The URL can be used to link to this page

274480 WMITE — CITV CLERK °� i� t i,A��! _ PINK — FINANCE OF SA I NT PALTL � CANd'RV — DEPARTMENT COIlIICII ��v .'`�¢ BLUE — MAVOR File NO. ouncil Resolution . Presented By Referred To Committee: Date Out of Committee By Date WHEREAS, David Bartol appli.ed to the Board of Zoning Appeals for a variance from the strict application of the provisions of Section 61. 101 (f) of the Saint Paul Legislative Code pertaining to lot size, set back and parking requirements in an RM-2 zoning district for his property located at 1348 and 1334 Ames Avenue; and WHEREAS, Following a public hearing with notice to affected property owners the Board o£ Zoning Appeals heard the said appeal and failed to obtain the required �our votes of its membership to either grant or deny this appeal; and WHEREAS, The said appeal was then brought before the City Council for its determination and, acting pursuant to Section 64. 204 through 64.207 and upon notice to appellant and other affected property owners, a public hearing was duly conducted by the City Council on February 7, 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 Pau}. does hereby grant the variances requested by David Bartol and does hereby grant the requested variances for his two apartment structures located at 1348 and 1334 Ames Avenue; and, be it FURTHER RESOLVED, That the appeal of David Bartol be and is hereby granted; and, be it COUNCILMEN Requested by Department of: Yeas Nays Butler [n Favor Hozza Hunt Levine _ __ Against BY Maddox Showalter Tedesco Form Approv d y Ci Att ney Adopted by Council: Date Certified Passed by Council Secretary BY By� Approved by �Vlavor. Date Approved b a for Submi$sion to Council BY - --- BY WHITE - CITV CLERK COl1IICl1 � �',`! �� '1�0� PINK - FINANCE GITY OF SAINT PAUL `' CAN�RY - OEPARTMENT BLUE - MAVOR File NO. Co�ncil Resolution Presented By Referred To Committee: Date Out of Committee By Date FURTHER RESOLVED, That the Citx Clerk shall mail a cop� o� this resolution to David Bartol, the Zoning Administrator, Planning Commission and Board of Zonin� Appeals. 2. COUIVCILMEN Requested by Department of: Yeas ��N(A�� Nays �e� � Hozza [n Favor Hunt ,,/ Levine _ V __ Against BY — Maddox Showalter 198� Tede FEg 2 i Form Approved Cit ttor y Adopte Council: Date ified Vassed C i S retary BY • C�p � �+ 19aQ Approved by Mayor or Submission to Council tappr ve b a or. D —�-E-� BY - By �iED MAR 1 1980 / r , , . o04�Ya.,� CITY OF SAINT PAUL � DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT � �uu�iim � �� m� �� n � t-m � DIVISION OF PLANNING •`,,m. � ��n�� 25 West Fourth Street,Saint Paul,Minnesota,55102 GEORGE LATIMER 612-298-4151 MAYOR January 31 , 1980 ' Rose Mix, City Clerk Room 386, City Hall St. Paul , Minn. , 55102 RE: Appeal of David Bartol Dear Madam: This is in response to the appeal of David Bartol for a variance of lot area, setback and parking in order to retain 42 units each in two adjacent apart- ment buildings (at 1348 and 1334 Ames. ) The action before the Board of Zoning Appeals was the result of the Zoning Administrator issuing a letter on July 23, 1979, stating that these variances must be granted in order to obtain a valid Certificate of Occupancy for these buildings since the previous Certificate of Occupancy was issued for 41 units for each building in 1970. At the public hearing held on January 8, 1980, the request for variance was heard by the St. Paul Board of Zoning Appeals . During the hearing, it was pointed out by staff that City Council , on May 16, 1970, gave approval to the application for an 82 car parking lot and building use (for 82 units.) The additional unit to each building was added illegally shortly after occupancy by the original owner. The present owner, not being aware of this earlier action, had purchased the buildings in 1977 as 84 units. There was no opposition or support present at the hearing. The Board voted 3-1 to approve the lot area variance of 41 ,539 sq. ft. in order to keep the two units. The motion failed, however, since four affirmative votes are required on a motion to approve. Ms. Morton, the Chairman, voted in opposition. This matter is scheduled to be heard before City Council on February 7 , 1980. Sincerely, �� Laurence J. Jung City Planner LJJ/cc Enc. O •� _��T=�o;=:... ' � � CITY OF SAINT PAUL =/.r` ��: '4 ""' � DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT :� ;iu�� ;`: ,.� ,in� tun; ^�-_ - DIVISION OF PLANNING � - �.. iss• .� ��:,.�:..c'� 25 West Fourth Street,Saint Paul,Minnesota, 55102 GEORGE LATIMER 612-298-4151 MAYOR January 31 , 1980 , :! � �� ,. Rose Mix, City Clerk Room 386, City Hall St. Paul , Minn. , 55102 RE: Appeal of David Bartol Dear Madam: This is in response to the appeal of David Bartol for a variance of lot area, setback and parking in order to retain 42 units each in two adjacent apart- ment buildings (at 1348 and 1334 Ames. ) The action before the Board of Zoning Appeals was the result of the Zoning Administrator issuing a letter on July 23, 1979, stating that these variances must be granted in order to obtain a valid Certificate of Occupancy for these buildings since the previous Certificate of Occupancy was issued for 41 units for each building in 1970. At the public hearing held on January 8, 1980, the request for variance was heard by the St. Paul Board of Zoning Appeals . During the hearing, it was pointed out by staff that City Council , on May 16, 1970, gave approval to the application for an 82 car parking lot and building use (for 82 units.) The additional unit to each building was added illegally shortly after occupancy by the original owner, The present owner, not being aware of this earlier action, had purchased the buildings in 1977 as 84 units. There was no opposition or support present at �he hearing. � � The Board voted 3-1 to approve the lot area variance of 41 ,539 sq. ft. in order to keep the two units. The motion failed , however, since four affirmative votes are required on a motion to approve. Ms . Morton , the Chairman, voted in opposition. This matter is scheduled to be heard before City Council on February 7, 1980. Sincerely, �Ccu��z�.c.Q ` � Laurence J. Jung City Planner LJJ/cc Enc. � �� Y Y , J � � 1 \ . �` ��,1 _ J V� L� K / , �`�'p � Janua.ry 10, 1980 � 'j, f ..-�-'' � . `,, �.% �� .�'..� � � - 'P ..4 .