..-.�`Z-c--f� � �`� �1-c2.�- �- u= ._.. � . ..__._ ._ � C. /� y � - / t � , �i�r�--w,-�-�.._-��.z-�• .�;�a-��(� ��—�' : , .ti-y _ _ � ... G�� ' �,��--�-� a ._ _ �_. . . _ .��-- �� ___ . , . � _ __ _ .��'.. -�u:�-��:�,- . ' � -,� � � ,��-..z-�G�� _ - ' G�`� __ . - � . : _ __ _ ��i-�� L� � �-�,-�-- � _.__ ___ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ . _ . _ . _ _ ___��«�. �= ��.��... - .. � �� _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ,_ . _ , • �i . %��6��6 LAW OFFICES BRICs � S ArTD MOFiGAN CHAHLES H�.$RIGOS(IBBt-IB�tl1 �� R.SCOIT D_aViES � J.�EIL:�foarov pHONESSZONAL BSSOCIATION - Jw�tES W.{,77'[LEPJELD 5wvve�A.Dtoxces . Joev B.Vwv ae Noera.Ja. COIE OEALBH . S7EYL1`Z.KwPId.\ A.LAURENCE DATtS � . RiCfL�RD G.MARK FR.vx Hwxronn A.vvaew C.$pCAEB LEO�\RD J.KEYCS 2200 FIRST NATIONAL B.1NK BUILllING Dt.T.FsArsrsse H.C�FSAHT . J1SkOYli A.GEIS � .JOliN�I.SGLLI4Ah' R�K!�AED P.Fxie� , SAINT PAUL,DIINNESOT2. 55101 BO�NIE L.HPSE20�SBY B�rer E.Sws�s�v . Steve A.Baevn MARR W.WESTBA DLJ.GALVIN.JR. �+ � ALS.V ft.rL�c�r.r � Dwvin C.FOassexc . JEFPBP.Y F.Suew Joea J..fcNer�x 2452 I D S CENT'ER � � GFBALD H.SWAN50.\' DAVID G.GBBE`I1N6 Ds�iD B.SAND �SC\EfL V.$EYDiOIIR�.TN. . . BESTY L.FIUM T88EXCF.N.DOYLP, MINNF.APOLIS,DSi�7NESOTA 55402 Crtwxaes R.Herxoa � R1CIfA8D R.ILYLH Jovsrnwx II.NOBOAti ArDHP.A M.BOND . ��AR7IN K.�ISS Joav L.DzvxaY ,� � Joav Bui.TS�e R.L.Soaexso� �61�.) 2J1-1213 Perax H.Sar:a Roacnr J..Dnvts PHILIP L.BRV4P.R . , RICHAFtD H.MAHTI`: TRL'DY II.SC8ROE8 Si�[USL T..HAi�SO.H Q o TSABY L.IPPEL RC\A7,DE.�HCHABD November �� JOO IOHN R.RENF.FICY / DAV1D J.t1LLEN Joex R.Fatsnxev Rosrv L.Ete_vsex DA�ID aI.SPERCYB . MA$OABET f:.Swveoe Dwxis�J.Cote.Je. � Bxtev G.Baci.si.e PETSH W.SIPHINS � MARY SCIIAYPNEH GY7vGEH llouoc.es L.Sxors t"iTCNA£L F{.$7RCATER MICFIAF.i.H.JEROYIMUS , � � RICHSHD D.A.YDRR50\ � OY COIIWSEL . R1CHAfLD E.FYCE . . �FBAVb Ti.GRdHAY $EPLY TO Saint Paul Board of Zoning Appeals 25 West Fourth Street Saint Paul, Minnesota 55101 Ke: Variance File #8758 Ladies and Gentlemen: On behalf of myself, as an owner of a single family residence at 552 Portland Avenue, and my neighbors at 550 Portland Avenue, I submit this letter in opposition to the request for a variance from the zoning applicable to the resi- dence at 555 Su�nmit Avenue, the corner of Summit Avenue and Kent Street. HRA sold the vacant lot at 555 Summit Avenue to its present owner under a contract providing for the construction of a duplex architecturally suitable for its location on historic Summit Avenue. Other people were interested in purchasing the property. The City of St. Paul followed the progress of the construction to ensure that the approved design was followed: I am pleased with the result and think that the City has made a valuable contribution to the character of Summit Avenue. Now, however, the owner, who obtained the property in competition with others interested in purchasing it, has applied for a variance to permit four units in the building rather than two. Under the applicable zaning, the square footage will not permit four units. ._,..�. �„ � -�� 4. x'" �j 1 � '� ��'A � ih:;� � . . �f f}~al 1 {S{ �. ,�7� ��.