01-1165� � � . �
o f e
Council File # A \� ��LS
Cneen Sheet # — $� .- J l(_)��
RESOLUTION
CITY OF SAINT PAUL, NIINNESOTA
h
Presented By �`� ��
Referred To
Comxnittee: Date
a�
2 Whereas, Steven T. Mitchell, in file no. O1-189209, made application to the Board of
3 Zoning Appeals (hereinafter, the 'BZA") for a variance from the strict application of the
4 provisions of the Saint Paul Zoning Code for property commonly known as 1236 Virginia Street
5 and legally described as: T. B. Somers Addition To St. Paul Subj To Alley Lots 25 And Lot 26;
6 and
8 Whereas, The purpose of the variance application was to vary the zoning code standards
9 to allow a front setback of 34 feet, a change of 15 feet in the required minimum setback of 49
10 feet for a new single family home; and
11
12 Whereas, The BZA conducted a public hearing on Tuesday, May 29, 2001, after having
13 provided notice to affected property owners, and the BZA, by its Resolution #O1-189209,
14 adopted on Tuesday, May 29, 2001, granted the application subject to the condition that the
15 applicant obtains subdivision approval prior to constructing the new home, based on the
16 following findings and conclusions:
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
1. The properry in question cannot be put to a reasonable use under the strict provisions
of the code.
The previous owner of this properry constructed the garage 30 feet from the alley
because of the difference in elevation between the alley and the lot. This limits the
buiidable area for a new house without encroaching into the required front setback.
The applicant is proposing to construct a new home on the lot with the garage and to
rent the existing home on the other lots for about five years. The applicant needs the
income from renting the existing house in order to afford to build the new house. He
eventualiy plans on demolishing the existing older home and to recombine the two
lots. In orderto avoid moving the existing garage which involve considerable
expense, the applicant is requesting this front yazd setback variance.
2. The plight of the land owner is due to circumstances unique to this properry, and
these circumstances were not created by the Zand owner.
The location of the existing garage on the site as well as the average setback of the
other homes on this block are circumstances that were not created by the applicant.
2 3. The proposed variance is in keeping with the spirit and intent of the code, and is 0 � — �� 4 5
3 consistent with the health, safety, comfort, morals and weZfare of the inhabitants of
4
5
the City of St. Pau1.
6 The proposed variance will allow the applicant to construct a new single family home
7 to eventually replace the old house existing on the properiy. Presently, the iwo lots
8 making up this parcel aze combined under one Property Identification Number as a
9 single tax pazcel. The applicant needs to split these two lots before he can build a
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
new house and he will need to recombine the two lots after the old house is removed.
Provided that the applicant obtains the necessary subdivision approval, the proposed
variance is in keeping with the spirit and intent of the code.
4. The proposed variance will not impair an adeguate suppZy of light and air to adjacent
property, nor wi11 it alter the essential character of the surrounding area or
unreasonably diminish established property values within the surrounding area.
Other than the front yard setback, the proposed new home will meet all of the setback
requirements. The average setback of the homes along this block ranges from 31 feet
to 55 feet. The proposed setback of 34 feet fa11s within the this range and will not be
out of keeping with the character of the area. This block of Virginia Street is a dead
end road and the opposite side of the block is undeveloped land. The proposed
variance will not significantly affect the supply of light or air to adjacent properties.
S. The variance, if granted, would not permit any use that is not permitted under the
provisions of the code for the property in the district where the affected land is
located, nor would it alter or change the zoning district classification of the property.
A single family home is a permitted use in this zoning district. The proposed
variance, if granted, will not change or alter the zoning classification of the properry.
6. The request for variance is not based primarily on a desire to increase the vaZue or
income potential of the parcel of land.
The applicant states that his primary desire is to provide a new home for his family.
Whereas, Pursuant to the provisions of Saint Paul Legislative Code § 64.205, Michael P.
Pfalz, duly filed an appeal from the determination made by the BZA and requested that a hearing
be held before the City Council for the purpose of considering the actions taken by the BZA; and
Whereas, Acting pursuant to Legislative Code §§ 64.205 - 64.208 and upon notice to
affected parties, a public hearing was duly conducted by the City Council on Wednesday, July
11, 2001 where all interested parties were given an opportunity to be heard; and
Whereas, at the conclusion of the July 11, 2001 public hearing, the matter was laid over to
July 18, 2001 where the mater was again laid over the to July 25, 2001 a11 for the purpose of
determining whether the parties could reach an agreement outside of the appeal process; and
Whereas, the parties have indicated that they are unable to reach a compromise in the matter;
�
2
4
5
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
Whereas, The Council, having heazd the statements made, and having considered the
variance application, the report of staff, the record, minutes and resolution ofthe BZA, does � �����.5
hereby
Resolve, That the Council hereby affiruis the decision of the BZA in this matter, having
found no error in fact, finding or procedure of the BZA; and be it
Further Resolved, That the appeal of Michaei P. Pfalz be and is hereby denied; and, be it
Further Resolved that the Council adopts as its own the findings and conclusions set forth in
BZA resolurion no. O1-189209; and, be it
Finally Resolved, That the City Clerk shall mail a copy of this resolution to the applicant
Steven T. Mitchell, the appellant Michael P. Pfalz, the Zoning Administrator, Plamiiug
Commission and Board of Zoning Appeals.
Requested by Department of:
By:
Fozm Approved by City Attorney
By:
Adoption Certified by Council Secretary Approved by Mayor for Submission to Council
By: Z . By:
Approved by Mayor: Date ���I��� _! !/�`
q
By:
�� � i
Adopted by Council: Date � ov' � a.p�ry,
w. _... c
DEPARTMENTNFFICE/CIXINCIL � DATE7NITW?ED ' — �— � ��
City Council Offices 10/30/2001 � S NO ������
con�racr a�tsot� s� �+or� � tin�uom.
Ji.m Reiter, 266-8650 , a ,,.�, i ., a
MUSf BE ON COUNCILAGBJOA BY (DAT�
AEa�GN
MWB9tPoR GlfiAiiOMElf OIYCIF�I(
RWTWG
� w11111rJ�LaQMCEfOR R11111CJ�LaFRIH�CCTC
❑ WYOR1�114i6fAMi� ❑
TOTAL � OF SIGNATURE RAGES (CUP ALL LOCATIONS FOR SIGNATURE)
CT�ON REQUESTED
Memorializing City Council action taken on July 25, 2001, in denying the appeal of Michael
Pfalz regarding the decision of the Board of Zoning Appeals, which granted a front yard
setback variance in order to construct a new single family home at 1236 Virginia Street.
RECOMMENDATION Approve (A) w Rejeet (R) GERSONALSERVICE CONiRACiS MUSTANSWER7HE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS:
1. HasthisPe`soMrtneuerworkeduMe�acart�acttorihisdePaNnent?
PLANNING COMMISSION rES No
CIB COMMITTEE 2. F@s thie peisoMrm erer been a dry empbyee?
CIVILSERVICECOMMISSION YES NO
3. Dces Nie pcvsoMrtn possess a sidll rw[ normallypotsessed by a�ry aRent city employee?
YES NO
. 4, is this peBOMum a tafpe[ed vendoY) .
YES NO
E+�Iain aIl Y� answers on sePa�ate sheetanE atfach W 9reen sheet
INITIATING PROBLEM ISSUE, OPPORTUNITY (Who. Wha[, When, Whem, Why)
ADVANTAGESIFAPPROVED -
Council Research CentBr
OCT � 0 ppp�
DISADVANTAGESIFAPPROVED � � � . ,
DISqDVANTAGESIFNOTAPPROVED � '
TOTAL AMOUNT OF TRANSACTION S COST/REVRIUE BUOGETED (GRCLE ONE) YES NO
FUNDING SOURCE ACTNITY NUFIDER
FlNANpqL INFORIMiION (IXPWt�
o�_�\�S
Interdepartmental Memoranduxn
CITY OF SAINT PAUL
DATE: October 5, 2001
TO: Nancy Anderson
FROM: Peter Warner
RE: Appeal of Michael Pfalz. Council Action date 7-25-01
Nancy, I found the attached resolution in my files. Did I ever send this to you for final adoprion by
the Council??? PWW
DI - l(�S
CTTY OF SAINT PAUL
Norm Coleman, M¢yor
June 13, 2001
Ms. Nancy Anderson
City Council Reseazch Office
Room 310 City Hall
Saint Paul, MI3 55102
Dear Ms. Anderson:
OFFICE OF LICENSE, INSPECTIONS AND
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
r�8e. c�.s;.t, ove�.
B UII DING INSPECflON AND
DESIGN
350 St Pefer Street
Suite 310
SaurtPau�Minnesot¢ 55102-ISIO
�\
!�c.�.t.—
ti
� ���o�
a`�
Telephone: 612-266-900I
F[us'vtile: 6I2-266-9099
I would like to confirm that a public hearing before the City Council is scheduled for Wednesday, July 11,
2001 for the following zoning case:
Appellant:
File Number:
Purpose:
Location:
Michael Pfalz, 1244 Virginia Sueet
;��ei�z�z:
Appeal of a Boazd of Zoning Appeals decision granting a front yard setback
variance in order to construct a new single family home.
1236 Virginia Street
Staff : Recommended approval
District 7: Recommended approval
Boazd : Approved on a 4-3 vote
I have confirmed this date with the office of Council Member Iim Reiter. My understanding is that this
public hearing request will appeaz on the agenda of the Ciry Council at your eazliest convenience and that
you will publish notice of the hearing in the Saint Paul Legal Ledger. Thanks! -
Please call me at 266-9082 if you have any questions.
S' cerely, _
ohn Hazdwick
Zoning Specialist
cc: CouncIl Member Reiter
- �FUZSr�nq• ,. �
� OF YOBrIG �6 ' � : �:
1Yie Satnt Paul CYty�Co�nc3l wiR cwn-
duct a p�iblic hearing on Wedneaday, July
11, 2001, " at 5:30 p.m.. _ Ctty Counctl
Chambers, 3rd Floar IXLy Hall. to consider
the appeal of Michael Pfa}z regazd�ng the
Boax+d'of Zoning APPeats dedsion grazrth�g'
a tront yard seU�aelc vartance in o;der' w
construet a new single family huu�e, at
1236 Virginia Sh'eet - � .
Dated: June 15, 2001 - - -
NANCYANDERSON -
Asslstan;CityCouncll5ecretary . .
� � (�7nne 18Ttic-
ar. reu�, r�nc+�caii ". `.
o�nasia . '
Ol-�t�5
OFFICE OF LICENSE, INSPECTIONS AND
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
Roger C4rtis, Director
CITY OF SAINT PAUL
Norm Coleman, Mayor
June 13, 2001
Ms. Nancy Anderson
City Council Reseazch Office
Room 310 City Hall
Saint Paul, MN 55102
Deaz Ms. Anderson:
Bl7IIDING INSPECIlON AND
DESIGN
350 St Petes Stseet
Suite 310
Saint P¢ut, Minnerota 55702-I570
Tetephone: 612-266-9007
F¢csimile: 612-266-9099
I would like to confirm that a public hearing before the City Council is scheduled for Wednesday, July i l,
2001 for the following zoning case:
�
�
Appellant: Michaei Pfalz, 1244 Virginia Sueet
File Number: O1-189209
Purpose:
Location:
Appeal of a Board of Zoning Appeais decision granting a front yard setback
variance in order to construct a new single family home.
1236 Virginia Street
Staff : Recommended approval
District 7: Recommended approval
Boazd : Approved on a 4-3 vote
I have confirmed this date with the office of Council Member Jim Reiter. My understanding is that this
public hearing request will appear on the agenda of the City Council at your eazliest convenience and that
you will publish notice of the hearing in the Saint Paul Legal Ledger. Thanks!
Please call me at 266-9082 if you have any questions.
S� cerely, _
ohn Hardwick
Zoning Specialist
� cc: Council Member Reiter
�5 11:4a 5514834fl49
APPLiCA7ION FQR APPEAL
JILL EEAtI
Dcnnrlme.rt of P/anulnp arrJ £cnnomic Drveloyment
$unbrg Srction
110D Clr} Ha!1 Annec
?S H'et/ Fnur/h Srrt¢I
So7nt Paul, MN SS102
16G-6589
APPELLAtdT � Name �Y1�c,hne\ Q Q-�p�,Z
Address 12�1y Vif��n �u, ~
Gty��4�__�t.� St.�Zip �11'lOaylimephone�,. -SXXn
PROPER7Y I Zon:ng FCe Namc Stcvth T, M�,tchall
LOCATIOtd
Atldress�Location_ 2'l, V�,,,, �St. ,.a� mn Sr,���
TYPE OF APPEAL Ap�i�cation is hereby matle for en ap�ea io ths
= Board o? Zoni�g Appe�i; �City Coun�i�
unce- the Gro��aions of Chaptar E4, Sec:ien y�! Paag�aph 1 DI of the Zoning Code, fo
a�weai a tlecis�er made by the j}, Qp,,,1,t SoqrL( a{ n' a p nnPnl�
�c__�,�_ 2q 1.001 Flie n um�er�l-l892oq
(oate 8` daasronj
GROUNDS FOR APPEAL Expiain why you fee! inere has teen an error m any requirement,
� per.^;:; oec s�o� o' re`usal rnade Dy a� a�minist•�fivt en c,al, or an eror fn fac;, �rocedurs or
;':•nd �� naoe b; t7e Board ot Zonmg Appeala o� the P�arning Commission.
i
�Plea�sz See 0.�tY�eJ� Sl'ltc#S �ncla.A��y explan�}ior, P+�oavs. an� proposed aic �t
+ m�,�;� ta sh�.v rny hom� tn r�,ia.F;on .b P �ew home.
�
�
�
��rte°h adhrt,ona! sneer �� neressap� I=�
+, r-I iJ
�,ppli;anYs s�gna?ure t��,cYYI/�� Date �-1Tn{ Ci±y g0ent�C�`
C .."_
.�I� M.00A.n lm:uvv-!`� S�S+t��
i'1b N- pwilap 5�-
I�oxv�de� �trn. ��pj
�51) '�q�' ��E
PA� � � .-
96/:2/2991 11:44 6514834949 JILL BEA�J PAGE 93
' ��� ���
� I wouid like to appeal the decision of the Board of Zoning Appeals Hearing from the meetin� on
May 29, 2001. The boazd voted 3-4 to approve a setback variance at 1236 Virginia.
I own the home aY 1244 Virginia which is just North of the proposed site. The Mitchel]'s aze
planning to build a house a mere 48 inches from the south wall of my home. (The properry iine
is just inches from my home.) I u111 already lose the light, air and general use of my 2 South
�vindows and attic access window, but if their new house is built I S ft forward, I wilI aiso have
only limited use of my Southwest livingroom window. Building a house so close and forward of
my house will definitely impact the quality of my life in a home that I have worked very hard to
improve. I also feei it will have a severe negative impact on the value and the resale pntential of
mY ProPeTi�'•
I feel thai if this house is built 15 ft forward I will lose significant use of my home and feel
overtaken by the adjoining property_ Mrs. Mitchell opetates a home-based daycare which I think
wil] on3y make matters worse.
i don't think there is anything that I can do about the houses being only 48 inches apart, but to
aUow it to be built so far forward of my home, I feel will incre�e the damage done to my
property value.
� tn addition, the gound in this area is mostly peat bog and I run very concbmed aboat a hoase
being built so close to my foundation. The area on the West side of Virsinia has no houses
because of this reason and the townhomes at the end of Virginia were builY with appro�cimately
61 pylons under the foundation to prevent it from sinking. I believe there is already deterioration
of that foundation and also the foundation of the house that the Mitchell's cumntly own. The
stability of my foundation and the new• foundation on ihis type of soil is of great concem to me.
Enclosed azc pictures of the front of my house and the view looking out of my front window
showing how �ranting this variance will limit the use of the Southwest window of my home in
addition to already losing the use of the South windows.
Thank you for your consideration in this matter.
Sincerely,
'I�,,�t��
Michael P. Pfalz
�
95l12l2091 11:44 65148�4948
1 �'�� �:� � `'�1 '=� >
11ynhu.ilda�le.._. At�� �
\ �� D'Z la' � ��R�
.- d o
; n
�i�•r.,,
� ---� � `�z
a �� - tu _ _ +✓ � �.7
� f : � ;� ; .t iu
3 �� n, � n� ��(l
J I � \ _ � �
1 l .. � _...�rD`\
I ; " `.`�""� '''
� ' �; �� 1j`��;
- : ,
�� �-
r .,
' - �
�� �� `-
�+ v�,
;i .� �
� U
•��
. x �r y .!�
` � ` c �
: �
` �� z
s c � -
� � V r c
...-� -----. �-,�----�: �-�--�.. �_._.-
� r
� �
e. � �. J
,,, r �� -
C 4 � �
q .. � ,
1
}• y C�.
i r
v, �
� �1
� ��
�
T �. �
� �a � �—c��e+— �
��
JILL BEAtJ
;:
;j
!`
��
��
�
,
�;�
1 _T" �
i�
! �
_I�
,
-C l.. �
V'1�•
T
( ( �lj
W ��
�'D
�x u
_� �, _. .
; �r.
r., .L
�i n r
I'
��\
" a t �
�' (1 ( ` V �
! i *n '�' \ c �w
I ?^ 2 4
N '� H
I I � � � y
� y 2 F., 2
`' � ` 1�°_ c '
�
w
l
r �
T-��i��
;
�
�
�
',
��
�
�
N
\ ��
���'� ��3.
,� s -
w s
�� �
� ��
� �
c �� ��
� � + e \ •�-� V �� � � •� P
I .l ` �-- -- --- - � �,
� � . � � �f, � a
� p
� � � I
�' Y
� � 6-<.=�^'_i
(y' g,4, 4
d � f T c.� i
I �' < F �� '' -1
'I �'� S i �,
�
L �;--� - ---'_ -`�` --- -� �' ^ �..�
�1,� � � �
� Ci' T� �
t•' �
;
'o
a
�,
�
U
��
�
a
L
�
PRGE 04
b" g N �
�
�f��-
�
<: � �- �
� u� �.
9
g a
3 � --�
�� �
�-� 3 Q
f 6 � � ,
�. � ��
r���
S' �
��
� -s
P �
� � {
� + �
� � �
T r' �
� ���
� �
�� � �
F .�
� � �
� 'C �
.
g 0
M1 �
� �
p � R
� Q C
� � �
o , &
� � �
3 .
1
�
F y '
- - �
.....� , � � � �
a s
�: r
., r_. 4 .. �.i vv�
:.:4 .. .��_ •..
,_� •r�1+ ,.s �.. � �, � � �.�
..'.,yr •. : :^ c ' .. �a
�� • c .� - 1
.� ..��� e ,,.r�I
..:. j ;,.
' Ys� .
,� s . .,,
' .. � .. �
v
> . � �' • , rv� �'�i � r
y�� f �`
. Y
r :: {'� � �: :�
.. f ; _�.;
� �. �� T .r : ;
. . .. ., r Y-v..r+C .,
.. , • • � .• 4 `�� �
g}
±� a .�� ,� ._ �
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS STAFF REPORT
TYPE OF APPLICATION: Minor Variance FILE #: O1-189209
APPLICANT:
HEARING DATE:
LOCATION:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
PLANNING DISTRICT:
PRESENT ZONING:
REPORT DATE:
DEADLIATE FOR ACTION:
STEVEN T. MITCHELL
May 29, 2001
1236 VIRGINIA STREET
T. B. SOMERS ADDITION TO ST. PAUL SUB7 TO ALLEY
LOTS 25 AND LOT 26
6
RM-2
May 18, 2001
August 14, 2001
ZONING CODE REFERENCE: 61.101
$Y: John Hardwick
DATE RECETVED: May 8, 2001
A. PURPOSE: A front setback variance in order to build a new single family home. The
reqnired front seYback is 49 feet and a-34-foot setback is proposed, for a variance of 15 feet.
B. SITE AND AREA CONDITIONS: This parcel currentiy consists of two 40 by 140-foot
lots. The existing house at 1236 Virginia is located on L,ot 25 and the gazage for the house is
located on Lot 26. There is access to-the gazage from both the street and the aIley.
Surrounding Land Use: Primarily one- and two-family homes.
C. BACKGROUND: The applicant currently lives at 1236 Virginia and would like to construct
a new house next to the existing one.
D. FINDINGS:
1. The properry in question cannot be put to a reasonable use under the smict provisions of
tJ7e code.
�
)
�
, The previous owner of this property constructed the garage 30 feet from the alley because
,_,_,_,,.,,_,�,_„�,,,,,,,�,,,, Of it1E dlffeI'eriCE,,,�l,j� C„�CV„�tJ,O„���,B� ,aTM„r� the lnt Thic limitc thr hnil`lahl �rP� T __,___�___�
for a new house without encroaching into the required front setback. The applicant is
proposin� to construct a new home on the lot with the garage and to rent the existing
home on the other lots for about five yeazs. The applicant needs the income from renting �
Page I of 3
� ��-< «s
�
File # O1-189209
Staff Report
the existing house in order to afford to build the new house. Ae eventually plans on
demolishing the existing older home and to recombine the two lots. In order to avoid
moving the existing garage which involve considerable expense, the applicant is
requesting this front yard setback variance.
2. The plight of the land owner is due to circunuta�2ces urzique to this property, and these
circumstances were not created by the Zand owner.
The ]ocation of the existing garage on the site as weil as the average setback of the other
homes on this block aze circumstances that were not created by the applicant.
�
3. The proposed varia�:ce is in keeping with tlie spii•it arad intent of the code, and is
consistent with the health, safety, comfort, mor arzd welfare of the inhabitants of the
City of St. Paul.
The proposed variance will allow the applicant to construct a new single family home to
eventually replace the old house existing on the property. Presently, the two lots making
up this parcel are combined under one Property Identification Number as a single taac
parcel. The applicant needs to split these t«�o lots before he can build a new house and he
will need to recombine the two lots afrer the old house is removed. Provided that the
applicant obtains the necessary subdivision approval, the proposed variance is in keeping
with the spirit and intent of the code.
4. The proposed variance wilt rtot impair an adeqt�ate supply of light and air to adjacent
pr•opert�>, nor will it alter the essential character of the surrounding m�ea or unreasonably
dimi�aislz established property values within the surr•ounding area.
Other than the front yard set6ack, the proposed new home will meet all of the setback
requirements. The average seTback of the homes along this block ranges from 31 feet to
55 feet. The praposed setback of 34 feet falls ���thin the this range and will not be out of
keeping «+ith the character of the area. This block of Virginia Street is a dead end road
and the opposite side of the block is undeveloped land. The proposed variance will not
significantly affect the supply of light or air to adjacent properties.
�
5. The vm ifgr�anted, woulcl not pernait a»y i{se that is not perntitted zinder the
provisions of the code for the property in the district where the affected land is located,
nor would if atter or� change the zoning ttisn classiftcation of the property.
A single family home is a perin�tted use in this zonin� district. The proposed variance, if
granted, will not change or alter the zoning classification of the property.
Page 2 of 3
File # Ol-]89209
Staff Report
6. The reguest for variance is not based primarily orz a desire to increase the value or
income potential of the parcel of land.
The applicant states that his primary desire is to provide a new home for his family.
E. DISTRICT COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION: As of the date of this report, we have not
received a recommendation from District 6.
F. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Based on findings 1 through 6, staff recommends
approval of the variance, subject to the condition that the applicant obtains subdivision
approval prior to construction of the new home.
Page 3 of 3
�
�
�
OI-ff(oS
�����
District 6 Planning Council ��
-, � . _... :
1061 Rice St.
St. Paul, MN 55117
Phone 651 488-4485
Fax 651 488-0343
May 24, 2001
Mr. John Hardwick
LIEP
350 St. Peter St.
Suite 300
Si. Paul, MN 55102
Dear John,
The District 6 P�anning Council received a request from Steven Mitchell, 1236 Virginia
St. for a front setback variance that would allow for the construction of a new house.
� The required setback is 49 feet and a 34 foot setback is proposed, for a variance of 15
feet.
On Wednesday, May 23, 2001 the Land Use Task Force of the District 6 Planning
Council approved this request.
If you have any questions, please call me at 651-488-4485.
Sincerely,
�� �
Kathy Co e�
Executive Director
cc: Steven Mitchell
�
APPLICATION FOR ZOIVING VARIANCE
OFFICE OF LICENSE, INSPECTIONS, AND
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
350 St. Peier Sfreet, Suite 300
Saint Paul, MN SS102-I SIO
65I-266-9008
APPLICANT
Name S i �v� �✓ � i'1 i 1'-lf i:.Z-t- Company
Address 1 �3�% Vt ' iN�V} S;.
City 5�' ���- Statei'l^� Zip ;)5��7 DaytimePhone�$/
Property interest of applicaM (owner, contract purchaser, etc.) ��w v�
Name of owner (if
PROPERTY AddresslLocation N��T ccT ni ; p_rif o F JJ-3C Ui/1:� ^jr.� $�,
Legaldescription 1.�� Sa.�1 -y'_5 ,/}(�Ol7�;nl ��cJ .`�i ,�'�r.�L �� j '�-�
(attach addi6onal sheet if necessary)
5 ; 1n•i�+-1`
"s Lof size �� � /�E% Present Zoning �t�'1 ��Presenf Use �1 �'%' � �- � .
ProposedUse 5i^''r�-�? L�.� ' SlN�< �+g+"7/�� �''.:�:L�C��L
1. Variance(s) requested: F�vT 5 � i�.'�K ?'C lj y' � ti L`.-.1�-t= �% t $`-�-'� �'
�r- y 9'
2:- What physical characteristics of the property prevent iTs being used for any of the permiYted uses in your zone?
�Z:- r.J � s i ��
(topography, size and shape of lot, soil conditions, etc.) <<; i q���,1SC i�,..q a.;- i.; i ri� i_.•"
(.-fl`nJr(ri? i-..i.'iilL.i ..idU.1) f.+c�'i ��:flv:ii �i.cY �'G'in�l i'•'i�l=. �:�.4;.��:�_
:.1�'Ti n�i�[_i l'� yr �t::.l: t3'-1�l.cJ'-�.'• /�,.J� C_:i�-�( f r fi-J^
1�� _IY ,IJ
3. Explain how the strict application of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance would result in peculiar or exceptionaf
practical difficulties or exceptional undue hardships. r. '�
`'�iT'� i rFc h�c'r�tl�bc Sc'� ' 94t �7= �7
. A�nJ.7 ci:.C.`}ila�L' :�P cXt$?rNo- L'�r�f'-'f�-E' f}N? /��rfft�•+'t. c�v./yL� .� i 1YCLl S. (ic=
r c`,�r �^��.'�'� ! w`lic:�l) j i%iJl}4�� TU �:: j/l/ jtrL ��t'L�l�� �"�i (
, l:�Su".>� 4�C���L f�' {!.'�7.'c lJ ���I i. v j'�iS .5 t l�='
4._- Explain how the granting of a variance will not be a substantial detriment
to the public good or a substantial impairment of the intent and �uroose
Tjt� S� i r �'+tlt T r9%r7
w �� S r`�« u��C ^� �t /t�'�1 c !�+}€�`t'c7' cPF i7/i
S�.=Z � r ri �i-�✓ �:JTrr'1ZS 6i�c�-f t� U e✓ ���-�-�lC.