� '�� /� � �� City Clerk � � �� Council Records 386 City•Hall , St. Paul, MN 55102 RE: Appeal of Case #8554 ) 3 3 � _ � 3� �' /� ry) �'S Dear Mrs. Zflix: We are appealing the Board� of Zoning decision regarding case #8554 held on Tuesday, Janua.ry 8, 1980. Enclosed is the fifty dollar ($50.00) fee required to appeal before the City Council. � Thank you �,��.�i DAVID BARTOI, , . , �.�'� ^ J s� J' �,� �� _ �l3�° . : . , - _ , , � . . . ' ,.;� . � . � �.�� . . - r. - ; , . , . . , , , � , "_ _ . . " ' � ' i . . � , , ` , ; , , - . �rch 4, 1980 , . : , . � . .. . _ r- ._ � .. . . . . � . �. � � � . � � . .. � . . , , . ' . , .�, . . '� - . � .. . . _ , � . � ... .. , � . . . . .. . � � . � . , . - � _ . . , . � , . � . ' I� .. � � . . . . � _ . . � . r � � � . � - � .. . ' . .' . . . . . . �.� . Iir. Qavid' Bartol • � ��142Q .Nstches Av�nue Sa. , I�inneapolis, �nnesota 55�416 - ' , " �, _ I�ar S�r: � , . "� _ , , 8acloesd ie `a capy ot a St. Paul City Gautc�l�;�,aaoluticp, C.F� No: � ' , 27�480, adapted by th� Counci]� on F�bruasy 21, 198fl-8r�tiaB Yo� ', ' _ ., . appeal to a decision of th� Board of Zania� App�tla far prope;tt at 134&-1334 �maa' Avenue� ; ; , � . , Very t�'ulj yours, . ` . , � . . . . . _ . . . ' . .. . � . . C _ . . ' .. . . , . . . . . � . .,.\' . �� . . . .. . " ' ' � � .' . � � .�C Cii� . � . . .. . . . . ' . �' � _ . . � C#Ly A.�ak . , , , _ - r , ,. Attsch. - , - . � dcr , . . , � . :cc: Buikdlag and Haueing Cods 8nfo�tc�ent � , ° � Planning ComAlsa�oa , , � Boszd of �oniag Appeal,a � ' ' , , _ ., � • , , � ' �. , • � , . , . , i , ;: . . , . ' _ - , � _ , , ; ' � , , . �� . , _ , � , . , � �, � ' ' . ^Y • � ' city of saint paul boarc� of zoning app�eals resolutior� zonir��; fiie number___$��___ , } Januar_ 22, 1980 ' �C�, le __. . _y---- - _ ___.. _ _ ---- ----.__ WHEREAS, David & Candyce Bartol have applied for a variance from the strict application of the provisions of Section 61 .101 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code pertaining to lot size, parking and setback requirements in an RM-2 zoning district; and � WHEREAS, the Saint Paul Board of Zoning Appeals conducted a public hearing on January 8, 1980, pursuant to said appeal in accordance with the requirements of Section 64.203(a) of the Legislative Code; and WHEREAS, the Saint Raul Board of Zoning -Appeals based upan- evidence presented at the public hearing, as substantially reflected in the minutes on file, made the following findings of fact: � 1 . The strict application of the setback, parking and lot size restrictions would result in unnecessary hardship to the present owner. 2. Granting the lot size variance to enable the two buildings to be certified as 42-units each can be approved since an undue hardship would be incurred by the present owner and that there would not be any substantial detriment to the community nor to the intent and purpose of the Ordinance. NOW, THEREFORE, BE I7 RESOLVED, by the Saint Paul Board of Zoning Appeals that under authority of the City's Legislative Code, Chapter� G4.206, the ��riance failed to receive the necessary four (4) affirmative votes as stipulated under Section 64.202 of the Ordinance and is therefore denied, for property described in the legal description of the application for variance and the site plan attached hereto. � m ove d by Mr K;rk Decisions of the Board of Zoning Appeals are final subject to appeal s e c o n d ed by Mr. Woods _ to the City Council within 30 days in favor 6 by anyone affectecl by th� decision . against � _ ---�. • • . . MINUTES OF THE MEETIP�G OF THE BOARD OF ZO��IPJG APPEALS IPJ CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS, ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA JANUARY 8, 1980 PRESENT: Mme, Morton; Messrs. Grais , Kirk, Parrish and 4loods of the Board - ' � of Zoning Appeals ; Mr. Jerome Seqal , Assistant City Attorney; Ms. Lane and Ms. Bijjani of the Division of Housing and Building Code Enforcement; Ms . Beseman and Mr. Jung of the Planning Division Staff. ABSENT: Mme. Summers and Messr. Peterson. The meeting was chaired by Ms. Gladys Morton, Chairman. DAVID & CANDYCE BARTOL #8554 : A variance request for lot size, setback and parking in order to o tain valid Certificates of Occupancy that would allow continued use of two apartment buildings as separate 42-unit structures at 1348 and 1334 Ames. The appellant was present. There was opposition. Mr. Jung showed slides of the site ,and reviewed his staff report. No recommendation was made by staff. It was their opinion that a determination should be made by the Board which would set a precedent for future cases similar to this. Two letters were received in opposition. The main ob,jections that were stated was the fact that the ori�inal buildinq oermits were issued for 41-units and they were changed without any further permits and also the parkina is not sufficient. Alice Sijjar►' reported that the Assessor's Records ind�cate that b,y Dece�nber 18,• � 1970 these buildings already had 42-units in them. The permits were taken out in September of 1970 and within a few months the additional units were put in. David Bartol , appellant, testified that he bought the buildinct two years ago as a 84-unit apartment building. A few months ago he received a notice from the city stating that it was only rated as an 82-unit and that he would have to dpply for a variance to legalize the 2 remaining units. He checked with the previous owner,.Program Land�and was informed that they bought the building as an 84-unit apartment and was not aware of any change in the status . He said he contacted Doerfler Construction Company, the oriqinal owner at the time of construction, and Mr. Vessel , participant in the ownership as a partner. Mr. Vessel told him that he had two offices planned for those two additional units and that right after the construction they chan9ed them to efficiency apartments , increasing the number of units from 82 to 84. He said he felt he had a legitimate request for the variance; they were added 10 years acio and that if they were eliminated, there would be a hardship which would result from it. At this point Mr. Grais requested permission to be excused so that he could attend another meeting. Ms. Bijjani reported the building was certified in 1971 as two 41-unit apartment buildings. The certificates have been in existence since that time desiqnatinc� them as 41-units each. . ; .t, . . � ° OAVID & CANDYCE BARTOL (#8554) PAGE 2 Mr. Segal stated that it was his understanding