��. .j_x1 �"�—�"'�°� . . . #. { -- -' � .t 'i � _.._ . ��yr�� tiW � � .. . . . �� BRIGCsS Axn D10RGAN Board of Zoning Appeals November 12, 1980 � Page Two The criteria upon which a variance may be granted are straight-forward: undue hardship resulting from a physical problem of the property, and not fr�m problems that were created by the owner of the property. These criteria are not met in this case. ' Furthermore, a variance would have a negative impact on the neighborhood. Parking is in short supply: four of the five single family houses on the corner of Kent and Portland, one block from 555 Summit, have no off-street parking. Density and traffic will be increased; the character of the City-approved new construction changed. Most important of all, grantiizg a variance in this case will create a bad precedent: both in the application of zoning laws generally as well as in their application specifically in the case of the development of valuable vacant property on Summit Avenue. We respectfully request that the request for a variance be denied. Yours very truly, �_,��'t- ��.�,G�-��. !/� � . �� Andrea M. Bond _, � _. _ _,. . .... . ._.. . ... . _ _. _ _._---,-.:_...�_ _ ---_ _.. _._ .. .. .. . _ _ _, . ___._ __..._._ , � ;��6�� 554 Portland Avenue St. Paul, 2R�1 55102 I3ovember 6, 1980 Board of Zoning Appeals 25 West Fourth Street St. Paul, MN 55102 RE: Zoning File ��8758 Zoning File Name HOSKING Gentlemen: I believe that an examination of all the records, correspondence, and minutes--there at City Hall (and also perhaps of the minutes of Planning Districts 8 and/or 16)--will very likel� sho�a that the lot at the corner of Summit and Kent was obtained by the present owner primarily for the purpose of constructing thereon a dc�elling for the owner. In order that the structure match the large scale of residences on Summit, it was decided thar a "double house" would be acceptable. I ari not aware at what paint the structure then became a three unit residence. Now we learn that the owner �aishes to make it a four unit operation. I am not in favor of the variance being proposed. l. The structure has already lost much of its protected status as an ocaner-occupied dwelling and--in my vie�a--has become basically, just another rental property and should be judged as such. As a rental property, it has started out �on a very favorable financial base--a large corner Iot made available at extremely low cost. (There may also be certain ta�: breaks available to this new cons::ruction, but I'm not sure of this point.) I make these points, for it does not seem likely that financial hardship would be incurred by the ocmer if the request for �a variance is not granted. 2. There are only three garages provided on the property in ' question. The streets in this part of town cannot acco��3�te more street parking and the zonin; laws, requiring appropriate on-site parking for new constructionr would seem to preclude a fourth unit in the structure. The process of.e�anding a dwelling into a four-unit rental property has apparently been a gradual one. It is now time to call this process to a halt. A triple unit is questionable on many counts. A four- unit status should not be approved. Yours truly, . ij ,-y _L,�I� .� . (1'tiJ�, ; .-,...._�.� _ �,�;��_� F� �� a �- � -j � s � � � 4. :a � Donald Z. oods � �: 3 ��-� ,, r �.� _..._....�.._,�. __ - � �� 6��+� � NOVEMBER 7, 1980 MR. STE�1E GROCHALA ZONING DEPARTMENT CITY OF ST. PAUL ST. PAUL, MN 55101 DEAR $TEVE: AS A�NEIGHBOR LIVING WITHIN 350 FEET OF THE REQUESTED VARIANCE ON THE �''ART OF MRS. DOROTHY HaSKINGS I WANT TO GO ON RECORD AS OPPOSING THE VARIANCE ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS: -- I DEPEND ON THE CITY TO UPHOLD ITS ZONING ORDINANCES TO ALLO'r�! FOR NEIGHBORHOODS WITH CONSISTENT STANDARDS THAT ARc DESIRABLE. --I CAN SEE NO LOGICAL REASON WITHIN THE CURRFNT Z4NING ORDINA!