The URL can be used to link to this page

275676 WHITE - CITY CLERK � PINK -� FINANCE COUACII �`��s CANARY -s DEPARTMENT G I T Y O F S A I N T PA U L BLU� - MAYOR File N O. ncil Resolution Presented By Referred To Committee: Date Out of Committee By Date WHEREAS, Stephen J. Kroiss applied to the Board of Zoning Appeals requesting several variances so as to permit the sub- division of his property located at 548 E . Minnehaha Avenue and legally described as Lots 6 & 7, Block 2, Phillips Addition, for the purpose of creating a single family homesite on a portion of the property and retaining the existing three-plex on the balance of the property, the variances including a lot area variance of 186 square feet, a lot area variance of 3, 609 square feet for the existing three-plex and a western side yard setback variance of four feet; and WHEREAS, Following a public hearing with notice to affected property owners the Board of Zoning Appeals by its Resolution 8658 granted the variances requested based on the Board's finding that the variances could be granted without substantial detriment to the coznmunity and would not impair the intent and purpose of the Zoning Ordinance, that the strict application of the regulations would result in exceptional practical difficulties upon the owner of the property because of the shape and area of the lot, that the variances would not impair adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property or unreasonably diminish or impair the established property values within the surrounding area or in any other respect impair the public health, safety, comfart, morals or welfare of the inhabitants and that the variances are not based primarily upon a desire to increase the value or income potential of the parcel of land; and WHEREAS, Pursuant to the provisions of Section 64 .204 the Railroad Island ITA Committee and District Five Planning Council duly filed with the City Clerk their appeal from the deterinination made by the Board of Zoning Appeals granting the requested variances; and COUNCILMEN Requestgd by Department of: Yeas Nays Hunt Levine IR Favor Maddox nn�nnanor, __ Against BY snowalter - Tedesco Wiison Form Approved by it At ney Adopted by Council: Date — CertifiE:d Passed by Council Secretary BY By . Approved by 1�layor: Date _ Approved by May or Submission to Council By _ — BY WHITE - CITY CLERK � �� PINK -{ FINANCE CAPjARY - DEPARTMENT C I T Y O F S A I N T ��L COUIICII r� BLUE - MAYOR Flle N O. Council Resolution Presented By Referred To Committee: Date Out of Committee By Date Page 2. WHEREAS, Acting pursuant to Section 64.204 through 64 .207 and upon notice to the Appellants and affected property owners a public hearing was duly conducted by the City Council on September 4, 1980 where all interested parties were given an opportunity to be heard; and WHEREAS, The Council having heard the statements made and having considered the variance application, the report of staff, the minutes and findings of the Board of Zoning Appeals does hereby RESOLVE, That the Council of the City of Saint Paul does hereby overturn the decision of the Board of Zoning Appeals in this matter and does hereby deny the request for variances made by Stephen J. Kroiss for the following reasons: l. That the request for variances is based primarily upon a desire to increase the value or income potential of the parcel of land. 2 . That the variances requested will impair the adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property, and further will unreasonably diminish and impair the established property values within the surrounding area, and will impair the public health, safety, comfort, morals or welfare of the inhabitants of Saint Paul . 3. That the strict application of the regulations of Section 61.100 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code will not result in exceptional practical difficulties upon the owner of the property as distinguished because of COUNCILMEN Yeas Nays Requestgd by Department of: Hunt Levine In Favor Maddox Q McMahon B showa�ter _ Against Y Ts�`a w�son Form Approved by City Attorney Ado by Counc- Date — ertified _sed by Council S'ecre y BY �� _ Approved by 1�layor: Date _ Approved by Mayor for Submission to Council By _ BY WHiTE - CITY CLERK �1� �'�J PINK - FINANCE � /� r BLU�RY - MAYORMENT GITY OF SAINT� PAUL � F1ecilNO � �� Council Resolution Presented By Referred To Committee: Date Out of Committee By Date Page 3. mere inconvenience and that there are no physical hardships caused because of the shape and area of the zoning lot involved. and, be it FURTHER RESOLVED, That the appeal of the Railroad Island ITA Committee and the District Five Planning Council be and is hereby granted; and, be it FURTHER RESOLVED, That the City Clerk shall mail a copy af this resolution to Stephen J. Kroiss, Eleanor Edmeier, Secretary of the Railroad Island ITA Committee, the Zoning Administrator, the Planning Commission and the Board of Zoning Appeals. COUNCILMEN Requestgd by Department of: Yeas Nays Hunt Levine [n Favor Maddox McMahon B snowaite� - __ Against Y zo�� Wilson Adopted by Council�� Date `�Gr � o '�po Form Approved b ity tt m . Certified Passed by C n � c etary BY i.. �--•-� -� � � By, �. ; Approv vor: Date � 2 �98� App v y Mayor for S i i o Council By _ B PU�us#tE� S E P 2 7 1980 ' � , . , , , � ,. y + a �SS�7� \ , _ , . � - � � , , . , , � . . � , . _ - ; F� . _ . � Sept. 34, 1980 � ' ' , ; ,� � : , . , ; t ' � ' ; 1 St=a'Vaanelli,; . Mstri,ct �5 �Pllanning Couacil � ` _ 1075 A�csda ' : Sti. Pa�l, Mi�aesota `55105 , . , � , . _ , Dear i�s... Vaartelli: � , \ - S�tclo�ed is a� coPy p# t St. Paul City Councfl Resolution�, C.F. Nv. 275b76, adapted bg tt�e Counci� oa Sept. 18, 1�80 granting pmsr.ap�ararl to a'decisl,'on af t� �oa�Ed iof ZoniaB APPeala �ar property •a�_548 E. Mineeohaha Av�. � � � 'Very trulp:7ou�rs. � ' • , � � i ` , '�� t-:�.. f i . , , . _ Ros� Mix ��f ' . , . Citg G1ark : Y • � Attsch. . � � � ' •�h 1 . . . ✓ _ ccs 3tephe�;J. 1��oiss . , . , ' ' , . Railroa�� I�la�ti ITJI Cowq�ittss . ' � 2oning ;�dainistrator ' , : . ' pla�� Comm�iaaioa � : � " . BOtIQ .O �OD�t!