that the reason the appellant , is before the Board is because the Buildinc� Department and the Zoning �ldministrator has refused to certify the two buildings as 42-units each. Under the existing code, there is not enouah area for the 42-units , there is not sufficient parkinc� and the side yard is also a problem. They apparently have determined that because the building was not legalJy established as 42-unit buildings before October 25, 1975 when the new Zoning Code went into effect, it is not a legal nonconforming use. The owner has the alternative of reducing the number of units by 1 each or obtain variances. He sees no problems with the authority of the Board granting these types of variances. P�r. Jung reported that staff is looking at this as a use variance. Forty-one units were permitted to be constructed, an additional 1-unit was added to each building and they want to see if this is a matter that can be varied. If it can be varied, the matter of hardship should be considered by the Qoard. Mr. Segal said he disagreed with staff. In his opinion this is not a request for a use variance, the property is zoned far multiple family and that is the use that they have it as. If there is any variance needed, it is because there are too many rooms �for the area of land, He did not know if that has been made clear through the staff report or whether the rooms exceed that required, but this could be waived or varied by the Board and the same with the parking. Mr. Jung stated that the Zoning Administrator has indicated that the 132 room based on the lot size would 6e permitted under todays ordinance. The building at 1334 Ames could have 64 rooms and the building at 1348 Ames could have 68 rooms. Each of the buildings break down to 101 rooms per buildinc�, so if the variance is granted it would be for 70 rooms. Ms, Morton asked staff about the parking requirements and setbacks. Mr. Jung said under todays standards, it allows for 12 space per unit, 126 spaces would be required. At the time it was built, it was for 82 spaces which was sufficient for the 82 units . One of the previous owners added 20 more spaces ►�hich now makes it 102 spaces. In regards to the setback, the existing setbacks are 4 feet from the nearest corner o� the building to the lot line. They need a minimum of 15 feet. Mr. Segal stated that if the owner wanted to add one more unit to each building to convert an office into another apartment unit, he would not need a waiver, he would need a waiver for the additional rooms which he is adding. He would not be required to provide any additional parking because under the Zoning Code additional parking is onl,v required if there is an expansion of the building. Ms. Bijjani reported that the two buildings were granted permits to be constructed as 41-unit apartment buildings . A unit has been added to each building. The permission they would need to add a unit to each building at that time, with permits, would be a variance from the lot size requirements because the present lot size is not large enough to support that number of rooms. If the.y were to put those units in now, with permits , it would require a variance on density , , , ,f, � � � � DAVID & CANDYCE BARTOL (#8554) PAGE 3 only. It is a conforming use, they are not enlargina the building so they , would not need any more parking but they are asking for a variance as if they were putting in those buildings now. The concern that the Building Department has is this type of thing has been done in other buildings throughout the city and they feel it has to be stopped. P1s. Morton asked Mr. Jung to clarify the variance of the lot size requirements. Mr. Jung said the way the buildinqs are arranged now with 6 efficiencies , 19 one-bedrooms and 17 two-bedrooms, based on the RM-2 standards that total area would be ]21 �200 Square feet. The site is 79,661 and the dif�erence is 41 ,539 square feet, The variance request for lot size would be n1 ,539 square feet. Mr. Parrish made a motion to approve the variance of 41 ,539` sq. ft. in lot size in order to enable the two buildings to be certified as 42-units each based on the fact that it would be an undue hardship to the present owner. Mr. Woods seconded the motion. The motion failed on a roll call vote of 3 to 1 with Ms. Morton voting against the motion. Submitted b,y: Approved by: ,' � � ' '- ' ' . t t-�. � ;��-� l� �--._- � C`�/ i i �.� ;� Laurence J. Jung - Gladys Morton, Chairman ,1,.. AFDLI�ANT: -' DAVID & CANDYCE BAR�OL DATE OF HEARING ,lan R_ 1 QRQ 2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CLASSIFICATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CURRENT PLANNING & ZONING COMMITTEE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS Rezoning ❑ Variance �7 Special Condition Use ❑ Administrative Review ❑ Determination of Similar Use ❑ Other � ❑ Change of Nonconforming Use ❑ ` " ` . Other ❑ � 3. LOCATION: 1348 & 1334 Ames (Ss Ames between Johnson Parkway & Prosperity) 4. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: See attached �. PRESENT ZONING: RM-2 ZONING CODE REFERENCE: 61 .101 6. STAFF INVESTIGATION & REPORT: DATE 12/28/79 BY Laurence J. Jung -------------------------------------------------------------------- P,. PURPOSE: The applicants are requesting lot size, set back and parking variances in order to obtain valid Certificates of Occupancy that would allow continued use of two apartment buildings as separate 42-unit strUCtures at 1348 and 1334 Ames. This action is the result of the Zoning Administrator issuing a letter to the applicants stating that variances must be obtained for lot size, set back an� parking .for the buildings or else the buildings must be reduced to 41 units each. 3. HISTORY: A parking lot application for 30 cars was withdrawn on August 27, 1969, for this s�te�because the proposed development did not meet the density requirements of the Zoning Code." On February 5, 1970, Virgil Doerfler applied for an 82 car parking lot permit as an accessory use to two proposed 41-unit apartment buildings. The Board of Zoning, after review and noting various objections to the project, approved the parking lot permit contingent on the applicant meeting certain traffic and parking lot standards. City Council , on May 16, 1970, gave final approval to the parking lot and building use and layout with these same provisos . (See Exhibits A, B, C) . C. FRONTAGE AND AREA: This irregular