�CE TO LEGALLY GRANT THIS VARIAMCE. THE PROPERTY OW��ER HAS EXCEEDED THE ALLOW'ABLE PERMIT AND SHOULD NOT f�OW BE GRANTED A VARIP,NCF, SINCE THE DECISIONS MADE WEP.E OF THE OWNERS OWN CHOOSING. --I AM CONCERNED ASOUT THE DENSITY OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. --THE ALREADY CROWDEC PARKING CONDITIONS WILL BECOP�iE 6•lORSE. ---THFRE WILL BE AN IMCREASE IN THE TRl�FFIC IrJ THE NEIGHBORHGOD . --THE UNIT IN QUESTION ORIGINALLY PLANNED FOR TWO D�•JFLLINGS WILL NOT ALLOW FOR ADEQUATE PRIVATE SPACES FOR ITS RESIDENTS:. IN VIEaJ OF THE ABOVt MENTIONS FACTS AND THE CONCERN OF MY NEIGHBORS I URGE YOU TO RECOMMEND AGAINST THE GRAPdTING OF THE �RIANCE TO MRS. DOROTHY I-IOSKINGS. SINCERELY, � .�. .,,.."""....,�...' 7�� c .�:.� , � -;� JEAN VELLEU � �s�"` ,,'�� i� �' :� ' ;':.-�.� _--------�---- - pA`.a'A .�p�� ..J a: v a '� . ....,...._.....__ . � . . � ...C � . � �� -�C��`�' � �� . � � � � 5 � � .�/ �0 �.� - � -, ,��s . ��e�n� ,��. � ' S�. �''iu�-� =�i'J �'S102 �;�VE;?i:?�.� ;>> lc�Q B��d �f Z�nin�; .��pe�ls 2� i�:eCt F�arti� St. S�. �=aul, :�ii:� 55102 Re: Z�nino �'i�.e ��t�. 8`l53 - u��.l.i�b T��..�_� i'raitle J.T.7C�1'l�i� La��i2s anc� i:entl�::len �1 the ��ra �-d ; T��an« ;��u, .��1 as:�i�z� �ur• �pirz��n ab�a� tne h�use i;.�,:�eciia�e�_;� SO:i��'_ 7f' 7ll?'�. '=':�-G' 'L1cVE t•:aLC'_"_EC: � �_i�C'i� 4•.'l.t'i�`1 .�@�:Z�_C�P.1^:1GC!u� �'+_1@ . sp�ra�ic ��r�;;x�ess t�iere sinc� e=�;.ava :,ion 'ce�an abauc a ==e«r c`�. �J. �I.l�, Z�,'2 c�. 1.57 lJB�C'_rl�G 1.t, Cu�.::i�,y bE?i:uUS� �'JQ be?i;:VBCi i,�i�� a pex.�ii� I:aG been brarzte., t� b!�i7_d a tt�:�--a�:iily �:o:�;� a�d c�n- �iderit i,na� tile rules �•,�il�_ uc a��ne�ed t�. t�:a sti1� have i;%_,�� c�nfidccice beca�ise we believe ��at ��,e city �f St, raul �.�z.11 a'pid e b�r i�s :�t•:�z r u]_e s. �`r@ 7tJ�@Ct Lp tilE Z°E'.(�U@St@Ci Vc?.i.i��.,::1..2 �,3 c1_�.^L•d ��J�Ii ��Y' ��7YPc} ur�:.�s at 555 S��i1��iit n�-c . ='�r t�es� r�as�:�s: (1) T;�ere t>>�uld be an increas� above le,,al Ii:aits irz �,1�� nu:�lber �f pe��le �_ivic�z;; zr� a c�-i_`'; r�d a�c� . (2) Theie Sa�al.:a �e ].ac.. ^f priv_��e s�.ace �'�r i,hl�� occi�parts of 55,� Su.n::�it ��ve. , bec� _,se �Le �truc��?re itsel:�� ccupies the :ri�j D�`l.�;y �:i the a va i:?a bI� 7_a�d . {3) D��:�ands on Citv sert-ices �-r�alc als� ir�c_rease. (4) k�ar'�i:�o space , already a i�r�a�e:.�, t�a��ld be a`;grava �ed ; t'�e paz:�i�� spac� ai, 5�5 Su:?i�:�it �v�. is �_r��;aeqEZa �e. `lhe a?_ready busy �;ra�'�ic t,tould li��=e��;isz incr�ase. (5) lhe c'r:aracter �fi this nei��,a�rin��c� �;�a'a ch�n�e t:1i�_h_ ir�- creas�d p��u7_ati�n �le�zsity �u� ��' �eepin;; Z•;i�h th�� i�i,e:�t �� z�ni�� lai�.s. :i�st �f us c,uri�� t�� past r��ta years have w��'�a� e,.t?�e_1eI;� hard ;� brin� �ur 90-p�_as-;�ear-�lc? h�rnes i.rt� c�::z�;?ia�ce� k�:�iti� zo ain;; an� bai� din� c�des. �^;'e li'::E;•�ise e;�ect tr_a � t��ese codes anc �rdinances �ai1.�� be respected in new c:�nstrt�cti�r�. :�irs. I-i�s:-�in�; has s� far ch�sen t� i��z�re the z�nin� orc�?nance, evea th�agh �hc- _;iust r1GG2 bt�e�! au7_ly ati�aare of i�.s i_:i�olicati�ns al1 al�n�;.� i�s direct nei�-�'a�rs t�:e .�eel tha� �ar ribh�s and c�ncerns sh�a�d be resL�e^ted , particu�.arly since t}�eJ haQ been spe?led ��.?t in th�: �rdinance b�;_�re �he "ac�. t��e tr�ts� that y�u �-��ll ta:-e �ur obj�c�i�ns irrt� �eri�us c�n�iderat��n a � y�u �:��i�h t?�e �ac�s in thiti mut��r. Sincere�y, , � �� 1 �:(�_-�'/ ----_- ,� �. � , h� ` � � _ � , ._-G�ti.��-z.�. _'`. <�' �, � , � ^ ` ' , - _.__._..__,__.�� _� Rud�lz" anc Eva SchnaSSe ._.��• ` " 1�7 �� , , .. �b 3 ; � 1 :.. �`. i � .. ..,...t:,-a -,.....__..�. � � . '-...�"„�`•-----�...v....,�,,.,.,,_,.,... �-._.._,..� . � . -'�'...�.��.�1 _.. ...._. __.�.w.,.. .....:.__._-- _ ,y . _.�.. __ -_ ...._. ._, .W ._.,. .... _ � �.�.. ��.. ,.:.:� �..:. .,,.y`..H., �, _ ._._, .... _ .. _. _ . . . i ��6��5 ' �� 548 PORTLAND AVENUE SA1NT PAUL, MN. 55102 • i _ . . + .:<,_. . .