$. �514 . r \ , � . . .. ' ,� . : < , , _I . . � . . - � ` ' /! � , � _ ' . J / ' . ""`� (R,FTURN TO JEROME SEGAL AF1ER AD�PTIQN) PINK� - FINANCE GANARY - DEPARTMENT (�I TY O F SA I NT �A U L ounci �� BLlIE -� MAYOR File N O. Council Resolution Presented By Referred To Committee: Date Out of Committee By Date WHEREAS, Stephen J. Kroiss applied to the Board of Zoning Appeals requesting several variances so as to permit the sub- division of his property located at 548 E. Minnehaha Avenue and legally described as Lots 6 & 7, Block 2, Phillips Addition, for the purpose of creating a single family homesite on a portion of the property and retaining the existing three-plex on the balance of the property, the variances including a lot area variance of 186 square feet, a lot area variance of 3, 609 square feet for the existing three-plex and a western side yard setback variance of four feet; and WHEREAS, Following a public hearing with notice to affected property owners the Board of Zoning Appeals by its Resolution 8658 granted the variances requested b,ase�l,-on the Board's finding that the variances could be granted without' substantial detriment to the community and would not impair the intent and purpose of the Zoning Ordinance, that the strict application of the regulations would result in exceptional practical difficulties upon the owner of the property because of the shape and area of the lot, that the variances would not impair adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property or unreasonably diminish or impair the established property values within the surrounding area or in any other respect impair the public health, safety, comfort, morals or welfare of the inhabitants and that the variances are not based primarily upon a desire to increase the value or income potential of the parcel of land; and WHEREAS, Pursuant to the provisions of Section 64.204 �he Railroad Island ITA Committee and District Five Planning Council duly filed with the City Clerk their appeal from the determination made by the Board of Zoning Appeals granting the requested variances; and COUNCILMEN Yeas Nays Requestgd by Department of: Hunt Levine [n Favor Maddox McMahon B snoWeiter __ Against Y redesco Wiison Form Approved by City Attorney Adopted by C ouncil: Date Certified Passed by Council Secretary By B}� __ Approved by Ylavor: Date _ Approved by Mayor for Submission to Council sy _ _ By wn��n - �,1� • a,LtrtM ' CANARY - DEPARTMENT 7 COUIlC1I BLCJE -�> MAYOR G I T Y O F S A I N T I A IT L � �� File N 0. Council Resolution Presented By Referred To Committee: Date Out of Committee By Date Page 2. WHEREAS, Acting pursuant to Section 64 .204 through 64.207 and upon notice to the Appellants and affected property owners a public hearing was duly conducted by the City Council on September 4, 1980 where all interested parties were given an opportunity to be heard; and WHEREAS, The Council having heard the statements made and having considered the variance application, the report of staff, the minutes and findings of the Board of Zoning Appeals does hereby RESOLVE, That the Council of the City of Saint Paul does hereby overturn the decision of the BoarS o'f'tioning Appeals in this matter and does hereby deny the request for variances made by Stephen J. Kroiss for the following reasons: 1. That the reguest for variances is based primarily upon a desire to increase the value or income potential of the parcel of land. _ __ _ _ _ .._ 2 . That the variances requested will impair the adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property, and further will unreasonably diminish and impair the established property values within the surrounding area, and will impair the public health, safety, comfort, marals or welfare of the inhabitants of Saint Paul . 3. That the strict application of the regulations of Section 61.100 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code will not result in exceptional practical difficulties upon the owner of the property as distinguished because of COUNCIL�4IEN Requestgd by Department of: Yeas Nays Hunt Levine In Favor Maddox McMahon B snowa�te� Against Y — Tedesco wlson Form Approved by City Attorney Adopted by Council: Date Certified Yassed by Council Secretary BY By __ Approved by Mavor: Date _ Approved by Mayor for Submission to Council By _ By WHITE - CITY CLERK �� PINK - FINANCE CAIyARY - DEPARTMENT C I TY O F SA I NT 1 �u L COUIICII BLLTE � ' -♦ MAVOR File N 0. Council Resolution Presented By Referred To Committee: Date Out of Committee By Date Page 3. mere inconvenience and that there are no physical hardships caused because of the shape and area of the zoning lot involved. and, be it FURTHER RESOLVED, That the appeal of the Railroad Island ITA Committee and the District Five Planning Council be and is hereby granted; and, be it FURTHER RESOLVED, That the C�ty��lerk shall mail a copy of this resolution to Stephen J. Kroiss, Eleanor Edmeier, Secretary of the Railroad Island ITA Committee, the Zoning Administrator, the Planning Commission and the Board of Zoning Appeals. - ___ _ COUNCILMEN Yeas Nays Requestgd by Department of: Hunt Levine In FavOr Maddox McMahon B sno�iter _ Against Y Tedesco Wilson Form Approved by City Attorney Adopted by Council: Date Certif�ed Yassed by Council Secretary By By� Approved by ;Navor: Date _ Approved by Mayor for Submission to Council By _ _ By �. � ' . ' - � ,�,; ir �, ; ' _ , � ` ��r�� . � , ;� , ' : y . _ i �� . . It . , ; � ; . — - � ; � ` � , , A11(�111['t 7! 2.� "? , ' �'�c ��1� �ltC21 • � _ � � De�art�ent af Firia�e. ' _ - '. . , � Rocrm 2�,8,` �ity H�ll % � Ae�r 3�r: ` � _ ,, � _ . ' � Tt� C�`�Y Ccjur�ai�: ,eet a, c��te d�' 'hearin��_f+dr Sept�mber 4,; 19�t3s: ' ' to eoneti�leier t�e app�al o#' �tie �i.a:ikroe8.,Isl.�na,nd I3A Comml�C�eel `� ' ' � ; " , and the? Di�trict 5 Pian�ning Cauncil� to e decia� �!'1 t2M �Acai�d ' -of,Zon�i�� Appeala re�;ardfn� Progerty at 5$8 Eaat� �.nneb,ahn Av+e. � Wil]. oi� lease sa� not�ces to � �' Y p P�Perty 4�r�tars .+� �eqiairecl , _ , , by _�e,w?' : , , . � , . � , � . , � � VeY'Y tru2Y Ycur�, - C. _ . " ' � .- � ' , - Roae �lit , , City Clerl� , , . � � . , , ; ; � , AB+d t la� , . , i : , , ' �c� P1ai��g 9�tat'f, ?;a�tting 8�ation � : " ; Ho�� do l�ldg. Code Bt�tor��eent D�pt. . � , , , . _ 1 ; ` . . ' - ' � � � . .�; , ,_ : . t .-. „ � , , : s : ; - , i . � � . � � . � . i � � . - . . . , , . . 1. . . � . ' .. � .. _� . . . ' .. . . . . . . . , .. . . .. . . � . . � .. � . ' . . .f . . . � . � . .. . . ,. � . . . . . . . . � _.. . . . . . . . {, . . ' . . . . . . , . � . . � . . � . . ., � ' .. . . . . � . ' ' . � � .. .� . . ' . .. � . i � . ' ' � - �5 . . � � , �. . . . � . . . , . , . �. . , � - , . . � ' , � . . � . � . , �. � � . . ' . � � � . . ' . . . . � . . . . 'f . _ ' ' I " . . . , . � . . � .. � . . . .. . . � . . / . .. - . . . � . .1.. . . , . . , ` ' � . ... . . . . . . � . . .. � _ � .. � . . . ' � . : .• .. . . � ,... � � � �, � ��"r ( � � J � �� 1:� _:.., �� :.�� ;��;�� , l. .� �r , .t: . , ��,, S� ' : � r . � ��rY .� y • . �.;,:.';: �:, ` �t:�;�:lg; � '` ';�;,,. n � ��i;��ir� A�� :y�+i ''�u�, �; ��,� 1 �� ..�.