shaped tract contains two separate parcels , each parcel containing a 42-unit building. The parcel at 1348 Ames (referred hereafter to as Parcel "A") contains 41 ,033 sq. ft. and has 183 ft. frontage on Ames. Parcel "B" (1334 Ames} fronts on City property approximately 280 ft. (total frontage along Johnson Parkway is 408 ft. ) . This parcel is about 38,628 sq. ft. The two parcels total approximately 79,661 sq. ft. D. SITE/AREA CONDITIONS: Each parcel includes two identical , rectangular shaped, 42-unit apartment buildings , both 22 stories in height. The two building-complex is identified as the Johnson Parkway Apartments. Each of these security-type buildings has entrances � toward the front and to the r�a� parking arees. The parking �ot referred to above ��ras . enlarged since 1970 from 82 to 102 spaces , 38 are in garages that rim the rear lot lines . The entire site .is fairly level although the buildings are elevated above street grade and the parking lot in the rear. Johnson Parkway right-of-way forms a wide park-like setting to the west of the site stretching more than 400 ft. in leng�h and giving the illusion of a very wide and landscaped frontage along the parkway. Industrial uses are located across the parkway to the west as well as to the southeast of the site. Railroad lines form part of southwest perimeter and a single family dwelling abuts the site on the southeast. A solidly built-up single family neighborhood extends north and east of the site. Access to the parking lot is from Prosperity Avenue d21y. There is no alley access on the block. �. VAftIANCE: Under Section 61 .101(f) , the applicants contend they are unable to meet the strict requirements of the Ordinance for lot size, set back and parking since the buildings were constructed and the uses established prior to their purchasing the property and prior to the establishment of the 1975 Zoning Ordinance. Since City Council has previously approved the parking lot, plans as well as the use of each building for 41 units, the only matter that can be considered b,� the Board of Zoning Appeals is that of determining if the reduction of one unit for each building is a reasonable request or if the matter is subject to a variance in the first place. . " . FINDINGS: 1 . Up to 1975, this tract was zoned "Heavy Industry" which permitted any type use v!ii.h no restrictions as to area dimensions , set backs , etc. Z. Parking requirements under the former code specified a m�nimur� of one space for each residential unit. Thus, 82 spaces met the minimum requirements for 82 units. � . _ �;l . ,� , , � ' ' DAVID & CANDYCE BARTOL STAFF REPORT PAGE TWO �. FINDINGS (continued) 3. The Zoning Administrator' s office has assured staff that the original building permits were issued for two 41-unit structures , although permit records cannot now be found for this property. This differs from City Council Resolution (Exhibit B) which states approval of a 41 and a 40 unit building. 4. No record can be found pursuant to permits as to when and where in each of the buildings the additional units were added. It is highly probable that these conversions were made shortly after the buildings were ereCted and have thus been in residential use for almost 10 years. G. CONCLUSION• Given the fact that the converted units have been continuously in existence o�a number of years , that the capacity of the parking lot has been increased over the minimum formerly required, that there has �been no history of complaints regarding .the upkeep or management of the property, that there is a need for housing units within the city, and, that it is extremely doubtful documentation can be found to certi�fy -as to wherr and where the units were added, the Board of Zoning Appeals should weigh the above facts with any further data that may be brought to its attention at the time of the public hearing so as to determine if 1 ) this is a matter that can be varied, and 2) if variable, the applicants would incur substantial hardship or practical difficulty to reconvert one of the units in each building into some other use. . r , , • -� ZOyItiG BOARD • r , •,� }: � , ,. � APPLICATION FOR ZONING ORDINANCE VARIANCE � CITY OF SAINT PAUL (' �' �` 'T � `� � __� �' ,- . _ _ , . , 1 ;,,. -, A VAFiIANCE OF ZONING CODE CHAPTER � ,SECTION ' PARAGRAPH - IS REQUESTED IN CONFORMITY WITH THE POWERS VESTED IN THE BOARD OF ZONING AP— PEALSTOPERMITTHE r�+Ni�'ri,l:::1;Ir C� '�F' '�_'"It = = ONPROPERTY ,�,��#�.` DESCRIBED BELOW. _,�`��i e� �^trn�. , � -� � ,� -�,, ;y��..., -, a-;�� . �� A. Applicant; NAME: '-'L-V G �~i �'' z `'E' '�`'_`- ADDRESS ��j T�z �Ci.'_E2 .'4TO ;�. T ,� �� 3.e�'�� ., . . �,_ -, � ! : _ ;��t��;�# � A ' �;' °i r .t�, �:.- DAYTIMETELEPHONENO. '`T�'� �' � ZIPCODE = �`� F'� �•*�� 1. Property interest of applicant: (owner,contract purchaser,etc.) .�� ,_,,.-.-_V l, �,r.;�2�-,.�}<, 2. Name of owner (if different) �Z`��ii �Q. B. ProPerty Description: ADDRESS � -%-=•'� ='�='1Q''=� �1�`�• f ^'�'• -1`�a `—y ''�'i �.. t , . �.w'!'`^ 1. Legal description: LOT BLOCK ADD � �T�^ ' r r°.� "+�^'-, � JLU tl �:� 2. Lotsize: 3� �2� ° ' - � �. �'�M'~"� v 3. Present Use �rG �-�'-�t=� � oning Dist. "s' C. Reasons for Request: � rli �..}� -n ±� -� ;.. , . -, -F � 1. ProPoseduse yG CC:_ _.:,�.�., E. �_?,- -- •. _. �:,:� `. _ �__ �.��t. rt��_....ij��-, � 2. What physical characteristics of the property prevent its being used for any of the permitted uses i�your zone? (topogrephy,soil conditions,size and shape of lot,etcJ � � {cj L-�' �'(�YV\�i �.` l(;(�-7- U � \�,�,i, �7 I�v�S :ia�e � �Y�_S��l� t� • i�l�-�� .� , 3. State the s�ecific vanat�n requested giving d�st�nces where appropriatr � -re�.ues-�in�; �. co�.�a :�� .�rs �� _ ;_ �. �� _ o r. . . _ , , , � ;±1P. EX1:�1i2� ;IXSd�E.' C��r �,:_.8 'C_ -,._,. ._;; ?. ;C ..__._. , 2.�3t. C1iC�`-'; , -�- '��Y'F -� y r �-�?.�y+..'� •;� �-� _ ..� � 1. :�ent o�cap�.nc�� ...t �te, ' , _, �r� ��l;r ��s tu�l?q�:S Explain how your case conforms to each of the foliowing: a. That the strict application of the provisions of the Zoning Ordia�ce would result in peculiar or exceptional practical difficulties,or exceptional undue hardships. -E-� `�• �-'��L'1" , t y ;°1 'C'.P.F:.S@G. �.�' <" :^ tL� �.�" :; A=� . ,�,E� _,P,C�fO.,,, �. .. �i;�E'�_ 0'n.� OC�.U.�:."1C�' 7e} t?�t, _'^v 5� .�a:1.t�. _ iir ,�S ��. . � - . - :i-:,y�a . � . . . '..ti.?.