„��. � � ��„_ �y � �- „3�,.. - � . 1:' -:jA�. . �' ��i � T0: Board of Zoning Appeals � �� 25 West Fourth Street � Saint Paul , Minnesota 55102 � I FROM: Priscilla G. Farnham I f SUBJECT: Variance File #8758 " " DATE: 10 November 1980 In response to a notice sent to me about a hearing on application for a variance, zoning file #8758, by Mrs. Nosking at 555 Summit Avenue, I wish to voice opposition to granting such a variance. Since we have lived in this neighborhood for 18 years, we have seen it progress from many multiple-unit dwellings toward single and double-unit housing. This trend � stabilized the character of the neighborhood and greatly improved it. Even with this positive trend, parking is still a problem, as the number of multiple-unit houses in ' the area is still too high. Granting a variance to allow 4 units instead of 2 would reverse this desirable trend, � as well as increase our parking difficulties. I strongly urge that such a variance be rejected. {_:;�� . /J�M ,ii�a�S - /��2��. =�;�� -. . � ��. ��=� � ' .�`�-�,�(X'�� __ '�"`.�'.�w^" :n:�a p cS 4SS V� � ti -� ;�� 1 , � .a ..`� 5 :n �'��i%a a��:a - � } . � � '�;�* 1 �.p' � .Z;.J y . . . 4�� '� " _...---�.`----°_._.�-^' � _--.--"'—.�.-- � - r _ _.,..._ _--•_�. ,.._,,___..... _,__. . _ : , -..._...._.....�_,�......�...-.-.R_.....,..._.,_...-,...�....,.v__..,....... _ .__..___.._... --- � ___....Y____.__, ...._. " `', episco�a,Ppa�s-h�of c---".; -�s"��` �- . , ,. t�; .�::.. ., �;.�`�'� `� ", ��;. ' ,�"��; «,,.t�.�.��r�''�,*�.A., �y.;�• a�t JoHn i the evangQlist November 10, 1°8Q Board of Zoning Appeals 25 West Fourth Street St. Paul, MN 55102 Dear Sirs, The Parish. of St. John the Evangelist who own the property on the west side of Kent Street hetween Summit Avenue and Portland Avenue do object to the granting of a variance requested by Dorothy Hosking for 555 Summit Avenue. There is so little off-street parking in the area now that in the winter it is frequently impossible for all those at- tending church services to find parking space in the Parish parkzng lots; as the space is filled with cars of those living in the area. The problem is further aggravated when trying to clear the lots of snow. Should Ms,. Hosking provide. adequate and convenient off-street parking foz four units at 555 Summit Avenue, the Parish_ would �vithdraw its objections. Yours ��ly,� , � ��r��' , �li�ii�l��-�-(� Par`is o St. John the Evangelist � by William Plummer, Treasurer WP/dr Enclosure � ��--°_,..�� .�..,;,.. � . �� _��,�------=" �„r, _; ��5�--..� � � � ;�-� � ,� ,� .,....---�--�'..' � �" > a:.:�.:.:- �-,� � ,� : ;; _ - :� ,`., f:�''`~."� ..--_-..�'`" _ �-y,:^."_ SIXTY KENT STREET ST. PAUL, MINN. 55102 TEL.EPHONE 225-7e51 ��6 552 Portland Avenue St. Paul, Minnesota 55102 November 12, 1980 Board of Zoning Appeals 25 West Four�h Street Saint Paul, Minneso�a 55102 Dear board members: As the owner of a single family residence at 552 Portland Avenue I wish to state my opposition to tlze granting of a zoning variance for 555 Summit Avenue (your file ��8758) . The application for the variance fails to meet the legally prescribed requirements for the change: the physicai character of the Iot in question does not pose an "undue hardship" to the owner, nor is any problem encountered by the owner not "self created." The increase in the number of units in the already constructed building from two to four, as the applicant requests, would adversely affect the neighborhood. It would increase the density of persons living in the area, exacerbate an already difficult parking situation, create additional