.�^•�7 Ju•u� !} �JckdJ �v0 �T�xZi i�i-c`R� IS �.r✓c
oi ff-(,=P f�j.�N CoCs�L �t-U�.f '�'1�YJyaF'i`
taCh additional sheets if needed.l
CASHIERS USE ONLY
�
� '�� � � / �__--
ApplicanYs
Date J �r�JO j
o�--tfto5
57� u��, r, � rc�ret-�
1 �-3c. v � Ft-�N.� 5 �
5T ��;� :.,-, .•J :� � ir �
T.G. 5�,�,�fy Aor�ir/�>> Yc:.
5T . i�)�+t, tor� �S � �E
_ fJ14 �1jF_� ��JD -1- zy- /��J �J�P.4USC
_ �W:- F�.�}D C}i[.e.�f(��Q ) N'll R DD� i� c.+i ; c� 04 Fi '.r•'v7 i=�L' . Fc.:..� J
�
1`� . �'6 ��- �M:aCj-] `�i'� i_n{c.aSIU"i� Aiv? i{{t f�u��.`�7/a.�. Cc::�O
c j�."'Ic ✓i�fic�+�'I.J ie/� i_,svK��) :..� �r, .�.,,.vi.�
J1`/LL. C��-,�T ,/� QGNjil�t=i2(}fj=� Ai,nc��i
' O� MoNC�L t.�oY T!U 1L=NjIGrI rit�r uJ =_ /y� � ti.�t=
�
�
�rc:. /JL=��r��(�1[�('�_ .'4.IU'D �-`�l: p:� �-(�<L ��=1 I
r3�+ /ia�z�i.Jl; ,g /iv.�,ti i.;` _ CU}tiT ci:�T" T1f-L 9�.ir-v1 Ul�
. � ���� ��l Gl;�l C �v�!'71�L� VV�. C✓}N /c'.L -4f �' c�L �
C�Ui� 1=x�5?"�N\Y �fc.•� �- r4 ./•iil�'='I/iEk U�' �L�l�i _
�— I G -�;11� 1 —��i � �.�; ;-� � i�� T� <l,s� 0�—+..� ..� T'tf �-
T
� � t v9
t 7 :�� 'c f�L ` (7� �
_ LcTS (.i1jLI< ���Tli�� , _ _
- tr+� �r�sr����- �:cy�., — ,v-.I c��' T1+ �✓+r�.�L�
' � 5 W 7�� +..J:= pji=.�C � T✓i �� Tltti h�'>^) �' C ii:jt. '�}i ✓i .✓
!� �
.. y! I j�L � L( i.:l� r' U{ � u- L Y � 1Zi9 Iv t_ uJt U�� !1'1 d�} /C �_'
TiA= i �Rf-✓+�� ii ,�f-��_� :� j� / i� /[ ii.i .9 3 :-n c:: � r�
�'� 5� � �+ � � z r�,.�- � .� L< . .�.� � ; � � ,� � �= FL-+-�
�
�� A�� ���;{� �,E-�d � 8� c��i.�-JC�� ;t: rr�
— �,.�irH�.v rrw P�i,�cl� �},a,�.=rz,�G� 5c'c ��iZ Pr�,.o�StY� 5 ti-r_
i /3A4c c;f�, �'�/ � u.;��:Lp K=�f t� � m. •5i �'ArTt��=2 � A�--tC _
-_ �� �}I✓;n1 �- F j�ft_jj�eMi=�i JJ Tl�i= /JC��=K ��n'4 'UJl �
�
�.
`I 3F_ h.q P�IT i L ��z-l�I'� i!h= /z-L'S i ,'� .� 'rl�-u {{a.+��=5 e ni
� � Yl-�,= lj4:Cz: �.✓ .�..v _.Pr.vin.J_
U
"`7 I �% V i-'"� ✓�I l �CN-LZ.C.
���_ �
dI-l�g�a�
�
��
3 '"
� b �
�:.
N '
<,. i
� c
� e S '
z AS
�r s
Y'_ :�v
W r,. �
_-�� �-Z-�p-<
��
0
��
,.=
s�
�
�, � ` � - � G .�
v [ O
-- �•,� •
--- - -�- - - - -- -- -• •;,< ......._._
� � � � � � R�� � �
u E t �'i
v��� �
�
-C' {- -j'}i F �` BL�
j � a � `;��
I ' ° i%S
— '�' ' '� c +`_. _ .
os f.�
K ��P
� �{J�O
yL1 4 � �. -� e n b' JO:.
� � c L x�.�p :
a S � ey,
r.•
x
�
y
I � � I �
tl •� '1 � r
y � � � �
� � c 2
� <.. r r �
r 3 t 1
c� o � D z
r.,
O
�
-{ <P, � r
� G'i
�� � J
U�
7�
�
rr>-1 R',
.n £ G�L
� s ��� a Q���
��� � �'00 x
� � ,, � � y �^ 1 � E
R a°L o �`�w b �f
eC °dd:�o� �
�
_ m (- r D
�
A
C
r,
E
s
K
3
2
l
�
2 -+'
�
�
�
�
�
�
c
G
�
� �
, C v
't �� O
rn � �
� z � =`a � -- 4 � .,�:, --• �:-
n -S cs •
�r �
�
C„
-Z / --.
�l�
Na �Ion� e:�
�
�
V� D ����
_' ��'
1D
e
� � � ; s ..0 � � ` �``7
c,� (`( --• '� I
�� � ;'��' �` � �
� � .. ' � _ '. \ � �
� �a�rr� \ ^
, ; ____
� � � G
� i f' �
� � � � '•;1,�
: � !7:
_ �: n ,-:
_ � ;� _:
r- ..
'L ' `J �-
�`; : ,�
�
u
�� � � � �t
i
�
, � c �
,� � �
� � � � Z
v � v� ` ;�
� � c
��
� � j �
� � � S
o' �a h �
' V '` `
r �� �
�, 1`
`
�
z
�
�
i �
��� �� �
2 O
-p �p —
� ` O
� �, n s
Ci � �
oh�i r.
� W ! ,s
� '
I T �•,i
1 �
� � � � � � �_
;� � { ��
� � �. : � 2 �'
i ri Q?� .
i � "� �
� ��
� ��, � � � '— L -��
; i _ ��---- �
i � ,� � � !
j �: � � � �
i I. ,
' �, , _v
,-: _-:__-� � _,.
�� � �� ,
i a ' � ; cf; �
; �' ; F� , �,
: i i
I � � V i
i� � r
— — � — �
1 -- - -- G ":
`t i� �� �..�.
� `; � �°
4, �� r
- �z
� ��
�E r
��o
��
.� r
Ur�-, --
n C d
-b Ct. Z
� �
o �' �
z�
�� -�
� z`
�
�1
c=
Z 4 �
Ya�
���
F � y
�� L
p� G
�o�
L��
�� z
`,G A
a � c�
��
Ul
0
3
�
0
-{
n II
G �
_� G � �
j
<� � �
L` �r
�
�
T
�
�
�
a
S
L
C
or-(t�S
�
r. �' ;.
`c. . o
'. - i`
_ �,
_
�
�
o�- t1 �5
PROPERTY WITHIN 100 FEET OF PARCEL: 1236 VIRGINIA STREET
�
►�
Z
�
w
�-
�
w
�
Z
O
H
C�
z
�
�
�
N
PREPARED BY:
LIEP
---� �
� � I `;
;
, ,
_�� ,
Q ;-�. '
� ;
�
❑'
�
�
�
i. SUNRAY-BATTLECREER-HIGHWOOD
2. HAZEL PARK HADEN-PROSPERITY HILLCREST
3. WEST SIDE _
4. DAYTON'S BLUFF
5. PAYNE-PIIl�.I,EN
6. NORTH END
7. THOMAS-DALE
8. SUMh4IT-UNTVERSTTI'
9. WEST SEVENTH
10. COMO
� 11. HAMLINE-MIDWAX
12. ST. ANTHONY PARK
13. MERRIAM PARK-LEXINGTO HAMLINE-SNELLING H AMLINE
______.,,.._., . .__.,___. 14. -�'31vA�C�E�TO�E�P,T�17 --�--,_.__.�--
1S. HIGHLAND
`" 16. SUMMIT HIT.L
17. DOWN`fOWN �
i ��'���� ���� ��I-189.��y��
r CITTZEN PARTTCIPATIQN PLANNING DISTRICTS
01=lIb�
CITY OF SAINT PAUL
S BOARD OF ZONITv'G APPEALS RESOLUTION
ZONING FILE NUMBER 01
DATE: May 29, 2001
WHEREAS, Steven T. Mitchell has applied for a vaziance from the strict appiication of the
provisions of Section 61.101 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code pertaining to the required front
setback of a new single family home in the RM-2 zoning district at 1236 Virginia Street; and
WHEREAS, the Saint Pau] Board of Zoning Appeals conducted a public hearing on May 29,
2001 pursuant to said application in accordance with the requirements of Section 64.203 of the
Legislative Code; and
WHE3tEAS, the Saint Paul Board of Zoning Appeals based upon evidence presented at the
public hearing, as substantially reflected in the minutes, made the following findings of fact:
1. The property ir1 question cannot be put to a reasonable use unde�• the strict provisions of the
code.
� The previous owner of this property constructed the garage 30 feet from the alley because of
the difference in elevation between the alley and the lot. This limits the buildable area for a
new house without encroaching into the required front setback. The applicant is proposing to
construct a new home on the lot with the garage and to rent the existing home on the other
lots for about five years. The applicant needs the income from renting the existin� house in
order to afford to build the new house. He eventually plans on demolishing the existing older
home and to recombine the two lots. In order to avoid moving the existing gara�e which
involve considerable expense, the applicant is requestin� this front yard setback variance.
2. Tfte plight of tJze lmid owner is dzce to circuntstances unique to this property, and these
circumstances were not created by the larrd owner.
The location of the existing garage on the site as well as the avera�e setback of the other
homes on this block are circumstances that were not created by the applicant.
3. The pr•oposed variance is in keeping with the spirit and intent of the code, and is consistent
tivith the health, safety, comfort, morals and welfare of the inhabitants of the City of St. Paul.
The proposed variance will allow the applicant to construct a new single family home to
eventually replace the old house existing on the property. Presently, the two lots making up
this parcel are combined under one Property Identification Number as a single tax parcel.
The applicant needs to split these two lots before he can build a new house and he will need
� to recombine the two lots after the old house is removed. Provided that the applicant obtains
the necessary subdivision approval, the proposed variance is in keeping with the spirit and
intent of the code.
Page 1 of 3
File # 01-189209
Resolution
4. The proposed variaTice will not impair an adequate supply of Zight and air to adjacent
property, nor will it alter the essential character of the surrounding area or unreasonably
dinrinish established property values within the surrounding area.
Other than the front yard setback, the proposed new home will meet all of the setback
requirements. The average setback of the homes along this block ranges from 31 feet to 55
feet. The proposed setback of 34 feet falls within the this range and will not be out of
keeping with the character of the area. This block of Virginia Street is a dead end road and
the opposite side of the block is undeveloped land. The proposed variance will not
significantly affect the supply of light or air to adjacent properties.
S. The vnr ifgranted, would not pern:it any use that is not permitted under the provisions
of the code for the property in the district where the affected la�id is located, nor would it
alter or change the zoning district classification of the property.
A single family home is a permitted use in this zoning district. The proposed variance, if
granted, �vill not change or aiter the zoning classification of the property.
6. The request fot• variance is not based prinzarily on a desire to increase the value or income
` poterttial of the parcel of lond.
The applicant states that his primary desire is to provide a new home for his family.
NOR', THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Saint Paul Boazd of Zoning Appeals that the
provisions of Section 61.101 are hereby waived to allow a 34-foot front setback; subject to the
condition that the appiicant obtains subdivision approval prior to construction of the new home;
In order to construct a new single family home on property located at 1236 Virginia Street; and
legall}� described as T. B. Somers Addirion To St. Paul Subj To Ailey Lots 25 And Lot 26; in
accordance with the applica2ion for variance and the site plan on file with the Zoning
Administrator.
MOVED BY : Wilson
SECONDED BY : Duckstad
�
�
r�T r
. _ . _____ --- arr - z � _.,...m.�,m.___...__�_____..�-_._..-..,-___,_—_—_
AGAINST: 3
MAILED: May 30, 2001
�
Page 2 of 3
01-(l�S
Fiie # 01-189209
Resolution
�
TIME LIMIT: No order of the Board of Zoning Appeals permitting the erection or
alteration of a building or off-street parking facility shall be valid for a
period longer than one year, unless a building permit for such erection or
alteration is obtained within such period and such erection or alteration is
proceeding pursuant to the terms of such permit. The Board of Zoning
Appeals or the City Council ma} grant an extension not to exceed one year.
In granting such estension, the Board of Zoning Appeals may decide to hold
a pubiic hearing.
APPEAL: Decisions of the Board of Zoning Appeals are final subject to appeal to the
City Council withi� 15 days by anyone affected by the decision. Building
permits shall not be issued after an appeal has been filed. If permits have
been issued before an appeal has been filed, then the permits are suspended
and construction shall cease until the City Council has made a final
determination of the appeal.
CERTIFICATION: I, the undersigned Secretary to the Board of Zoning Appeals for the City of
Saint Paul, Minnesota, do hereb}' certify that I have compared the foregoing
copy with the original record in my office; and find the same to be a true and
� correct copy of said originai and of the fvhole thereof', as based on approved
minutes of the Saint Paul Board of Zoning Appeals meeting held on May 29,
2001 and on record in the Office of License Inspection and Environmental
Protection, 350 St. Peter Street, Saint Paul, Minnesota.
SAINT PAUL BOARD OF ZO\I\G APPEALS
Debbie Crippen
Secretary to the Board
�
Page 3 oT 3
MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
CITY COUNCIL CAAMBERS, 330 CITY HALL �
ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA, MAY 29, 2001
PRESENT: Mmes. Maddox, and Morton; Messrs. Courtney, Duckstad, Faricy, Galies, and Wilson
of the Board of Zoning Appeais; Mr. Warner, Assistant Ciry Attorney; Mr. Hardwick
and Ms. Crippen of the Office of License, Inspection, aad Environmental Protection.
ABSENT None
The meeting was chaired by Joyce Maddox, Chair.
Steven T. Mitchell (NO1-189209) 1236 Virainia Street• A front setback variance in order
to build a new single family home. The required front setback is 49 feet and a 34-foot setback is
proposed, for a variance of 15 feet.
Mr. Hardwick showed siides of the site and reviewed the staff report with a recommendation for
approval, subject to the condition that the applicant obtains subdivision approval prior to construction
of the new home.
There was no correspondence received in opposition to the variance request.
One letter was received in support of the variance from District 6.
The applicant STEVEN T. MITCHELL, 1236 Virginia Street, was present. There was opposition �
present at the hearing. Mr. Mitchell stated he had nothing to add.
Mike Ross, 1244 Virginia Street, stated that the south property line was four inches from the south
wall of his house. Mr. Ross stated that if Mr. Mitchell's garage was not placed correcfly. Mr. Ross
had a bid to move the garage and rebuild the crumbling retaining wall for a cost of $6,300. He stated
that if Mr. Mi[chell moved the gara�e where it should be he could place the new house where it should
be accordins to the Zoning Code. Mr. Ross stated he was not opposed to the new house, however, if
the garage was not moved the house and the garage would be too close to his home.
Mr. Duckstad questioned whether Mr. Ross had spoken to Mr. Mitche2L Mr. Ross stated he had not.
Mr. Mitchell stated that he did not know if the bid had included having to excavate three feet of earth
behind the retaining wall. Mr. Mitchell stated that he would have a hard time getting into [he garage
because of the height of the alley. He stated that if the bid Mr. Ross had did not include the excavation
of three feet of dirt the price would be higher.
Ms. Maddox questioned whether Mr. Mitchell had spoken to Mr. Ross about the project. Mr.
Mitchell replied that he had mentioned that they were goino to build a house there and would need a
variance for the front of the house. He stated that Mr. Ross did not say anything then.
___,�Mr �Wilson_questioned whether_Mz,_A'Iitcl�eJ,1fS_nejgY�boZ_had be�n_p��s�ntatIhes?is.tricime�Ting__MI_—_.
Mitchell stated that Mr. Ross had not been there.
Mr. Courmey questioned Mr. Mitchell whether the ne«� house Gvould be blocking Mx. Ross's view. �
O(-lt(t5"
� File #/ O1-189209
Minutes OS-29-01
Page Two
Mr. Mitchell stated that he was unsure if his neighbor's smalt side window on the south side would be
blocked.
Mr. Courtney questioned whether Mr. Mitchell would be willing to move the garage if the bid were
correct and included the excavation necessary. Mr. Mitchell stated he could look at it, however, the
driveway would have to be re-sloped. He stated that he had enough tilt now and he would not be able
to use the garage in the winter.
Hearing no further testimony, Ms. Maddox closed the public portion of the meeting.
Mr. Wilson moved to approve the variance and resolution based on findings 1 through 6, subject to the
condition that the applicant obtains subdivision approval prior to construction of the new home.
Mr. Duckstad seconded the motion, which passed on a roll call vote of 4-3(Courtney, Galles,
Maddox).
� Submitted by: Approved by:
John Hardwick
Jon Duckstad, Secretary
�
o I- ��c�
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
The Saint Paul City Council will conduct a public hearing on Wednesday, 3uly ll,
2001, at 5:30 p.m., City Council Chambers, 3rd Floor City Hall, to consider the
appeal of Michael Pfalz regarding the Board of Zoning Appeals decision granting
a front yard setback variance in order to construct a new single family home at
1236 Virginia Street.
Dated: June 15, 2001
Nancy Anderson
Assistant City Council Secretary
*�**�**�** -COhB'I.JOURNRL- �*�**�*� DqTE JUN-15-2001 �� TIME 07�37 � P.01
01'!!�S
MODE = MEMp2Y TRRNSMISSION
FSLE F�.= 204
NO- CQ1 FlHOLNTWK STRTION IJfiMIF/
TEl_Pti�lE FD.
001 OK <01> LEGFlL LEDC'aER
STRRT=JUN-15 07�36 ENU=JICJ-15 07�37
,. i�%�%
{ity of Saint Paul -
�� -City Cauncil - �� - 651 266 �74- �k
'.: illiiil�
CITY OF SAINT PAUL
OFFICE OF THE CTTY COUNCII,
�'ACSTNIILE TRANSMISSION
COVERSHEET
TO: �
FROM:
FAX #:
�: �'�=�- l.�-�-°
��
DA'1'E: r�i,A� IS a-oo �
Note: FacsSmile operator, please deliver this transmission to the above
addressee. If yon did not receive all of the pages in good condition,
please advise danie Lafrenz at (651) 266-8560 at your
earliest coovenieuce.
Thank you_
NUNIBER OF PAGES (INCLUDTNG'1'HIS PA.GE): �
CTTY AALL TFID2D FLOOR SAIN1' PAUG �1NESOTA 55102
�
pnnuaonleryn'eLpsGa.
i
95/i2/2001 11:44 5514934948
APPLICA710N FOft APPENL
JILL BEf��d
Depor7merzt of P/anirinP anO,E'roxo�nic Develoymen!
)'unLrg Srction
]30D CIt}•13a.7Annex
15 H'esr Faurth Srreer
Sornt Paul, M!\' SSIO2
26G-6589
APPELIAMT I Name_1`(]ochnel �. �a�;�
�
Address t2�1�1 �rq, ,p,
City��� S1.�,iZip�(L'��aytime phonel�►-Q$'J•58�
PROpER7Y
LO C A710N
parE e2
������
Zon;ng FI'e Name Stcvch T, M�� fchall
Addre>s«ocation_.4�� Y«��.,, � St. �. rnr,. S5v�']
TYPE OF APPEAL Appbca�;on is hereDy metle 9or en appea� to the
= Board of Zoning Appe�ls !N City Coun�il
�nc�- the prov�sions of Chaptor b4, Sec:ion �1 _. Par�graph 1 DI of the ZoNng Code, !o
appeai a decir.on made by the_;�, Pp,wt 6Qg f 1 ;,,a A�y �penl�
�n 2g, Lt�i Flle number pl�tSg2o4
(7at +d ecrs, o n)
� GROUNDS FOR APpEA�: Expiain why you feel there has been an error �n eny requirement,
� permd dec',sion or re'usa� made by an a�m(nigtra2rvt CtFUai, or an error in f�ct, peocedure or
� I., fmding made by th° Board o! Zonmg Appeala o� the planning Commisswn.
�rPlea�se. See a�ls�cr,e5,, shrrts "�.,cl�i�y eXqio�nti�i=n, pv,otvs, anl provose.� aie �t•n,
I m�,S,�e,� +a sho.�u rny hom` sr, r�,in,b„n � propoaA new home.
Atteoh atl7�'�ona! sneet d necessa0?
ApphcanYs signature�j��rYblfL Date�____ City s�e
�,t� M.bean tm��n�,a'� s�s+e.)
nb N• Dun�aP SF.
1'�oxv� �le � Nrn . 'S6u 3
(Lsi) 44�-484q
96!?2/2091 11:44 6514834B48 JILL BEAhJ
PAGE 03
V�'���Z�
I would like to appeal the decision of tbe Board of Zoning Appeals Hearing from the meeting on
May 29, 2001. The boazd voted 3-4 to approve a setback variance at 1236 Vizginia.
I own the home az 1244 Virgxnis which is just North of the proposed site. The Mitchell's aze
planning to build a house a mere 48 inches from the south wall of my home. (The property line
is just inches ftom my home.) T will already lose the light, air and genecat use of my 2 South
windows amd attic access window, but if their new house is buiit I S ft forvuard, I will also have
only limited use of my Southwest livinp�oonti window. Building a house so close and forvvard of
my house wilt de5nitely impact the quality of my life ia a home that I have worked very hard to
improve. I als6 feei it will have a severe negauve impact on the calue and the resale potentia! of
�Y ProP�Y•
I feel that i�f th,is house is built 15 ft forwazd I will lose significar�t use of my home and feel
overtaken by the adjoining property. Mrs. Mitcheli operates a home-based dsycare which I think
will only maY.e mattErs worse.
i don't think there is anything that I can do about the houses being only 48 inches apart, but to
aUow it to be buili so far fonvard of my home, I feel will increase the damage done to my
properiy va(ue.
In addition, the sround in this area is mostly peat bog and I am very conc6rnerl about a house
being built so close W my foundation. I'he area oa the West side of Virginia has no houses
because of this reason and the townhomes at the end of Virginia were built with approximately
61 pylons under the fou�dation to prevent it from sinking. I bclieve there is already deterioration
of that fowidarion and also the foundation of the house that the Mitchell's cumntly own. The
stability of my founidation and the new £oundation on this type of soil is of great concezn to me.
Hnclosed are pictures of the front of my house and the view looking out of my Pront wiadow
showing how gaixring this vareance will limit the vse of the Southwest window of my home in
addition to already losing the use of the South windows.
"fhank you for youx consideration in this matter.
Sincerely,
'���� ,� y,
Michacl P. P£aiz72t
3
a
n
�
�-
3
�
�
06/12l2001 11:44 6514894848
JILL BEAN
M < .�
'" k s
�, �
�c �e � �
1.�
�
.�
�
�
�t�
���
�.;�
�'I
O !'� � :- >
e.._. ftt�„� 3
t-` r�-` �.�
� ^5 0
�---� z
� � �' .0 �b
� .� �: t su
n � �� ��
;
� \
' , rRSfb..\. e � � +
� ;--' , ,:u �� t -� _
� y, ``Y 7��
�� ._.
�..
� �.
�G cI `-
!'; �,
.� �
,�
z m �r w J �
. ; '1 � �
' � i
` � c Z
s c
v ` C C
� �I
�
� � � �
� , �
�; r � _
4 � � ^
f �
* �i r
v, t'
�
� �
V h
. �'_ x �
-` � — �
cn r .t,
f.� r, �
�
�
r
a
��Y�
,/
�,
�
�
0
-�
�`
N
��
I T _Y� � e
� .�.
._.t. ____ �n� �r3
I A ^ ' �] � �� � s & •
��� � �� �� �<ffi
�' z �` i v � , ��
.- � ' f �. o�l l� ..a,�.�
' S�a
� `� ' ��I
� �__���.
k ° 6__ ._ ---.- .— -
� I
� 1 ,/
� � ,
l; �
� �
o, e ;�'�; 4
+' i .. � -t
�� , F�� y ` , ,,
_ -� � �, �^
.. �� I y
j ._.. _ __. � __._, � :
�
� l � r �`' �^ i+ 'A
t�L
;
0
�
k
�
w
h
a
L
r
- i ?'
�p
e
�
e�
� �
PAGE ea
0� -���)
g3 �
��A �
�¢��
�f� �
<:��-�$.
t,� 'v
$ v � ��
3 � _.a
�� �
�� 3 ��
� � � ��
i���
� �
� �.
� � �
� F_ ..G
Q�
�
���
�¢I�
�
� g �
�. � �
.� a
� ,�-
� � �
�� �
` �
��
�
p L c C 16
` Q C
a r T
3 , �
3 � -
1
.,....
�
. �'�
�....
• .. �R.
��J � '4 � � ..
? . ,
. f . A � .
�
:
� � �� �
. .
. , _ . .:. . :v'�,:�
,�
,,. ;�.
. .. , : ,,
' .• . .
�
�.k . . '�ML ' ..
r �' , t ..
` l.
. ' ^ ���•' i���
rv. y, . .. ��
't`M Y,,
. .Y"� , ' �.+ `�,�M
', ' .. .
`, °:5 �,, . .
��4. � �
a .' • :l.�^+ ,f�
� ��� .. .. . ,.
^ T yy � . .� . . ... �.�3C��,,JI.
.�;�: �'--�'. �
. . �M'., �j'� �
• : �� 1 'AN , �� , . �� �' �
� .. . ,'��' Sk?.���{ , � .