� , �_.. ; U l l �:��:: . ;:_. .: .... . .;�: ....,. __.. �. . ., ��.., .. . ,. k�•..,�.:::rJ;,. �- �/ �� `"�� + � � - July 31, 1980 I �� Ron Maddox President City Council of Saint Paul Office of the City Clerk Room 386 City Hall and Courthouse Saint Paul, Minnesota 55102 Dear President Maddox: This is to inform you that the District 5 Planning Council and the Railroad Island ITA Committee wishes to appeal the decision of the City of Saint Paul Board of Zoning Appeals on June 24, 1980 which grant- ed several variances to permit the subdivision of property at 548 East Minnehaha Avenue to create a single-family homesite and retain the existing three- plex (zoning file #8658, Applicant: Stephen J. Kroiss) . Based on the findings of the ITA Committee (attached) which were presented to the Board of Zoning Appeals on June ,24, 1980, the District 5 Planning Council and the Railroad Island ITA Committee continues to strongly believe that the granting of the variances will totally disrupt the physical characteristics of the lot in terms of its shape and area thereby creating a substantial detriment to the public good. In addition, we have some concern that any and all legal prerequisites have been fulfilled in permitt- ing the subdivision of the property. Therefore, both the Planning Council and the ITA Committee have concurred than an appeal of the July 8, 1980 resolution of the Zoning Board of Appeals . � , - � � Page 2 Appeal by Railroad Island ITA Committee( ` -'--� " ` ' ' "� `'� � ' and District 5 Planning Council � � c 75 "�-- r.�-� --- � '� � � � Zoning File #8658, Applicant: Stephen J. Kroiss� -a>•>.,; , ?.� ��,4� �•.4� � �� 1} �.- granting variances for the property at 548 East Minnehaha Avenue is appropriate and justified . A check for $50 is enclosed to cover the filing fee. Sincerely yours, Eleanor Edmeier Secretary Railroad Island ITA Committee � j G�r-r•..?�.e�2. Enclosure . ,� , • • � ��J��✓ �� + - r V `�� T0: Board of Zoning Appeals FR01�: Railraod Island ITA Committee RE: Kroiss Application For 548 E. �linnehaha Uariance DATE: June 24, 1980 Summary: While the ITA Committee acknowledges that there are some positive ramifi- cations to the granting of this variance, e.g. , increased property values, increased housing stock, potential for rehab. of existing triplex, the Committee feels strongly that the negative ramifications outweigh these, e.g., the removal of the triplex yerd greatly diminishes the livability of the triplex as well as the intended new structure, the overwhelming odds are that it is unlikely that something compatible can be built given cost and design complications, and present high density will be further intensi- fied by the addition of the intended structure. This potentially creates a dangerous precedent that in Railroad Island it is appropriate to match houses with lots regardless of sound design criteria. The Committee would like to commend I�r. Kroiss for his willingness to work with the neighborhood in this process, and we certainly hope that he will continue to do so regardless of today's outcome. We recognize the potential inherent difficulties that denial may pose for �Ir. Kroiss, but want it to be clear that the Committee feels the issue here is one of neighborhood policy and direction. FINDINGS: 1 . Other options are potentially available to effect rehab. of the existing triplex. 2. The livability of both the triplex and the intended structure is greatly reduced. 3. The triplex lot is not historically viewed as a "vacant lot" but as part of the existing triplex. 4. The present high density would be intensified with the granting of the variance thereby creating potentially harmful social consequences, e.g., history of tenant problems, 5. It is unlikely that a compatible structure could be built given the costs related to design complications. 6. The granting of a variance sets a dangerous precedent in the neighborhood that promotes placing houses on lots without regard for sound physical and social criteria. ��r� - � ' � CITY Of ST. PAUL �'r DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE AND MANAGEMENT SERVICES ', • ASSESSMENT DIVISION ;(� Z i8 CITY HALL 5T.PAUL,MINNESOTA 55102 � ��;�f�� August 22, 1980 File X 2�4 Page - Zoning File 865$ 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 September 4,.L�980 on the: • Appeal of the Railroad Island ITA Committe�. and the District 5 Planning Council to a decisiqn of the Board of Zoning Appeal$ regarding property at 548':,:E. Minnehaha Avenus. On July 8, 198Q the Board of Zoning Appeals , granted the request of Stephen J. Kroiss for a variance of lot area and side yard setback require4aeats for 548 E, Minnehaha Avenue. The Rock Island ITA, Committee and District 5 Planning Council are appealing this decision. a If you would like further information about tliis hearing, contact the Valuation Bureau, Room 2I8 City Hall or telephone 298-5317. While the City _Charter requires that we notify you of the hearing, we want to help you to learn fully about any impY`ovement �that could affect you or your com- munity. 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. WILLIAM DONOVAN VALUATION AND ASSESSMENT ENGINEER � ' � � a_�� •�' � / 9�''� . . � , � � 2`� '�f� -, . : � %�� _ � - �.�'� � � � � �� . . � � �� , �� -�� .-�� / 9�� - � . � � �� .��'�- .� - VV•�/ a' � �� . � . `�� ,� f �� - � �o �.y�� " � ' �� a-u�J . r ��.. QJ O � . � 5 ��7 � ` . � � � � �` � �� 1 �3� �� . � �-�� n�-�-�-� . ��- �� o ��- � � �3 , �, �, � , , ' ' ' _ .� ' 'j :z.%,� �'f 3 � �e�c_e.e �� ;�=-� �, �. cJ �_�y�. ,`�; � �, -y� ' ,��.� _ .J � ��'��; . `"� -� � �� .�--�� 7.�'S -_ ; � �� , ��_�_ , , � ;�-t— ;, _� i,��_�� , ��?' d�� d �� . � _ ;�� GQ� � �'_�y � � �/A , 7 4 . . Nia'�[�+�V r � _"`_.'._...__...._..,......_?.._ -a..�—� �'' /� B. _...__ �—_�._....-.� + • � � �,�/ (6 V/ , ! y ��s�� _ ��-�,,��_.rn��-�. � ��' �3 o z�- � ' .� '"�� , '� " �f� �" � � �,/�p � �, �-� � / �_ Z�:l'iw �� r � �,-��'�/Y'�'`�-' ' � C , . --��'�' �� ,.��..',;�-�,.��t-�'�_ � �/ � - ��, ._ '-3'7�� , � � Q ' � l� 3 . � _, _ � , �� r ��` < < _ � S�- Q' � ` �a—�a� 7 7 �- �Z�� ' - ., � ,�,c._c�, ��---�� '� � 3 ��''�:'-y` �� 7 � �- 3aC� � � — � � �� ,� � � � . ( ) ��f� �.. ��'`�/�i�'/�'Yt h V " �� V � � V '� -�-z_�� _._ , � �.s�� °1�� .�� "� 9,� � �� 1 ��d � i� � � G�- �� y � �� av ��- �`-d ��n �;Q� , 7 7D .— D� � � a� ��"`'`' . C�..�a,�-�- � � � �l��Y� ,.=�� o, � ' CITY OF SAINT PAUL ' °R�y '. �e a DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 5�� iiii'ii n� o� ��,!�� DIVISION OF PLANNING f .s.