vehicular traffic on residential streets, and, mcre ger:erally, retard the stabilization oi the neighborhood. In tne past several years many multi-unit dwellings have been returned to single and double-unit housing. To permit the construction or, more precisely, the redesign of a duplex structu re in this area from a double unit to a multi-unit would conflict with this desirable trend. It would certainly a�t to discourage the many persons like myself who have invested considerable money, time, and vast quantities of "sweat equity" to create and maintain an attractive resz3ential area. I strongly request that the variance request be denied. Sincerely, � ,r� ;'/' ° ;; �`Gi U �:, Charles Sk`rief �✓,�'-----...........,....�� . { r � � ��, - .&':xt �.,, �+ _�' z}�"a n , '""°^—�,,.�„�,,,� . � � �� r�: � � ��Q � � . .�....y �� . . `�..^^++. . �^^+�...�„yy�+..� �'�r.,�. �� r��,y� . . -�'�� .. ..� " . .. . .... .......,..._+.,...:.._... ..-.�,:...��..__,_......_..._._ ....._�.�.�.�... ..�.,_....yC.........�-..�.,..,.......�......_..� ... _.. . ... _" ',.__' . _' '."_"_. ._. ._.r.,.-. .. , _ . ....... ZONING STAFF REPORT �� l . APPLICANT: DO�OTHY HOSKING ; DATE OF HEARTPdG 11/12/80 2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CLASSIFICATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CURREfdT PLANNING & ZONING GOMMITTEE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS Rezoning ❑ Variance LX1. Special Condition Use ❑ Administrative Review ❑ Determination of Similar Use ❑ Other ❑ Change of Nonconforming Use Q Other 3. LOCATTON: 555 Summit Avenue. 4. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Except the N. 48' , Lot 11 , alack 22, Auditor's Subdivision 11 . 5. FRESENT ZONING: RT_2 ZONING CODE REFEREPdCE: Sections 61 .101 (f} & 64.205(b) 6. STAFF INVESTIGATION & REPORT: DA?E 10/31j80 BY Stephen Grochala A. PURPOSE: A variance in lot size from 11 ,000 required by the RT-2 schedule of regulations to 10.076 sq. ft. to allow two 2-bedroom apartments and two 1-bedroom apartments or a total of�� rooms. . - B. SITE & AREA CONDITIONS: The applicant's structure is a neN� house built on a lot sold by the Housing & Redevel�pment Authority. The site is on Summit and Kent, the northeast corner. Other uses in the area include the St. John's parking lot across Kent, a large house with apartments to the east, and a duplex to the north. Across Summit is a single family house, a 6-unit apartment building and a vacant lot. C. ORDINA�lCE CITATION: Section 61 .101 (f) provides that in an RT-2 zone the total number of rooms permitted sha11 not be more than the area af the parcel in square feet divided by 100. Section 64.205(b) states that the Board of Zoning Appeals cannot "permit as a variance any use that is not permitted under the Ordinance for property in the district ulhere the effected person's land is located." D. FIfJDINGS: 1 . The applicant purchased the property with the intent t� build a duplex. 2. The applicant did have to meet Housing & Redevelopment Authority development controls designed to make the npw strurture more compatible �vith existing architECture on Summit Avenue. 3. The size of the applicant's lot in square footage (10,07b.18) wou7d allow use of the structure for two 2-bedroom apartments and one 1-bedroom apartment for a total of eight rooms. (Nine rooms would be allowed. ) _ 4. The RM-1 zoning district density schedule ��ould allow 11 roons on this site. Rezoning to RM-1 would permit use of the site for 4 units with a total of 10 rooms. 5. The RT-2 district allows a maximum of 4 units on any zoning lot if the lot also meets density regulations in Section 61 .101 (f}. 