. •. � �. �:��' •, .
� �"�rt�t,�+sa� ," "�'•_-.��_.�."°"� yii. �
�� ���' '`"�
''^ '` �
_ � n
�.���' � ,��
� r K �
'^ � �;���� �; �
,
,,� ,F.�' ��,:,,'',
r ,� ' .�"
,, ��r:i�x ,
1- 1 `
� f � . . �� ,�
i.. „ �,�'�.�x.a.:
wi..� k ..
.. ,y[}'�ii �
� �' • �' �
bl-�I�eS
BOARD OF Z01�ING APPEALS STAFF REPORT
TYPE OF APPLICATION: Minor Variance FILE #: O1-189209
APPLICANT:
HEARING DATE:
LOCATION:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
PLANNING DISTffiCT:
PRESENT ZONING:
REPORT DATE:
DEADLINE FOR ACTION:
STEVEN T. Mfi'CHELL
May 29, 2001
1236 VIRGINIA STREET
T. B. SOMERS ADDTTION TO ST. PAUL SUBJ TO ALLEY
LOTS 25 AND LOT 26
RM-2
May 18, 2001
August 14, 2001
ZONING CODE REFERENCE: 61.101
BY: John Hardwick
DATE RECEIVED: May 8, 2001
A. PURPOSE: A front setback variance in order to build a new single family home. The
required front setback is 49 feet and a 34-foot setback is proposed, for a variance of 15 feet.
B. SITE AND AREA CONDITIQNS: This parcel currently consists of two 40 by 140-foot
lots. The existing house at 1236 Virgima is located on Lot 25 and the garage for the house is
located on Lot 26. There is access to the garage from both the street and the alley.
Surrounding Land Use: Primarily one- and two-family homes.
C. BACKGROUND: The applicant currently lives at 1236 Virginia and wouid like to construct
a new house next to the existing one.
D. FINDINGS:
1. The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use under the strict provisions of
the code.
The previous owner of this property constructed the garage 30 feet from the alley because
of the difference in elevation between the alley and the lot. This limits the buildable area
far a new house without encroaching into the required front setback. The applicant is
proposing to construct a new home on the lot with the garage and to rent the existing
home on the other lots for about five years. The applicant needs the income from renting
Page 1 of 3
pl � t(t�S
File # O1-189209
Staff Report
the existing house in order to afford to build the new house. He eventually plans on
demolishing the existing older home and to recombine the two lots. In order to avoid
moving the existing gazage which involve considerable expense, the applicant is
requesting this front yard setback variance.
2. The plight of the Zand owner is due to circumstances unique to this property, and these
circumstances were not created by the Zand owner.
The location of the existing gazage on the site as well as the average setback of the other
homes on this block aze circumstances that were not created by the applicant.
3. The proposed variance is in keeping with the spirit and intent of the code, and is
consistent with the health, safery, comfort, morals and welfare of the inhabitants of the
City of St. Paul.
The proposed variance will allow the applicant to construct a new single family home to
eventually replace the old house existing on the properiy. Presently, the two lots making
up this parcel are combined under one Property Identification Number as a single tas
parcel. The applicant needs to split these two lots before he can build a new house and he
will need to recombine the two lots after the old house is removed. Provided that the
applicant obtains the necessary subdivision approval, the proposed variance is in keeping
with the spirit and intent of the code.
4. The proposed variance wi11 not impair an adequate supply of Zight and air to adjacent
property, nor will it alter the essential character of the surrounding area or unreasonably
diminish established properry values within the surrounding area.
Other than the front yard setback, the proposed new home will meet all of the setback
requirements. The average setback of the homes along this block ranges from 31 feet to
55 feet. The proposed setback of 34 feet fa11s within the this range and will not be out of
keeping with the character of the area. This block of Virginia Street is a dead end road
and the opposite side of the block is undeveloped land. The proposed variance will not
significantiy affect the supply of light or air to adj acent properties.
5. 77xe variance, if granted, would not permit any use that is not perznitted under the
provisions of the code for the property in the district where the affected Zand is located,
nor would it alter or change the zoning district classification of the property.
A single faxnily home is a permitted use in this zoning district. The proposed variance, if
granted, will not change or alter the zoning classification of the property.
Page 2 of 3
Ol-lit�s
File # 01-189209
Staff Report
6. The request for variance is not based primariZy on a desire to increase the value or
income potential of the parcel of Zand.
The applicant states that his primary desire is to provide a new home for his family.
E. DISTRICT COiJNCIL RECONIMENDATION: As of the date of this report, we have not
received a recommendation from District 6.
F. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Based on findings 1 through 6, staff recommends
approval of the variance, subject to the condition that the applicant obtains subdivision
approval prior to construction of the new home.
Page 3 of 3
- - - �
V
Distr�ct 6 Planning Counc�l ___ w c� o� -� ��5
- � �,
� � .�.
. _ _ .�.,__ .... ..... ...._ ..,..,,.� ..__ ..�,� a. _._�.. _ ..........t.. _t- .._...a . _,.. . � . _ . _.,.. _ . _ _ .
1061 Rice St.
St. Paul, MN 55117
Phone 651 488-4485
Fau 651 488-0343
May 24, 2001
Mr. John Hardwick
LIEP
350 St. Peter St.
Suite 300
St. Paul, MN 55102
Dear John,
The District 6 Planning Councii received a request from Steven Mitchell, 1236 Virginia
St. for a front setback variance that would allow for the construction of a new house.
The required setback is 49 feet and a 34 foot setback is proposed, for a variance of 15
feet.
On Wednesday, May 23, 2001 the Land Use Task Force of the District 6 Planning
Council approved this request.
If you have any questions, please cail me at 651-488-4485.
Sincerely,
�(,T � �� t/r�/
Kat y Co e�
Executive Director
cc: Steven Mitchell
APPLICATION FOR ZONING VARIANCE
OFFICE OFLICENSE, INSPECTIONS, A1VD
EIWIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
350 SL Peter Street, Suite 300
Saint Pars� MN 5510�1510
651-266-9008
APPLICANT
PROPERTY
Name S i��-� t. i'1 i 1�-�fiu- Company
Address ]a"3fo U'f�i(,INt�{ �
City 57 ��L State �'1'� Zip .531t� Daytime Phone ( S'!'��l
Property interest of applicant (owner, contract purchaser, etc.) ow nr �'K
Name of owner
Address/�ocation N� x'+" zcT ni r oF /l vr/�e-�f4 ST.
Legal description i.$ Se� �s /�o� �y 5f 6�¢+iL ��a t�.6
(attach addi6onalsheetifnecessary) Si �� ����
Lotsize y� x��� Present Zoning�m a-PresentUse�,1. oc �-�Tip�
ProposedUse $laJb�..t- LEi - SfKC`tt /�/}y`1/� Q�"l�-ZU'''�Gr
1. Variance(s)requested: F� S�i J3�k �p ?j�J j /�1/ `'t-.'�� v'F ���
oF E /9 r
2. What physical characteristics of the property prevent its being used for any of the permitted uses in your zone?
(topography, size and shape of lot, soil conditions, etcJ k��yy�a�irSC Wp.�;� �p � rr1 �y n1�
6 h'�C�4�' i.oC%9�I;��/ :����j N-o`i" f'c: /-ncs�r QR;,v'j Q��if�7j. G-,A-F�
:.�/$�. fjv i i� � y �R-�:3�i:.a5 c1rA�(J� �-, A+v-D y�...e:-�-Y u;tr�vT'�''a.
3. Explain how the strict appliration of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance wouid result in peculiar or exceptional
practical difficulties or exceptional undue hardships. w F .� r .� ` ��; E-p�6t S t"r'S`9� � yg �
,l�.va Cec.�}iTan/ ,F tX�STint6 C` AnrP /L�T�FwE�'^�d}'-;- �`FT h�i�'� Srd�
e� PRa�� ���D Gt uvA6� to P�r 1N 7r�. D�LZV Yt+�r- 1
Wa�Tt-� 0� � Ns}�ee tS:.;��--i 6nJ 71i-iS $ iiti�.
4. Explain how the granting of a variance will not be a substantial detriment
to the public good or a substantial impairment of the intent and purpose
oftheZoningOrdinance. 7-� S�i�� r f�� R�
�.t; �i.i 5 i l�` le�� �� /f�6; jE li+f-feI'f2� oFF 77fc
5:"��ZT i tf A"� �t�'�"1ZS ,�'i�[�97� 6,n/ i Zf`'c fJ �tK.
�t�a 3���- � o��-o tNo s�� r�+t,eL rs �
Oj7t-�,=(L `�l�.N LUtt�L I�O�SF ����
(Attach additional sheets if needed.)
CASHIERS USE ONLY
� , � p��V �
� �08 r o
Applicant's
Date ���JO /
i� o�-�l
! 57� uc;� r� r rcH�:'u- ""
:i ---- - � l�-3 irIRC:-wix� �5�
:; 5� �r�L _ . s .�rJ S�S�r7
i T. 8. so.� �R5 H D/)irlc,� 7c
i ST .!'qUL i.oTS a..$ t,Z(.,
'1"O W 1�0++7 !T M A� C'o a1 Ci= '
� .W�U ,.t.C:: A.Jd i ACa= A�GL✓inti.- �'e2 r'� 111Af�.lAn�Ct_. Bi-P.rar�SY'
�
� i`f� .-� 0 6� ,M J cA 'T� �h+`eNS�v c, qN � � fK F�� �'J37�J rJ cc��-D
I{��SS�hLS la�+Sc 5�:✓7c ?it:.ficE»'I� ul,- i_r;uKL:fl ;..tZ ,.Y,avi.�tr
�
w ti
�v �
> � � f�T
;v�n,�G�_
� � /yc .;
au �` C,e
AJ � L`�T" '
� ,�
-urv� 5i,
�� a � �
L
� �'7 E 2� � 27� �
7
r,
�i � �
/3Ac!(
Tfti. eX+Si'I+�v Lc�Cv.rj�o�l c7� T/�
R�/ +�c= }.�t=�c j U T✓i�i= Tlf� NvM L c �
'I'l� �p�rc-rfT' t�a� d4�- ti'/ G.-t2✓i0 � woc��
J�i�,�'�t jF��rO ?� c� S� 1� 1 i vJ � 3
��v-� RL r��.�- �:� �� . AN� ,�� N
N�L �o� ,vE Z-c� {�i� c'Jlr9.n/
�/ rH� 6t,J�IL r���L�� gu't-r3,�94�, o��'L P
. .... �
y
u
. Ls
i
�
�oo�ttp 5
`7 f'� V�-'"� iMI �CF�L7L
c.�. o �- < <�
�4�
.� ��
d�=��q���
��
3 d
c �� G
U 1
ai
� C
ae S '
Z �
N �
w � a '
'�_'' �.
c•
_-�� �-Z-��-<
��
0
��
„=
s�
�
� L�
J �C S
,�
G •
60
' ' _ _ _ ' _ ' . �� a � ... . . . . . . _
� prc
_ _ _ �� � � Pt. ..-.� d � �
n E c [ I
� Bn �
`'� � �' �
Gpa
' _ ' ' _ .pw`.� c _ _� . _ .
I �
q � x�
ad c `
x
�
d �� �n
y <
� (,� 'J � m
° L � Z
� r r a
� � �' 3
r 3 Z y
� o Z n 2
r,
- � �, :-1 �
i �'
� J
�
W
�
r�>
3
'_��� _
D� trt` �
s
����ma��� �� �
'y� � �0o x �
c. ,� �° a -1 °
l� S ��
,S 00"��8���
— �
�m r ra
Z -�
`- -- - - �
�
�
�
�
0
�
R C
'{ p O
� �• o
!` L � ��� ` _,... (� � `� �.' �
n -S d
�y
�
G�
-Z --�
� � �
�
Na �� o � �: � # 1 �
� ;�
� D_.�,..c�A—S 1.�� � T
-,
=1 M1 I
a �Z � i
�,.� � � � .`�� c � °D
� �`'� �
���' �'�` �
� `
�!"' _ _ _ �. ._ �
� .�cr.r�-� ^ .�
� ,� _ .- _. � _ � ,.�� _ _ .�
1 ) ("'V
1 �', �:. �
� � \��y`. .., .i �
� ,�- ih\��
`�; ,__
--f � <.
� w �. i�
r-� :l `i�
Y :
r_Y , �' r
;f � � �
f'
�
�v�
sw
oh
� � o
_ _p o �
� U• �
� �t i� �
�
� X
I�
i �
f ��
I Z
i .g
i i
r„
�'� R
� j
�ti�
\ 4� � "�
� � �
� y
r c tr
��� �^9 �
�
v
�� �
{ y t,y �
R _ � :�
�G'� �#
�
��� -� -...�
� -�' — "� � _
��i�i ��
/
'� � _ � � �
" 3 � � c�
x �
� �
� � G l',
� 6� C _
�� U� �
1 1 � (� `�
v ti `
� u�
� � � � �
. �
� � � �
� � ya
�
� c
v, ('
�
�
v
�
���� �'—���
�'t�i� h
- �z
-� � �
�� n
� r
v n �
� c
s a. L
� `'
O � '
� ' �
�
� z�
�
r�
c x
� 4�
fa�
�^ �y
o � (
�� G
p�G
n
� b�
W� `
� A
a �
D �
�.�.�
�
a
3
�
O
-�
s �
G � �
�;I cy �
/' �
� �
a
0
O
Z
V
�
a
3
�
r
�
r
�
�
_� � �
� �
Z � 5
� V 1
e
�(-Il��
C.�'. o�-�!
PROPERTY WITHIN 100 FEET OF PARCEL: 1236 VIRGINIA STREET
�
W
�
�
W
S �
Q/,
� � �
� �
� �
� �
�
.
N
PREPARED BY: LI EP
nl-iims�
1. SUNRAY-BATTLECREEK-HIGHWOOD
2. HAZEL PARK HADEN-PROSPERITY HILLCREST
3. WEST SIDE _
4. BAYTON'S BLUPF
5. PAYNE-PFIALEN
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
• : y.i��l7
THOMAS-DALE
SUMMIT-UNIVERSTI'Y
WEST SEVENTT�
COMO
HAMLINE-MIDWAY
ST. ANTfIONY PARK
MERRTAM PARK-LEXINGTON HAMLINE-SNELLING HAMLINE
MACALESTER GROVEI..EIND
HIGHLAND
SiIMMiT HILL
DOWNTOIVN
� Z����� ���� �o�
CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PLANNING DISTRICTS
�
(� i - l l lv5
CITY OF SAINT PAUL
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS RESOLUTION
ZONING FII.E NU1vIBER: 01-189209
DATE; May 29, 2001
WHEREAS, Steven T. Mitchell bas applied for a variance from the strict application of the
provisions of Section 61.101 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code perta.iuing to the required front
setback of a new single fanuiy home in the RM-2 zoning district at 1236 Virginia Street; and
WHEREAS, the Saint Paul Boazd of Zoning Appeals conducted a public hearing on May 29,
2001 pursuant to said application in accordance with the requirements of Section 64.203 of the
Legislative Code; and
WHEREAS, the Saint Paul Board of Zoning Appeals based apon evidence presented at the
public hearing, as substantially reflected in the minutes, made the following findings of fact:
1. The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use under the strict provisions of the
code.
The previous owner of this property constnzcted the garage 30 feet from the alley because of
the difference in elevation between the alley and the lot. This limits the buildable area for a
new house without encroaching into the required front setback. The applicant is proposing to
construct a new home on the lot with the garage and to rent the existing home on the other
lots for about five years. The applicant needs the income from renting the existing house in
order to afford to build the new house. He eventually plans on demo2ishing the existing older
home and to recombine the two lots. In order to avoid moving the existing garage which
involve considerable expense, the applicant is requesting this front yard setback variance.
2. The plight of the land owner is due to circumstances unique to this property, and these
circumstances were not created by the land owner.
The location of the existing garage on the site as well as the average setback of the other
homes on this block are circuxnstances that were not created by the applicant.
3. The proposed variance is in keeping with the spirit and intent of the code, and is consistent
with the health, safety, comfort, morals and welfare of the inhabitants of the City of St. Paul.
The proposed variance will allow the applicant to construct a new single family home to
evenhxally replace the old house existing on the property. Presently, the two lots making up
this parcel are combined under one Property Identification Numbar as a single tas parcel.
The applicant needs to split these two lots before he can build a new house and he will need
to recombine the two lots a$er the old house is removed. Provided that the applicant obtains
the necessary subdivision approval, the proposed variance is in keeping with the spirit and
intent of the code.
Page I of 3
ot-c rces
File # O1-189209
Resolution
4. The proposed variance will not impair an adequate supply of Zight and air to adjacent
properzy, nor will it alter the essential character of the surrounding area or unreasonably
diminish established property vaZues within the surrounding area.
Other than the front yazd setback, the proposed new home will meet all of the setback
requirements. The average setback of the homes along this block ranges from 31 feet to 55
feet. The proposed setback of 34 feet falls within the this range and will not be out of
keeping with the character of the area. This block of Virginia Street is a dead end road and
the opposite side of the block is undeveloped land. The proposed variance will not
significantly affect the supply of light or air to adjacent properties.
S. The variance, ifgranted, would not permit any use that is not permitted under the provisions
of the code for the property in the district where the affected land is located, nor would it
alter or change the zoning diszrict classification of the property.
A single family home is a permitted use in this zoning district. The proposed variance, if
granted, will not change or alter the zoning classification of the property.
6. The request for variance is not based primarily on a desire to increase the value or income
potenlial of the parcel of land.
The applicant states that his primary desire is to provide a new home for his family.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Saint Paul Board of Zoning Appeals that the
provisions of Section 61.101 are hereby waived to allow a 34-foot front setback; subject to the
condition that the applicant obtains subdivision approval prior to construction of the new home•,
In arder to construct a new single family home on property located at 1236 Virginia Street; and
legally described as T. B. Somers Addition To St. Paul Subj To Alley Lots 25 And Lot 26; in
accordance with the application for variance and the site plan on file with the Zoning
Administrator.
MOVED BY: wi�son
SECONDED BY : Duckstad
IN FAVOR: a
AGAINST: s
MAILED: May 30, 2001
Page 2 of 3
dl-r1��
File # O1-189209
Resolurion
TIl1� LIlVIIT: No order oF the Board of Zoning Appeals permitting the erection or
alterafion of a building or off-street parldng Facility shall be valid for a
period longer than one year, unless a bnilding permit for such erection or
alteration is obtained within such period and snch erection or alteration is
proceeding pursuant to the terms of such permit. The Board of Zoning
Appeals or the City Council may grant an extension not to eaceed one year.
In granting such egtension, the Board of Zoning Appeals may decide to hold
a public hearing.
APPEAL: Decisions of the Board of Zoning Appeals are final subject to appeal to the
City Council within 15 days by anyone afFected by the decision. Building
permits shall not be issued after an appeal has been filed. If permits have
been issued before an appeal has been filed, then the permits are suspended
and construction shall cease until the City Council has made a final
determination of the appeal.
CERTIFICATION: I, the undersigned Secretary to the Board of Zoning Appeals for the City of
Saint Paul, Minnesota, do hereby certify that I have compared the foregoing
copy with the original record in my office; and Snd the same to be a true and
correct copy af said original and of the whole thereof, as based on approved
minutes of the Saint Paul Board of Zoning Appeals meeting held on May 29,
2001 and on record in the Office of License InspecYion and Environmental
Protection, 350 St. Peter Street, Saint Paul, Minnesota.
SAINT PAUL BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
Debbie Crippen
Secretary to the Board
Page 3 of 3
o�-i«y
MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE BOARD OF ZOIVING APPEALS
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 330 CITY HALL
ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA, MAY 29, 2001
PRFSENT: Mmes. Maddox, and Morton; Messrs. Courtney, Duckstad, Faricy, Galles, �a wason
of the Board of Zoning Appeals; Mr. Warner, Assistant City Attomey; Mr, Hazdwick
and Ms. Crippen of ffie Office of License, Inspection, and Environmental Protecrion.
ABSENT None
The meeting was chaired by Joyce Maddox, Chair.
Steven T. Mitchell (#O1-189209) 1236 Vir¢inia Street: A front setback variance in order
to build a new single family home. The required front setback is 49 feet and a 34-foot setback is
proposed, for a variance of 15 feei.
Mr. Hardwick showed slides of the site and reviewed the staff report with a recommenda6on for
approval, subject to the condiuon that the applicant obtains subdivision approval prior to construction
of the new home.
There was no correspondence received in opposition to ffie variance request.
One letter was received in suppozt of the variance from District 6.
The applicant STEVEN T. MPPCHELL, 1236 Virginia Street, was present. There was opposition
present at the hearing. Mr. Mitchell stated he had nothing to add.
Mike Ross, 1244 Virginia Street, stated that the south property line was four inches from the south
wall of his house. Mr. Ross stated that if Mr. Mitchell's garage was not placed correctly. Mr. Ross
had a bid to move the garage and rebuild the crumbling retaining wall for a cost of $6,300. He stated
that if Mr. Mitchell moved the gazage where it should be he could place the new house where it should
be according to the Zoning Code. Mr. Ross stated he was not opposed to the new house, however, if
the garage was not moved the house and the garage would be too close to his home.
Mr. Duckstad questioned whether Mr. Ross had spoken to Mr. Mitchell. Mr. Ross stated he had not.
Mr. Mitchell stated that he did not know if the bid had included having to excavate three feet of earth
behind the retaining wa1L Mr. Mitchell stated that he would have a hard time getting into the garage
because of the height of the alley. He stated that if the bid Mr. Ross had did not include the excavation
of three feet of dirt the price would be higher.
Ms. Maddox questioned whether Mr. Mitchell had spoken to Mr. Ross about the project. Mr.
Mitchell replied that he had menUOned that they were going to build a house there and wouid need a
variance for the front of the house. He stated that Mr. Ross did not say anything then.
Mr. Wilson questioned whether Mr. Mitchell's neighbor had been present at the District meeting. Mr.
Mitchell stated that Mr. Ross had not been there.
Mr. Courtney questioned Mz Mitchell whether the new house would be blocking Mr. Ross's view.
�/ ! � � L �Q�
File # O1-189209
Minutes OS-29-01
Page Two
Mr. Mitchell stated that he was unsure if his neighbor's small side window on the south side would be
blocked.
Mr. Courtney questioned whether Mr. Mitchell would be willing to move the garage if the bid were
correct and included the excavation necessary. Mr. Mitchell stated he could look at it, however, the
driveway would have to be re-sloped. He stated that he had enough tilt now and he would not be able
to use the garage in the winter.
Hearing no further testunony, Ms. Maddox closed the public pordon of the meeting.
Mr. Wilson moved to approve the variance and resolution based on findings 1 through 6, subject to the
condition that the applicant obtains subdivision approvai prior to construcrion of the new home.
Mr. Duckstad seconded the mouon, which passed on a roll call vote of 43(Courtney, Galles,
Maddox).
Submitted by:
John Hardwick
Approved by:
Jon Duckstad, Secretary
� � � . �
o f e
Council File # A \� ��LS
Cneen Sheet # — $� .- J l(_)��
RESOLUTION
CITY OF SAINT PAUL, NIINNESOTA
h
Presented By �`� ��
Referred To
Comxnittee: Date
a�
2 Whereas, Steven T. Mitchell, in file no. O1-189209, made application to the Board of
3 Zoning Appeals (hereinafter, the 'BZA") for a variance from the strict application of the
4 provisions of the Saint Paul Zoning Code for property commonly known as 1236 Virginia Street
5 and legally described as: T. B. Somers Addition To St. Paul Subj To Alley Lots 25 And Lot 26;
6 and
8 Whereas, The purpose of the variance application was to vary the zoning code standards
9 to allow a front setback of 34 feet, a change of 15 feet in the required minimum setback of 49
10 feet for a new single family home; and
11
12 Whereas, The BZA conducted a public hearing on Tuesday, May 29, 2001, after having
13 provided notice to affected property owners, and the BZA, by its Resolution #O1-189209,
14 adopted on Tuesday, May 29, 2001, granted the application subject to the condition that the
15 applicant obtains subdivision approval prior to constructing the new home, based on the
16 following findings and conclusions:
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
1. The properry in question cannot be put to a reasonable use under the strict provisions
of the code.
The previous owner of this properry constructed the garage 30 feet from the alley
because of the difference in elevation between the alley and the lot. This limits the
buiidable area for a new house without encroaching into the required front setback.
The applicant is proposing to construct a new home on the lot with the garage and to
rent the existing home on the other lots for about five years. The applicant needs the
income from renting the existing house in order to afford to build the new house. He
eventualiy plans on demolishing the existing older home and to recombine the two
lots. In orderto avoid moving the existing garage which involve considerable
expense, the applicant is requesting this front yazd setback variance.
2. The plight of the land owner is due to circumstances unique to this properry, and
these circumstances were not created by the Zand owner.
The location of the existing garage on the site as well as the average setback of the
other homes on this block are circumstances that were not created by the applicant.
2 3. The proposed variance is in keeping with the spirit and intent of the code, and is 0 � — �� 4 5
3 consistent with the health, safety, comfort, morals and weZfare of the inhabitants of
4
5
the City of St. Pau1.
6 The proposed variance will allow the applicant to construct a new single family home
7 to eventually replace the old house existing on the properiy. Presently, the iwo lots
8 making up this parcel aze combined under one Property Identification Number as a
9 single tax pazcel. The applicant needs to split these two lots before he can build a
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
new house and he will need to recombine the two lots after the old house is removed.
Provided that the applicant obtains the necessary subdivision approval, the proposed
variance is in keeping with the spirit and intent of the code.
4. The proposed variance will not impair an adeguate suppZy of light and air to adjacent
property, nor wi11 it alter the essential character of the surrounding area or
unreasonably diminish established property values within the surrounding area.
Other than the front yard setback, the proposed new home will meet all of the setback
requirements. The average setback of the homes along this block ranges from 31 feet
to 55 feet. The proposed setback of 34 feet fa11s within the this range and will not be
out of keeping with the character of the area. This block of Virginia Street is a dead
end road and the opposite side of the block is undeveloped land. The proposed
variance will not significantly affect the supply of light or air to adjacent properties.
S. The variance, if granted, would not permit any use that is not permitted under the
provisions of the code for the property in the district where the affected land is
located, nor would it alter or change the zoning district classification of the property.
A single family home is a permitted use in this zoning district. The proposed
variance, if granted, will not change or alter the zoning classification of the properry.
6. The request for variance is not based primarily on a desire to increase the vaZue or
income potential of the parcel of land.
The applicant states that his primary desire is to provide a new home for his family.