• 25 West fourth Street,Saint Paul,Minnesota,55702 GEORGE LATIMER 612-298-4151 MAYOR August 27 , 1980 Rose Mix, City Clerk Room 386, City Hall Saint Paul , Minnesota 55102 RE: Zoning File No. 8658 - Appeal of Kroiss Variance Request by � Railroad Island ITA Committee and District Five Planning Council City Council Hearing: September 4, 1980 Dear Madam: This letter is written in response to the appeal of the Railroad Island ITA Committee and the District Five Planning Council to the decision of the Board of Zoning Appeals regarding variances for the property at 548 E. Minnehaha Avenue. The applicant requesting the variances, Stephen J. Kroiss, has pre- viously stated his intention to subdivide the lot in order to either build a single family house or to sell the new subdivided lot and use the proceeds to renovate the existing three-plex. On June 24, 1980, the Board of Zoning Appeals conducted a public hearing on this case, at which time the appellant requested the variances. Three letters were received in opposition and three people testified in opposition to the requested variances. The district planner submitted a memorandum in support of the requested variances. The Railroad Island ITA Committee of the District Five Planning Council submitted a letter at the hearing in opposition to the requested variances. The Board of Zoning Appeals recorrmended approval of the requested variances on a vote of 5 to 0. Subsequent to the hearing, and following the filing of the appeal by the Rail- road Island ITA Comnittee the Zoning staff thoroughly re-examined all aspects of the case. Their findings are inc1uded within this packet. The matter of the appeal of the Railroad Island ITA Committee and the District Five Planning Council to the decision of the Board of Zoning Appeals regarding variances for the property at 548 E. Minnehaha Avenue will be heard by the City Council on September 4, 1980. Sincerely, . � ��-� Marvin R. Bunnell Planner - Zoning MRB/cc O , . t�INU�ES OF THE MEETING OF THE BOARD OF ZQNING APREALS IN � CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS, ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA, JUNE 24, 1980 ��*�. f,.f� !^f / � t�+`a.� : PRESENT: Ms. Morton; Messrs. Grais, Kirk, Parrish and Woods of the 8oard of Zoning Appeals ; Mr. Jerome Segal , Assistant City Attorney; Ms. Wendy Lane of the Division of Housing and Building Code Enforcement; Messrs. Bunnell and Torstenson, and Ms. Hanson of the Planning Division staff. ' ABSENT: Ms. Summers and Mr. Peterson , � � The meeting was chaired by Gladys Morton, Chairman STEPNEN J. KROISS (#8658): Requesting variances to permit the subdivision o s property to create a single family homesite and retain the existing tht^ee-plex. The variances include a lot area variance for the proposed single fami1y house and a lot area variance and a side yard setback variance for the existing three plex, located a�C 548 E. Minnehaha (southeast corner of Minnehaha and 8edford). . y,., ,. The appellant was present. There was opposition present at the hearing. Mr. Bunnell showed slides of the site and presented his staff report with a reco►ronendation for approval . Stephen KroiSS, 3375 Chandler Rd. , Shoreview explained that he has worked with Planning staff to develop this proposal . He feels the city� is in need of housing and with his proposal he will create a„�ew housing unit and also upgrade the present structure. He feels the area � is in need uf single family housinq, Also, he is working to upgrade the tenant situation in the existing structure. This improvement wou1d be of benefit to the neighborhood. Eileen Weida from the Payne-Minnehaha Community Council explained that the Council is against this proposal . The lot is not large enough to accommodate two structures; and was also concerned about the compatibility of any new structure. Th� Council .feels that this proposal would set a precedent for . placing new structures on small lots, creating density proble�ns. , � ' A letter was read which the Council received from Marilyn Kunz, who lived at 548 E. Minnehaha as a child. She feels that the lot size is too small to accommodate another home on the site. Nick Cochiarella of 702 Bradley stated he was against the proposal because of the lack of yard space. Stephen Kroiss exp?ained that with his proposal , the yard space would still � be larger than many of the other homes in the area. Hearing no further testimony, Ms. Morton closed the public hearing por.tion of the meeting. Mr. Parrish made a motion to approve the variance request based on findings 11 , and 13 through 16 of the staff report. Mr. Grais seconded the motion. The motion was passed with a roll call vote of 5 to 0. , . Submitted by: A roved b�y; •' � .r..�u�....�.Q �' j ' �v�� 7'n-�---�-. ��. �� -. i�� ;,�, ��' ' � .�rv?r n� � Gladys Morton, Chairman . . �"*.:.f �'� ' CITY OF SAINT PAUL A � INTERDEPARTMENTAL MEMORANDUM , ��` � �b DATE: August 26, 1980 T0: Larry Soderholm, Principal Planner-Zoning FROM: Marvin Bunnell , Zoning Staff RE: Appeal of Kroiss Variance Request (Zoning File #8658) I have re-examined the Kroiss varianc� request and discussed it with District representatives, the District planner, Mr. Kroiss,and other members of the Zoning staff. The District planner, Don Keysser, has changed his position and now is urging the Zoning staff to revise its earlier report and findings and overturn the three variances granted by the Board of Zoning Appeals. The Railroad Island ITA Comnittee and the District 5 Planning Council 's appeal of these variances and the subdivision of the property at 548 E. Minnehaha Avenue are apparently based on the items mentioned in testimony at the BZA hearing on June 24, 1980 by Eileen Weida of the TTA committee. I will address each of these items and then the coneerns of Don Keysser, the district planner, as they relate to the Kroiss variance request. First, it is true that other development options for rehabilitation exist, but the City is only in a position to assist and offer advice if requested about such pragrams. The City is in no position to force an owner to use an existing program. Second, the District Council claims that the "livabiiity" of the triplex and the intended structure are greatly reduced. But how�does one measure "livabil- ity" objectively or even define it? This appears to be a somewhat arbitrary term to imply that the loss of some yard space for the triplex may negatively impact the desirability of living there. Mr. Kroiss, I believe, strongly disagrees with this notion. Tn any case, to speculate on how various residents of this property would interpret "livability" as an undefined concept is rather pointless. Third, the District Council views the vacant portion of the triplex lots as yard