6, The applicant's request constitutes a request to build more habitable rooms than is permitted under the RT-2 schedu7e of regulations. 7. The request constitutes a request for a use variance�because the use requested would only be permissible under a minimum density allowed first in the RM-1 zoning district. 8. The Board of Zoning Appeals is prohibited from granting such a variance. _ 9. It appears that the strict application of the regulations would not result 5n exceptional undue hardship upon the owner of the property, and that any� inconvenierice that exists is self-created. 10. Since h1innesota Statutes (Section 462.357, subdivision 6, clause 2} and the Zoning Ordinance (Section 64.205(b) specifically prohibit as a variance any use that is not permitted under the Ordinance for the property in the zone a:+here the affected person's lancl is located, it appears that the variance can►�ot be granted without substantially impairing the intent and purpose of the Ordinance. 11 . It appears that the variance requested would not impair adequate light or air to adjacent property, or unreasonably diminish or impair established property values 4vithin the surro�m ding area. � �. �� a�� , , ,�� DO.ROTHY, HOSKING (#8758) STAFF REPORT PAGE 2 D. FINDIPJGS CONT'D. 12. It appears that the variance request is not based primarily upon a desire to increase the value or income potential of the parcel. of land. E. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Based on findings 7 through 10, staff recommends denial of the variance request. j • . �- �. � , �:. _ ,��;��+� . _ .. _� �._.: __. _. .. . . _ . . _ . ...,. . ._. _.. ..... . . �.Y.•{'-:.. ...��,; ... , � + ' . 't �. ' , . � . . . . . ' '..,Y . . . . . ' ��f! . � . . . � , . � 1 + �1. . � ��O�J � `�1 � - . i � / `:� , �. �/' , t � x � � , ��1'e- •. ' � . /,; � � `, e � � _ v"�,- T:_�� . , � � .. . � . � �, . � � . . .� ,,�i. � . . .. � . . !' - : . � � -. . .. � . . . . . . ii � _'_ __,�_ _,:.._ .. .._f. ._....k_..-.__-.-�-�__..i _ � `•, `� a . . , e •r � , �. . S a ` � . _+: _ _.. � _ . � . ' �4 ..__ . .- � �.�- . _.._. � � +.r . 7 '.:.a•r. :��:✓.�� .� , . � �. " � ��-,_ - � i ' . � '. '� � � �L . •i C.=T ... . � . . � . C. . i ' ` . \ , i . ! �. �• ; - �y_ . � -- ' � . � � . i \ � i � t � , '•\ ?�'3' ` � � . . , ; . � . �� ' � # � � ;� x � , +� L..�, -_ _ :. � �_ _ . .��..- -_ ,;....:,,�-�_._._�_...._.,.. � I I - , � \, ' ,, ' �',�: _J,---, _ tJY_ V . � . iv �- !� I��., - . � . . . � ' ' . . , . . . '11v..�� . J:1a:_e�- ' ; � J, i, . � �,�.� . i/ ,3. . . . . � � t rZ�.:�;7 �i�'r�...i-.i'.31� ' ' . . ' �� ' a � � �t�` • � ... - , .. . •:/� , �. �� - ..� .. ._.F; .r-'� 'y_ _u�.�hC` . ... � '� � ; ' ��c ' - _�- -._ ..v__.s,j .... . . . . �. ' " . . � — . t ` ; � . . . . . : . '�•Y . , - --.. �x=�.:...o-a .::r.r,-� � . .- i . - : . . a �_ . . _ t 1 . ' + . .. . �. . . , ' r � . � , . � ' c • - - :- . . t , , . 4 . . .. _ _ .,,� . � . . - ��F f ,. . _ . ._ . : . ., , .. �. . . � ._._...>._... ; :.,._.„ -'-.- -_�.. ._,...,-...._.e . . . . �. � . . . � ; ,� -. , .... ,.- . . . . ._ _... __. _...-'._'.--.�..__ _... , . .. . .. . . . , .. � .:. - _. < .: . _� . . . �� . -, �. .. �- 1 # ' 1- . . + . � . . - . - ._._ . . . . - � r1 .. � � � � � �� - ,..�.� ._ ; ...�. . . .��, �' ' �:.. _ - . . 'F ii7C.�w✓ �'e^T- ..- �j f � : n .-� : _� .. : . . ._ . . . . - .. �. i... � _ ' - ' . - . . . -� . _ -�. . ._ . .. . ��a•�:.� . J ' . .. � . .. . . . . . ' d �--�'� . � _ �, i . f . - � . . �. � . . - � , � . - � _�- _, ..._� . .. . .'-. . ' �'- 7-' t'•`, j . j .. . . � _ . . . . . _ " ' . .'1��:+'...a.O'. � e � � r. „ ��:"'�. - � _ . G . '-n:. . � ; - ; � . L . ' , �. _• . ''. . . �- . .yvi„'r� T / . ...:'_1,.._ wJ�i ./ '?!.