Whereas, Pursuant to the provisions of Saint Paul Legislative Code § 64.205, Michael P.
Pfalz, duly filed an appeal from the determination made by the BZA and requested that a hearing
be held before the City Council for the purpose of considering the actions taken by the BZA; and
Whereas, Acting pursuant to Legislative Code §§ 64.205 - 64.208 and upon notice to
affected parties, a public hearing was duly conducted by the City Council on Wednesday, July
11, 2001 where all interested parties were given an opportunity to be heard; and
Whereas, at the conclusion of the July 11, 2001 public hearing, the matter was laid over to
July 18, 2001 where the mater was again laid over the to July 25, 2001 a11 for the purpose of
determining whether the parties could reach an agreement outside of the appeal process; and
Whereas, the parties have indicated that they are unable to reach a compromise in the matter;
�
2
4
5
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
Whereas, The Council, having heazd the statements made, and having considered the
variance application, the report of staff, the record, minutes and resolution ofthe BZA, does � �����.5
hereby
Resolve, That the Council hereby affiruis the decision of the BZA in this matter, having
found no error in fact, finding or procedure of the BZA; and be it
Further Resolved, That the appeal of Michaei P. Pfalz be and is hereby denied; and, be it
Further Resolved that the Council adopts as its own the findings and conclusions set forth in
BZA resolurion no. O1-189209; and, be it
Finally Resolved, That the City Clerk shall mail a copy of this resolution to the applicant
Steven T. Mitchell, the appellant Michael P. Pfalz, the Zoning Administrator, Plamiiug
Commission and Board of Zoning Appeals.
Requested by Department of:
By:
Fozm Approved by City Attorney
By:
Adoption Certified by Council Secretary Approved by Mayor for Submission to Council
By: Z . By:
Approved by Mayor: Date ���I��� _! !/�`
q
By:
�� � i
Adopted by Council: Date � ov' � a.p�ry,
w. _... c
DEPARTMENTNFFICE/CIXINCIL � DATE7NITW?ED ' — �— � ��
City Council Offices 10/30/2001 � S NO ������
con�racr a�tsot� s� �+or� � tin�uom.
Ji.m Reiter, 266-8650 , a ,,.�, i ., a
MUSf BE ON COUNCILAGBJOA BY (DAT�
AEa�GN
MWB9tPoR GlfiAiiOMElf OIYCIF�I(
RWTWG
� w11111rJ�LaQMCEfOR R11111CJ�LaFRIH�CCTC
❑ WYOR1�114i6fAMi� ❑
TOTAL � OF SIGNATURE RAGES (CUP ALL LOCATIONS FOR SIGNATURE)
CT�ON REQUESTED
Memorializing City Council action taken on July 25, 2001, in denying the appeal of Michael
Pfalz regarding the decision of the Board of Zoning Appeals, which granted a front yard
setback variance in order to construct a new single family home at 1236 Virginia Street.
RECOMMENDATION Approve (A) w Rejeet (R) GERSONALSERVICE CONiRACiS MUSTANSWER7HE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS:
1. HasthisPe`soMrtneuerworkeduMe�acart�acttorihisdePaNnent?
PLANNING COMMISSION rES No
CIB COMMITTEE 2. F@s thie peisoMrm erer been a dry empbyee?
CIVILSERVICECOMMISSION YES NO
3. Dces Nie pcvsoMrtn possess a sidll rw[ normallypotsessed by a�ry aRent city employee?
YES NO
. 4, is this peBOMum a tafpe[ed vendoY) .
YES NO
E+�Iain aIl Y� answers on sePa�ate sheetanE atfach W 9reen sheet
INITIATING PROBLEM ISSUE, OPPORTUNITY (Who. Wha[, When, Whem, Why)
ADVANTAGESIFAPPROVED -
Council Research CentBr
OCT � 0 ppp�
DISADVANTAGESIFAPPROVED � � � . ,
DISqDVANTAGESIFNOTAPPROVED � '
TOTAL AMOUNT OF TRANSACTION S COST/REVRIUE BUOGETED (GRCLE ONE) YES NO
FUNDING SOURCE ACTNITY NUFIDER
FlNANpqL INFORIMiION (IXPWt�
o�_�\�S
Interdepartmental Memoranduxn
CITY OF SAINT PAUL
DATE: October 5, 2001
TO: Nancy Anderson
FROM: Peter Warner
RE: Appeal of Michael Pfalz. Council Action date 7-25-01
Nancy, I found the attached resolution in my files. Did I ever send this to you for final adoprion by
the Council??? PWW
DI - l(�S
CTTY OF SAINT PAUL
Norm Coleman, M¢yor
June 13, 2001
Ms. Nancy Anderson
City Council Reseazch Office
Room 310 City Hall
Saint Paul, MI3 55102
Dear Ms. Anderson:
OFFICE OF LICENSE, INSPECTIONS AND
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
r�8e. c�.s;.t, ove�.
B UII DING INSPECflON AND
DESIGN
350 St Pefer Street
Suite 310
SaurtPau�Minnesot¢ 55102-ISIO
�\
!�c.�.t.—
ti
� ���o�
a`�
Telephone: 612-266-900I
F[us'vtile: 6I2-266-9099
I would like to confirm that a public hearing before the City Council is scheduled for Wednesday, July 11,
2001 for the following zoning case:
Appellant:
File Number:
Purpose:
Location:
Michael Pfalz, 1244 Virginia Sueet
;��ei�z�z:
Appeal of a Boazd of Zoning Appeals decision granting a front yard setback
variance in order to construct a new single family home.
1236 Virginia Street
Staff : Recommended approval
District 7: Recommended approval
Boazd : Approved on a 4-3 vote
I have confirmed this date with the office of Council Member Iim Reiter. My understanding is that this
public hearing request will appeaz on the agenda of the Ciry Council at your eazliest convenience and that
you will publish notice of the hearing in the Saint Paul Legal Ledger. Thanks! -
Please call me at 266-9082 if you have any questions.
S' cerely, _
ohn Hazdwick
Zoning Specialist
cc: CouncIl Member Reiter
- �FUZSr�nq• ,. �
� OF YOBrIG �6 ' � : �:
1Yie Satnt Paul CYty�Co�nc3l wiR cwn-
duct a p�iblic hearing on Wedneaday, July
11, 2001, " at 5:30 p.m.. _ Ctty Counctl
Chambers, 3rd Floar IXLy Hall. to consider
the appeal of Michael Pfa}z regazd�ng the
Boax+d'of Zoning APPeats dedsion grazrth�g'
a tront yard seU�aelc vartance in o;der' w
construet a new single family huu�e, at
1236 Virginia Sh'eet - � .
Dated: June 15, 2001 - - -
NANCYANDERSON -
Asslstan;CityCouncll5ecretary . .
� � (�7nne 18Ttic-
ar. reu�, r�nc+�caii ". `.
o�nasia . '
Ol-�t�5
OFFICE OF LICENSE, INSPECTIONS AND
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
Roger C4rtis, Director
CITY OF SAINT PAUL
Norm Coleman, Mayor
June 13, 2001
Ms. Nancy Anderson
City Council Reseazch Office
Room 310 City Hall
Saint Paul, MN 55102
Deaz Ms. Anderson:
Bl7IIDING INSPECIlON AND
DESIGN
350 St Petes Stseet
Suite 310
Saint P¢ut, Minnerota 55702-I570
Tetephone: 612-266-9007
F¢csimile: 612-266-9099
I would like to confirm that a public hearing before the City Council is scheduled for Wednesday, July i l,
2001 for the following zoning case:
�
�
Appellant: Michaei Pfalz, 1244 Virginia Sueet
File Number: O1-189209
Purpose:
Location:
Appeal of a Board of Zoning Appeais decision granting a front yard setback
variance in order to construct a new single family home.
1236 Virginia Street
Staff : Recommended approval
District 7: Recommended approval
Boazd : Approved on a 4-3 vote
I have confirmed this date with the office of Council Member Jim Reiter. My understanding is that this
public hearing request will appear on the agenda of the City Council at your eazliest convenience and that
you will publish notice of the hearing in the Saint Paul Legal Ledger. Thanks!
Please call me at 266-9082 if you have any questions.
S� cerely, _
ohn Hardwick
Zoning Specialist
� cc: Council Member Reiter
�5 11:4a 5514834fl49
APPLiCA7ION FQR APPEAL
JILL EEAtI
Dcnnrlme.rt of P/anulnp arrJ £cnnomic Drveloyment
$unbrg Srction
110D Clr} Ha!1 Annec
?S H'et/ Fnur/h Srrt¢I
So7nt Paul, MN SS102
16G-6589
APPELLAtdT � Name �Y1�c,hne\ Q Q-�p�,Z
Address 12�1y Vif��n �u, ~
Gty��4�__�t.� St.�Zip �11'lOaylimephone�,. -SXXn
PROPER7Y I Zon:ng FCe Namc Stcvth T, M�,tchall
LOCATIOtd
Atldress�Location_ 2'l, V�,,,, �St. ,.a� mn Sr,���
TYPE OF APPEAL Ap�i�cation is hereby matle for en ap�ea io ths
= Board o? Zoni�g Appe�i; �City Coun�i�
unce- the Gro��aions of Chaptar E4, Sec:ien y�! Paag�aph 1 DI of the Zoning Code, fo
a�weai a tlecis�er made by the j}, Qp,,,1,t SoqrL( a{ n' a p nnPnl�
�c__�,�_ 2q 1.001 Flie n um�er�l-l892oq
(oate 8` daasronj
GROUNDS FOR APPEAL Expiain why you fee! inere has teen an error m any requirement,
� per.^;:; oec s�o� o' re`usal rnade Dy a� a�minist•�fivt en c,al, or an eror fn fac;, �rocedurs or
;':•nd �� naoe b; t7e Board ot Zonmg Appeala o� the P�arning Commission.
i
�Plea�sz See 0.�tY�eJ� Sl'ltc#S �ncla.A��y explan�}ior, P+�oavs. an� proposed aic �t
+ m�,�;� ta sh�.v rny hom� tn r�,ia.F;on .b P �ew home.
�
�
�
��rte°h adhrt,ona! sneer �� neressap� I=�
+, r-I iJ
�,ppli;anYs s�gna?ure t��,cYYI/�� Date �-1Tn{ Ci±y g0ent�C�`
C .."_
.�I� M.00A.n lm:uvv-!`� S�S+t��
i'1b N- pwilap 5�-
I�oxv�de� �trn. ��pj
�51) '�q�' ��E
PA� � � .-
96/:2/2991 11:44 6514834949 JILL BEA�J PAGE 93
' ��� ���
� I wouid like to appeal the decision of the Board of Zoning Appeals Hearing from the meetin� on
May 29, 2001. The boazd voted 3-4 to approve a setback variance at 1236 Virginia.
I own the home aY 1244 Virginia which is just North of the proposed site. The Mitchel]'s aze
planning to build a house a mere 48 inches from the south wall of my home. (The properry iine
is just inches from my home.) I u111 already lose the light, air and general use of my 2 South
�vindows and attic access window, but if their new house is built I S ft forward, I wilI aiso have
only limited use of my Southwest livingroom window. Building a house so close and forward of
my house will definitely impact the quality of my life in a home that I have worked very hard to
improve. I also feei it will have a severe negative impact on the value and the resale pntential of
mY ProPeTi�'•
I feel thai if this house is built 15 ft forward I will lose significant use of my home and feel
overtaken by the adjoining property_ Mrs. Mitchell opetates a home-based daycare which I think
wil] on3y make matters worse.
i don't think there is anything that I can do about the houses being only 48 inches apart, but to
aUow it to be built so far forward of my home, I feel will incre�e the damage done to my
property value.
� tn addition, the gound in this area is mostly peat bog and I run very concbmed aboat a hoase
being built so close to my foundation. The area on the West side of Virsinia has no houses
because of this reason and the townhomes at the end of Virginia were builY with appro�cimately
61 pylons under the foundation to prevent it from sinking. I believe there is already deterioration
of that foundation and also the foundation of the house that the Mitchell's cumntly own. The
stability of my foundation and the new• foundation on ihis type of soil is of great concem to me.
Enclosed azc pictures of the front of my house and the view looking out of my front window
showing how �ranting this variance will limit the use of the Southwest window of my home in
addition to already losing the use of the South windows.
Thank you for your consideration in this matter.
Sincerely,
'I�,,�t��
Michael P. Pfalz
�
95l12l2091 11:44 65148�4948
1 �'�� �:� � `'�1 '=� >
11ynhu.ilda�le.._. At�� �
\ �� D'Z la' � ��R�
.- d o
; n
�i�•r.,,
� ---� � `�z
a �� - tu _ _ +✓ � �.7
� f : � ;� ; .t iu
3 �� n, � n� ��(l
J I � \ _ � �
1 l .. � _...�rD`\
I ; " `.`�""� '''
� ' �; �� 1j`��;
- : ,
�� �-
r .,
' - �
�� �� `-
�+ v�,
;i .� �
� U
•��
. x �r y .!�
` � ` c �
: �
` �� z
s c � -
� � V r c
...-� -----. �-,�----�: �-�--�.. �_._.-
� r
� �
e. � �. J
,,, r �� -
C 4 � �
q .. � ,
1
}• y C�.
i r
v, �
� �1
� ��
�
T �. �
� �a � �—c��e+— �
��
JILL BEAtJ
;:
;j
!`
��
��
�
,
�;�
1 _T" �
i�
! �
_I�
,
-C l.. �
V'1�•
T
( ( �lj
W ��
�'D
�x u
_� �, _. .
; �r.
r., .L
�i n r
I'
��\
" a t �
�' (1 ( ` V �
! i *n '�' \ c �w
I ?^ 2 4
N '� H
I I � � � y
� y 2 F., 2
`' � ` 1�°_ c '
�
w
l
r �
T-��i��
;
�
�
�
',
��
�
�
N
\ ��
���'� ��3.
,� s -
w s
�� �
� ��
� �
c �� ��
� � + e \ •�-� V �� � � •� P
I .l ` �-- -- --- - � �,
� � . � � �f, � a
� p
� � � I
�' Y
� � 6-<.=�^'_i
(y' g,4, 4
d � f T c.� i
I �' < F �� '' -1
'I �'� S i �,
�
L �;--� - ---'_ -`�` --- -� �' ^ �..�
�1,� � � �
� Ci' T� �
t•' �
;
'o
a
�,
�
U
��
�
a
L
�
PRGE 04
b" g N �
�
�f��-
�
<: � �- �
� u� �.
9
g a
3 � --�
�� �
�-� 3 Q
f 6 � � ,
�. � ��
r���
S' �
��
� -s
P �
� � {
� + �
� � �
T r' �
� ���
� �
�� � �
F .�
� � �
� 'C �
.
g 0
M1 �
� �
p � R
� Q C
� � �
o , &
� � �
3 .
1
�
F y '
- - �
.....� , � � � �
a s
�: r
., r_. 4 .. �.i vv�
:.:4 .. .��_ •..
,_� •r�1+ ,.s �.. � �, � � �.�
..'.,yr •. : :^ c ' .. �a
�� • c .� - 1
.� ..��� e ,,.r�I
..:. j ;,.
' Ys� .
,� s . .,,
' .. � .. �
v
> . � �' • , rv� �'�i � r
y�� f �`
. Y
r :: {'� � �: :�
.. f ; _�.;
� �. �� T .r : ;
. . .. ., r Y-v..r+C .,
.. , • • � .• 4 `�� �
g}
±� a .�� ,� ._ �
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS STAFF REPORT
TYPE OF APPLICATION: Minor Variance FILE #: O1-189209
APPLICANT:
HEARING DATE:
LOCATION:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
PLANNING DISTRICT:
PRESENT ZONING:
REPORT DATE:
DEADLIATE FOR ACTION:
STEVEN T. MITCHELL
May 29, 2001
1236 VIRGINIA STREET
T. B. SOMERS ADDITION TO ST. PAUL SUB7 TO ALLEY
LOTS 25 AND LOT 26
6
RM-2
May 18, 2001
August 14, 2001
ZONING CODE REFERENCE: 61.101
$Y: John Hardwick
DATE RECETVED: May 8, 2001
A. PURPOSE: A front setback variance in order to build a new single family home. The
reqnired front seYback is 49 feet and a-34-foot setback is proposed, for a variance of 15 feet.
B. SITE AND AREA CONDITIONS: This parcel currentiy consists of two 40 by 140-foot
lots. The existing house at 1236 Virginia is located on L,ot 25 and the gazage for the house is
located on Lot 26. There is access to-the gazage from both the street and the aIley.
Surrounding Land Use: Primarily one- and two-family homes.
C. BACKGROUND: The applicant currently lives at 1236 Virginia and would like to construct
a new house next to the existing one.
D. FINDINGS:
1. The properry in question cannot be put to a reasonable use under the smict provisions of
tJ7e code.
�
)
�
, The previous owner of this property constructed the garage 30 feet from the alley because
,_,_,_,,.,,_,�,_„�,,,,,,,�,,,, Of it1E dlffeI'eriCE,,,�l,j� C„�CV„�tJ,O„���,B� ,aTM„r� the lnt Thic limitc thr hnil`lahl �rP� T __,___�___�
for a new house without encroaching into the required front setback. The applicant is
proposin� to construct a new home on the lot with the garage and to rent the existing
home on the other lots for about five yeazs. The applicant needs the income from renting �
Page I of 3
� ��-< «s
�
File # O1-189209
Staff Report
the existing house in order to afford to build the new house. Ae eventually plans on
demolishing the existing older home and to recombine the two lots. In order to avoid
moving the existing garage which involve considerable expense, the applicant is
requesting this front yard setback variance.
2. The plight of the land owner is due to circunuta�2ces urzique to this property, and these
circumstances were not created by the Zand owner.
The ]ocation of the existing garage on the site as weil as the average setback of the other
homes on this block aze circumstances that were not created by the applicant.
�
3. The proposed varia�:ce is in keeping with tlie spii•it arad intent of the code, and is
consistent with the health, safety, comfort, mor arzd welfare of the inhabitants of the
City of St. Paul.
The proposed variance will allow the applicant to construct a new single family home to
eventually replace the old house existing on the property. Presently, the two lots making
up this parcel are combined under one Property Identification Number as a single taac
parcel. The applicant needs to split these t«�o lots before he can build a new house and he
will need to recombine the two lots afrer the old house is removed. Provided that the
applicant obtains the necessary subdivision approval, the proposed variance is in keeping
with the spirit and intent of the code.
4. The proposed variance wilt rtot impair an adeqt�ate supply of light and air to adjacent
pr•opert�>, nor will it alter the essential character of the surrounding m�ea or unreasonably
dimi�aislz established property values within the surr•ounding area.
Other than the front yard set6ack, the proposed new home will meet all of the setback
requirements. The average seTback of the homes along this block ranges from 31 feet to
55 feet. The praposed setback of 34 feet falls ���thin the this range and will not be out of
keeping «+ith the character of the area. This block of Virginia Street is a dead end road
and the opposite side of the block is undeveloped land. The proposed variance will not
significantly affect the supply of light or air to adjacent properties.
�
5. The vm ifgr�anted, woulcl not pernait a»y i{se that is not perntitted zinder the
provisions of the code for the property in the district where the affected land is located,
nor would if atter or� change the zoning ttisn classiftcation of the property.
A single family home is a perin�tted use in this zonin� district. The proposed variance, if
granted, will not change or alter the zoning classification of the property.
Page 2 of 3
File # Ol-]89209
Staff Report
6. The reguest for variance is not based primarily orz a desire to increase the value or
income potential of the parcel of land.
The applicant states that his primary desire is to provide a new home for his family.
E. DISTRICT COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION: As of the date of this report, we have not
received a recommendation from District 6.
F. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Based on findings 1 through 6, staff recommends
approval of the variance, subject to the condition that the applicant obtains subdivision
approval prior to construction of the new home.
Page 3 of 3
�
�
�
OI-ff(oS
�����
District 6 Planning Council ��
-, � . _... :
1061 Rice St.
St. Paul, MN 55117
Phone 651 488-4485
Fax 651 488-0343
May 24, 2001
Mr. John Hardwick
LIEP
350 St. Peter St.
Suite 300
Si. Paul, MN 55102
Dear John,
The District 6 P�anning Council received a request from Steven Mitchell, 1236 Virginia
St. for a front setback variance that would allow for the construction of a new house.
� The required setback is 49 feet and a 34 foot setback is proposed, for a variance of 15
feet.
On Wednesday, May 23, 2001 the Land Use Task Force of the District 6 Planning
Council approved this request.
If you have any questions, please call me at 651-488-4485.
Sincerely,
�� �
Kathy Co e�
Executive Director
cc: Steven Mitchell
�
APPLICATION FOR ZOIVING VARIANCE
OFFICE OF LICENSE, INSPECTIONS, AND
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
350 St. Peier Sfreet, Suite 300
Saint Paul, MN SS102-I SIO
65I-266-9008
APPLICANT
Name S i �v� �✓ � i'1 i 1'-lf i:.Z-t- Company
Address 1 �3�% Vt ' iN�V} S;.
City 5�' ���- Statei'l^� Zip ;)5��7 DaytimePhone�$/
Property interest of applicaM (owner, contract purchaser, etc.) ��w v�
Name of owner (if
PROPERTY AddresslLocation N��T ccT ni ; p_rif o F JJ-3C Ui/1:� ^jr.� $�,
Legaldescription 1.�� Sa.�1 -y'_5 ,/}(�Ol7�;nl ��cJ .`�i ,�'�r.�L �� j '�-�
(attach addi6onal sheet if necessary)
5 ; 1n•i�+-1`
"s Lof size �� � /�E% Present Zoning �t�'1 ��Presenf Use �1 �'%' � �- � .
ProposedUse 5i^''r�-�? L�.� ' SlN�< �+g+"7/�� �''.:�:L�C��L
1. Variance(s) requested: F�vT 5 � i�.'�K ?'C lj y' � ti L`.-.1�-t= �% t $`-�-'� �'
�r- y 9'
2:- What physical characteristics of the property prevent iTs being used for any of the permiYted uses in your zone?
�Z:- r.J � s i ��
(topography, size and shape of lot, soil conditions, etc.) <<; i q���,1SC i�,..q a.;- i.; i ri� i_.•"
(.-fl`nJr(ri? i-..i.'iilL.i ..idU.1) f.+c�'i ��:flv:ii �i.cY �'G'in�l i'•'i�l=. �:�.4;.��:�_
:.1�'Ti n�i�[_i l'� yr �t::.l: t3'-1�l.cJ'-�.'• /�,.J� C_:i�-�( f r fi-J^
1�� _IY ,IJ
3. Explain how the strict application of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance would result in peculiar or exceptionaf
practical difficulties or exceptional undue hardships. r. '�
`'�iT'� i rFc h�c'r�tl�bc Sc'� ' 94t �7= �7
. A�nJ.7 ci:.C.`}ila�L' :�P cXt$?rNo- L'�r�f'-'f�-E' f}N? /��rfft�•+'t. c�v./yL� .� i 1YCLl S. (ic=
r c`,�r �^��.'�'� ! w`lic:�l) j i%iJl}4�� TU �:: j/l/ jtrL ��t'L�l�� �"�i (
, l:�Su".>� 4�C���L f�' {!.'�7.'c lJ ���I i. v j'�iS .5 t l�='
4._- Explain how the granting of a variance will not be a substantial detriment
to the public good or a substantial impairment of the intent and �uroose
Tjt� S� i r �'+tlt T r9%r7
w �� S r`�« u��C ^� �t /t�'�1 c !�+}€�`t'c7' cPF i7/i
S�.=Z � r ri �i-�✓ �:JTrr'1ZS 6i�c�-f t� U e✓ ���-�-�lC.
.�^•�7 Ju•u� !} �JckdJ �v0 �T�xZi i�i-c`R� IS �.r✓c
oi ff-(,=P f�j.�N CoCs�L �t-U�.f '�'1�YJyaF'i`
taCh additional sheets if needed.l
CASHIERS USE ONLY
�
� '�� � � / �__--
ApplicanYs
Date J �r�JO j
o�--tfto5
57� u��, r, � rc�ret-�
1 �-3c. v � Ft-�N.� 5 �
5T ��;� :.,-, .•J :� � ir �
T.G. 5�,�,�fy Aor�ir/�>> Yc:.
5T . i�)�+t, tor� �S � �E
_ fJ14 �1jF_� ��JD -1- zy- /��J �J�P.4USC
_ �W:- F�.�}D C}i[.e.�f(��Q ) N'll R DD� i� c.+i ; c� 04 Fi '.r•'v7 i=�L' . Fc.:..� J
�
1`� . �'6 ��- �M:aCj-] `�i'� i_n{c.aSIU"i� Aiv? i{{t f�u��.`�7/a.�. Cc::�O
c j�."'Ic ✓i�fic�+�'I.J ie/� i_,svK��) :..� �r, .�.,,.vi.�
J1`/LL. C��-,�T ,/� QGNjil�t=i2(}fj=� Ai,nc��i
' O� MoNC�L t.�oY T!U 1L=NjIGrI rit�r uJ =_ /y� � ti.�t=
�
�
�rc:. /JL=��r��(�1[�('�_ .'4.IU'D �-`�l: p:� �-(�<L ��=1 I
r3�+ /ia�z�i.Jl; ,g /iv.�,ti i.;` _ CU}tiT ci:�T" T1f-L 9�.ir-v1 Ul�
. � ���� ��l Gl;�l C �v�!'71�L� VV�. C✓}N /c'.L -4f �' c�L �
C�Ui� 1=x�5?"�N\Y �fc.•� �- r4 ./•iil�'='I/iEk U�' �L�l�i _
�— I G -�;11� 1 —��i � �.�; ;-� � i�� T� <l,s� 0�—+..� ..� T'tf �-
T
� � t v9
t 7 :�� 'c f�L ` (7� �
_ LcTS (.i1jLI< ���Tli�� , _ _
- tr+� �r�sr����- �:cy�., — ,v-.I c��' T1+ �✓+r�.�L�
' � 5 W 7�� +..J:= pji=.�C � T✓i �� Tltti h�'>^) �' C ii:jt. '�}i ✓i .✓
!� �
.. y! I j�L � L( i.:l� r' U{ � u- L Y � 1Zi9 Iv t_ uJt U�� !1'1 d�} /C �_'
TiA= i �Rf-✓+�� ii ,�f-��_� :� j� / i� /[ ii.i .9 3 :-n c:: � r�
�'� 5� � �+ � � z r�,.�- � .� L< . .�.� � ; � � ,� � �= FL-+-�
�
�� A�� ���;{� �,E-�d � 8� c��i.�-JC�� ;t: rr�
— �,.�irH�.v rrw P�i,�cl� �},a,�.=rz,�G� 5c'c ��iZ Pr�,.o�StY� 5 ti-r_
i /3A4c c;f�, �'�/ � u.;��:Lp K=�f t� � m. •5i �'ArTt��=2 � A�--tC _
-_ �� �}I✓;n1 �- F j�ft_jj�eMi=�i JJ Tl�i= /JC��=K ��n'4 'UJl �
�
�.