space and not as a vacant lot. The vacant portion of the property represents the undeveloped portion of two previously platted lots. The existing tri�lex was constructed across one lot onto another thereby eliminating the use of the second lot for another structure of any kind unless the property was re-sub- � divided. It is my understanding that this is the basis for which Mr. Kroiss claims physical hardship. While the District Council views this privately-owned vacant land as a yard space to be preserved, it is Mr. Kroiss who has title to the land and he views it as suitable for subdivision. It seems that the "historical" view of this vacant portion of the property as a yard is essentially irrelevant to the rights Mr. Kroiss enjoys as the property owner. Fourth, the District Council claims that the present high density would be intensified with the variances creating potentially harmful social consequences. A general review of density in the area revealed that the overall density of the six block area is 15.12 dwelling units per residential acrea although the density on the Kroiss block is only 13.13 d.u. 's/acre. Adding one additional unit would increase the density in the neighborhood by only 1� to 15.20 d.u. 's/acre and on the ICroiss block by 5% to 13.75 d.u. 's/acre. It appears that the desired "`,�s`,�-�:vi . � ... . . .. . .. . .-.,.. ,. �.-,..,. ,-........«...,,.•�..w..__........,.:.�„�,_...,�....._,.-.-.,--,.,,�,......-.-...,.,.--••,•.-..�..�....-.,,.�.,,..„.._„�-+w .._,,.,.,,,. _. . . . . � ,.,.. - -. --. . **,.�.....�' r . � -2- _ SF unit on this proposedllot would not substantially increase the density in the neighborhood as claimed. Mr. Kroiss purchased the property even though several serious events occurred there prior to his ownership, such as a murder, drug raids, etc. Mr. Kroiss has indicated that he does not tolerate such activity and has evicted several sets of tenants since acquiring the property. " I cannot think of any evidence supporting the view that the addition of one more housing ,unit in this area or in any area like this will create added social problems. I �believe that part of the opposition to this case stems from a fear of the unknown - what will happen to the vacant land and what will Mr. Kroiss do to �improve and/or maintain the property? In spite of the effort which Mr. Kroiss has expended in working with the comnunity and staff re- garding this matter, these suspicions still persist. Five, the District Council believes that a compatible structure probably cannot be built on the proposed subdivided lot given the costs related. to design complications. I would certainly concur with this. However, I believe that it would be very dif- ficult to build a very distinctive house in many other portions of St. Paul which would adequately blend into the neighborhood due to the rapidly escalating costs of special design and craftsmanship. This comment could probably then be applied to other areas of the City as well . But I seriously doubt whether this would serve as a suitable basis for denying a property owner the opportunity of building a house on his own land. Six, the District Council believes that granting these variances "sets a dangerous precedent in the neighborhood that promotes placing houses on lots .without regard for sound physical and social criteria." Just what kind of physical and social criteria should be used and what are the bases for using such criteria? This case has been analyzed based on applicable zoning regulations and has been reviewed by the Board of Zoning Appeals and subsequently approved unanimously. I would challenge the District Council to indicate the specific social and physical criteria which should be used for reviewing such proposals and the basis for which such criteria are applicable. ;% In reviewing the lot sizes regarding this case, staff found that the proposed subdivided lot which Kroiss hopes to obtain (4814 sq.ft.) is only l� larger than the average size single family lot in the neighborhood (4769 sq.ft.) and only 1� smaller than the most frequently found single family lot in the neighborhood (4880 sq. ft.). In addition, the "small " triplex lot resulting from this sub- division (5561 square feet) is actually 10� larger than the average size triplex lot in the neighborhood which is 5039 square feet. It would appear that the proposed lots are not undersized since they would be larger or as large as the typical lots used for similar uses in the neighborhood. � Seven, the District Council further claimed that it "is dubious that the funds from the sale of this property will be used for the rehabilitation of the three-plex." In this claim, all we have is the word of Mr. Kroiss versus the claim of the District Council . The District Council indicates that Mr. Kroiss hasn't satisfactorily main- tained his property which is especially noticeable in terms of the care of his yard. Mr. Kroiss has indicated that he has intentions to do some other improvements. This is a speculative guess either way although Mr. Kroiss has continually stated that he will rehabilitate the three-plex from the development or sale of the smaller lot. : , ._ .... _.�_�.�.�_.,�_.,_�_._._..�.. ..�._,._ _._ ._ _._ ,.... __ � __....�...�..._._._r....�... _ �_�r __,�. . -3- . ��!�� ' Eight, Don Keysser, the district planner, indicated that, in his opinion, the- requested variances are based primarily ora a desire for economic gain. He states that Mr.Kroiss has repeatedly indicated his intentions of selling the SF lot for development or of developing the SF lot and then selling it and using the proceeds for the rehabilitation of the 3-plex. Mr. Keysser also seriously doubts that Mr. Krojss will , in fact, retain ownership of the 3-plex and suspects he will sell it as well . Ne also believes that Mr. Kroiss is in essence speculating on the value of the entire property since he .is an absentee landlord who has no intention of residing in either the 3-plex or the proposed SF structure. Mr. Keysser has mentioned frequently the words used by Mr. Kroiss, of his intention of "turning a profit", although it is not clear wHether Mr. Kroiss means over the long run or over a short span of time. Mr. Kroiss has also frequently mentioned"improving his detrt structure" based on wh"atever he does to the property. Although some of these latter claims may be disputed by Mr. Kroiss, the evidence presently appears that Mr. Kroiss may be attempting to achieve an economic gain out of the requested variances. Based on this detailed analysis, I will submit the following changes in rqy staff findings and will submit the following recornrnendation to the City Council regarding the Kroiss variances appeal : E. FINDINGS 10. The District Planner, Don Keysser, has changed his original recorrrnendation and now recommends denial of the variances. 