�• ,. .� __:.'._ ._.__" ... ._"'__'_--. . . . ' : � 1 d� .� � . , � . '_' . ......_- e . � • l. �L.. , °T'� � .A`� /r'Zf I�.�.ry� • . � ' x _ JY - - . i + . � } � t � _ ' . _,�- ^ . � - - -- - --- . . . , . . . . ( _.. . � , � � � . : . ,� . � � y_� t� r - ' • � " � ' � ' ' - -- . . - � ^ � . ' . �� . , . . � . . _� -'-- "_.....__ ._... . . . . , ,.�._ _..._,,.�_..__., . . � j - ' -_ �� - � . . � . . . � ' ' ' � , . 'j. .. �1 � ' . . . , �"'; . 1 a �� . � _�:- . ._ .. .. � � � .. ._ �_ .. - � }\ .i._'r . �' . �_ • , . . i - .- . . . . , s'.. ^�rfG .J,.�`-� J� . . . � � �. -��_� . .. . . � � - � �+.r•/�/ - f . �•R ... .A.b . : ' �. . � . . ' .. � . _ . ; . . , . / . .T• :.1_�'. M1.� . . . . T , . ' . . i 3 ; . ' J ✓_.:'.M r�1� . • � � - . � � - ' ' ,t ' � t�r.�� .-. � � ; . .. � , . . ... . _ �1.. . . . � -MJ 4-� L<��.�.fc .��. y�� .• �_-_. . •�� i . . } 1} . .�.. � . -- jl �. . . .. y . ' k—• i t . . . . € . L, _}.K . .'. ' " "'_. ". .—r...�_... . � , � , . . . . . . �. � ..:._ .. ._.. .... ' ' ' �' .; � `� & _..._...-.._ •` } . ' � _..._,....-�». .-��.""_ ..:.�.»'1n+ .. . ' - �, . . � . -y�S . , } . } (. ,. . � . . . . . . � . . � � . . - ` S , • _ : r� i � . , . � , . . - - -- - . � _ ._.. - ` - ....a.. - �- __ _ - -�_ � r_�► � . � �_-__ :��__ -_ �� --__." _._ __�� __�; . � � :� � _ �� . ? ;'. � , - - -�� .� _ : .� : , : ! .� a. � _ _ � _. _ ..._ ._ . _ .� ._ ._ __ � � 4 . , ' ' � i i _ ; � � . , , '� � ,, ' . . . . . i - . ... _ . � '� � � � � . , .. _ . � . � . ..._j-_..__... _...,. ..._,_. f _....�_ .. _,. .. . _ _.-' ; � ..._..___. _�.�_._,_ ..., . � . ._ ._ � - , .. ._ .._........_. . .__.._,._-- -- - ----._..__. _ .. _ ._.__...._...:...,,..._-, E � � ,Y S e GQ , --- ___- ---___ - � d��td� S . � C ° � ; ,. � �.:._ � � .. _ ... . � . .. - -' ,_� � ____.L..�,"_� _.._ �.s� �..,...�... . .... .. __ . ,. - - .__., ., �__�.., ..,_...,..;�.�.,.<. .f�=.�?,�sz__;fa,.. _ �..•�? , , i �,, � ; , I ` � � ' � �•�% �� ` ' � _._,_�-_ ; ; � � j :,—�- ', � � � � L'�fJfb,L� ; V � � + I � � o , ---; ; I � � � <.� " v v v � v � � � .�r.�r�'a 1 �; , � � ' � � � � � � �� 6 � � - ' � r �� s ��P-- 4� V Oo Q 6 6 �. ��U�E� �vE. . : F ^ �, , -�--r--'?--,- ;�- o ��o o v ; o c� c� v � �� e �. 6 � � o� � i � �.;° ;4�. 0 , � � ; � o Ag , _�- �: ' I ; ► , --�_ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _�_ : . �_ _ � _ -o- � - - - - �' t A� --T--�T- ; ; _ _� � T�I�T� AeT , , � , _ ; , � � � � �o o �' o ° �� ; �o ; � � v v (v�v � � � --� � � , � ;�SNLAI�� AVE. v _ .,�� -� ,,� (� 6. P_-� (� 6 6 �O 6 i �I—��.�—_ �— I l � ( i V 7 V V -,Y � "fi 6�' T �1 G v �� T Q ,-�- 1 � 1-_ ..� « _�____ S .P ULS CNURGH i ' a � 6 C AB ,.r i� � � NOME — — -T-- —r- �, _ ' ' ��—i� v AB A�3 ! i I� ... , I P i f {� �� (�' � o00 - ; �� ' 0 ��; c� �o ' o; c i l' 9 � e � 7 T � � �-• 5 6 �:, - i �l �LLY E. RECTORY (� � i � ' 9 z� � �3 R H, - ' i � � � ;- ° � � - �� o ;G� � __ T ' '° \-✓ � �� ' ; ! �� ' ' �v i � � .� � O �-. . i.;� �. ._�_. �,_ -�- �' t. .--- � � -1,---r—._, � g� g ;.: � I I �I l �� j� i I � ' � � I � � f:, � � � i P �iC� I ` �' f I 5 'U � O v � � I � a � , 2 I 20 � � � � i ' R H O I � � '', �� .,;. T�A� D " , R�W �V �. � i ii ► i � t , �� '� � ' � � � � � � 4�p � i��: ;Y , �� # � �� , � �.�:. , . � � T � i , �� >> 6 � I � , � �] � � `0 � _� "': ^ � � v i � � i i � � ��1__.�_- -------�-- � - "' i . U i t i t � � � � ,� � � � �,� � � � , � � i E �� ' v � Co, � ;P u.,= -�-- � (� ; o �t , , ; � � o � �- ��9 � -� � �� „ U 4� � �o � b ► , I 1 I I 333 2 ROW � •� — ---- ---_--—_-- ---- --- — . . � ------- •• — ---_ ,_..