`I 3F_ h.q P�IT i L ��z-l�I'� i!h= /z-L'S i ,'� .� 'rl�-u {{a.+��=5 e ni
� � Yl-�,= lj4:Cz: �.✓ .�..v _.Pr.vin.J_
U
"`7 I �% V i-'"� ✓�I l �CN-LZ.C.
���_ �
dI-l�g�a�
�
��
3 '"
� b �
�:.
N '
<,. i
� c
� e S '
z AS
�r s
Y'_ :�v
W r,. �
_-�� �-Z-�p-<
��
0
��
,.=
s�
�
�, � ` � - � G .�
v [ O
-- �•,� •
--- - -�- - - - -- -- -• •;,< ......._._
� � � � � � R�� � �
u E t �'i
v��� �
�
-C' {- -j'}i F �` BL�
j � a � `;��
I ' ° i%S
— '�' ' '� c +`_. _ .
os f.�
K ��P
� �{J�O
yL1 4 � �. -� e n b' JO:.
� � c L x�.�p :
a S � ey,
r.•
x
�
y
I � � I �
tl •� '1 � r
y � � � �
� � c 2
� <.. r r �
r 3 t 1
c� o � D z
r.,
O
�
-{ <P, � r
� G'i
�� � J
U�
7�
�
rr>-1 R',
.n £ G�L
� s ��� a Q���
��� � �'00 x
� � ,, � � y �^ 1 � E
R a°L o �`�w b �f
eC °dd:�o� �
�
_ m (- r D
�
A
C
r,
E
s
K
3
2
l
�
2 -+'
�
�
�
�
�
�
c
G
�
� �
, C v
't �� O
rn � �
� z � =`a � -- 4 � .,�:, --• �:-
n -S cs •
�r �
�
C„
-Z / --.
�l�
Na �Ion� e:�
�
�
V� D ����
_' ��'
1D
e
� � � ; s ..0 � � ` �``7
c,� (`( --• '� I
�� � ;'��' �` � �
� � .. ' � _ '. \ � �
� �a�rr� \ ^
, ; ____
� � � G
� i f' �
� � � � '•;1,�
: � !7:
_ �: n ,-:
_ � ;� _:
r- ..
'L ' `J �-
�`; : ,�
�
u
�� � � � �t
i
�
, � c �
,� � �
� � � � Z
v � v� ` ;�
� � c
��
� � j �
� � � S
o' �a h �
' V '` `
r �� �
�, 1`
`
�
z
�
�
i �
��� �� �
2 O
-p �p —
� ` O
� �, n s
Ci � �
oh�i r.
� W ! ,s
� '
I T �•,i
1 �
� � � � � � �_
;� � { ��
� � �. : � 2 �'
i ri Q?� .
i � "� �
� ��
� ��, � � � '— L -��
; i _ ��---- �
i � ,� � � !
j �: � � � �
i I. ,
' �, , _v
,-: _-:__-� � _,.
�� � �� ,
i a ' � ; cf; �
; �' ; F� , �,
: i i
I � � V i
i� � r
— — � — �
1 -- - -- G ":
`t i� �� �..�.
� `; � �°
4, �� r
- �z
� ��
�E r
��o
��
.� r
Ur�-, --
n C d
-b Ct. Z
� �
o �' �
z�
�� -�
� z`
�
�1
c=
Z 4 �
Ya�
���
F � y
�� L
p� G
�o�
L��
�� z
`,G A
a � c�
��
Ul
0
3
�
0
-{
n II
G �
_� G � �
j
<� � �
L` �r
�
�
T
�
�
�
a
S
L
C
or-(t�S
�
r. �' ;.
`c. . o
'. - i`
_ �,
_
�
�
o�- t1 �5
PROPERTY WITHIN 100 FEET OF PARCEL: 1236 VIRGINIA STREET
�
►�
Z
�
w
�-
�
w
�
Z
O
H
C�
z
�
�
�
N
PREPARED BY:
LIEP
---� �
� � I `;
;
, ,
_�� ,
Q ;-�. '
� ;
�
❑'
�
�
�
i. SUNRAY-BATTLECREER-HIGHWOOD
2. HAZEL PARK HADEN-PROSPERITY HILLCREST
3. WEST SIDE _
4. DAYTON'S BLUFF
5. PAYNE-PIIl�.I,EN
6. NORTH END
7. THOMAS-DALE
8. SUMh4IT-UNTVERSTTI'
9. WEST SEVENTH
10. COMO
� 11. HAMLINE-MIDWAX
12. ST. ANTHONY PARK
13. MERRIAM PARK-LEXINGTO HAMLINE-SNELLING H AMLINE
______.,,.._., . .__.,___. 14. -�'31vA�C�E�TO�E�P,T�17 --�--,_.__.�--
1S. HIGHLAND
`" 16. SUMMIT HIT.L
17. DOWN`fOWN �
i ��'���� ���� ��I-189.��y��
r CITTZEN PARTTCIPATIQN PLANNING DISTRICTS
01=lIb�
CITY OF SAINT PAUL
S BOARD OF ZONITv'G APPEALS RESOLUTION
ZONING FILE NUMBER 01
DATE: May 29, 2001
WHEREAS, Steven T. Mitchell has applied for a vaziance from the strict appiication of the
provisions of Section 61.101 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code pertaining to the required front
setback of a new single family home in the RM-2 zoning district at 1236 Virginia Street; and
WHEREAS, the Saint Pau] Board of Zoning Appeals conducted a public hearing on May 29,
2001 pursuant to said application in accordance with the requirements of Section 64.203 of the
Legislative Code; and
WHE3tEAS, the Saint Paul Board of Zoning Appeals based upon evidence presented at the
public hearing, as substantially reflected in the minutes, made the following findings of fact:
1. The property ir1 question cannot be put to a reasonable use unde�• the strict provisions of the
code.
� The previous owner of this property constructed the garage 30 feet from the alley because of
the difference in elevation between the alley and the lot. This limits the buildable area for a
new house without encroaching into the required front setback. The applicant is proposing to
construct a new home on the lot with the garage and to rent the existing home on the other
lots for about five years. The applicant needs the income from renting the existin� house in
order to afford to build the new house. He eventually plans on demolishing the existing older
home and to recombine the two lots. In order to avoid moving the existing gara�e which
involve considerable expense, the applicant is requestin� this front yard setback variance.
2. Tfte plight of tJze lmid owner is dzce to circuntstances unique to this property, and these
circumstances were not created by the larrd owner.
The location of the existing garage on the site as well as the avera�e setback of the other
homes on this block are circumstances that were not created by the applicant.
3. The pr•oposed variance is in keeping with the spirit and intent of the code, and is consistent
tivith the health, safety, comfort, morals and welfare of the inhabitants of the City of St. Paul.
The proposed variance will allow the applicant to construct a new single family home to
eventually replace the old house existing on the property. Presently, the two lots making up
this parcel are combined under one Property Identification Number as a single tax parcel.
The applicant needs to split these two lots before he can build a new house and he will need
� to recombine the two lots after the old house is removed. Provided that the applicant obtains
the necessary subdivision approval, the proposed variance is in keeping with the spirit and
intent of the code.
Page 1 of 3
File # 01-189209
Resolution
4. The proposed variaTice will not impair an adequate supply of Zight and air to adjacent
property, nor will it alter the essential character of the surrounding area or unreasonably
dinrinish established property values within the surrounding area.
Other than the front yard setback, the proposed new home will meet all of the setback
requirements. The average setback of the homes along this block ranges from 31 feet to 55
feet. The proposed setback of 34 feet falls within the this range and will not be out of
keeping with the character of the area. This block of Virginia Street is a dead end road and
the opposite side of the block is undeveloped land. The proposed variance will not
significantly affect the supply of light or air to adjacent properties.
S. The vnr ifgranted, would not pern:it any use that is not permitted under the provisions
of the code for the property in the district where the affected la�id is located, nor would it
alter or change the zoning district classification of the property.
A single family home is a permitted use in this zoning district. The proposed variance, if
granted, �vill not change or aiter the zoning classification of the property.
6. The request fot• variance is not based prinzarily on a desire to increase the value or income
` poterttial of the parcel of lond.
The applicant states that his primary desire is to provide a new home for his family.
NOR', THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Saint Paul Boazd of Zoning Appeals that the
provisions of Section 61.101 are hereby waived to allow a 34-foot front setback; subject to the
condition that the appiicant obtains subdivision approval prior to construction of the new home;
In order to construct a new single family home on property located at 1236 Virginia Street; and
legall}� described as T. B. Somers Addirion To St. Paul Subj To Ailey Lots 25 And Lot 26; in
accordance with the applica2ion for variance and the site plan on file with the Zoning
Administrator.
MOVED BY : Wilson
SECONDED BY : Duckstad
�
�
r�T r
. _ . _____ --- arr - z � _.,...m.�,m.___...__�_____..�-_._..-..,-___,_—_—_
AGAINST: 3
MAILED: May 30, 2001
�
Page 2 of 3
01-(l�S
Fiie # 01-189209
Resolution
�
TIME LIMIT: No order of the Board of Zoning Appeals permitting the erection or
alteration of a building or off-street parking facility shall be valid for a
period longer than one year, unless a building permit for such erection or
alteration is obtained within such period and such erection or alteration is
proceeding pursuant to the terms of such permit. The Board of Zoning
Appeals or the City Council ma} grant an extension not to exceed one year.
In granting such estension, the Board of Zoning Appeals may decide to hold
a pubiic hearing.
APPEAL: Decisions of the Board of Zoning Appeals are final subject to appeal to the
City Council withi� 15 days by anyone affected by the decision. Building
permits shall not be issued after an appeal has been filed. If permits have
been issued before an appeal has been filed, then the permits are suspended
and construction shall cease until the City Council has made a final
determination of the appeal.
CERTIFICATION: I, the undersigned Secretary to the Board of Zoning Appeals for the City of
Saint Paul, Minnesota, do hereb}' certify that I have compared the foregoing
copy with the original record in my office; and find the same to be a true and
� correct copy of said originai and of the fvhole thereof', as based on approved
minutes of the Saint Paul Board of Zoning Appeals meeting held on May 29,
2001 and on record in the Office of License Inspection and Environmental
Protection, 350 St. Peter Street, Saint Paul, Minnesota.
SAINT PAUL BOARD OF ZO\I\G APPEALS
Debbie Crippen
Secretary to the Board
�
Page 3 oT 3
MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
CITY COUNCIL CAAMBERS, 330 CITY HALL �
ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA, MAY 29, 2001
PRESENT: Mmes. Maddox, and Morton; Messrs. Courtney, Duckstad, Faricy, Galies, and Wilson
of the Board of Zoning Appeais; Mr. Warner, Assistant Ciry Attorney; Mr. Hardwick
and Ms. Crippen of the Office of License, Inspection, aad Environmental Protection.
ABSENT None
The meeting was chaired by Joyce Maddox, Chair.
Steven T. Mitchell (NO1-189209) 1236 Virainia Street• A front setback variance in order
to build a new single family home. The required front setback is 49 feet and a 34-foot setback is
proposed, for a variance of 15 feet.
Mr. Hardwick showed siides of the site and reviewed the staff report with a recommendation for
approval, subject to the condition that the applicant obtains subdivision approval prior to construction
of the new home.
There was no correspondence received in opposition to the variance request.
One letter was received in support of the variance from District 6.
The applicant STEVEN T. MITCHELL, 1236 Virginia Street, was present. There was opposition �
present at the hearing. Mr. Mitchell stated he had nothing to add.
Mike Ross, 1244 Virginia Street, stated that the south property line was four inches from the south
wall of his house. Mr. Ross stated that if Mr. Mitchell's garage was not placed correcfly. Mr. Ross
had a bid to move the garage and rebuild the crumbling retaining wall for a cost of $6,300. He stated
that if Mr. Mi[chell moved the gara�e where it should be he could place the new house where it should
be accordins to the Zoning Code. Mr. Ross stated he was not opposed to the new house, however, if
the garage was not moved the house and the garage would be too close to his home.
Mr. Duckstad questioned whether Mr. Ross had spoken to Mr. Mitche2L Mr. Ross stated he had not.
Mr. Mitchell stated that he did not know if the bid had included having to excavate three feet of earth
behind the retaining wall. Mr. Mitchell stated that he would have a hard time getting into [he garage
because of the height of the alley. He stated that if the bid Mr. Ross had did not include the excavation
of three feet of dirt the price would be higher.
Ms. Maddox questioned whether Mr. Mitchell had spoken to Mr. Ross about the project. Mr.
Mitchell replied that he had mentioned that they were goino to build a house there and would need a
variance for the front of the house. He stated that Mr. Ross did not say anything then.
___,�Mr �Wilson_questioned whether_Mz,_A'Iitcl�eJ,1fS_nejgY�boZ_had be�n_p��s�ntatIhes?is.tricime�Ting__MI_—_.
Mitchell stated that Mr. Ross had not been there.
Mr. Courmey questioned Mr. Mitchell whether the ne«� house Gvould be blocking Mx. Ross's view. �
O(-lt(t5"
� File #/ O1-189209
Minutes OS-29-01
Page Two
Mr. Mitchell stated that he was unsure if his neighbor's smalt side window on the south side would be
blocked.
Mr. Courtney questioned whether Mr. Mitchell would be willing to move the garage if the bid were
correct and included the excavation necessary. Mr. Mitchell stated he could look at it, however, the
driveway would have to be re-sloped. He stated that he had enough tilt now and he would not be able
to use the garage in the winter.
Hearing no further testimony, Ms. Maddox closed the public portion of the meeting.
Mr. Wilson moved to approve the variance and resolution based on findings 1 through 6, subject to the
condition that the applicant obtains subdivision approval prior to construction of the new home.
Mr. Duckstad seconded the motion, which passed on a roll call vote of 4-3(Courtney, Galles,
Maddox).
� Submitted by: Approved by:
John Hardwick
Jon Duckstad, Secretary
�
o I- ��c�
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
The Saint Paul City Council will conduct a public hearing on Wednesday, 3uly ll,
2001, at 5:30 p.m., City Council Chambers, 3rd Floor City Hall, to consider the
appeal of Michael Pfalz regarding the Board of Zoning Appeals decision granting
a front yard setback variance in order to construct a new single family home at
1236 Virginia Street.
Dated: June 15, 2001
Nancy Anderson
Assistant City Council Secretary
*�**�**�** -COhB'I.JOURNRL- �*�**�*� DqTE JUN-15-2001 �� TIME 07�37 � P.01
01'!!�S
MODE = MEMp2Y TRRNSMISSION
FSLE F�.= 204
NO- CQ1 FlHOLNTWK STRTION IJfiMIF/
TEl_Pti�lE FD.
001 OK <01> LEGFlL LEDC'aER
STRRT=JUN-15 07�36 ENU=JICJ-15 07�37
,. i�%�%
{ity of Saint Paul -
�� -City Cauncil - �� - 651 266 �74- �k
'.: illiiil�
CITY OF SAINT PAUL
OFFICE OF THE CTTY COUNCII,
�'ACSTNIILE TRANSMISSION
COVERSHEET
TO: �
FROM:
FAX #:
�: �'�=�- l.�-�-°
��
DA'1'E: r�i,A� IS a-oo �
Note: FacsSmile operator, please deliver this transmission to the above
addressee. If yon did not receive all of the pages in good condition,
please advise danie Lafrenz at (651) 266-8560 at your
earliest coovenieuce.
Thank you_
NUNIBER OF PAGES (INCLUDTNG'1'HIS PA.GE): �
CTTY AALL TFID2D FLOOR SAIN1' PAUG �1NESOTA 55102
�
pnnuaonleryn'eLpsGa.
i
95/i2/2001 11:44 5514934948
APPLICA710N FOft APPENL
JILL BEf��d
Depor7merzt of P/anirinP anO,E'roxo�nic Develoymen!
)'unLrg Srction
]30D CIt}•13a.7Annex
15 H'esr Faurth Srreer
Sornt Paul, M!\' SSIO2
26G-6589
APPELIAMT I Name_1`(]ochnel �. �a�;�
�
Address t2�1�1 �rq, ,p,
City��� S1.�,iZip�(L'��aytime phonel�►-Q$'J•58�
PROpER7Y
LO C A710N
parE e2
������
Zon;ng FI'e Name Stcvch T, M�� fchall
Addre>s«ocation_.4�� Y«��.,, � St. �. rnr,. S5v�']
TYPE OF APPEAL Appbca�;on is hereDy metle 9or en appea� to the
= Board of Zoning Appe�ls !N City Coun�il
�nc�- the prov�sions of Chaptor b4, Sec:ion �1 _. Par�graph 1 DI of the ZoNng Code, !o
appeai a decir.on made by the_;�, Pp,wt 6Qg f 1 ;,,a A�y �penl�
�n 2g, Lt�i Flle number pl�tSg2o4
(7at +d ecrs, o n)
� GROUNDS FOR APpEA�: Expiain why you feel there has been an error �n eny requirement,
� permd dec',sion or re'usa� made by an a�m(nigtra2rvt CtFUai, or an error in f�ct, peocedure or
� I., fmding made by th° Board o! Zonmg Appeala o� the planning Commisswn.
�rPlea�se. See a�ls�cr,e5,, shrrts "�.,cl�i�y eXqio�nti�i=n, pv,otvs, anl provose.� aie �t•n,
I m�,S,�e,� +a sho.�u rny hom` sr, r�,in,b„n � propoaA new home.
Atteoh atl7�'�ona! sneet d necessa0?
ApphcanYs signature�j��rYblfL Date�____ City s�e
�,t� M.bean tm��n�,a'� s�s+e.)
nb N• Dun�aP SF.
1'�oxv� �le � Nrn . 'S6u 3
(Lsi) 44�-484q
96!?2/2091 11:44 6514834B48 JILL BEAhJ
PAGE 03
V�'���Z�
I would like to appeal the decision of tbe Board of Zoning Appeals Hearing from the meeting on
May 29, 2001. The boazd voted 3-4 to approve a setback variance at 1236 Vizginia.
I own the home az 1244 Virgxnis which is just North of the proposed site. The Mitchell's aze
planning to build a house a mere 48 inches from the south wall of my home. (The property line
is just inches ftom my home.) T will already lose the light, air and genecat use of my 2 South
windows amd attic access window, but if their new house is buiit I S ft forvuard, I will also have
only limited use of my Southwest livinp�oonti window. Building a house so close and forvvard of
my house wilt de5nitely impact the quality of my life ia a home that I have worked very hard to
improve. I als6 feei it will have a severe negauve impact on the calue and the resale potentia! of
�Y ProP�Y•
I feel that i�f th,is house is built 15 ft forwazd I will lose significar�t use of my home and feel
overtaken by the adjoining property. Mrs. Mitcheli operates a home-based dsycare which I think
will only maY.e mattErs worse.
i don't think there is anything that I can do about the houses being only 48 inches apart, but to
aUow it to be buili so far fonvard of my home, I feel will increase the damage done to my
properiy va(ue.
In addition, the sround in this area is mostly peat bog and I am very conc6rnerl about a house
being built so close W my foundation. I'he area oa the West side of Virginia has no houses
because of this reason and the townhomes at the end of Virginia were built with approximately
61 pylons under the fou�dation to prevent it from sinking. I bclieve there is already deterioration
of that fowidarion and also the foundation of the house that the Mitchell's cumntly own. The
stability of my founidation and the new £oundation on this type of soil is of great concezn to me.
Hnclosed are pictures of the front of my house and the view looking out of my Pront wiadow
showing how gaixring this vareance will limit the vse of the Southwest window of my home in
addition to already losing the use of the South windows.
"fhank you for youx consideration in this matter.
Sincerely,
'���� ,� y,
Michacl P. P£aiz72t
3
a
n
�
�-
3
�
�
06/12l2001 11:44 6514894848
JILL BEAN
M < .�
'" k s
�, �
�c �e � �
1.�
�
.�
�
�
�t�
���
�.;�
�'I
O !'� � :- >
e.._. ftt�„� 3
t-` r�-` �.�
� ^5 0
�---� z
� � �' .0 �b
� .� �: t su
n � �� ��
;
� \
' , rRSfb..\. e � � +
� ;--' , ,:u �� t -� _
� y, ``Y 7��
�� ._.
�..
� �.
�G cI `-
!'; �,
.� �
,�
z m �r w J �
. ; '1 � �
' � i
` � c Z
s c
v ` C C
� �I
�
� � � �
� , �
�; r � _
4 � � ^
f �
* �i r
v, t'
�
� �
V h
. �'_ x �
-` � — �
cn r .t,
f.� r, �
�
�
r
a
��Y�
,/
�,
�
�
0
-�
�`
N
��
I T _Y� � e
� .�.
._.t. ____ �n� �r3
I A ^ ' �] � �� � s & •
��� � �� �� �<ffi
�' z �` i v � , ��
.- � ' f �. o�l l� ..a,�.�
' S�a
� `� ' ��I
� �__���.
k ° 6__ ._ ---.- .— -
� I
� 1 ,/
� � ,
l; �
� �
o, e ;�'�; 4
+' i .. � -t
�� , F�� y ` , ,,
_ -� � �, �^
.. �� I y
j ._.. _ __. � __._, � :
�
� l � r �`' �^ i+ 'A
t�L
;
0
�
k
�
w
h
a
L
r
- i ?'
�p
e
�
e�
� �
PAGE ea
0� -���)
g3 �
��A �
�¢��
�f� �
<:��-�$.
t,� 'v
$ v � ��
3 � _.a
�� �
�� 3 ��
� � � ��
i���
� �
� �.
� � �
� F_ ..G
Q�
�
���
�¢I�
�
� g �
�. � �
.� a
� ,�-
� � �
�� �
` �
��
�
p L c C 16
` Q C
a r T
3 , �
3 � -
1
.,....
�
. �'�
�....
• .. �R.
��J � '4 � � ..
? . ,
. f . A � .
�
:
� � �� �
. .
. , _ . .:. . :v'�,:�
,�
,,. ;�.
. .. , : ,,
' .• . .
�
�.k . . '�ML ' ..
r �' , t ..
` l.
. ' ^ ���•' i���
rv. y, . .. ��
't`M Y,,
. .Y"� , ' �.+ `�,�M
', ' .. .
`, °:5 �,, . .
��4. � �
a .' • :l.�^+ ,f�
� ��� .. .. . ,.
^ T yy � . .� . . ... �.�3C��,,JI.
.�;�: �'--�'. �
. . �M'., �j'� �
• : �� 1 'AN , �� , . �� �' �
� .. . ,'��' Sk?.���{ , � .
. •. � �. �:��' •, .
� �"�rt�t,�+sa� ," "�'•_-.��_.�."°"� yii. �
�� ���' '`"�
''^ '` �
_ � n
�.���' � ,��
� r K �
'^ � �;���� �; �
,
,,� ,F.�' ��,:,,'',
r ,� ' .�"
,, ��r:i�x ,
1- 1 `
� f � . . �� ,�
i.. „ �,�'�.�x.a.:
wi..� k ..
.. ,y[}'�ii �
� �' • �' �
bl-�I�eS
BOARD OF Z01�ING APPEALS STAFF REPORT
TYPE OF APPLICATION: Minor Variance FILE #: O1-189209
APPLICANT:
HEARING DATE:
LOCATION:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
PLANNING DISTffiCT:
PRESENT ZONING:
REPORT DATE:
DEADLINE FOR ACTION:
STEVEN T. Mfi'CHELL
May 29, 2001
1236 VIRGINIA STREET
T. B. SOMERS ADDTTION TO ST. PAUL SUBJ TO ALLEY
LOTS 25 AND LOT 26
RM-2
May 18, 2001
August 14, 2001
ZONING CODE REFERENCE: 61.101
BY: John Hardwick
DATE RECEIVED: May 8, 2001
A. PURPOSE: A front setback variance in order to build a new single family home. The
required front setback is 49 feet and a 34-foot setback is proposed, for a variance of 15 feet.
B. SITE AND AREA CONDITIQNS: This parcel currently consists of two 40 by 140-foot
lots. The existing house at 1236 Virgima is located on Lot 25 and the garage for the house is
located on Lot 26. There is access to the garage from both the street and the alley.
Surrounding Land Use: Primarily one- and two-family homes.
C. BACKGROUND: The applicant currently lives at 1236 Virginia and wouid like to construct
a new house next to the existing one.
D. FINDINGS:
1. The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use under the strict provisions of
the code.
The previous owner of this property constructed the garage 30 feet from the alley because
of the difference in elevation between the alley and the lot. This limits the buildable area
far a new house without encroaching into the required front setback. The applicant is
proposing to construct a new home on the lot with the garage and to rent the existing
home on the other lots for about five years. The applicant needs the income from renting
Page 1 of 3
pl � t(t�S
File # O1-189209
Staff Report
the existing house in order to afford to build the new house. He eventually plans on
demolishing the existing older home and to recombine the two lots. In order to avoid
moving the existing gazage which involve considerable expense, the applicant is
requesting this front yard setback variance.
2. The plight of the Zand owner is due to circumstances unique to this property, and these
circumstances were not created by the Zand owner.
The location of the existing gazage on the site as well as the average setback of the other
homes on this block aze circumstances that were not created by the applicant.
3. The proposed variance is in keeping with the spirit and intent of the code, and is
consistent with the health, safery, comfort, morals and welfare of the inhabitants of the
City of St. Paul.
The proposed variance will allow the applicant to construct a new single family home to
eventually replace the old house existing on the properiy. Presently, the two lots making
up this parcel are combined under one Property Identification Number as a single tas
parcel. The applicant needs to split these two lots before he can build a new house and he
will need to recombine the two lots after the old house is removed. Provided that the
applicant obtains the necessary subdivision approval, the proposed variance is in keeping
with the spirit and intent of the code.
4. The proposed variance wi11 not impair an adequate supply of Zight and air to adjacent
property, nor will it alter the essential character of the surrounding area or unreasonably
diminish established properry values within the surrounding area.
Other than the front yard setback, the proposed new home will meet all of the setback
requirements. The average setback of the homes along this block ranges from 31 feet to
55 feet. The proposed setback of 34 feet fa11s within the this range and will not be out of
keeping with the character of the area. This block of Virginia Street is a dead end road
and the opposite side of the block is undeveloped land. The proposed variance will not
significantiy affect the supply of light or air to adj acent properties.