11 . It appears that the request for the variances�: is based partially on the physical characteristics of the lot in terms of its shape and area. 16. The request for these variances is apparently based primarily on a desire for economic gain. � F. STAFF RECOMMENDATIQN: Based on finding 16, staff alters its original position an recorrr�nnen s enia of the variance requests and in support of the Railroad Island ITA Comnittee and the District 5 Planning Council 's appeal of these variances. � MB/cc . __� . .,.. �-__.._._� _._ ��...�__._,.,....��..,�.,�._,...�,�..�.��_�. ,.��.,r_ _..� �__. -- _..... _.h��.-�- �- _ _.. __ ____� _ _._.�... . . :, _ ,,.,, �� • , '�' CITY OF SAINT PAUL . INTERDEPARTMENTAL MEMORANDUM - August 22, 1980 . , T0: Marv Bunnell , Zoning Staff FROM: Don Keysser �� . RE: APPEAL OF KROISS VARIANCE REQUEST (FILE #8658) At the time this case was first reviewed, I wrote a letter as the District 5 planner, supporting Mr. Kroiss' petition for three variances. Since then, I have had the opportunity to discuss the issue at greater length with the community, and to re-examine my earlier decision to support the variances. I have now come to the conclusion that this earlier support was mistaken, and that the zoning staff's earlier report on the variances was mistaken, and that we should now recommend against the variances, in favor of the appeal by District 5. My reasons for this change are as follows: 1 . There is no evidence here of physical hardship._�.,.The only hardship present is self-created by Mr. Kroiss' desire tb build a house in the yard of the existing tri-plex. � 2. It is also inaccurate to state that these variances are not based primarily on a desire for economic gain. Mr. Kroiss, a real estate speculator and developer, has made it clear that he wants to sell this yard, either undeveloped or developeds to realize additional income. 3. It is strongly felt within the neighborhood that constructing a single- family home on what is now the yard-space for the tri-plex will be detrimental to the neighborhood, in that it will add to the existing high density of housing in the area, and eliminate one of the few open-spaces and yards now in �he neighborhood. It is also felt that removing the yard from the tri--plex will substantially lower the value of this tri-plex, both aesthetically (to the tenants;) and financially (to the owner). 4. Finally, while the neighborhood recognizes the need in the City for additional housing opportunities, and has been supportive of other housing development projects within Railroad Island, they question the desirability of adding further to the density of the neighborhood, and eliminating an important aesthetic element of the neighborhood, simply to create one more single-family home, when there are so many other more suitable development sites in the area. �„�; � ..._ . . ,.__.. _.. ...�.-_�._.__,.�. ....._�._.__�N.�,_._.._ .____.��_,.__._._.�:_..__._�__.�_.__..__w_ __r�_..__.__�_-------,-�,:�- Marv Bunnell -2- August 22, 1980 --, Based on these observations, I strongly urge the zoning staff to revise its earlier report and findings, and to now recorrnnend to the City Council that these three variances be overturned. Y 1 DK:sb � CC: Doug Forsberg Sue Vannelli Paul Schersten Bill Kummer Steve Kroiss t ; ; �n. �__.. _. . ._ _.� _,_�_. _�... ...�_�.,.,..�, ��r. . , . .. .� . .. .. .. . ,.. .�,.. ..:-. ,�7,.a .. . - . �-. ✓+, � . � . � �:�,��_ city of saint paul , board of zoning appeals resolution zoning file number 865$ � ' date �u,y $, ,980 , WHEREAS, STEPHEN J. KROISS has applied; for a variance from the strict application of the provisions of Section 61 .100 of the Saint Paul -Legislative Code pertaining to the subdivision of his property for a single family hoase and an existing triplex in an RM-2 zoning district, and WHEREAS, the Saint Paul Board o.f Zoning Appeals conducted a public hearing on June 24, 1980, pursuant to said appeal in accordance with the requirements of Section 64.203(a) of the Legislative Code, and WNEREAS, 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: : l . That strict application of the regulations would result in exceptional practical difficulties upon the owner of the property at 548 E. Minnehaha Avenue, as distinguished from mere inconvenience, because of the shape and area of the lot. . 2. That the variances can be granted, in this case,"withaut substantial - detriment to the community and would not :impair the intent and purpose of the Zoning Ordinance. 3. That the variances would not impair and adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property, or unreasonably diminish or impair established . property values within the surrounding area, or irt any other respect impair the public health, safety, comfort,morals, or welfare of the inhabitants of St. Paul . , 4. That the variances are not based primarily upon a desire to increase the value or income potential of the parcel of land. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Saint Paul Board of Zoning Appeals that the provisions of Section 61 .]00 be hereby waived to allow the subdivision of this pr.operty .at 548 E. Minnehaha for a single family lot 83'x58' in size and the triplex lot 83'x67 ' in size, respective lot areas of 4814 square feet and -5561 square feet, and a western side yard setback of 11 feet for the three-plex in accordance with the application for variance and the site plan attached hereto. moved b Mr Woods Decisions of the Board of Zoning Y Appeals are final subject to appeal seco nd ed by Mr �rais __ to the City Council within 30 days by anyone affected by the deCision. in favor � against � ,� _�_�-_..___._ ..__. .__ .__z M....��....�......�.,�.�......_._.� ...._.,...