��, ROW +,�2e rLS�'; 9 i� 6 � i ( � { I r : �, }.-� i i a 1� i � �i � I Ci �I1 � I 1 I (J � �vl` � i 1 � , � � v � i i � `i� d ��i � � � �, v � i I i �, �a �� ; ; � � � z � � ; ; � , , � � c�f � ; � ,, , , � ; ! 4.t , � , � � ; � i � � � �.,.,,,� ,�-1_�- = � -o- .J `°�; �F �� -- -- -" � � � �� L's'J • , • ' I � I I � .. Q _�_--- --- — — .___ � ,,J ' I � � 1 : 1 I � � ` I 1 I ..,...� , � , � i � s- -�--- -i _ � AR �� i�AP APPLICANT DORQTHY HOSKT�iG LEGEND -- --- ZONiiVG DISTRICT BOUNDARY 555 Summi t Ave�,te � SUBJ�CT PROPERTY PURPOS� Conversion from 3-plex to • O 0 N E FA M I�Y PLANNiNG . to 4-pi ex __ _ � DISTRtGT TWO FAMILY F!L� �l0. 8758 ___._ 8 & 16 �-�- � �viULTIPL.E ��+91LY DA7E 11/12/80 � � n CO��E�2CIAL. SCAI.E � !'� = 200� iVO�2TN � � �' lN�USTR�AL MAP N4. 20 �AlNT PAUL �LAi'+;NiiVG BOA�2D V �IACANT . � _ . ___._ __ . _:,-..�.._�.�.._...., , i ��i�� . . � �,� ,� g48 lrlest Idebraska Avenue .��L� Saint Paul, i�iinnesota 55117 �,7 � November 22, 1980 �� . I�iembers o� the City Council City Council �dministrative Offices City Eall Saint Paul, Minnesota 55102 Re: Appeal from Zoning Co:nm. ' denial of density variance request at 555 �t �venue. . . 2� ��5� Dear Piembers of the City Council: I am herewith appealing the decision of the Zoning Com.�nissio n to deny my request for a density variance on the above property which was intended to be a duplex and which now is a legal 3-plex. rIy reasons for agpealing the unfavorable �ecision are: l. The Staff report - which was unfavor�.ble - s-tated that my prablem was "self-created" and wou2d not result in any, undue ha.rdship upon the owner. The truth is that I ha.ve plenty of evidence, including a state- ment by the Historical Society people, that I` did not lmow about the cha.ri�s and there was nothing I could h�.ve done about it. Also, I am now facin� bankruptcy because the �'a.nge� from the original plan has more than doubled the cost of the construction and money is just not available to ba.il me out because the banks say the building will not support such a loan at today's confiscatory intexest charges. All the changes, which have caused numerous xed-tag and other delays in constructi.on, ha.ve been very expensive and ha.ve pushed me closer to the brink of disaster. I�lthough the City has had millions of dollars for changing present apartment buildings into candos Z have been unable to get one penny to help me build what is now four new units which would help the housin� crunch at least this much, 2. Althoug�some of my enighbors did not receive notification of the zoning hearing, tYie people who did receive notice and who did write lettexs and appeared against the variance, were there with wha.t I would con- sider as "dirty hands" inasmuch as they are the sane people who caused so much delay in my building schedule because they wanted to build garages on the Zot on Summit Avenue. Yet they wexe permitted to testify tha,t their only interest is to keep the "inte�it;�r of the neighborhood". �llso, Mro Niicha.el Hoffman who said he represented the Summit gxoup lrnown as Ramsey-, Hill Association, did not ha,ve a specific mandate from that group to speak against it. I�r�, immediate neighbors are ver�' happy with this building. For the above reasona, and many more, I want to ap�eal tYfis decision. Sincerely yours, . �,c� �_ ��.�..-�---� Dorothy D. Ho _ 'ng �� c. 1 I am enclosing a check for �50.00 which I am told is necess�z�'• . ...,. .._.._._;_ . ... . . ... _.. . _._. _. T - .._. _..____....._....,_,._.,....__.._.. ... ....._ . . . ....__._._:.T...._..�-T-....___-�---. , _. . _ . ._ ._ . -.-.- - .- ,-�.._._. ..�,., ' •�x.. � . � . � . . . ....