5. 77xe variance, if granted, would not permit any use that is not perznitted under the
provisions of the code for the property in the district where the affected Zand is located,
nor would it alter or change the zoning district classification of the property.
A single faxnily home is a permitted use in this zoning district. The proposed variance, if
granted, will not change or alter the zoning classification of the property.
Page 2 of 3
Ol-lit�s
File # 01-189209
Staff Report
6. The request for variance is not based primariZy on a desire to increase the value or
income potential of the parcel of Zand.
The applicant states that his primary desire is to provide a new home for his family.
E. DISTRICT COiJNCIL RECONIMENDATION: As of the date of this report, we have not
received a recommendation from District 6.
F. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Based on findings 1 through 6, staff recommends
approval of the variance, subject to the condition that the applicant obtains subdivision
approval prior to construction of the new home.
Page 3 of 3
- - - �
V
Distr�ct 6 Planning Counc�l ___ w c� o� -� ��5
- � �,
� � .�.
. _ _ .�.,__ .... ..... ...._ ..,..,,.� ..__ ..�,� a. _._�.. _ ..........t.. _t- .._...a . _,.. . � . _ . _.,.. _ . _ _ .
1061 Rice St.
St. Paul, MN 55117
Phone 651 488-4485
Fau 651 488-0343
May 24, 2001
Mr. John Hardwick
LIEP
350 St. Peter St.
Suite 300
St. Paul, MN 55102
Dear John,
The District 6 Planning Councii received a request from Steven Mitchell, 1236 Virginia
St. for a front setback variance that would allow for the construction of a new house.
The required setback is 49 feet and a 34 foot setback is proposed, for a variance of 15
feet.
On Wednesday, May 23, 2001 the Land Use Task Force of the District 6 Planning
Council approved this request.
If you have any questions, please cail me at 651-488-4485.
Sincerely,
�(,T � �� t/r�/
Kat y Co e�
Executive Director
cc: Steven Mitchell
APPLICATION FOR ZONING VARIANCE
OFFICE OFLICENSE, INSPECTIONS, A1VD
EIWIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
350 SL Peter Street, Suite 300
Saint Pars� MN 5510�1510
651-266-9008
APPLICANT
PROPERTY
Name S i��-� t. i'1 i 1�-�fiu- Company
Address ]a"3fo U'f�i(,INt�{ �
City 57 ��L State �'1'� Zip .531t� Daytime Phone ( S'!'��l
Property interest of applicant (owner, contract purchaser, etc.) ow nr �'K
Name of owner
Address/�ocation N� x'+" zcT ni r oF /l vr/�e-�f4 ST.
Legal description i.$ Se� �s /�o� �y 5f 6�¢+iL ��a t�.6
(attach addi6onalsheetifnecessary) Si �� ����
Lotsize y� x��� Present Zoning�m a-PresentUse�,1. oc �-�Tip�
ProposedUse $laJb�..t- LEi - SfKC`tt /�/}y`1/� Q�"l�-ZU'''�Gr
1. Variance(s)requested: F� S�i J3�k �p ?j�J j /�1/ `'t-.'�� v'F ���
oF E /9 r
2. What physical characteristics of the property prevent its being used for any of the permitted uses in your zone?
(topography, size and shape of lot, soil conditions, etcJ k��yy�a�irSC Wp.�;� �p � rr1 �y n1�
6 h'�C�4�' i.oC%9�I;��/ :����j N-o`i" f'c: /-ncs�r QR;,v'j Q��if�7j. G-,A-F�
:.�/$�. fjv i i� � y �R-�:3�i:.a5 c1rA�(J� �-, A+v-D y�...e:-�-Y u;tr�vT'�''a.
3. Explain how the strict appliration of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance wouid result in peculiar or exceptional
practical difficulties or exceptional undue hardships. w F .� r .� ` ��; E-p�6t S t"r'S`9� � yg �
,l�.va Cec.�}iTan/ ,F tX�STint6 C` AnrP /L�T�FwE�'^�d}'-;- �`FT h�i�'� Srd�
e� PRa�� ���D Gt uvA6� to P�r 1N 7r�. D�LZV Yt+�r- 1
Wa�Tt-� 0� � Ns}�ee tS:.;��--i 6nJ 71i-iS $ iiti�.
4. Explain how the granting of a variance will not be a substantial detriment
to the public good or a substantial impairment of the intent and purpose
oftheZoningOrdinance. 7-� S�i�� r f�� R�
�.t; �i.i 5 i l�` le�� �� /f�6; jE li+f-feI'f2� oFF 77fc
5:"��ZT i tf A"� �t�'�"1ZS ,�'i�[�97� 6,n/ i Zf`'c fJ �tK.
�t�a 3���- � o��-o tNo s�� r�+t,eL rs �
Oj7t-�,=(L `�l�.N LUtt�L I�O�SF ����
(Attach additional sheets if needed.)
CASHIERS USE ONLY
� , � p��V �
� �08 r o
Applicant's
Date ���JO /
i� o�-�l
! 57� uc;� r� r rcH�:'u- ""
:i ---- - � l�-3 irIRC:-wix� �5�
:; 5� �r�L _ . s .�rJ S�S�r7
i T. 8. so.� �R5 H D/)irlc,� 7c
i ST .!'qUL i.oTS a..$ t,Z(.,
'1"O W 1�0++7 !T M A� C'o a1 Ci= '
� .W�U ,.t.C:: A.Jd i ACa= A�GL✓inti.- �'e2 r'� 111Af�.lAn�Ct_. Bi-P.rar�SY'
�
� i`f� .-� 0 6� ,M J cA 'T� �h+`eNS�v c, qN � � fK F�� �'J37�J rJ cc��-D
I{��SS�hLS la�+Sc 5�:✓7c ?it:.ficE»'I� ul,- i_r;uKL:fl ;..tZ ,.Y,avi.�tr
�
w ti
�v �
> � � f�T
;v�n,�G�_
� � /yc .;
au �` C,e
AJ � L`�T" '
� ,�
-urv� 5i,
�� a � �
L
� �'7 E 2� � 27� �
7
r,
�i � �
/3Ac!(
Tfti. eX+Si'I+�v Lc�Cv.rj�o�l c7� T/�
R�/ +�c= }.�t=�c j U T✓i�i= Tlf� NvM L c �
'I'l� �p�rc-rfT' t�a� d4�- ti'/ G.-t2✓i0 � woc��
J�i�,�'�t jF��rO ?� c� S� 1� 1 i vJ � 3
��v-� RL r��.�- �:� �� . AN� ,�� N
N�L �o� ,vE Z-c� {�i� c'Jlr9.n/
�/ rH� 6t,J�IL r���L�� gu't-r3,�94�, o��'L P
. .... �
y
u
. Ls
i
�
�oo�ttp 5
`7 f'� V�-'"� iMI �CF�L7L
c.�. o �- < <�
�4�
.� ��
d�=��q���
��
3 d
c �� G
U 1
ai
� C
ae S '
Z �
N �
w � a '
'�_'' �.
c•
_-�� �-Z-��-<
��
0
��
„=
s�
�
� L�
J �C S
,�
G •
60
' ' _ _ _ ' _ ' . �� a � ... . . . . . . _
� prc
_ _ _ �� � � Pt. ..-.� d � �
n E c [ I
� Bn �
`'� � �' �
Gpa
' _ ' ' _ .pw`.� c _ _� . _ .
I �
q � x�
ad c `
x
�
d �� �n
y <
� (,� 'J � m
° L � Z
� r r a
� � �' 3
r 3 Z y
� o Z n 2
r,
- � �, :-1 �
i �'
� J
�
W
�
r�>
3
'_��� _
D� trt` �
s
����ma��� �� �
'y� � �0o x �
c. ,� �° a -1 °
l� S ��
,S 00"��8���
— �
�m r ra
Z -�
`- -- - - �
�
�
�
�
0
�
R C
'{ p O
� �• o
!` L � ��� ` _,... (� � `� �.' �
n -S d
�y
�
G�
-Z --�
� � �
�
Na �� o � �: � # 1 �
� ;�
� D_.�,..c�A—S 1.�� � T
-,
=1 M1 I
a �Z � i
�,.� � � � .`�� c � °D
� �`'� �
���' �'�` �
� `
�!"' _ _ _ �. ._ �
� .�cr.r�-� ^ .�
� ,� _ .- _. � _ � ,.�� _ _ .�
1 ) ("'V
1 �', �:. �
� � \��y`. .., .i �
� ,�- ih\��
`�; ,__
--f � <.
� w �. i�
r-� :l `i�
Y :
r_Y , �' r
;f � � �
f'
�
�v�
sw
oh
� � o
_ _p o �
� U• �
� �t i� �
�
� X
I�
i �
f ��
I Z
i .g
i i
r„
�'� R
� j
�ti�
\ 4� � "�
� � �
� y
r c tr
��� �^9 �
�
v
�� �
{ y t,y �
R _ � :�
�G'� �#
�
��� -� -...�
� -�' — "� � _
��i�i ��
/
'� � _ � � �
" 3 � � c�
x �
� �
� � G l',
� 6� C _
�� U� �
1 1 � (� `�
v ti `
� u�
� � � � �
. �
� � � �
� � ya
�
� c
v, ('
�
�
v
�
���� �'—���
�'t�i� h
- �z
-� � �
�� n
� r
v n �
� c
s a. L
� `'
O � '
� ' �
�
� z�
�
r�
c x
� 4�
fa�
�^ �y
o � (
�� G
p�G
n
� b�
W� `
� A
a �
D �
�.�.�
�
a
3
�
O
-�
s �
G � �
�;I cy �
/' �
� �
a
0
O
Z
V
�
a
3
�
r
�
r
�
�
_� � �
� �
Z � 5
� V 1
e
�(-Il��
C.�'. o�-�!
PROPERTY WITHIN 100 FEET OF PARCEL: 1236 VIRGINIA STREET
�
W
�
�
W
S �
Q/,
� � �
� �
� �
� �
�
.
N
PREPARED BY: LI EP
nl-iims�
1. SUNRAY-BATTLECREEK-HIGHWOOD
2. HAZEL PARK HADEN-PROSPERITY HILLCREST
3. WEST SIDE _
4. BAYTON'S BLUPF
5. PAYNE-PFIALEN
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
• : y.i��l7
THOMAS-DALE
SUMMIT-UNIVERSTI'Y
WEST SEVENTT�
COMO
HAMLINE-MIDWAY
ST. ANTfIONY PARK
MERRTAM PARK-LEXINGTON HAMLINE-SNELLING HAMLINE
MACALESTER GROVEI..EIND
HIGHLAND
SiIMMiT HILL
DOWNTOIVN
� Z����� ���� �o�
CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PLANNING DISTRICTS
�
(� i - l l lv5
CITY OF SAINT PAUL
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS RESOLUTION
ZONING FII.E NU1vIBER: 01-189209
DATE; May 29, 2001
WHEREAS, Steven T. Mitchell bas applied for a variance from the strict application of the
provisions of Section 61.101 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code perta.iuing to the required front
setback of a new single fanuiy home in the RM-2 zoning district at 1236 Virginia Street; and
WHEREAS, the Saint Paul Boazd of Zoning Appeals conducted a public hearing on May 29,
2001 pursuant to said application in accordance with the requirements of Section 64.203 of the
Legislative Code; and
WHEREAS, the Saint Paul Board of Zoning Appeals based apon evidence presented at the
public hearing, as substantially reflected in the minutes, made the following findings of fact:
1. The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use under the strict provisions of the
code.
The previous owner of this property constnzcted the garage 30 feet from the alley because of
the difference in elevation between the alley and the lot. This limits the buildable area for a
new house without encroaching into the required front setback. The applicant is proposing to
construct a new home on the lot with the garage and to rent the existing home on the other
lots for about five years. The applicant needs the income from renting the existing house in
order to afford to build the new house. He eventually plans on demo2ishing the existing older
home and to recombine the two lots. In order to avoid moving the existing garage which
involve considerable expense, the applicant is requesting this front yard setback variance.
2. The plight of the land owner is due to circumstances unique to this property, and these
circumstances were not created by the land owner.
The location of the existing garage on the site as well as the average setback of the other
homes on this block are circuxnstances that were not created by the applicant.
3. The proposed variance is in keeping with the spirit and intent of the code, and is consistent
with the health, safety, comfort, morals and welfare of the inhabitants of the City of St. Paul.
The proposed variance will allow the applicant to construct a new single family home to
evenhxally replace the old house existing on the property. Presently, the two lots making up
this parcel are combined under one Property Identification Numbar as a single tas parcel.
The applicant needs to split these two lots before he can build a new house and he will need
to recombine the two lots a$er the old house is removed. Provided that the applicant obtains
the necessary subdivision approval, the proposed variance is in keeping with the spirit and
intent of the code.
Page I of 3
ot-c rces
File # O1-189209
Resolution
4. The proposed variance will not impair an adequate supply of Zight and air to adjacent
properzy, nor will it alter the essential character of the surrounding area or unreasonably
diminish established property vaZues within the surrounding area.
Other than the front yazd setback, the proposed new home will meet all of the setback
requirements. The average setback of the homes along this block ranges from 31 feet to 55
feet. The proposed setback of 34 feet falls within the this range and will not be out of
keeping with the character of the area. This block of Virginia Street is a dead end road and
the opposite side of the block is undeveloped land. The proposed variance will not
significantly affect the supply of light or air to adjacent properties.
S. The variance, ifgranted, would not permit any use that is not permitted under the provisions
of the code for the property in the district where the affected land is located, nor would it
alter or change the zoning diszrict classification of the property.
A single family home is a permitted use in this zoning district. The proposed variance, if
granted, will not change or alter the zoning classification of the property.
6. The request for variance is not based primarily on a desire to increase the value or income
potenlial of the parcel of land.
The applicant states that his primary desire is to provide a new home for his family.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Saint Paul Board of Zoning Appeals that the
provisions of Section 61.101 are hereby waived to allow a 34-foot front setback; subject to the
condition that the applicant obtains subdivision approval prior to construction of the new home•,
In arder to construct a new single family home on property located at 1236 Virginia Street; and
legally described as T. B. Somers Addition To St. Paul Subj To Alley Lots 25 And Lot 26; in
accordance with the application for variance and the site plan on file with the Zoning
Administrator.
MOVED BY: wi�son
SECONDED BY : Duckstad
IN FAVOR: a
AGAINST: s
MAILED: May 30, 2001
Page 2 of 3
dl-r1��
File # O1-189209
Resolurion
TIl1� LIlVIIT: No order oF the Board of Zoning Appeals permitting the erection or
alterafion of a building or off-street parldng Facility shall be valid for a
period longer than one year, unless a bnilding permit for such erection or
alteration is obtained within such period and snch erection or alteration is
proceeding pursuant to the terms of such permit. The Board of Zoning
Appeals or the City Council may grant an extension not to eaceed one year.
In granting such egtension, the Board of Zoning Appeals may decide to hold
a public hearing.
APPEAL: Decisions of the Board of Zoning Appeals are final subject to appeal to the
City Council within 15 days by anyone afFected by the decision. Building
permits shall not be issued after an appeal has been filed. If permits have
been issued before an appeal has been filed, then the permits are suspended
and construction shall cease until the City Council has made a final
determination of the appeal.
CERTIFICATION: I, the undersigned Secretary to the Board of Zoning Appeals for the City of
Saint Paul, Minnesota, do hereby certify that I have compared the foregoing
copy with the original record in my office; and Snd the same to be a true and
correct copy af said original and of the whole thereof, as based on approved
minutes of the Saint Paul Board of Zoning Appeals meeting held on May 29,
2001 and on record in the Office of License InspecYion and Environmental
Protection, 350 St. Peter Street, Saint Paul, Minnesota.
SAINT PAUL BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
Debbie Crippen
Secretary to the Board
Page 3 of 3
o�-i«y
MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE BOARD OF ZOIVING APPEALS
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 330 CITY HALL
ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA, MAY 29, 2001
PRFSENT: Mmes. Maddox, and Morton; Messrs. Courtney, Duckstad, Faricy, Galles, �a wason
of the Board of Zoning Appeals; Mr. Warner, Assistant City Attomey; Mr, Hazdwick
and Ms. Crippen of ffie Office of License, Inspection, and Environmental Protecrion.
ABSENT None
The meeting was chaired by Joyce Maddox, Chair.
Steven T. Mitchell (#O1-189209) 1236 Vir¢inia Street: A front setback variance in order
to build a new single family home. The required front setback is 49 feet and a 34-foot setback is
proposed, for a variance of 15 feei.
Mr. Hardwick showed slides of the site and reviewed the staff report with a recommenda6on for
approval, subject to the condiuon that the applicant obtains subdivision approval prior to construction
of the new home.
There was no correspondence received in opposition to ffie variance request.
One letter was received in suppozt of the variance from District 6.
The applicant STEVEN T. MPPCHELL, 1236 Virginia Street, was present. There was opposition
present at the hearing. Mr. Mitchell stated he had nothing to add.
Mike Ross, 1244 Virginia Street, stated that the south property line was four inches from the south
wall of his house. Mr. Ross stated that if Mr. Mitchell's garage was not placed correctly. Mr. Ross
had a bid to move the garage and rebuild the crumbling retaining wall for a cost of $6,300. He stated
that if Mr. Mitchell moved the gazage where it should be he could place the new house where it should
be according to the Zoning Code. Mr. Ross stated he was not opposed to the new house, however, if
the garage was not moved the house and the garage would be too close to his home.
Mr. Duckstad questioned whether Mr. Ross had spoken to Mr. Mitchell. Mr. Ross stated he had not.
Mr. Mitchell stated that he did not know if the bid had included having to excavate three feet of earth
behind the retaining wa1L Mr. Mitchell stated that he would have a hard time getting into the garage
because of the height of the alley. He stated that if the bid Mr. Ross had did not include the excavation
of three feet of dirt the price would be higher.
Ms. Maddox questioned whether Mr. Mitchell had spoken to Mr. Ross about the project. Mr.
Mitchell replied that he had menUOned that they were going to build a house there and wouid need a
variance for the front of the house. He stated that Mr. Ross did not say anything then.
Mr. Wilson questioned whether Mr. Mitchell's neighbor had been present at the District meeting. Mr.
Mitchell stated that Mr. Ross had not been there.
Mr. Courtney questioned Mz Mitchell whether the new house would be blocking Mr. Ross's view.
�/ ! � � L �Q�
File # O1-189209
Minutes OS-29-01
Page Two
Mr. Mitchell stated that he was unsure if his neighbor's small side window on the south side would be
blocked.
Mr. Courtney questioned whether Mr. Mitchell would be willing to move the garage if the bid were
correct and included the excavation necessary. Mr. Mitchell stated he could look at it, however, the
driveway would have to be re-sloped. He stated that he had enough tilt now and he would not be able
to use the garage in the winter.
Hearing no further testunony, Ms. Maddox closed the public pordon of the meeting.
Mr. Wilson moved to approve the variance and resolution based on findings 1 through 6, subject to the
condition that the applicant obtains subdivision approvai prior to construcrion of the new home.
Mr. Duckstad seconded the mouon, which passed on a roll call vote of 43(Courtney, Galles,
Maddox).
Submitted by:
John Hardwick
Approved by:
Jon Duckstad, Secretary
� � � . �
o f e
Council File # A \� ��LS
Cneen Sheet # — $� .- J l(_)��
RESOLUTION
CITY OF SAINT PAUL, NIINNESOTA
h
Presented By �`� ��
Referred To
Comxnittee: Date
a�
2 Whereas, Steven T. Mitchell, in file no. O1-189209, made application to the Board of
3 Zoning Appeals (hereinafter, the 'BZA") for a variance from the strict application of the
4 provisions of the Saint Paul Zoning Code for property commonly known as 1236 Virginia Street
5 and legally described as: T. B. Somers Addition To St. Paul Subj To Alley Lots 25 And Lot 26;
6 and
8 Whereas, The purpose of the variance application was to vary the zoning code standards
9 to allow a front setback of 34 feet, a change of 15 feet in the required minimum setback of 49
10 feet for a new single family home; and
11
12 Whereas, The BZA conducted a public hearing on Tuesday, May 29, 2001, after having
13 provided notice to affected property owners, and the BZA, by its Resolution #O1-189209,
14 adopted on Tuesday, May 29, 2001, granted the application subject to the condition that the
15 applicant obtains subdivision approval prior to constructing the new home, based on the
16 following findings and conclusions:
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
1. The properry in question cannot be put to a reasonable use under the strict provisions
of the code.
The previous owner of this properry constructed the garage 30 feet from the alley
because of the difference in elevation between the alley and the lot. This limits the
buiidable area for a new house without encroaching into the required front setback.
The applicant is proposing to construct a new home on the lot with the garage and to
rent the existing home on the other lots for about five years. The applicant needs the
income from renting the existing house in order to afford to build the new house. He
eventualiy plans on demolishing the existing older home and to recombine the two
lots. In orderto avoid moving the existing garage which involve considerable
expense, the applicant is requesting this front yazd setback variance.
2. The plight of the land owner is due to circumstances unique to this properry, and
these circumstances were not created by the Zand owner.
The location of the existing garage on the site as well as the average setback of the
other homes on this block are circumstances that were not created by the applicant.
2 3. The proposed variance is in keeping with the spirit and intent of the code, and is 0 � — �� 4 5
3 consistent with the health, safety, comfort, morals and weZfare of the inhabitants of
4
5
the City of St. Pau1.
6 The proposed variance will allow the applicant to construct a new single family home
7 to eventually replace the old house existing on the properiy. Presently, the iwo lots
8 making up this parcel aze combined under one Property Identification Number as a
9 single tax pazcel. The applicant needs to split these two lots before he can build a
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
new house and he will need to recombine the two lots after the old house is removed.
Provided that the applicant obtains the necessary subdivision approval, the proposed
variance is in keeping with the spirit and intent of the code.
4. The proposed variance will not impair an adeguate suppZy of light and air to adjacent
property, nor wi11 it alter the essential character of the surrounding area or
unreasonably diminish established property values within the surrounding area.
Other than the front yard setback, the proposed new home will meet all of the setback
requirements. The average setback of the homes along this block ranges from 31 feet
to 55 feet. The proposed setback of 34 feet fa11s within the this range and will not be
out of keeping with the character of the area. This block of Virginia Street is a dead
end road and the opposite side of the block is undeveloped land. The proposed
variance will not significantly affect the supply of light or air to adjacent properties.
S. The variance, if granted, would not permit any use that is not permitted under the
provisions of the code for the property in the district where the affected land is
located, nor would it alter or change the zoning district classification of the property.
A single family home is a permitted use in this zoning district. The proposed
variance, if granted, will not change or alter the zoning classification of the properry.
6. The request for variance is not based primarily on a desire to increase the vaZue or
income potential of the parcel of land.
The applicant states that his primary desire is to provide a new home for his family.
Whereas, Pursuant to the provisions of Saint Paul Legislative Code § 64.205, Michael P.
Pfalz, duly filed an appeal from the determination made by the BZA and requested that a hearing
be held before the City Council for the purpose of considering the actions taken by the BZA; and
Whereas, Acting pursuant to Legislative Code §§ 64.205 - 64.208 and upon notice to
affected parties, a public hearing was duly conducted by the City Council on Wednesday, July
11, 2001 where all interested parties were given an opportunity to be heard; and
Whereas, at the conclusion of the July 11, 2001 public hearing, the matter was laid over to
July 18, 2001 where the mater was again laid over the to July 25, 2001 a11 for the purpose of
determining whether the parties could reach an agreement outside of the appeal process; and
Whereas, the parties have indicated that they are unable to reach a compromise in the matter;
�
2
4
5
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
Whereas, The Council, having heazd the statements made, and having considered the
variance application, the report of staff, the record, minutes and resolution ofthe BZA, does � �����.5
hereby
Resolve, That the Council hereby affiruis the decision of the BZA in this matter, having
found no error in fact, finding or procedure of the BZA; and be it
Further Resolved, That the appeal of Michaei P. Pfalz be and is hereby denied; and, be it
Further Resolved that the Council adopts as its own the findings and conclusions set forth in
BZA resolurion no. O1-189209; and, be it
Finally Resolved, That the City Clerk shall mail a copy of this resolution to the applicant
Steven T. Mitchell, the appellant Michael P. Pfalz, the Zoning Administrator, Plamiiug
Commission and Board of Zoning Appeals.
Requested by Department of:
By:
Fozm Approved by City Attorney
By:
Adoption Certified by Council Secretary Approved by Mayor for Submission to Council
By: Z . By:
Approved by Mayor: Date ���I��� _! !/�`
q
By:
�� � i
Adopted by Council: Date � ov' � a.p�ry,
w. _... c
DEPARTMENTNFFICE/CIXINCIL � DATE7NITW?ED ' — �— � ��
City Council Offices 10/30/2001 � S NO ������
con�racr a�tsot� s� �+or� � tin�uom.
Ji.m Reiter, 266-8650 , a ,,.�, i ., a
MUSf BE ON COUNCILAGBJOA BY (DAT�
AEa�GN
MWB9tPoR GlfiAiiOMElf OIYCIF�I(
RWTWG
� w11111rJ�LaQMCEfOR R11111CJ�LaFRIH�CCTC
❑ WYOR1�114i6fAMi� ❑
TOTAL � OF SIGNATURE RAGES (CUP ALL LOCATIONS FOR SIGNATURE)
CT�ON REQUESTED
Memorializing City Council action taken on July 25, 2001, in denying the appeal of Michael
Pfalz regarding the decision of the Board of Zoning Appeals, which granted a front yard
setback variance in order to construct a new single family home at 1236 Virginia Street.
RECOMMENDATION Approve (A) w Rejeet (R) GERSONALSERVICE CONiRACiS MUSTANSWER7HE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS:
1. HasthisPe`soMrtneuerworkeduMe�acart�acttorihisdePaNnent?
PLANNING COMMISSION rES No
CIB COMMITTEE 2. F@s thie peisoMrm erer been a dry empbyee?
CIVILSERVICECOMMISSION YES NO
3. Dces Nie pcvsoMrtn possess a sidll rw[ normallypotsessed by a�ry aRent city employee?
YES NO
. 4, is this peBOMum a tafpe[ed vendoY) .