� �,�3t�',�� CASHIERS USE ONLY �.',�t. b. That the granting of a variance will ;•=i•�' not be a substantial detriment to ' � f• i�i. p u b l i c g o o d o r a s u b s t a n t i a l i m p a i r- #� ment of the intent and purposeof r ��;.' �� the Zoning Ordinance, m O OLlI' ' �j� �� . �l��'!�� E?�r.'"'n �f�;� ;l.,-�''�• i'1'c�.S �.l�'c'.::.j.r7 �� J J � �� _ _`. ys ' � , a 4% Uriit _��lc�r j/,�` ` � �;een use-: as ' j, � 1'� "��r'i �!'1P 2,�, a:,°i l f', �l 0� ` y " }^y� : „-. ,..,. � .�-�rr�-�..: ,.,. �t �1.��.y�j'i �-� '!' I '� '�,"� L?TI.0 �0".J�.��.�.t,l�J?1 C;.°,i1`,:. ' , � � �� NOTE: THIS WIL OT BE PROCESSED WITH4�UT A COMPLETE SI�E PLAN� ��,� '. � (/ / � Signature �� _ � �/ .� �, ��• / ` ` t, i Date Received t , . ZONlN� 80ARD . , . T � , APPi.ICATION FOR ZONING ORDINANCE VARIANCE { s CITY OF SAINT PAUL r• �1 "'� � '� ;.�r; �-�-"�� A VARIANCE OF ZONING CODE CHAPTER �1 ,SECTION � ,� PARAGRAPH IS REQUESTED IN CONFORMITY WITH THE POWERS VESTED IN THE BOARD OF ZONING AP— PEAIS TO PERMIT THE ��O?"l��;i=``-'-l:'=1t�`'- C)-� . -;1' '�`':' ON PROPERTY DESCRIBED BELOW. - �•3�,��' � :,;� � d $.. - Il ?-7� .n� 7,.:. .-, � it�. A. Applicant; NAME: '-�` '" r � _ _v.� �;:%�� .. � � �� • ,. ADDRESS � 4L.� ,'�'t'v^:I°..� ._ . �'. `� U. � :�-L�� t; . � s';iig„ . , , .r`, DAYTIME TELEPHONE NO. �r� —� =�� ZIP CODE .%:1`� �� =.�i�! 1. Property interest of appiicant: lowner,contract purchaser,etc.) -:-v�,,.,:.1�' ,� .",';�.,� 2. • Name of owner (if different) `;r�i�1'ii v 0. B. Property Description: ADDRESS i �Ct� ��*;�?� :y Jc. �%�t. ��`.:.:;i� � _ :T Ct.-+ ',`✓�/• J 1. Legai description: LOT 'a�c :?fiT`3,CB�.00K ^ .��.� =i , _,; 1�t�`� :uan 2. Lot size: `f� �'`�-.;-� ` `�`, :'+t°'� �-� 3. Present Use �`�- ��-�� sent ist. —`� C. Reasons for Request: �i C C^ '-�_� "� ,.: + -. �� _ � - `- -• , -; ', .'�"'. - - 1. ProPosed use 4�?}'�'�`==�,-'' ` / . 2. What physical characteristics of the property prevent its being used for any of the permitted uses in your zone? (topography,soil conditions,size and shape of lot,etc.) _��y.;a�;� r,�:r;Y`( � - ,., .�f." � � � �f� � �;i, j�,.�� rv, :':,: t} ' ��i...� . � � , � , _ ` 3. State the specific�nation requested,giving d�stances wh�ere appropriate.1 �' 'f- i�P�l�..�i��:.'�i_ll�� '.~st�.f_�«!tA�._i:l.v :.i.'�_ �.��' ._ _� �".�i •_ ... ... _'" �r . � v :'• � "•; ,.. � . .�.' ,,i ., � : ui1.° 4�F. E..��vy.�':1�Y Z..:i'r' `_�� }�'`� -:.ia .�_ �,i�� :. -'�i�l'. _1.�.1.'.. . _ -�•-r� � � � ��f.-"� �Y+4 A?>'i l� �.n..C�:,i � t l� er :-�,��. _ . . . �.�. 1�� .;_: _"` .y�``!�.. {-. 4"Explain�Fiow y ur case conforms to each.of the following: ' a. That the strict aPplication of the provisions of the Zoning Ordiance would resuit in pecittiar or exceptional practicai difficulties,or exceptional undue hardships.�-�_��``,'�`• ��''�.� or ��:-lly �aY��' �_-��' �� l_ ��i-r �r t . � � �; . s ?T� .aC'i.,OT' _)01.!?� 4?".. .7�t�` OC{ ---....'^C'j - "'"""'�T �OY' i � l:tl2?..f.-. j��}' , _,,E. � � � �4 �` CASHIERS USE ONLY `^ b. That the granting of. a variance wili `� '�� ;-. not be a substantial detriment•to � r #� public good or a substantia�impair- � g,t� ment of the inte�t and r -J G it�;� purpose of - the Zoning Ordinance. t -�i ``� � To o�ar �rno�,�lea:�~e �:,y��. (� ;�,� - ( � _ r�.: a.1 ,�,�� N�A� .�,�.�C -�. .� � � ? � a �2 u::��t :��y� �..r�c? �;�:1 Y� �v �, :� , , -- , ,,, ,._. � - ,,� �, , .�.� _ ,,,_, -�- ' 'ti7.0 �-- �.0�?1� J O>i.�..�,OL __ _ - ' , . �- � NOTE: THIS WI��NOT BE PR�CESSEDlW1�4UT A CQMP,LETE,SyTE�LANJ--,A_.x�` - • , .�. y ..L t>. .. r. � Signature �� r�• � �/ ' �^L '"�-"t`._�� ._ ,' � �� —� . � Date Received +' i �`�� i yW ZO �dHH � � -� �dbd f " �' N � � � x � yv�iO4� `.:.; � O� �7U] � � t"i � H �d U1 �.:. � N ` tzJ ►-3 -P� � � H � H , ::.., ; � � -� U1 x�o H w ! � � , � t� N\ OoH � U� 1 `: � U2 N-� H � l� �tn pCH =r ; � . � � �So �° r� y4' ,v � H � HO h � C�7 �d `1� w J�-J � H e� `r�' ',� � ? ` ; I rd -'�� x :U� �. yxH � O �7 i . . � ►-y< � oH`J' x � � o � ro ; .... � � � y ' � a -�AO � � y � y � � � H i: t��:: I ! ty � i-3 H 9 -t� �1 t� O 1 ' � Oy00 � H � 0ot/� � � ��/� � �. �n � � OU' O � �� H �dZ � �!/ :� �n C/� td t-� x z -� t�i C -� �'J H �,' N ►-3 `,z7 Vl o� � zr� � o � xi-; � � trJO � H H f--7 � t�-+ ��-3H � � trJ x L!] --� Nb.� -�t'� HH � '� '� � OC� U1� � yw � � OOOx HO� � O� trJ� �� j �� OH '� � O � Ox �d� �70 '� t� � � � N � HC] � � '� � �-300 '=J � �-C asny "�'' (�. � C�cs.ru LJ � � C� � �iy D � b � j ,�`�'. H � ►d O � � L-�+ HH � y � t� d0 t� �c -' � � � �J -• '� � t� x t� H H CJ� � t�1 ,�Y� --.. � � � � � ►-�G �''jO � � � � K4� fs� �`�-3 � ` ;.� � � H � C�/� �7 � t'+ H -+ xav�i00H H `�y�. ` ~ � � � � x� � � � y '=J ►br �d O --� HHCII � � HtrJ � � u`� vt d \Hx � t� NHH � C� H , � t��! � � � H �� x OwoxH � Z � w � o�i C�/2 � x � ��n � � � � 9K � ; H �`n � � H r-] H �!' �d Z � �C � Hy� HxU2\ � H H �r1 H U� z �; � O H � . . 1 ` `� iiOA�D OH 'G�NING NEPURT AND AC"I'ION _ February 5, 1970 Plat Map �f 37 __ ActinK uncier Legislative Coc�e L'hHpter 60 thru 64 File No. passed Aug��st 22, 19�2 , as amended ta April 6, 1970. 693? 6824 1 . APPLICANT 'S NAME ; Virgil Doerfler ; Also ? . CLASSIFICATIUN . � Amendment � Appeal � permit � Other _ 3. PIJRYOSE Install an 82-car parking lot to be used in X- � conjunction with two 41-unit apt. buildings 4. LOCATION . Southeast corner of Ames Avenue and Johnson Parkway S. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Part of Sec. 27, T. 29, R. 22. (See file) � �h�b�'f �1 6. PRESF.NT 7.ONING . Iieavy Industry 7. PURSUANT TO Zoning Code Chapter: 60 Section: .23 Paragraph: 4, 2 8. STAFF INVESTIGATION AND REPORT: Date: 1/30/70 By: CLS A. HISTORY: Application for a permit to install a 30-car parking lot was withdrawn on August 27, 1969, because the proposed development did not meet the density requirements of the Zoning Code. B. AREA ZONING: The areas to the weat and north are Heavy Industry; south across the railroad is largely "B" Residence; to the immediate east is a mixture of Light and lieavy In�3ustry, with a mixture of residential districts further to the east. C. DESIGN STANDARDS : The proposed parking area meets minimum required design standards for this type of development, t D. FRUNTAGE, AREA, AND LOT COVERAGE: An irregularly-ahaped tract having an area of about 77,500 square feet and frontages of 408 feet along the Johnson Parkway rigt►t- of-way, 183 feet along Ames Avenue, and 175 feet along Prosperity Avenue. E. T1tAFFIC �NGINEER: The Txaffic Engineer hae reviewed the application and reco�nenda clenial based