__� - _ - -______�____� �.. . ._._. � � �� ZO�Iei�G �iLE ��s$ , - � — T0: Board oP Zoning Appeals FROM: Railraod Island ITA Committee : , RE: Kroiss Application For 548 E. �linnehaha Variance DA'fE: Zune 24, 1980 � � -� - Summary: While the ITA Committee acknowledges that there are some positive rami�i- cations to the granting of this variance, e.g., increased property values, increased housing atack, potential for rehab. of existing triplex, the Committee feels atrongly that the negative ramifications outwaigh these, e.g., the remnval of the triplex yard greatly diminishes the livability of the triplex as well as the intended new structurs, the overwhelmi�g odds are that it is unlikely that somsthing compatible can be built given cost and design complications, and present high density wzll be further intensi- fied by the addition of the intended structure. This potentially crestes a dangerous precedent that in Railroa�l Island it is appropriate to match houses with lo'ts regardless o� sound design criteria. - The Committee wauld like to commend I�r. Kraiss for his willingness to work with �he - neighborhood in this process, and we certainly hope that he uill continue to do so regardless of today's outcome. We recognize the potential inherent dipficulties that danial may pose for Mr. Kroiss, but want �it to be clear that the Committee faels tha issue here is one .of �ezghborhood policy and direction. � . . . �_�� . . � � � . ...._ .___.__.._ __..__._ : . ... . .. FINDINGS: , 1 . Other options are potentially availablo to effect rehab. of the existing tripl.ex. 2. The livability of both the triplex and the intended structure is greatly roduced. . 3. The triplex lot is not historically viewed as a "vacant lot" tut as part of tFte exis-ting triplex. � _ , 4. The present high density would be intensified with the granting og the variance thereby creating potentially harmful social consequences, e.g., history of tenant problems. . - . 5. It is unlikely that a compatible structure could be built given the costs releted to design complications. 6. 'fhe granting of a variance sets a dangerous precedent in the neighborhood that promotes placing houses on lots without regard for sound physical and socia2 critaria. a�� , � �1- :� ��' �� i�`�`�' � �� L` � �„„�,� .� ;�-� .,.�_ � � 3-`�x , , �� -�-A �.�� T� � �� . ........_,.�.,x.. ._:,-,..,�.-..- ..,.,..-...._..,,..��: . ..�.,.. . ..,. . . , � . _..."__...._ ....-+..,.-.•---�- .�.;._.....-.._,..�_..-._...,-,�...._.. .�.„T...,.,. � , ....,... .-...--.....,.... *- ..�� '. . , � . � . . •� � � . . . .. .. �:A �. _ : . � : . � r � . � . � � . . . . . . � .. � . • � . . .. � . � . . . . . . . , . 6��* ' � . . . . . . ' . . . . .. � , .. . .�� t.� ` �.1ti1 . . ' . . .. ' . . ' . : ��.� ,. . � . � . . . . ?.Y . . . . - . . . . _ ,.�i � . ♦.��'s 2•. . ., . , � . . - � . � ` � \ 1 \ \ . � � �� .� . � � � � �. �. � � . �1 . �� c � � `� ' � � � � � � � � � . , 1 � . A �� _ � � � � , � � � � • . � � � - . . � � - �- � � � , � � � � � _ � � � � , ,{::- � �- � � � �l . � , _ � �� * _ � . � . . /��-: J � . � �n 1 `' 1 � V' � 4� t.�•'. ��. � � r . �'�`Y�� '`j ' �� , ' � , , � � -�',�, , , ��-� v ' °� � � 6� �i � s� �:;.. � � � ,; ..�, � � �I `�; . � �.. �:� <,� � , -,..;. �� o , - 4 � p , _ � � � � . � `\ � /� � o J . � ` �` � � � � _ _ � � � - �_:__ � � . � � �____ __ ____ _ ; �^_:_. , �...��.�.�..._...�_ _ . _ �__ _ . .__ � � � � � :� r � � � ' MqL � .� .� .. Np� � • � YwIM � � �' / . �_}. � � �j -p _a � �`v � � 7[zr zzw� �ww � � � . .. - a= � � . w♦ ` ` � . . . �� \ \� � . `\�`J `v � . . . .. . . r~ . . ^ V , � I � . N � A � , " ' `� . � � I � � � � � . , , � - � � � -�,� c� � , - _ .�.. � � , +r°��+ . � � �' � � °� � � � - • � � � �' � � _ � . � , �. � , �� ; : . � �� _ ZONING STAFF REPORT � . � �� . � '1 . APPLICANT: STEPHEN J. KROISS , DATE OF HEARING 6124/$� 2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CLASSIFICATION . . ! . . . . . . . . , . . . CURRENT PLANNING & ZONING COMMITTEE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS Rezoning ❑ Variance � Special Condition Use - ❑ Administrative Review Q Determination of Similar Use ❑ Other Change of Nonconforming Use ❑ • Other ❑ � 3. LOCATION: 548 E. Minnehaha Avenue (Southeast corner of Minnehaha and Bedford). 4. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot 6 & 7, Block 2, Phillips Addition. 5. PRESENT ZONING: RM-2 ZONING CODE REFEREP�CE: Section 61.100 . �� ' .�� ' ,.�. CITY OF SAINT PAUL INTERDEPARTMENTAL MEMORANDUM _ o I June 13, 1980 - , T0: Marv Bunnell , Zoning Staff = FROM: Don Keysser, District 5' Planner D� #' � RE: VARIANCE REQUEST BY STEPHEN KROISS (fite #8658) - I have reviewed Mr. Kroiss' variance request, and discussed it with District representatives. I understand that there are some concerns in the immediate neighborhood with adding another residence on what is now a vacant lot, and that Mr. Kroiss has discussed these concerns wi tr, the commun i ty. I ask that the Zoning staff give a favorable review of this request and recommend its approval . The intention to build another house on that si.te contributes both to the City's and the District's housing goals, and should complement the conmunity's present efforts at : ► revitalization. -,,�,: t . _ --- �,: DK:sb .,�,;,a> Iw .��,...� n� .... �,.,� . .,.��,.,�� _ -- - ...,.,.,..�,,..,.�.��.�,��.: . . _�,'",� . _ _ ._,. ...,.,.. _ .., ,_ _. � .�__�. . _.._,_. �._., .,� _ _ , ,_,. , .., . ...�W. . ., , ,. __ ___ --- --_ _ .__.. . .� , �T ,,._.��,�,�.. _ ' � ' &,�..,-��t.,,� • STEPHEN J. KROISS (#8658) PAGE 2 E. FINDINGS CONT'D. - � : 6. According to the applicant, the three-pl'ex needs extensive repairs and main�enance work including exterior painting, walls patching, electrical work, replacement of broken windows, and repair of the interior staircase. - 7. The applicant also is pursuing the possibility of rehabilitation money available through the Section 8 Program as well as the possibility of building a 235 single family house through Ruscon Inc. , a home builder. 8. The neighboring property owners have expressed their concerns to the applicar�t and the District Planner about the use of this property based primarily on the previous renters failure to maintain the property (grass-cutting and snow/ice'. , removal) and the events occurring at this property prior to its sale to the �. applicant. ; �� : � 9. The Community Organizer of the District 5 Planning Council has verbally � expressed reservations to the District Planner about the plans of the applicant for this property. 10. The District Planner, Don Keysser, has recomnended approval of the plans of the applicant and the requested variances. 11. It appears that the request for the variances is based primarily on the physical characteristics of the lot in terms of its shape and area. 12. The applicant has considered numerous alternative lot shapes and setbacks to minimize the need for and the distances requiring a variance. 13. It appears that without these variances, the owner would, based on the physical characteristics, incur exceptional practical difficu7ties as di�stinguished from , mere inconvenience. - 14. The variances can be granted without substantial detriment to the community and would not impair the intent and purpose of the Zoning Ordinance. 