YES NO
E+�Iain aIl Y� answers on sePa�ate sheetanE atfach W 9reen sheet
INITIATING PROBLEM ISSUE, OPPORTUNITY (Who. Wha[, When, Whem, Why)
ADVANTAGESIFAPPROVED -
Council Research CentBr
OCT � 0 ppp�
DISADVANTAGESIFAPPROVED � � � . ,
DISqDVANTAGESIFNOTAPPROVED � '
TOTAL AMOUNT OF TRANSACTION S COST/REVRIUE BUOGETED (GRCLE ONE) YES NO
FUNDING SOURCE ACTNITY NUFIDER
FlNANpqL INFORIMiION (IXPWt�
o�_�\�S
Interdepartmental Memoranduxn
CITY OF SAINT PAUL
DATE: October 5, 2001
TO: Nancy Anderson
FROM: Peter Warner
RE: Appeal of Michael Pfalz. Council Action date 7-25-01
Nancy, I found the attached resolution in my files. Did I ever send this to you for final adoprion by
the Council??? PWW
DI - l(�S
CTTY OF SAINT PAUL
Norm Coleman, M¢yor
June 13, 2001
Ms. Nancy Anderson
City Council Reseazch Office
Room 310 City Hall
Saint Paul, MI3 55102
Dear Ms. Anderson:
OFFICE OF LICENSE, INSPECTIONS AND
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
r�8e. c�.s;.t, ove�.
B UII DING INSPECflON AND
DESIGN
350 St Pefer Street
Suite 310
SaurtPau�Minnesot¢ 55102-ISIO
�\
!�c.�.t.—
ti
� ���o�
a`�
Telephone: 612-266-900I
F[us'vtile: 6I2-266-9099
I would like to confirm that a public hearing before the City Council is scheduled for Wednesday, July 11,
2001 for the following zoning case:
Appellant:
File Number:
Purpose:
Location:
Michael Pfalz, 1244 Virginia Sueet
;��ei�z�z:
Appeal of a Boazd of Zoning Appeals decision granting a front yard setback
variance in order to construct a new single family home.
1236 Virginia Street
Staff : Recommended approval
District 7: Recommended approval
Boazd : Approved on a 4-3 vote
I have confirmed this date with the office of Council Member Iim Reiter. My understanding is that this
public hearing request will appeaz on the agenda of the Ciry Council at your eazliest convenience and that
you will publish notice of the hearing in the Saint Paul Legal Ledger. Thanks! -
Please call me at 266-9082 if you have any questions.
S' cerely, _
ohn Hazdwick
Zoning Specialist
cc: CouncIl Member Reiter
- �FUZSr�nq• ,. �
� OF YOBrIG �6 ' � : �:
1Yie Satnt Paul CYty�Co�nc3l wiR cwn-
duct a p�iblic hearing on Wedneaday, July
11, 2001, " at 5:30 p.m.. _ Ctty Counctl
Chambers, 3rd Floar IXLy Hall. to consider
the appeal of Michael Pfa}z regazd�ng the
Boax+d'of Zoning APPeats dedsion grazrth�g'
a tront yard seU�aelc vartance in o;der' w
construet a new single family huu�e, at
1236 Virginia Sh'eet - � .
Dated: June 15, 2001 - - -
NANCYANDERSON -
Asslstan;CityCouncll5ecretary . .
� � (�7nne 18Ttic-
ar. reu�, r�nc+�caii ". `.
o�nasia . '
Ol-�t�5
OFFICE OF LICENSE, INSPECTIONS AND
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
Roger C4rtis, Director
CITY OF SAINT PAUL
Norm Coleman, Mayor
June 13, 2001
Ms. Nancy Anderson
City Council Reseazch Office
Room 310 City Hall
Saint Paul, MN 55102
Deaz Ms. Anderson:
Bl7IIDING INSPECIlON AND
DESIGN
350 St Petes Stseet
Suite 310
Saint P¢ut, Minnerota 55702-I570
Tetephone: 612-266-9007
F¢csimile: 612-266-9099
I would like to confirm that a public hearing before the City Council is scheduled for Wednesday, July i l,
2001 for the following zoning case:
�
�
Appellant: Michaei Pfalz, 1244 Virginia Sueet
File Number: O1-189209
Purpose:
Location:
Appeal of a Board of Zoning Appeais decision granting a front yard setback
variance in order to construct a new single family home.
1236 Virginia Street
Staff : Recommended approval
District 7: Recommended approval
Boazd : Approved on a 4-3 vote
I have confirmed this date with the office of Council Member Jim Reiter. My understanding is that this
public hearing request will appear on the agenda of the City Council at your eazliest convenience and that
you will publish notice of the hearing in the Saint Paul Legal Ledger. Thanks!
Please call me at 266-9082 if you have any questions.
S� cerely, _
ohn Hardwick
Zoning Specialist
� cc: Council Member Reiter
�5 11:4a 5514834fl49
APPLiCA7ION FQR APPEAL
JILL EEAtI
Dcnnrlme.rt of P/anulnp arrJ £cnnomic Drveloyment
$unbrg Srction
110D Clr} Ha!1 Annec
?S H'et/ Fnur/h Srrt¢I
So7nt Paul, MN SS102
16G-6589
APPELLAtdT � Name �Y1�c,hne\ Q Q-�p�,Z
Address 12�1y Vif��n �u, ~
Gty��4�__�t.� St.�Zip �11'lOaylimephone�,. -SXXn
PROPER7Y I Zon:ng FCe Namc Stcvth T, M�,tchall
LOCATIOtd
Atldress�Location_ 2'l, V�,,,, �St. ,.a� mn Sr,���
TYPE OF APPEAL Ap�i�cation is hereby matle for en ap�ea io ths
= Board o? Zoni�g Appe�i; �City Coun�i�
unce- the Gro��aions of Chaptar E4, Sec:ien y�! Paag�aph 1 DI of the Zoning Code, fo
a�weai a tlecis�er made by the j}, Qp,,,1,t SoqrL( a{ n' a p nnPnl�
�c__�,�_ 2q 1.001 Flie n um�er�l-l892oq
(oate 8` daasronj
GROUNDS FOR APPEAL Expiain why you fee! inere has teen an error m any requirement,
� per.^;:; oec s�o� o' re`usal rnade Dy a� a�minist•�fivt en c,al, or an eror fn fac;, �rocedurs or
;':•nd �� naoe b; t7e Board ot Zonmg Appeala o� the P�arning Commission.
i
�Plea�sz See 0.�tY�eJ� Sl'ltc#S �ncla.A��y explan�}ior, P+�oavs. an� proposed aic �t
+ m�,�;� ta sh�.v rny hom� tn r�,ia.F;on .b P �ew home.
�
�
�
��rte°h adhrt,ona! sneer �� neressap� I=�
+, r-I iJ
�,ppli;anYs s�gna?ure t��,cYYI/�� Date �-1Tn{ Ci±y g0ent�C�`
C .."_
.�I� M.00A.n lm:uvv-!`� S�S+t��
i'1b N- pwilap 5�-
I�oxv�de� �trn. ��pj
�51) '�q�' ��E
PA� � � .-
96/:2/2991 11:44 6514834949 JILL BEA�J PAGE 93
' ��� ���
� I wouid like to appeal the decision of the Board of Zoning Appeals Hearing from the meetin� on
May 29, 2001. The boazd voted 3-4 to approve a setback variance at 1236 Virginia.
I own the home aY 1244 Virginia which is just North of the proposed site. The Mitchel]'s aze
planning to build a house a mere 48 inches from the south wall of my home. (The properry iine
is just inches from my home.) I u111 already lose the light, air and general use of my 2 South
�vindows and attic access window, but if their new house is built I S ft forward, I wilI aiso have
only limited use of my Southwest livingroom window. Building a house so close and forward of
my house will definitely impact the quality of my life in a home that I have worked very hard to
improve. I also feei it will have a severe negative impact on the value and the resale pntential of
mY ProPeTi�'•
I feel thai if this house is built 15 ft forward I will lose significant use of my home and feel
overtaken by the adjoining property_ Mrs. Mitchell opetates a home-based daycare which I think
wil] on3y make matters worse.
i don't think there is anything that I can do about the houses being only 48 inches apart, but to
aUow it to be built so far forward of my home, I feel will incre�e the damage done to my
property value.
� tn addition, the gound in this area is mostly peat bog and I run very concbmed aboat a hoase
being built so close to my foundation. The area on the West side of Virsinia has no houses
because of this reason and the townhomes at the end of Virginia were builY with appro�cimately
61 pylons under the foundation to prevent it from sinking. I believe there is already deterioration
of that foundation and also the foundation of the house that the Mitchell's cumntly own. The
stability of my foundation and the new• foundation on ihis type of soil is of great concem to me.
Enclosed azc pictures of the front of my house and the view looking out of my front window
showing how �ranting this variance will limit the use of the Southwest window of my home in
addition to already losing the use of the South windows.
Thank you for your consideration in this matter.
Sincerely,
'I�,,�t��
Michael P. Pfalz
�
95l12l2091 11:44 65148�4948
1 �'�� �:� � `'�1 '=� >
11ynhu.ilda�le.._. At�� �
\ �� D'Z la' � ��R�
.- d o
; n
�i�•r.,,
� ---� � `�z
a �� - tu _ _ +✓ � �.7
� f : � ;� ; .t iu
3 �� n, � n� ��(l
J I � \ _ � �
1 l .. � _...�rD`\
I ; " `.`�""� '''
� ' �; �� 1j`��;
- : ,
�� �-
r .,
' - �
�� �� `-
�+ v�,
;i .� �
� U
•��
. x �r y .!�
` � ` c �
: �
` �� z
s c � -
� � V r c
...-� -----. �-,�----�: �-�--�.. �_._.-
� r
� �
e. � �. J
,,, r �� -
C 4 � �
q .. � ,
1
}• y C�.
i r
v, �
� �1
� ��
�
T �. �
� �a � �—c��e+— �
��
JILL BEAtJ
;:
;j
!`
��
��
�
,
�;�
1 _T" �
i�
! �
_I�
,
-C l.. �
V'1�•
T
( ( �lj
W ��
�'D
�x u
_� �, _. .
; �r.
r., .L
�i n r
I'
��\
" a t �
�' (1 ( ` V �
! i *n '�' \ c �w
I ?^ 2 4
N '� H
I I � � � y
� y 2 F., 2
`' � ` 1�°_ c '
�
w
l
r �
T-��i��
;
�
�
�
',
��
�
�
N
\ ��
���'� ��3.
,� s -
w s
�� �
� ��
� �
c �� ��
� � + e \ •�-� V �� � � •� P
I .l ` �-- -- --- - � �,
� � . � � �f, � a
� p
� � � I
�' Y
� � 6-<.=�^'_i
(y' g,4, 4
d � f T c.� i
I �' < F �� '' -1
'I �'� S i �,
�
L �;--� - ---'_ -`�` --- -� �' ^ �..�
�1,� � � �
� Ci' T� �
t•' �
;
'o
a
�,
�
U
��
�
a
L
�
PRGE 04
b" g N �
�
�f��-
�
<: � �- �
� u� �.
9
g a
3 � --�
�� �
�-� 3 Q
f 6 � � ,
�. � ��
r���
S' �
��
� -s
P �
� � {
� + �
� � �
T r' �
� ���
� �
�� � �
F .�
� � �
� 'C �
.
g 0
M1 �
� �
p � R
� Q C
� � �
o , &
� � �
3 .
1
�
F y '
- - �
.....� , � � � �
a s
�: r
., r_. 4 .. �.i vv�
:.:4 .. .��_ •..
,_� •r�1+ ,.s �.. � �, � � �.�
..'.,yr •. : :^ c ' .. �a
�� • c .� - 1
.� ..��� e ,,.r�I
..:. j ;,.
' Ys� .
,� s . .,,
' .. � .. �
v
> . � �' • , rv� �'�i � r
y�� f �`
. Y
r :: {'� � �: :�
.. f ; _�.;
� �. �� T .r : ;
. . .. ., r Y-v..r+C .,
.. , • • � .• 4 `�� �
g}
±� a .�� ,� ._ �
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS STAFF REPORT
TYPE OF APPLICATION: Minor Variance FILE #: O1-189209
APPLICANT:
HEARING DATE:
LOCATION:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
PLANNING DISTRICT:
PRESENT ZONING:
REPORT DATE:
DEADLIATE FOR ACTION:
STEVEN T. MITCHELL
May 29, 2001
1236 VIRGINIA STREET
T. B. SOMERS ADDITION TO ST. PAUL SUB7 TO ALLEY
LOTS 25 AND LOT 26
6
RM-2
May 18, 2001
August 14, 2001
ZONING CODE REFERENCE: 61.101
$Y: John Hardwick
DATE RECETVED: May 8, 2001
A. PURPOSE: A front setback variance in order to build a new single family home. The
reqnired front seYback is 49 feet and a-34-foot setback is proposed, for a variance of 15 feet.
B. SITE AND AREA CONDITIONS: This parcel currentiy consists of two 40 by 140-foot
lots. The existing house at 1236 Virginia is located on L,ot 25 and the gazage for the house is
located on Lot 26. There is access to-the gazage from both the street and the aIley.
Surrounding Land Use: Primarily one- and two-family homes.
C. BACKGROUND: The applicant currently lives at 1236 Virginia and would like to construct
a new house next to the existing one.
D. FINDINGS:
1. The properry in question cannot be put to a reasonable use under the smict provisions of
tJ7e code.
�
)
�
, The previous owner of this property constructed the garage 30 feet from the alley because
,_,_,_,,.,,_,�,_„�,,,,,,,�,,,, Of it1E dlffeI'eriCE,,,�l,j� C„�CV„�tJ,O„���,B� ,aTM„r� the lnt Thic limitc thr hnil`lahl �rP� T __,___�___�
for a new house without encroaching into the required front setback. The applicant is
proposin� to construct a new home on the lot with the garage and to rent the existing
home on the other lots for about five yeazs. The applicant needs the income from renting �
Page I of 3
� ��-< «s
�
File # O1-189209
Staff Report
the existing house in order to afford to build the new house. Ae eventually plans on
demolishing the existing older home and to recombine the two lots. In order to avoid
moving the existing garage which involve considerable expense, the applicant is
requesting this front yard setback variance.
2. The plight of the land owner is due to circunuta�2ces urzique to this property, and these
circumstances were not created by the Zand owner.
The ]ocation of the existing garage on the site as weil as the average setback of the other
homes on this block aze circumstances that were not created by the applicant.
�
3. The proposed varia�:ce is in keeping with tlie spii•it arad intent of the code, and is
consistent with the health, safety, comfort, mor arzd welfare of the inhabitants of the
City of St. Paul.
The proposed variance will allow the applicant to construct a new single family home to
eventually replace the old house existing on the property. Presently, the two lots making
up this parcel are combined under one Property Identification Number as a single taac
parcel. The applicant needs to split these t«�o lots before he can build a new house and he
will need to recombine the two lots afrer the old house is removed. Provided that the
applicant obtains the necessary subdivision approval, the proposed variance is in keeping
with the spirit and intent of the code.
4. The proposed variance wilt rtot impair an adeqt�ate supply of light and air to adjacent
pr•opert�>, nor will it alter the essential character of the surrounding m�ea or unreasonably
dimi�aislz established property values within the surr•ounding area.
Other than the front yard set6ack, the proposed new home will meet all of the setback
requirements. The average seTback of the homes along this block ranges from 31 feet to
55 feet. The praposed setback of 34 feet falls ���thin the this range and will not be out of
keeping «+ith the character of the area. This block of Virginia Street is a dead end road
and the opposite side of the block is undeveloped land. The proposed variance will not
significantly affect the supply of light or air to adjacent properties.
�
5. The vm ifgr�anted, woulcl not pernait a»y i{se that is not perntitted zinder the
provisions of the code for the property in the district where the affected land is located,
nor would if atter or� change the zoning ttisn classiftcation of the property.
A single family home is a perin�tted use in this zonin� district. The proposed variance, if
granted, will not change or alter the zoning classification of the property.
Page 2 of 3
File # Ol-]89209
Staff Report
6. The reguest for variance is not based primarily orz a desire to increase the value or
income potential of the parcel of land.
The applicant states that his primary desire is to provide a new home for his family.
E. DISTRICT COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION: As of the date of this report, we have not
received a recommendation from District 6.
F. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Based on findings 1 through 6, staff recommends
approval of the variance, subject to the condition that the applicant obtains subdivision
approval prior to construction of the new home.
Page 3 of 3
�
�
�
OI-ff(oS
�����
District 6 Planning Council ��
-, � . _... :
1061 Rice St.
St. Paul, MN 55117
Phone 651 488-4485
Fax 651 488-0343
May 24, 2001
Mr. John Hardwick
LIEP
350 St. Peter St.
Suite 300
Si. Paul, MN 55102
Dear John,
The District 6 P�anning Council received a request from Steven Mitchell, 1236 Virginia
St. for a front setback variance that would allow for the construction of a new house.
� The required setback is 49 feet and a 34 foot setback is proposed, for a variance of 15
feet.
On Wednesday, May 23, 2001 the Land Use Task Force of the District 6 Planning
Council approved this request.
If you have any questions, please call me at 651-488-4485.
Sincerely,
�� �
Kathy Co e�
Executive Director
cc: Steven Mitchell
�
APPLICATION FOR ZOIVING VARIANCE
OFFICE OF LICENSE, INSPECTIONS, AND
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
350 St. Peier Sfreet, Suite 300
Saint Paul, MN SS102-I SIO
65I-266-9008
APPLICANT
Name S i �v� �✓ � i'1 i 1'-lf i:.Z-t- Company
Address 1 �3�% Vt ' iN�V} S;.
City 5�' ���- Statei'l^� Zip ;)5��7 DaytimePhone�$/
Property interest of applicaM (owner, contract purchaser, etc.) ��w v�
Name of owner (if
PROPERTY AddresslLocation N��T ccT ni ; p_rif o F JJ-3C Ui/1:� ^jr.� $�,
Legaldescription 1.�� Sa.�1 -y'_5 ,/}(�Ol7�;nl ��cJ .`�i ,�'�r.�L �� j '�-�
(attach addi6onal sheet if necessary)
5 ; 1n•i�+-1`
"s Lof size �� � /�E% Present Zoning �t�'1 ��Presenf Use �1 �'%' � �- � .
ProposedUse 5i^''r�-�? L�.� ' SlN�< �+g+"7/�� �''.:�:L�C��L
1. Variance(s) requested: F�vT 5 � i�.'�K ?'C lj y' � ti L`.-.1�-t= �% t $`-�-'� �'
�r- y 9'
2:- What physical characteristics of the property prevent iTs being used for any of the permiYted uses in your zone?
�Z:- r.J � s i ��
(topography, size and shape of lot, soil conditions, etc.) <<; i q���,1SC i�,..q a.;- i.; i ri� i_.•"
(.-fl`nJr(ri? i-..i.'iilL.i ..idU.1) f.+c�'i ��:flv:ii �i.cY �'G'in�l i'•'i�l=. �:�.4;.��:�_
:.1�'Ti n�i�[_i l'� yr �t::.l: t3'-1�l.cJ'-�.'• /�,.J� C_:i�-�( f r fi-J^
1�� _IY ,IJ
3. Explain how the strict application of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance would result in peculiar or exceptionaf
practical difficulties or exceptional undue hardships. r. '�
`'�iT'� i rFc h�c'r�tl�bc Sc'� ' 94t �7= �7
. A�nJ.7 ci:.C.`}ila�L' :�P cXt$?rNo- L'�r�f'-'f�-E' f}N? /��rfft�•+'t. c�v./yL� .� i 1YCLl S. (ic=
r c`,�r �^��.'�'� ! w`lic:�l) j i%iJl}4�� TU �:: j/l/ jtrL ��t'L�l�� �"�i (
, l:�Su".>� 4�C���L f�' {!.'�7.'c lJ ���I i. v j'�iS .5 t l�='
4._- Explain how the granting of a variance will not be a substantial detriment
to the public good or a substantial impairment of the intent and �uroose
Tjt� S� i r �'+tlt T r9%r7
w �� S r`�« u��C ^� �t /t�'�1 c !�+}€�`t'c7' cPF i7/i
S�.=Z � r ri �i-�✓ �:JTrr'1ZS 6i�c�-f t� U e✓ ���-�-�lC.
.�^•�7 Ju•u� !} �JckdJ �v0 �T�xZi i�i-c`R� IS �.r✓c
oi ff-(,=P f�j.�N CoCs�L �t-U�.f '�'1�YJyaF'i`
taCh additional sheets if needed.l
CASHIERS USE ONLY
�
� '�� � � / �__--
ApplicanYs
Date J �r�JO j
o�--tfto5
57� u��, r, � rc�ret-�
1 �-3c. v � Ft-�N.� 5 �
5T ��;� :.,-, .•J :� � ir �
T.G. 5�,�,�fy Aor�ir/�>> Yc:.
5T . i�)�+t, tor� �S � �E
_ fJ14 �1jF_� ��JD -1- zy- /��J �J�P.4USC
_ �W:- F�.�}D C}i[.e.�f(��Q ) N'll R DD� i� c.+i ; c� 04 Fi '.r•'v7 i=�L' . Fc.:..� J
�
1`� . �'6 ��- �M:aCj-] `�i'� i_n{c.aSIU"i� Aiv? i{{t f�u��.`�7/a.�. Cc::�O
c j�."'Ic ✓i�fic�+�'I.J ie/� i_,svK��) :..� �r, .�.,,.vi.�
J1`/LL. C��-,�T ,/� QGNjil�t=i2(}fj=� Ai,nc��i
' O� MoNC�L t.�oY T!U 1L=NjIGrI rit�r uJ =_ /y� � ti.�t=
�
�
�rc:. /JL=��r��(�1[�('�_ .'4.IU'D �-`�l: p:� �-(�<L ��=1 I
r3�+ /ia�z�i.Jl; ,g /iv.�,ti i.;` _ CU}tiT ci:�T" T1f-L 9�.ir-v1 Ul�
. � ���� ��l Gl;�l C �v�!'71�L� VV�. C✓}N /c'.L -4f �' c�L �
C�Ui� 1=x�5?"�N\Y �fc.•� �- r4 ./•iil�'='I/iEk U�' �L�l�i _
�— I G -�;11� 1 —��i � �.�; ;-� � i�� T� <l,s� 0�—+..� ..� T'tf �-
T
� � t v9
t 7 :�� 'c f�L ` (7� �
_ LcTS (.i1jLI< ���Tli�� , _ _
- tr+� �r�sr����- �:cy�., — ,v-.I c��' T1+ �✓+r�.�L�
' � 5 W 7�� +..J:= pji=.�C � T✓i �� Tltti h�'>^) �' C ii:jt. '�}i ✓i .✓
!� �
.. y! I j�L � L( i.:l� r' U{ � u- L Y � 1Zi9 Iv t_ uJt U�� !1'1 d�} /C �_'
TiA= i �Rf-✓+�� ii ,�f-��_� :� j� / i� /[ ii.i .9 3 :-n c:: � r�
�'� 5� � �+ � � z r�,.�- � .� L< . .�.� � ; � � ,� � �= FL-+-�
�
�� A�� ���;{� �,E-�d � 8� c��i.�-JC�� ;t: rr�
— �,.�irH�.v rrw P�i,�cl� �},a,�.=rz,�G� 5c'c ��iZ Pr�,.o�StY� 5 ti-r_
i /3A4c c;f�, �'�/ � u.;��:Lp K=�f t� � m. •5i �'ArTt��=2 � A�--tC _
-_ �� �}I✓;n1 �- F j�ft_jj�eMi=�i JJ Tl�i= /JC��=K ��n'4 'UJl �
�
�.
`I 3F_ h.q P�IT i L ��z-l�I'� i!h= /z-L'S i ,'� .� 'rl�-u {{a.+��=5 e ni
� � Yl-�,= lj4:Cz: �.✓ .�..v _.Pr.vin.J_
U
"`7 I �% V i-'"� ✓�I l �CN-LZ.C.
���_ �
dI-l�g�a�
�
��
3 '"
� b �
�:.
N '
<,. i
� c
� e S '
z AS
�r s
Y'_ :�v
W r,. �
_-�� �-Z-�p-<
��
0
��
,.=
s�
�
�, � ` � - � G .�
v [ O
-- �•,� •
--- - -�- - - - -- -- -• •;,< ......._._
� � � � � � R�� � �
u E t �'i
v��� �
�
-C' {- -j'}i F �` BL�
j � a � `;��
I ' ° i%S
— '�' ' '� c +`_. _ .
os f.�
K ��P
� �{J�O
yL1 4 � �. -� e n b' JO:.
� � c L x�.�p :
a S � ey,
r.•
x
�
y
I � � I �
tl •� '1 � r
y � � � �
� � c 2
� <.. r r �
r 3 t 1
c� o � D z
r.,
O
�
-{ <P, � r
� G'i
�� � J
U�
7�
�
rr>-1 R',
.n £ G�L
� s ��� a Q���
��� � �'00 x
� � ,, � � y �^ 1 � E
R a°L o �`�w b �f
eC °dd:�o� �
�
_ m (- r D
�
A
C
r,
E
s
K
3
2
l
�
2 -+'
�
�
�
�
�
�
c
G
�
� �
, C v
't �� O
rn � �
� z � =`a � -- 4 � .,�:, --• �:-
n -S cs •
�r �
�
C„
-Z / --.
�l�
Na �Ion� e:�
�
�
V� D ����
_' ��'
1D
e
� � � ; s ..0 � � ` �``7
c,� (`( --• '� I
�� � ;'��' �` � �
� � .. ' � _ '. \ � �
� �a�rr� \ ^
, ; ____
� � � G
� i f' �
� � � � '•;1,�
: � !7:
_ �: n ,-:
_ � ;� _:
r- ..
'L ' `J �-
�`; : ,�
�
u
�� � � � �t
i
�
, � c �
,� � �
� � � � Z
v � v� ` ;�
� � c
��
� � j �
� � � S
o' �a h �
' V '` `
r �� �
�, 1`
`
�
z
�
�
i �
��� �� �
2 O
-p �p —
� ` O
� �, n s
Ci � �
oh�i r.
� W ! ,s
� '
I T �•,i
1 �
� � � � � � �_
;� � { ��
� � �. : � 2 �'
i ri Q?� .
i � "� �
� ��
� ��, � � � '— L -��
; i _ ��---- �
i � ,� � � !
j �: � � � �
i I. ,
' �, , _v
,-: _-:__-� � _,.
�� � �� ,
i a ' � ; cf; �
; �' ; F� , �,
: i i
I � � V i
i� � r
— — � — �
1 -- - -- G ":
`t i� �� �..�.