upon the following factors: 1) the proposed T.li. #61 extension would go through the apartment site; 2) the driveway from the parking_ lot enters Ames Ave. at a bad location (too close to the intersection) and also cuts across park property; and 3) one-to-one parking ratio is not adequate. F. SITE CONDITIONS: The site is currently occupied by two single-family residences in fair condition. The land is of irregular topography & is above the. grade of Johnson Pw� G. AREA CONDITIONS: Johnson Parkway rlght-of-way abuts on ttie west and railroad right- of-way is on the south. Areas to the north and west have industrial uses while those to the south and east are occupied by residential uses. A communication from the Publi< Works Dept. indicates that while there is no schedule for acquisition of the property, they would hope that no construction take place within the proposed right-of-way. A co�nunication from the Parks Dept. notes the development is undesirable from their point of-view and recommends a la setback so e not be detrimental �- ; 9. BOARD ACTIUN: To Recommend � Approval � Denial Council Letter _ . -°--•"" Da t ed: � ,. �I�Eoved- by;:�"' • "�tcP �+ Yeas Nays 4/29/70 - �+ _ � , �'�_._� � , ;� � � ~■'�^ Gadler i.�..._.w ..-�- •- ,S Piansur X Date of Hearing � ��I,.�_ Cauger X Maietta 4/30/70 , Secre[ary's remarks : x Mansur Council_ Actior. , Subject to the c�rdition that rra�'�a.r X AmPs - Ch. ,�..;(} • S!_8R!�E1':G'S h2 ISl?'. r 'r^,i�Y. *': , '. : _ X � �L�i�.� . � ��'�� j�yV^'r�� :�T'.r C:t8� L'F''v:_S'�_ '� . . a" �,AI'C..:_R I 1 .� I ` p. -i:� N�.:ins (Alt.j Date lot design s�anca-r..: . .. . . . . , . , + ��'b/7° 1 . . . Councii F}le 1Vo. 2#880a–By VicfOr�J. Tedeeco— Resolved, That Virgii DoerAer be and hereby is granted a permit to in- • . stall an 82-car parking feciHty !n con- iunctlon with two apartment� (41 and 40 units respeetively) on property lo- cated on the southeast corner ot Ames Avenue and Johnaon Parkway, more ' partiCUlnrly descrlbed as follows: Part oi aouthweat i'4, northwelt ?�. and northwest �4, eovthwest I�'f, in Sec. 27, T. 29, R. 22 bounded by the following descrlbed lines: Be- ginnlnq at the point of intersectlon of the noutherly line Amea Avent�e and e�sterly line Johnson Perk- • way; then eac+ter�y along southerly • llne Ames Avenue 183 feet;-then svutherly at a defiection engle to the right of 90° 175 feet; then westerly et a deflectfon angle to the rtqht of 90° 140 feet; then southerly at a deflection anqie to the left of 00° 1302 feet; theh weSterly alonq the rtorther�j+ R/W - llne oY Chicago and NorEhw�stetn. " Ry. 308.7 feet; then northeasterly a distance oi 408.3 teet t0 the point of beginning; all in accotdance with final plans dated Recelved March 24, 1970; subject to the condition that traRlc standards be met wlth proper curb cuts and that plans meet parking lot design stand- ards, and that said applicant-permitteE, and hls successors and assigns, shall make due cofnpliance with all appllca• bie provistons of municipal ordinancea, state statutes and rules and regula. tions of public authoritiea having cog- nizance. Adopted by the Councll May 9, 1970. Approved NTay 8, 1970. (May 18, 1970) ,F..xl/a/f �3 i� °� `� ,� ' a "r' �''�� :� ti � r � .`: .r ��'� �:, ..�..y::n .�.Ew ..., ._ _ -' . ` � '� f''�;.:_, :;� :'A:r--.F� w .. � .. _ . . � .. ;�: ri_. !'::: 1}• f;�i.: ;',. .:�;: ;l,'Hi:t.iC: ':.�.,'FU� 't"._ii; :'>C,:� IJJ t�r 'LON1Nt; lJ.: i�::ili :;i�i�i. ?'CI;LLI"u";' J� Z�ii�? E�l: .!:1)U l� .i'1, ��t��i:l��l.: 1"1@SE�:9_ talil�`.'�i � r<ll�i;.•:'J c�c:1'2Lr�1fn,, i�i�,!el'ta, tlllCj j�c:ilSlSY Of Lt�e J�C�Br[� 8[llj � MM I4essis� �3r�:,tr�: �:_��l ;;:.�::::cr�s,��t :�r�d i•fiss Schirmcr oF �.;te staff. VIRd':IT, llOEP.FLER: An applicat-lon fnr ;.i perr�it to i*�stal� �n 82-car p�rking lot to ��e usec� in con_junckf.ni2 uitl� tw� 41-uniC t�partmeut buil:]ings oc� proper[y locaced on the southeast car��r. of .�wes Avenue and Johnsor► Par�.�,a��y. . Mr.� �orenson gove the starf ce��vrt stating that an appliea�ic,n for a pexueit to instsll s 30-car Nar]ciag 1c:L wsa �rithdrawn on Augus�t 2�, 1.969, becnuse the proposed develo1�rueTtt did r�c�t cneaC r.he density requirem�nts of tl�e Zoning Code� The TreffiC F.ngineer h�s ;-+�vfewed the appllC�tion and recousi,en�s denipl bssed upon the follow±ng factcr�: J.) the proposed 'L., Ho �t61.�extension c-rould go tt�rough tfse apartn�ent sike; �) the driveway �Erom thE parking lot enters Ames Avenue at a bad location (tou close to the intersectfon) and a2so cute across psrk property (comments on this matter have been requested of the Parka Dep�rtmen.t) ; anJ 3� one-to-v.�e par�:ing rat�o is �ot adequbte. 2•ir, Sarenson noted u couanu�.3.c:ations �fraui rhe Public Works Departa�ent which indicateci that w�hile th�re �s no s�che�ule for��cc;�isition of th2 property, they wou1J hope chat no construction t�eke pl.bce within the pxoposed Xight-of-way. � c�ui�ication fron the Parks I)epart:e.�nt r.ote� Ct�a�t the development ia undesirable �racu Cheir p�iiit af view a►z<t recouanends a Iarger sei-back so as to not be detrim�ntal to the park property. The eite is currentZy occupied b}r ewo single-fam�ly reaidences in f�3.r c��dition, . The land i3 of irrebular togo�rttF>hy and is above the grxde of Johnson Parkw�y. �� Mr„ Sorenson ad�ised a re�;isrcred survey and propoaed topography map may be n�eeded to check the pl�ns for densit} and coverage conforne�nce. TY►e parking lot n�et� deaign standarda but parking wi11 be inadequate. There t� limited street pazking. Garages may iutensive2y i.ncr�ase the parkiag inadequacy. rir, Maiettcr� asked if ther� had b��n any notification fram the Highway Department indicating the highw�y was �;oing througta. Mro Soreczaun advised that tihE Public Works Depurt�n�ut ie the dep�rtment C,iat h�s been contacted G11 this. Mr.. Sumaiers, �awyer for tlie spplica�t, said they wo:�ld be williag to coafai-m with the nuuxlser of units ss detei-r.�ined by a final area cc�mputation: The paricwa;► is largely a s�ntic queation--�:he neareaL- building would be 170 reet from ti�e roadway. In anawer to a Guestion by Mr, Ames, Mr. Suimnera s�±d if it is irnpaesible eo �sbtain parkwny depar[r.�nt ripproval of accests to Amea A��enue they caouid be more �han �li,llin� to yield �haL acc.eas �nd go on Prosper�.ty Avenue which �.s r� �ead end. Air,. Bu'lles who r�sS.des In t:t�e neighbonc�od �tated he ca�ae tc get claxificatfon. 