15. The variances can be granted without substantial detriment to the neighbors in terms of the supply of light and air, safety, health, and property values. 16. The r.equest for these variances is apparently not based pr'imarily on a desire for economic gain. `, F. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Based on the required findings 11 , 13 through 16, staff recomnends approval of the variance requests. r • . � � . . . , � ��_ • . . �� o� � � ,�.:��.,•�,� '� ____— � . co .. . . � d --`'�1�brn3C1�,,c.. .. _... .._.,..�.._.._..�...____._._- � � �B ,_...._____..,...�._ __-._ _ , � � , . .� - � _ . i ' • � " 1� i � . ` . � . , t i . ' _ � _ , , ��---�---- -- ---� ; . � , � � i I . � o � � 0 � � ' �j{ � � � m , � ly � 0 : � , � Y� . �p Y � 1 I , . '�j 0 `� ; �' � ��1" � �. . � i `� � __.t�,T, ,rs � � CITY OF SA1 NT PAUL °"o '' DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT �� u�n�tnn , ?+ "" �°° � DIVIStON OF PLANNING � ,��• i�s• . . 25 West Fourth Street,Saint Paul,Minnesota,551U2 12 298-4151 GEORGE LATIMER d'��j�� MAYOR ' ! �.+ � �+' � �;, MEMORANDUM J �, ., x a,; DATE: June 2, 1980 . � �� T0: Members of Board of Zoning Appeals FROM: Marvi n Bunnel l '�'�'�j Y SUBJECT: Kroiss Zoning File 8658 � Late last week, Mr. Stephen J. Kroiss notified the Zoning staff of his intention to resubmit his request for lot area variances and a side yard setback variance for subdividing his property at 548 E. Minnehaha Avenue. Since the specific changes were not yet fully determined as of noon today and, as a result, there was an inadequate amount of time to re-examine the case based on the changes, Mr. Kroiss was advised that his case would be held over until the next Board of Zoning Appeals meeting on June 24, 1980. - �- t ..,.. t 1 � . . . ��.. .. ........... .._......_,.,.....�_... _. ..„.._... ..-.__._.�__.�...._ .�.,__ — .. _. .. .._ �... .. .. ._.._. ...,.__._ . . _ _ T.._. . . . ... . _ ..._ . . .T . � �:s. ' . -. � . . . . . .... � - . . . . _ � ._ .. .... _� _ � � .� _ _ ' ._.._.. _._....��_ .�.__ _. __.. .� . .. �� '�." 4 !, ,�., � ..........,,� � .,�,,,.. ti;,' ....� __ _ _.,, . .r_. . . ... �''"' . �'. ;1, •� ' ' �' `F'v .�i,�.�,�' –•-- y' ; �(/J . a ��R :,t�.�� . �ri r !y �f0 � ��.. --� �---•-^ �� „y� I ��. �C'',,L.i � _ ,111�. � :.. �. , b' � . bl �I � I ' � � �' � 1 '�' • i \ , ` �� ,� ;�t. . L'� a, � ��„�� .• , � , 30 \ •\ �..._.._._..�_._.-- ----i � ` • ' '� ' , �'"`a�' '-. ' '.. '�. • G � ,�� 1 .�'o. �� ___ s9� _ ; n� I � ��3 •• ' � '- S/ 1 O .�. .��. �� : o6c�r�z�oz�M , szi �,� � ...�;.�, •� — zzrc� � .,, ' , �•,•r. . m {/ 1h{,h.,�1 �� I ' . ' . . /� [�r7,�SZ':'e.v:•. � . . _ . �..._. .. ...L��r I� ��t�� i�+*-: � \ I• 7r �'"t •- - ;�*�`'"YT.,�;:' r� ,�,,,_--. 1�- -'�r�-�-,# _ -- - - -- - �- - - - � ,�: _ t• _ + a � . . . , 1 ( � .S / 1f�`,� s� � �i .� k . �•- �,• G • ~ �I • OZ -Z, ' �' �yyy v�� ` , �''�d .t-j�'�'. � � '�� + � V!�+ '�Y� ��; ` � \ I ti:i.'� •. ' � — • 1 � �,ro�v� "i✓ � �� F zz � �� -�"G' � i :�,�=.' {`�� . �` OZ _ / � � --------- ---- �x� ��Y�; � /az �� ---_—��_ ; ` � � I �. -�' •; f63'tr �+ �� ' � - -�----e ./ �1 � � �fi" ��' �I r' –�--– --- ' ' R '�. 'i� �`''� �3�"h� �/ _-iS�� i . � _.__ ' � � - '-::--.---�.- �j �° ' ,''� �.� �'� , _.` � G,, `�� 1 ;:: � /1'/�r� � �/,,�� , � ' +�'t �• _ w�_. ��,).!! z � ` � ' 0 ' � . �� , `�� ' �*;'` �-F-r�z -- __� • oi , ; °�� '� w- - - -� �, .� �. '' 9nz 4� r��ti �- ' v -- �� `"� - �: a �� ;;_-o , �`_� "_V ; , __._..__. � ' � � ,� • , _ . �- ��. � � ---- - ------1 , � ; �, � _ �.�, .;A e A !, ° '`'�� ,� ' ti� '� , - _,. ! S � 1,�� ll� % �--- _ , ' `U � . - � *'',� � ! z E' �- .� � �� ; f�.`�;� '" '�y; ! a� l�J� G1 4.. � , � , . _ y �', . .r _ _ � .�` ` , • + i –9� .� � L' , °`�� --`� ` �<' i ; �' / S1(� �� w _ , . . � . . �'' ., �� r6 .. .. Z�i •:• ^+�`i� /;;"+�d :� � f �`�� pg t+� �o i � y ----�- '�� A✓CCw<8Zr I•1�lc�F!';G ....__._ __._.__ '�' ..�._,,..�_._..`_% �./�*��n7� � ` Z � . � ��//�� . T"�+re*�*- � f �J . . - '—�:..�__-- .' - •" .�p_._.._. _ _ ._. � -�� V _ .._... .. ... .,�"'4_ ----ii-- •- -...-------.a �. `'�+r- . _ . �'[::��. y v -a_' -�- s� ro•rr'rs•sc � �. : ' � o �� w ,�'V6'p; V OZ � 'g� ZZ oZ � 77/ v .�,�v t'�`� � • � '� 6 �� 91� L �s- � ��. � ` �, � . - a� �- � F�9 � � 4 �- M i o � o � o � ' - � ' ' { : /�, .,�s�� g S : � ' j c , � at " – ;� -- � �,�� ♦ ' � t � � � `' , ' � ��, �,�� /Z Z' � ' (�� '1+G��' ZZ' + � t � ��••' �^ \"` . ' 1°,�' Gi �'� C�, �1 I a .. y �i� "� �.� ' �2 �� t t � , � _ _ � _ I ,r•��r �rcr � • ,l�a / : � . a � : 9 S'/ s ' - S'! _ , �� • 91 ---- ;-r' �I _..__ � ' � ; �-� . � F� �� ,, �' z! // � � � • �►/� Z/ _ // _ , . c- . Gj� � �-L�`' 6 � o� � � _ !�' . _ ��'� r '� .o, s � .�— �� _ �_��. T � �" ._... __ T-.._ _ __,._ �..,_;_ __._..� i� �. ,._,.._�._. --.-_,_. � `- _.�. - .—` -�_-�-��3_ _= -- -- - - ._ � � _� . ,.. — —��_=�" � i � �, y AvE. '' � „ , � . < � $ --=a > __ ___� __. : � ' � � �: -�, o_ o --- - - o � �► � .___ , -o- ; __ ° �°�=- � - � -�- � o � �i � ► _�- � -o- ---o- ° ° I. R E A N E Y - �.�-- _ � _o- r� , - ° �;� -- n ` � - -- a � � ; ; � -- -�- �. �' o u, __�_ i' _ ' + - ° pG � -�..,� � � --�- I ; ; ; � - W -0- � _ f �Q p �. . - .'�j. = Q r � - --� � -d- i i7 ! '.-�-_.Q ao - � � - 6 � ' 6 . _.. —�+td�1E � � � . � _ - - o � o R �, �� -Q- ~ t G -� (f� -o- �R � . ° cn o _ _ . -�--- �-- _ ._ -- - �,,_ _ . _ _- ----- � -�--- � �_ �_ ----- �. . ° � -0-- t.�, o o -a- - D F --- -0� � - - _->- - o � o-. -o- ' � � - - - o �� _ .- (� -�- <t __ - ' - � ; � �- -o- -b_� o �� w . , , 1;,o O o -p_ 4 p � C� IYl CO �� m .� w � -�UMONT SG Q � �-�� ,�.i' ; ; � � �-�- O O O � � O -�- L� �-__ b` :�b, � � -�_�: 11� . .. o� , _. O � _ _ _ ��` /` �----� ' � __ _ � �� -- _ / `_ _Q � _4--- - ; � _ _ g� I � _ - _ _� � O'O p - -O- ,�/ •� � ' w �, � � � : ,. �� ,:�:�r �.:;�C��?<��,fl �- �� :�FAYET��E'' � cr �.•-�i� �-�`'�' � �_ � � � '; � � ; j / � � pi;AYG'0,� -�`:5 � � ' • �. 1�� :� 3 / •�,� / • � ' �V�' ` 22 ` , v . . / � /� '{_7 t, �� J�'3V�3�,�� 1 V'..!•j Cs/C� �/� � � i LL :��`,R� � � ,�,,�v�'�';;� �� / � -_-_ `�.�'`�,_5��,'�j �,� :3 � ��'�;;�} � QQG / / --- - Z -- _r `�..�..1 N S � �■■�rr�S � � Q - _ _ � � ~ / � v � z , . I / _ i , � � � . ? ► rr- AREA MAP APPLICANT �r-P�� • KroisS LEGEND v�� ,{ �� ZONING DIS7RICT BOUNOARY -� pe+►w�i PURPOSE su6t�:vitiov► of � {,p �y � SUBJECT PROPERTY YL . 3_�� O ONE FAMILY PI.ANNING �j. SF�oti,r�p,Si�t- e3++d . `�'a�w c'�C DISTRIST $6S� � TWO FAMILY � F�ILE N0. �� O OATE ��► t l0� �q$O - MULTIP�E FA":f1LY �� • �► n COMMERCtAL SCALE� 1��= 200�� NORTH � "�' � �NOUSTRIAL MAP N0. SAINT PAUL PLANNIN� BOARD V VACANT !� ��.�...._.�_..,:,� ..�._.,._.�.._..�.��.,-_. _,,,t,T..._.__.�..,_.. .._.._�. _ • . . :. _.:, ► . ._ ..:: .. . . � _ _ _ . . . . .� . . . . .� .. . ..ti. .«.eF::...