'Thete is a par�.i�t� nroblers an:i h� will a�ak the Traffic Division erect signa: "No Pardi_ng" on th�: s�ree:t--ttita is �sp�ecially neceasary in win�er. .__�___-,_r____--- __ _;-_ + _- �---- a ..a ��'�' � ��- . , ; _:��-:; ��.....—_--,.- ..,.T,_...�—�.--�--�-- � � ,Ex ��6,�-C' '� (�; 1 �. �:IZ.:,1. �.iC 'r ��ti� ii:(llillti;lr�.. �t . � cir� 1�icl`<Srt:li_r. -.:::,�;�-•d �'or a��,r��v�l of e.he rec�ueyC e;ubj�ct co meet Lh� Traffic :-'t�,icia�d5 with �)L"J()CY c:�rt• :ut;s and ps�lcing on L'he �r.ogerty end thaL any revise� pltan L�eets tlae sL�;r�laccl;;. Seconded by Mr.. e•lansur, Cize motion • c�rrieu unanimousty. rir� Sunaners �sizi r�s Lhc u�otion w�s adopt�ci he understood if it wnA possible to get appr.oval of the Parks DepartnieYit the u�otion would permit' the applicant to get staff appraval for the arcess. This way the cancensus of tlie Bc�ard. Snbmitted by: Colonel Lo Sorenson R ert Lo Ames, Chairman y.�---_,__-__ _._—�— _� ------—'""_'_"" " __—y�----.... Q'�� '..: ,z.�. j'� .� , -• . , , .� .a _ ,._..,..�—._ . _ . . ,�,_.-.s.�..�,�..,,._.• � ,�,�..�,,,,,,_..�_�.�.—° ' ��7� � ��6� t � ,., . . _. . _ , �s� `�i' °'., CITY OF SAINT PAUL � �` DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY SERVICES � :�,_��.. � : *N'•i'�;t � s � DIVISION OF HOUSING AND BUILDING CODE ENFORCEMENT +'� City Hall,SaiM Paul,Minnesota SS102 Georgr latimer 612-299-4212 Mayw ,luly 23 , 197J �, i- , „ �t1 � i� � � �rl �� t :� �:`: �f�1�:� Harwil co . g Larry Gre�c�rY . (:IIY PLA(VPriNG ficlil?;i; 0 2299 Ra inbow Ave. . ."'�nt �' �, r��::.:;..... . New Bri�hton , Minnesota 55112 RE : 1334 and 1348 Ames [)car Sirs : 7'hc Il i v i� i on has rev iewed the Zon ing prohl em at 1334 ancl 1348 Ames and has reached the following conclusions : 1 . The �ermits issued in 1970 with Council a�proval for the con�truction of these buildin�;s were for two 41 unit huildings. 2 . '1'he t:ert ificate of Occupar�cy for these buildings were a��roved and issued for 4l units cach . 3. Since that time person or per,ons unknown ill.eg� lly acicl��d one unit to each building in violation of the Zoning Code . 4 . 1'hese huildinRs must each he reduced to 41 units . unles, a variance from lot size , set back , and parking requirem��nts is obtained from the Zoning l;oard ot Appeals . To make appl�cation Eor a variance contact Planning at 298-4154 . As statcd in our previous letter, we expect this issue to be resolvecl by August S , 1979 . [ f you havc any furt}ier yue�tions , rontact Alice Aijjani at 298-�9 215. urs trul , C�. � Glenn A. Fri�ksori �,�y-"_ StiP�r•vi ,or of (:ode E:nCorcement p! �� cnr. : nAt; :�� Z�� ,��C�tr�af' � ' � 1. 1 1 �I C o • - • , - �_ _ - : ,is' , � �, �8 ? � fs. . . �ti . �n �► � , '► `� , - �N_ _ _r , • .� = � � 1 i g0 . o , y � /3 � �'• � �Z� 6 2� •� �o o �y ��. •; � ' '� ,�3 24 25 2 � j 3 . � �" ;'� � ' , ,.. ; o ,,,,.� ,: 33 ► �.--.. � 6� s bo � �,;�•'-' , 1�.3 � � S s �^,, '°' � 1 C++ � � � � t O �� 9,�� .o ti` � �, ', - 13 138� ,-�., '�� ' � ' '� t' � o ' lf t � � � �C � � O � � 0 k�! � 1 z b 3 ' ��3 � °o A �' �'l -- � 0 � � p � , �� -� ;� v � 39 3 � �?�- o • - �f-� 1 ' A9 � Y� •: 7s � /yA � .�:�� ' •-\'�.7 • ��_ r .�� a� / � • � \ ,��'�,{-� ,/ V� �zo _ `6 �'8•• �I�.. �' ,btJ� �b'r. - / " v` d9 7S i � �,y�� jt� �. h I, t .+, \0 �S . � 'P� � � Q �, :r" �ti ,��. 3g � � .Y� ti M'.\0 I i� � ' � Ao �� J FC^' +�! w ��' I �� - .` w � r'�' �3a, 6 +o � ; _� �,� ML.� , � i•�.. - � ' O 0 N °„= �.. �� . � . j� � � ,; � ��'''.` 4� � � �r'�' -' o° � 3 i . \ � \�'� �% � �% ��;�;- ' 3 7j Ap.�! �% r ' I � �1 O� i , , 3� � '� i , ! O�Q.IC /9 qe � �' � . . J i pi � J sr C 1 5 � .I � �p0 � bo � v� I ` ��.� 9 / 1� '� , �, , f M _I � �; � ' s� � o� ; ,/9s"� + . Appl i cant`s �i te Pl an � , � _ - ' Scale - , � � ' • 1 " = 100' � . i ''�� i , � v �" ac � � i �3�s ` � 6 . � i y� � � i �j ! . oZ�s � 0 21 � : ; r ,. � � d� , o . a � ..`" �1 a:: i{."a '� � , �y � f � E*-�' � .� `,5 9 u _,�`.` ��0 _ y:r ,`,.0 9� 2 �` J >. , � 2 �� '` � ' � \ � �� ` � �{ i � \ 13�9 1 Q8� r b 1 � , 07 � O�t � ::i ' � , „ p� � -- � , � so i �, e , �'i , , f�5 i3.f° �, 8 , �9 � �1,a � ' � _ - �. ^ � `.� c �_ _ -l�- �. .� � ., 5 -�" `` ` 90 � � o: �.' " 0_ s� � 3 4 - � � Uy A 26 � ,- ol° , ' 202C °- . p6 � �� , � 1 p•f �� p.+ 4'� �� , 27 �� i �ro � S3 s s s r. � i! . , i � �,�� o� . �� al b \ ,f"-�e��l� �i✓�� , , _ �_ __ '-� ` - �!+..,��+n��- � _ _ ' ', .,=, �, '"_�-^,�— ��, V ,��. � �s c'-, —4 so 6 n � f- �� \ 1 � ,`, .� -,"- �' ,� , J,:: ,4� � 2 3 �� '0 1 1.f �,��z , 'J O f I , � - " L, _� r" -� � _- 1� � ° 3 l7 `� ' 1 1� �• , �_ � , � ___ �3 � �\� `t c0 ` Z `r-'_ - "' __ -i `r' � _ ,_ �� _ `� 1� � x� �� 'V �� \ �Z � �• - y � � % ��., -,,,�J 4.�. � � � ��' � � i t- 1 , _ >' ,'� � � � _�� 1� � ) �� J \� �J� �f �� V ' �j � �`�� ¢ � �(�l � � � �- �%_ -- �� - � _ � �� '� �1 �' � - � � ,r_� 2 � R 70 — --.� � � 7D ►--' _ _ ' , _�1 _`_,_ - J, � O��O�g�� , _TV Js r �, ,1- � ,� - '� � ` � .n `f� �;' �; `r �-- �� ;�' , �j � + � �� . � � � `` l < < v �r- J��_ .1 .: /. � �. � � � /S�. � . � Q � J ,^ - , _ _ �: � ' _ , ► '`�5� f-"� .o o � � 14 � �- � ',`r � ' ' �`' '1 � �T` �� "� � � � \t.J � �= - ' - =_;��j � t � a �B o i3g9 �- ;', . ,(_ �- , � /• BD N \� � B L � � _ -�� 1 i 7. ,` _ � �B _ , - " .. F� � __ � � B'� p V�0. ,�jBL - �: _ - ` , - a • i r - ' ��' �, f l.''� ^ ,� / �� o� �� `O )J` ��_, - ' ► � ��IS� �/a Za� .. � �� `8 Q V •� \ sf , `(. . �,G � - . _ _ '`, ; �v ' g� ' . Z'�� _ \ • f_. ,� � • _ 1� /�1O - ./'•,� . . � Q. I,b i 2�L \ �� _ ;,.- ,.•.yv /pl O ` � ` � 42�5 � 33 ' o�7 ° � '� � � ' �•,=�- = 33 � . 5 (�9 • b� 3 � 90' �- ��;�_l�'��;� : j l �S � � 3 � � O ,��' � � � � 90" `° , � ' °rS � t` �� . ' �� l� � �� - �� S �3g0 � � . � t _ c � � � � � ' J � r v .�z�Q °°�� h ' ' ' " - : . " °'° � °rO 3 � ��ts � � 3 , � �� _ o �9 � zl0 � oao 39 � J � �Z6. . , ° <*. '� o '� �9' � 39 .. � c� ' � . ,o..�� . , . t : �v �0 U 0 M � �. �., �^ ,_�' f � `� ,\� /� � . , .r. ' �pr."7 ��,, �,}►�� . a 1 �9L- ',�� ;w.�' ��_� 1'• w; `' �S a b� = � �f ,�y�__ .. r:��'`'�,,J f' �� ', `•�: ��2�� b.S b a 5 g 5 . i�A.' ��. /� � . .. �i �1�'L ! ♦ ..: Lry� �Z 0 � ' . '�� "� .:�� r�� t�i� � 39 7f ��G� �� „r� �� ' / � f ��45 `� � 1�,�." �`� �':w;: �;� -;' ' ��7.�f�f�,t _ _' �es� � \ 0�' F � t.,` 1 � � t '�..'�i� � \'1 -,,,;s�'r � �� \ �� k5 ' � t ;.� �:_ . . a" , � �`��' t f. b , �o �\ •.�- ,��. �.�� / • � �..` . .J,� . �� N � � � � � � ^'Y3�, 6Z8 i• 1 ' i? .�• , j y'l � j. , ..� .�` O O ol ..� s8� ' j' ,,. .� f �`'y .37 � s q �� 'pGb� �^ /� . � ' 4'� j�'r;�1 "'. rr--->� _ � '�� i " ,�" l . ; � 1 ,:e� ..,.•t; : m . � _ i . • � ..�- � , := ' f ' - �� / �� :. ,� ►� o 'F-' ��` ��, ..:F:�J � � . _ _; ' � -•� .�. - - ' . _ - — ; � � � � - , �,.Q� � �r '�c. �-- �r� , �� ' s' � � , _ • .' . .. .'y� y *�^ 3�' ��- 050�� /� . t a0 . ;:.;:-d+:�:. ;�Z eGtf. x,-l� 9 f� ,.aw f:r ,O� 5� 6 3:. ' � 05 � � � � �6� a M P �� { � ,I - ,` T SEE M y ' �'� b � ,� ..�tQn � � � „ ' s•�g� ,/9s��' MP°' a5 Site Plan based on approved - "� PLS °'' plan received by Planning � Office March 24, 1970. _ '' Scale � � ' � " 1 " = 100' . � ` 7 F _ _ . � � � � o�S . ` 4 . � � 5 g- � �' oii � ` ,� � q� .� ` � � �r�� _� 3—d o g O� �� -y 2 �y � �(J�' , 0�11 b\ � --7 cc � � ,�� , . , 40 � ,� � i31q ' S�� ,�' - - -�Y-o.-- - �� ` s° ' 5,,, � �� ^.;�, `� i a:�. � :•r ��.; . ti �3 �''_ ' _� 'e�. � n x.r.o .._ .._...�� e I 2�^ S � �_ 'z ° � - `` 0. ,�25 � � ;� q � �'�_ - � ` � 41 � 5? `` . �oN A � 0 0 � \� �� '`� "� ,� �b t . �` I �t� s ° o� � �'�' -°- 'U P v Q�+ !�. 27 � � � , ' ^`' � ` p � �r ..�1 4 j 0o z �C1 n�m n � -�'-� �� S • � � /,2 J ��L___.—L= �S, � �o ��_ i .,_l. � � , , _�.r�:v�on•'- _ w . . s . . . . . . .. . . �..,...r .._ . . _�.. . . . , ._. .. .__ ..._ ._, .. ... , _....r... ..«-,.,y, E: ," �::. :� �' _ - ' .� . f ; ��:� - o ° ° � h�,. � � -� � :�� _ - p -� i ::� , -0 • � ` o�,. i �` ' �i � t-,v O � � l� .::'�... .. .: ...:' �� '� O � �� ' /, . ;... . .. � 1 � O �� n :� r � o o �'y o o � o � \ � _ � o '� ..� ° o '�,��, � : � � __-- o � � � ` , � \ n� "� � _ O _ O O E--� � � ( � .f � O - � � � ;. . ` �� V � pf Q '�'#.` Ex�`e (o � O , � � ' � :�� L p O WOO O ::�;:::.� M�c teri �s . O i � � , o � ;y �� , � p � p � � �� , O � � �� ; �' � � , d �� .� p . . . � ".: .k 1 � O O s �/ � � � � � "� � � � : � � , � �z ,,t . i' C � �: .:.: , .. ` ..�;::.:.:::..:.:.::::�i /, � � w!"•�:::•:::::::t•:;.�...... :.. J .�::: �`•:di::i:.,.:::•.•....... J l + � / �'� ��7� � �; .. .,... •.••�..::•r..::...: . • r * I �� — I''1��L� + �' � . . .,s� : ��.. � ' r �� t I �r 42 ° o . ..�:..::... .....: � � � � ••.: �� '� :f i`;�.• '`''y. � =�— � � %�X . 1 � �� X �r.:�` ' ._ �� ` \ . ` \ \\ � .. � �' \ ` \ \ \ � � � _.. ':�'y' ��`\ 1 �, `\ ` \ \ . � r i • , � "� � � � ` � ' I �� . ° :.� �r � I � �}� C 1 I w'"� � �.�, '�:;.:;:•::•�•`� � � \t{ \ ..y.. ��..:....y� r O� � `. \ \ i �"� '�,' \ ; �'� ` -.� c `�� '( '"� :� .�":: : ,. ' }l � � { . . I - .c � :� i� /� \� :: ��:: a .�-� ., ,+�' V : � . 1. � � ` i �"_�:�� ' " `� �.. � � � - � � �� ,�s �� -'�' 0 O � , p � � `� � J--Y",��' �:;: � � O ` ' _ , - ;Y �+� � � � � y ..�' +� _ 0 � � � \�n\� � �` \' V V V - ' ' � I \ � � , � Y� R w AV E . — � � u - - - � �--- �� o �C�' �7 � � v V __ ;, � I I v � -� V;V V V v � , i � , 0 �+ v � � � � � � i i � U __ _ _ v AR�A MAP APPLICANT DAVID & CANDYCE BARTOL LEGEND "' �' ZON(NG DiSTRICT BOUNDARY PURPOSE Variar,ce to retain two 42-unit L�L.L�LJ SUBJECT PRO�ERTY apartment bui 1 di ngs � ONE FA�fiLY P�atv�vir�� D{STRICT FILE N0. 8554 TV�/0 FAMILY 2 DATE Jan. 8, 1980 �� O MULTlPLE FAMILY • a n COh1MEP,CIAL SCALE : 1��= 200� NORTH � �a° �NDUSTRIAL MAp N0. SAINT PAUL PI.ANNlNG BOARO V VACANT j� , . �• �• � w CITY OF ST. PAUL "" DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE AND MANAGEMENT SERVICES ,. ASSESSMENT D1ViSiON 113 CRY HALL ST.PAUL,MINNESOTA 55102 �,>t .e � ;��" r�4 �. i .;. January 18, 1980 City Clerk 3� City Hall File X2�+�+0 Page 1 Zoning File 8554 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 Thursday, February 7, 1980 on the: Appeal of David Bartol to a decision of the Board of Zoning Appeals. This appeal . concerns an application by Da.vid Bartol for a lot area variance for two 1+2-unit apartment buildings located at 1334 Ames Avenue and 1348 Ames Avenue; being on the south si3e of Ames Avenue between Prosperity Avenue and Johnson Parkway. If you would ]�ike further information about this hearing, cont3ct the Current Planning Section of the Planning Board, Room 1202 City Hall Annex -- 298-4154. While _the City Charter xequires that we noti-fy you of the hearing, we want to help you to. learn fully about any improvement that could affect you or your co�nunity. 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 EIvGINEER _ . ` r J . • , ,� . �� - , � . , - .. . \' ,� + NM i ��, $. . . . . . . . . � � � � . . . � � � . .. . . � � ..j,. . , . � . , . . . . . . . . .' . . ` _ . � . . . . . - � � . .. , ._/ �. . . _ . . , . .i�,- . ,' . . . ., . . � - � . . ': . r . � . . .' _ . . . � . � � � . . I , . r . . . . � � . � . � .. � � . . � . . � � ' � �� .ti, . . , � .. � . . ` . . \ . .. �. . . � � . t � . .. , � . . � � . , _ . , : -. . . � . _ . . �'�z. � , � �� - . � . .. � . � . . . . . . ' . . . ..... � .>t � . � . � ' , . . . . . � . . . � . . . � . . .. . ,. . � � � . i � . . . . �. . � . . , . ' . . . , . � ' . _ . � ,_ . . , : . ;� , , ,1 ' �� ,.l�� a ' . . . � . . � - � . � � � .. � . . . . . . . _ .. '. P . , -. . , . . . , . . . _ . . / , . .. . . . . . � ..� . . ' . � �:�♦� �I-i�L-�i.:V�j� - . . . �. ' �. . . . - . � � T �. . ' D1s'1ta�t�� :Rl�n�oeR b�M�sgw�eot �erv'l.oea : � R+oe� -1�, �G'i.ta► H�al� . . 8�. P+�u�;�-Mietn. i _ . , , � , , - � Dsar 81r i � � �, �e t9�onail seat' a dste of haari,ag !'ar Fabruary 7s 1�8t�� 'tb '. - , . '- a+ae�s3d�sr t�i .,)p�a]. of� Davi�l �at�a1 �l.o �t d+ac�.#�a ot t��e ` � . �d af �onia�y ADlysals afts�et�aag yqropert,�r st �4-13k8 J�es , � :�kvs�owt. t�l 3r4u Q�.sa�rs �d 'ootiors to �'P�1►�r�rs _. .. , , °.u i�qui�rid�,'bg isa? . _ � � Very �nt1y 3ro�te, , , ' . . ,' � Aase 2�t , , . C3�yy C1e rk , _ , . � � - � ;i , � , , . % + � , _ �k80�Za . , � . � ; ,_ , . . . � ea�- Pl�an#o� �t�k!!, �iesin8 �ea�ion - . ' Baa�iag i��#�g �bd� Ei�tb�ae�rnt :�p�. : >� , - , ,; , � ,% , i � , , ; , . �, i . . � , , , __ _ * , . , � . , , � , _ - �'' , • ` � , . . • � _ , , ': . � � _ - �� , . � .. � . ' � � � � . . � . I �. . . � . 1 .� , - � /': � . . , . � . � � . .. . - � � � . . . - . . .�-. . . . ._.. .,. , . � �� . �� _� �,�'� . � . � � ,� � 5�- `� U �� , January 10, 1 g80 �,�� . �� City Clerk � �'�` Council Records � 386 City•x�.11 St. Paul, �iN 55102 ' RE: Appeal of Case #8554 1 3 3 � _ � 3� 8 � � �S Dear �irs. Nlix: We are appealing t�ie Board• of Zoning decision regarding case #8554 held on Tuesday, January 8, 1g80, Enclosed is the fifty dollar ($50.00) fee required to appea.l before the City Council. T�.ank you ��,�� DAVID BARTOL � � ,� �L��,� �� ,�s� ��,.y �