� `; � �°
4, �� r
- �z
� ��
�E r
��o
��
.� r
Ur�-, --
n C d
-b Ct. Z
� �
o �' �
z�
�� -�
� z`
�
�1
c=
Z 4 �
Ya�
���
F � y
�� L
p� G
�o�
L��
�� z
`,G A
a � c�
��
Ul
0
3
�
0
-{
n II
G �
_� G � �
j
<� � �
L` �r
�
�
T
�
�
�
a
S
L
C
or-(t�S
�
r. �' ;.
`c. . o
'. - i`
_ �,
_
�
�
o�- t1 �5
PROPERTY WITHIN 100 FEET OF PARCEL: 1236 VIRGINIA STREET
�
►�
Z
�
w
�-
�
w
�
Z
O
H
C�
z
�
�
�
N
PREPARED BY:
LIEP
---� �
� � I `;
;
, ,
_�� ,
Q ;-�. '
� ;
�
❑'
�
�
�
i. SUNRAY-BATTLECREER-HIGHWOOD
2. HAZEL PARK HADEN-PROSPERITY HILLCREST
3. WEST SIDE _
4. DAYTON'S BLUFF
5. PAYNE-PIIl�.I,EN
6. NORTH END
7. THOMAS-DALE
8. SUMh4IT-UNTVERSTTI'
9. WEST SEVENTH
10. COMO
� 11. HAMLINE-MIDWAX
12. ST. ANTHONY PARK
13. MERRIAM PARK-LEXINGTO HAMLINE-SNELLING H AMLINE
______.,,.._., . .__.,___. 14. -�'31vA�C�E�TO�E�P,T�17 --�--,_.__.�--
1S. HIGHLAND
`" 16. SUMMIT HIT.L
17. DOWN`fOWN �
i ��'���� ���� ��I-189.��y��
r CITTZEN PARTTCIPATIQN PLANNING DISTRICTS
01=lIb�
CITY OF SAINT PAUL
S BOARD OF ZONITv'G APPEALS RESOLUTION
ZONING FILE NUMBER 01
DATE: May 29, 2001
WHEREAS, Steven T. Mitchell has applied for a vaziance from the strict appiication of the
provisions of Section 61.101 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code pertaining to the required front
setback of a new single family home in the RM-2 zoning district at 1236 Virginia Street; and
WHEREAS, the Saint Pau] Board of Zoning Appeals conducted a public hearing on May 29,
2001 pursuant to said application in accordance with the requirements of Section 64.203 of the
Legislative Code; and
WHE3tEAS, the Saint Paul Board of Zoning Appeals based upon evidence presented at the
public hearing, as substantially reflected in the minutes, made the following findings of fact:
1. The property ir1 question cannot be put to a reasonable use unde�• the strict provisions of the
code.
� The previous owner of this property constructed the garage 30 feet from the alley because of
the difference in elevation between the alley and the lot. This limits the buildable area for a
new house without encroaching into the required front setback. The applicant is proposing to
construct a new home on the lot with the garage and to rent the existing home on the other
lots for about five years. The applicant needs the income from renting the existin� house in
order to afford to build the new house. He eventually plans on demolishing the existing older
home and to recombine the two lots. In order to avoid moving the existing gara�e which
involve considerable expense, the applicant is requestin� this front yard setback variance.
2. Tfte plight of tJze lmid owner is dzce to circuntstances unique to this property, and these
circumstances were not created by the larrd owner.
The location of the existing garage on the site as well as the avera�e setback of the other
homes on this block are circumstances that were not created by the applicant.
3. The pr•oposed variance is in keeping with the spirit and intent of the code, and is consistent
tivith the health, safety, comfort, morals and welfare of the inhabitants of the City of St. Paul.
The proposed variance will allow the applicant to construct a new single family home to
eventually replace the old house existing on the property. Presently, the two lots making up
this parcel are combined under one Property Identification Number as a single tax parcel.
The applicant needs to split these two lots before he can build a new house and he will need
� to recombine the two lots after the old house is removed. Provided that the applicant obtains
the necessary subdivision approval, the proposed variance is in keeping with the spirit and
intent of the code.
Page 1 of 3
File # 01-189209
Resolution
4. The proposed variaTice will not impair an adequate supply of Zight and air to adjacent
property, nor will it alter the essential character of the surrounding area or unreasonably
dinrinish established property values within the surrounding area.
Other than the front yard setback, the proposed new home will meet all of the setback
requirements. The average setback of the homes along this block ranges from 31 feet to 55
feet. The proposed setback of 34 feet falls within the this range and will not be out of
keeping with the character of the area. This block of Virginia Street is a dead end road and
the opposite side of the block is undeveloped land. The proposed variance will not
significantly affect the supply of light or air to adjacent properties.
S. The vnr ifgranted, would not pern:it any use that is not permitted under the provisions
of the code for the property in the district where the affected la�id is located, nor would it
alter or change the zoning district classification of the property.
A single family home is a permitted use in this zoning district. The proposed variance, if
granted, �vill not change or aiter the zoning classification of the property.
6. The request fot• variance is not based prinzarily on a desire to increase the value or income
` poterttial of the parcel of lond.
The applicant states that his primary desire is to provide a new home for his family.
NOR', THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Saint Paul Boazd of Zoning Appeals that the
provisions of Section 61.101 are hereby waived to allow a 34-foot front setback; subject to the
condition that the appiicant obtains subdivision approval prior to construction of the new home;
In order to construct a new single family home on property located at 1236 Virginia Street; and
legall}� described as T. B. Somers Addirion To St. Paul Subj To Ailey Lots 25 And Lot 26; in
accordance with the applica2ion for variance and the site plan on file with the Zoning
Administrator.
MOVED BY : Wilson
SECONDED BY : Duckstad
�
�
r�T r
. _ . _____ --- arr - z � _.,...m.�,m.___...__�_____..�-_._..-..,-___,_—_—_
AGAINST: 3
MAILED: May 30, 2001
�
Page 2 of 3
01-(l�S
Fiie # 01-189209
Resolution
�
TIME LIMIT: No order of the Board of Zoning Appeals permitting the erection or
alteration of a building or off-street parking facility shall be valid for a
period longer than one year, unless a building permit for such erection or
alteration is obtained within such period and such erection or alteration is
proceeding pursuant to the terms of such permit. The Board of Zoning
Appeals or the City Council ma} grant an extension not to exceed one year.
In granting such estension, the Board of Zoning Appeals may decide to hold
a pubiic hearing.
APPEAL: Decisions of the Board of Zoning Appeals are final subject to appeal to the
City Council withi� 15 days by anyone affected by the decision. Building
permits shall not be issued after an appeal has been filed. If permits have
been issued before an appeal has been filed, then the permits are suspended
and construction shall cease until the City Council has made a final
determination of the appeal.
CERTIFICATION: I, the undersigned Secretary to the Board of Zoning Appeals for the City of
Saint Paul, Minnesota, do hereb}' certify that I have compared the foregoing
copy with the original record in my office; and find the same to be a true and
� correct copy of said originai and of the fvhole thereof', as based on approved
minutes of the Saint Paul Board of Zoning Appeals meeting held on May 29,
2001 and on record in the Office of License Inspection and Environmental
Protection, 350 St. Peter Street, Saint Paul, Minnesota.
SAINT PAUL BOARD OF ZO\I\G APPEALS
Debbie Crippen
Secretary to the Board
�
Page 3 oT 3
MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
CITY COUNCIL CAAMBERS, 330 CITY HALL �
ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA, MAY 29, 2001
PRESENT: Mmes. Maddox, and Morton; Messrs. Courtney, Duckstad, Faricy, Galies, and Wilson
of the Board of Zoning Appeais; Mr. Warner, Assistant Ciry Attorney; Mr. Hardwick
and Ms. Crippen of the Office of License, Inspection, aad Environmental Protection.
ABSENT None
The meeting was chaired by Joyce Maddox, Chair.
Steven T. Mitchell (NO1-189209) 1236 Virainia Street• A front setback variance in order
to build a new single family home. The required front setback is 49 feet and a 34-foot setback is
proposed, for a variance of 15 feet.
Mr. Hardwick showed siides of the site and reviewed the staff report with a recommendation for
approval, subject to the condition that the applicant obtains subdivision approval prior to construction
of the new home.
There was no correspondence received in opposition to the variance request.
One letter was received in support of the variance from District 6.
The applicant STEVEN T. MITCHELL, 1236 Virginia Street, was present. There was opposition �
present at the hearing. Mr. Mitchell stated he had nothing to add.
Mike Ross, 1244 Virginia Street, stated that the south property line was four inches from the south
wall of his house. Mr. Ross stated that if Mr. Mitchell's garage was not placed correcfly. Mr. Ross
had a bid to move the garage and rebuild the crumbling retaining wall for a cost of $6,300. He stated
that if Mr. Mi[chell moved the gara�e where it should be he could place the new house where it should
be accordins to the Zoning Code. Mr. Ross stated he was not opposed to the new house, however, if
the garage was not moved the house and the garage would be too close to his home.
Mr. Duckstad questioned whether Mr. Ross had spoken to Mr. Mitche2L Mr. Ross stated he had not.
Mr. Mitchell stated that he did not know if the bid had included having to excavate three feet of earth
behind the retaining wall. Mr. Mitchell stated that he would have a hard time getting into [he garage
because of the height of the alley. He stated that if the bid Mr. Ross had did not include the excavation
of three feet of dirt the price would be higher.
Ms. Maddox questioned whether Mr. Mitchell had spoken to Mr. Ross about the project. Mr.
Mitchell replied that he had mentioned that they were goino to build a house there and would need a
variance for the front of the house. He stated that Mr. Ross did not say anything then.
___,�Mr �Wilson_questioned whether_Mz,_A'Iitcl�eJ,1fS_nejgY�boZ_had be�n_p��s�ntatIhes?is.tricime�Ting__MI_—_.
Mitchell stated that Mr. Ross had not been there.
Mr. Courmey questioned Mr. Mitchell whether the ne«� house Gvould be blocking Mx. Ross's view. �
O(-lt(t5"
� File #/ O1-189209
Minutes OS-29-01
Page Two
Mr. Mitchell stated that he was unsure if his neighbor's smalt side window on the south side would be
blocked.
Mr. Courtney questioned whether Mr. Mitchell would be willing to move the garage if the bid were
correct and included the excavation necessary. Mr. Mitchell stated he could look at it, however, the
driveway would have to be re-sloped. He stated that he had enough tilt now and he would not be able
to use the garage in the winter.
Hearing no further testimony, Ms. Maddox closed the public portion of the meeting.
Mr. Wilson moved to approve the variance and resolution based on findings 1 through 6, subject to the
condition that the applicant obtains subdivision approval prior to construction of the new home.
Mr. Duckstad seconded the motion, which passed on a roll call vote of 4-3(Courtney, Galles,
Maddox).
� Submitted by: Approved by:
John Hardwick
Jon Duckstad, Secretary
�
o I- ��c�
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
The Saint Paul City Council will conduct a public hearing on Wednesday, 3uly ll,
2001, at 5:30 p.m., City Council Chambers, 3rd Floor City Hall, to consider the
appeal of Michael Pfalz regarding the Board of Zoning Appeals decision granting
a front yard setback variance in order to construct a new single family home at
1236 Virginia Street.
Dated: June 15, 2001
Nancy Anderson
Assistant City Council Secretary
*�**�**�** -COhB'I.JOURNRL- �*�**�*� DqTE JUN-15-2001 �� TIME 07�37 � P.01
01'!!�S
MODE = MEMp2Y TRRNSMISSION
FSLE F�.= 204
NO- CQ1 FlHOLNTWK STRTION IJfiMIF/
TEl_Pti�lE FD.
001 OK <01> LEGFlL LEDC'aER
STRRT=JUN-15 07�36 ENU=JICJ-15 07�37
,. i�%�%
{ity of Saint Paul -
�� -City Cauncil - �� - 651 266 �74- �k
'.: illiiil�
CITY OF SAINT PAUL
OFFICE OF THE CTTY COUNCII,
�'ACSTNIILE TRANSMISSION
COVERSHEET
TO: �
FROM:
FAX #:
�: �'�=�- l.�-�-°
��
DA'1'E: r�i,A� IS a-oo �
Note: FacsSmile operator, please deliver this transmission to the above
addressee. If yon did not receive all of the pages in good condition,
please advise danie Lafrenz at (651) 266-8560 at your
earliest coovenieuce.
Thank you_
NUNIBER OF PAGES (INCLUDTNG'1'HIS PA.GE): �
CTTY AALL TFID2D FLOOR SAIN1' PAUG �1NESOTA 55102
�
pnnuaonleryn'eLpsGa.
i
95/i2/2001 11:44 5514934948
APPLICA710N FOft APPENL
JILL BEf��d
Depor7merzt of P/anirinP anO,E'roxo�nic Develoymen!
)'unLrg Srction
]30D CIt}•13a.7Annex
15 H'esr Faurth Srreer
Sornt Paul, M!\' SSIO2
26G-6589
APPELIAMT I Name_1`(]ochnel �. �a�;�
�
Address t2�1�1 �rq, ,p,
City��� S1.�,iZip�(L'��aytime phonel�►-Q$'J•58�
PROpER7Y
LO C A710N
parE e2
������
Zon;ng FI'e Name Stcvch T, M�� fchall
Addre>s«ocation_.4�� Y«��.,, � St. �. rnr,. S5v�']
TYPE OF APPEAL Appbca�;on is hereDy metle 9or en appea� to the
= Board of Zoning Appe�ls !N City Coun�il
�nc�- the prov�sions of Chaptor b4, Sec:ion �1 _. Par�graph 1 DI of the ZoNng Code, !o
appeai a decir.on made by the_;�, Pp,wt 6Qg f 1 ;,,a A�y �penl�
�n 2g, Lt�i Flle number pl�tSg2o4
(7at +d ecrs, o n)
� GROUNDS FOR APpEA�: Expiain why you feel there has been an error �n eny requirement,
� permd dec',sion or re'usa� made by an a�m(nigtra2rvt CtFUai, or an error in f�ct, peocedure or
� I., fmding made by th° Board o! Zonmg Appeala o� the planning Commisswn.
�rPlea�se. See a�ls�cr,e5,, shrrts "�.,cl�i�y eXqio�nti�i=n, pv,otvs, anl provose.� aie �t•n,
I m�,S,�e,� +a sho.�u rny hom` sr, r�,in,b„n � propoaA new home.
Atteoh atl7�'�ona! sneet d necessa0?
ApphcanYs signature�j��rYblfL Date�____ City s�e
�,t� M.bean tm��n�,a'� s�s+e.)
nb N• Dun�aP SF.
1'�oxv� �le � Nrn . 'S6u 3
(Lsi) 44�-484q
96!?2/2091 11:44 6514834B48 JILL BEAhJ
PAGE 03
V�'���Z�
I would like to appeal the decision of tbe Board of Zoning Appeals Hearing from the meeting on
May 29, 2001. The boazd voted 3-4 to approve a setback variance at 1236 Vizginia.
I own the home az 1244 Virgxnis which is just North of the proposed site. The Mitchell's aze
planning to build a house a mere 48 inches from the south wall of my home. (The property line
is just inches ftom my home.) T will already lose the light, air and genecat use of my 2 South
windows amd attic access window, but if their new house is buiit I S ft forvuard, I will also have
only limited use of my Southwest livinp�oonti window. Building a house so close and forvvard of
my house wilt de5nitely impact the quality of my life ia a home that I have worked very hard to
improve. I als6 feei it will have a severe negauve impact on the calue and the resale potentia! of
�Y ProP�Y•
I feel that i�f th,is house is built 15 ft forwazd I will lose significar�t use of my home and feel
overtaken by the adjoining property. Mrs. Mitcheli operates a home-based dsycare which I think
will only maY.e mattErs worse.
i don't think there is anything that I can do about the houses being only 48 inches apart, but to
aUow it to be buili so far fonvard of my home, I feel will increase the damage done to my
properiy va(ue.
In addition, the sround in this area is mostly peat bog and I am very conc6rnerl about a house
being built so close W my foundation. I'he area oa the West side of Virginia has no houses
because of this reason and the townhomes at the end of Virginia were built with approximately
61 pylons under the fou�dation to prevent it from sinking. I bclieve there is already deterioration
of that fowidarion and also the foundation of the house that the Mitchell's cumntly own. The
stability of my founidation and the new £oundation on this type of soil is of great concezn to me.
Hnclosed are pictures of the front of my house and the view looking out of my Pront wiadow
showing how gaixring this vareance will limit the vse of the Southwest window of my home in
addition to already losing the use of the South windows.
"fhank you for youx consideration in this matter.
Sincerely,
'���� ,� y,
Michacl P. P£aiz72t
3
a
n
�
�-
3
�
�
06/12l2001 11:44 6514894848
JILL BEAN
M < .�
'" k s
�, �
�c �e � �
1.�
�
.�
�
�
�t�
���
�.;�
�'I
O !'� � :- >
e.._. ftt�„� 3
t-` r�-` �.�
� ^5 0
�---� z
� � �' .0 �b
� .� �: t su
n � �� ��
;
� \
' , rRSfb..\. e � � +
� ;--' , ,:u �� t -� _
� y, ``Y 7��
�� ._.
�..
� �.
�G cI `-
!'; �,
.� �
,�
z m �r w J �
. ; '1 � �
' � i
` � c Z
s c
v ` C C
� �I
�
� � � �
� , �
�; r � _
4 � � ^
f �
* �i r
v, t'
�
� �
V h
. �'_ x �
-` � — �
cn r .t,
f.� r, �
�
�
r
a
��Y�
,/
�,
�
�
0
-�
�`
N
��
I T _Y� � e
� .�.
._.t. ____ �n� �r3
I A ^ ' �] � �� � s & •
��� � �� �� �<ffi
�' z �` i v � , ��
.- � ' f �. o�l l� ..a,�.�
' S�a
� `� ' ��I
� �__���.
k ° 6__ ._ ---.- .— -
� I
� 1 ,/
� � ,
l; �
� �
o, e ;�'�; 4
+' i .. � -t
�� , F�� y ` , ,,
_ -� � �, �^
.. �� I y
j ._.. _ __. � __._, � :
�
� l � r �`' �^ i+ 'A
t�L
;
0
�
k
�
w
h
a
L
r
- i ?'
�p
e
�
e�
� �
PAGE ea
0� -���)
g3 �
��A �
�¢��
�f� �
<:��-�$.
t,� 'v
$ v � ��
3 � _.a
�� �
�� 3 ��
� � � ��
i���
� �
� �.
� � �
� F_ ..G
Q�
�
���
�¢I�
�
� g �
�. � �
.� a
� ,�-
� � �
�� �
` �
��
�
p L c C 16
` Q C
a r T
3 , �
3 � -
1
.,....
�
. �'�
�....
• .. �R.
��J � '4 � � ..
? . ,
. f . A � .
�
:
� � �� �
. .
. , _ . .:. . :v'�,:�
,�
,,. ;�.
. .. , : ,,
' .• . .
�
�.k . . '�ML ' ..
r �' , t ..
` l.
. ' ^ ���•' i���
rv. y, . .. ��
't`M Y,,
. .Y"� , ' �.+ `�,�M
', ' .. .
`, °:5 �,, . .
��4. � �
a .' • :l.�^+ ,f�
� ��� .. .. . ,.
^ T yy � . .� . . ... �.�3C��,,JI.
.�;�: �'--�'. �
. . �M'., �j'� �
• : �� 1 'AN , �� , . �� �' �
� .. . ,'��' Sk?.���{ , � .
. •. � �. �:��' •, .
� �"�rt�t,�+sa� ," "�'•_-.��_.�."°"� yii. �
�� ���' '`"�
''^ '` �
_ � n
�.���' � ,��
� r K �
'^ � �;���� �; �
,
,,� ,F.�' ��,:,,'',
r ,� ' .�"
,, ��r:i�x ,
1- 1 `
� f � . . �� ,�
i.. „ �,�'�.�x.a.:
wi..� k ..
.. ,y[}'�ii �
� �' • �' �
bl-�I�eS
BOARD OF Z01�ING APPEALS STAFF REPORT
TYPE OF APPLICATION: Minor Variance FILE #: O1-189209
APPLICANT:
HEARING DATE:
LOCATION:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
PLANNING DISTffiCT:
PRESENT ZONING:
REPORT DATE:
DEADLINE FOR ACTION:
STEVEN T. Mfi'CHELL
May 29, 2001
1236 VIRGINIA STREET
T. B. SOMERS ADDTTION TO ST. PAUL SUBJ TO ALLEY
LOTS 25 AND LOT 26
RM-2
May 18, 2001
August 14, 2001
ZONING CODE REFERENCE: 61.101
BY: John Hardwick
DATE RECEIVED: May 8, 2001
A. PURPOSE: A front setback variance in order to build a new single family home. The
required front setback is 49 feet and a 34-foot setback is proposed, for a variance of 15 feet.
B. SITE AND AREA CONDITIQNS: This parcel currently consists of two 40 by 140-foot
lots. The existing house at 1236 Virgima is located on Lot 25 and the garage for the house is
located on Lot 26. There is access to the garage from both the street and the alley.
Surrounding Land Use: Primarily one- and two-family homes.
C. BACKGROUND: The applicant currently lives at 1236 Virginia and wouid like to construct
a new house next to the existing one.
D. FINDINGS:
1. The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use under the strict provisions of
the code.
The previous owner of this property constructed the garage 30 feet from the alley because
of the difference in elevation between the alley and the lot. This limits the buildable area
far a new house without encroaching into the required front setback. The applicant is
proposing to construct a new home on the lot with the garage and to rent the existing
home on the other lots for about five years. The applicant needs the income from renting
Page 1 of 3
pl � t(t�S
File # O1-189209
Staff Report
the existing house in order to afford to build the new house. He eventually plans on
demolishing the existing older home and to recombine the two lots. In order to avoid
moving the existing gazage which involve considerable expense, the applicant is
requesting this front yard setback variance.
2. The plight of the Zand owner is due to circumstances unique to this property, and these
circumstances were not created by the Zand owner.
The location of the existing gazage on the site as well as the average setback of the other
homes on this block aze circumstances that were not created by the applicant.
3. The proposed variance is in keeping with the spirit and intent of the code, and is
consistent with the health, safery, comfort, morals and welfare of the inhabitants of the
City of St. Paul.
The proposed variance will allow the applicant to construct a new single family home to
eventually replace the old house existing on the properiy. Presently, the two lots making
up this parcel are combined under one Property Identification Number as a single tas
parcel. The applicant needs to split these two lots before he can build a new house and he
will need to recombine the two lots after the old house is removed. Provided that the
applicant obtains the necessary subdivision approval, the proposed variance is in keeping
with the spirit and intent of the code.
4. The proposed variance wi11 not impair an adequate supply of Zight and air to adjacent
property, nor will it alter the essential character of the surrounding area or unreasonably
diminish established properry values within the surrounding area.
Other than the front yard setback, the proposed new home will meet all of the setback
requirements. The average setback of the homes along this block ranges from 31 feet to
55 feet. The proposed setback of 34 feet fa11s within the this range and will not be out of
keeping with the character of the area. This block of Virginia Street is a dead end road
and the opposite side of the block is undeveloped land. The proposed variance will not
significantiy affect the supply of light or air to adj acent properties.
5. 77xe variance, if granted, would not permit any use that is not perznitted under the
provisions of the code for the property in the district where the affected Zand is located,
nor would it alter or change the zoning district classification of the property.
A single faxnily home is a permitted use in this zoning district. The proposed variance, if
granted, will not change or alter the zoning classification of the property.
Page 2 of 3
Ol-lit�s
File # 01-189209
Staff Report
6. The request for variance is not based primariZy on a desire to increase the value or
income potential of the parcel of Zand.
The applicant states that his primary desire is to provide a new home for his family.
E. DISTRICT COiJNCIL RECONIMENDATION: As of the date of this report, we have not
received a recommendation from District 6.
F. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Based on findings 1 through 6, staff recommends
approval of the variance, subject to the condition that the applicant obtains subdivision
approval prior to construction of the new home.
Page 3 of 3
- - - �
V
Distr�ct 6 Planning Counc�l ___ w c� o� -� ��5
- � �,
� � .�.
. _ _ .�.,__ .... ..... ...._ ..,..,,.� ..__ ..�,� a. _._�.. _ ..........t.. _t- .._...a . _,.. . � . _ . _.,.. _ . _ _ .
1061 Rice St.
St. Paul, MN 55117
Phone 651 488-4485
Fau 651 488-0343
May 24, 2001
Mr. John Hardwick
LIEP
350 St. Peter St.
Suite 300
St. Paul, MN 55102
Dear John,
The District 6 Planning Councii received a request from Steven Mitchell, 1236 Virginia
St. for a front setback variance that would allow for the construction of a new house.
The required setback is 49 feet and a 34 foot setback is proposed, for a variance of 15
feet.
On Wednesday, May 23, 2001 the Land Use Task Force of the District 6 Planning
Council approved this request.
If you have any questions, please cail me at 651-488-4485.
Sincerely,
�(,T � �� t/r�/
Kat y Co e�
Executive Director
cc: Steven Mitchell
APPLICATION FOR ZONING VARIANCE
OFFICE OFLICENSE, INSPECTIONS, A1VD
EIWIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
350 SL Peter Street, Suite 300
Saint Pars� MN 5510�1510
651-266-9008
APPLICANT
PROPERTY
Name S i��-� t. i'1 i 1�-�fiu- Company
Address ]a"3fo U'f�i(,INt�{ �
City 57 ��L State �'1'� Zip .531t� Daytime Phone ( S'!'��l
Property interest of applicant (owner, contract purchaser, etc.) ow nr �'K
Name of owner
Address/�ocation N� x'+" zcT ni r oF /l vr/�e-�f4 ST.
Legal description i.$ Se� �s /�o� �y 5f 6�¢+iL ��a t�.6
(attach addi6onalsheetifnecessary) Si �� ����
Lotsize y� x��� Present Zoning�m a-PresentUse�,1. oc �-�Tip�
ProposedUse $laJb�..t- LEi - SfKC`tt /�/}y`1/� Q�"l�-ZU'''�Gr
1. Variance(s)requested: F� S�i J3�k �p ?j�J j /�1/ `'t-.'�� v'F ���
oF E /9 r
2. What physical characteristics of the property prevent its being used for any of the permitted uses in your zone?
(topography, size and shape of lot, soil conditions, etcJ k��yy�a�irSC Wp.�;� �p � rr1 �y n1�
6 h'�C�4�' i.oC%9�I;��/ :����j N-o`i" f'c: /-ncs�r QR;,v'j Q��if�7j. G-,A-F�
:.�/$�. fjv i i� � y �R-�:3�i:.a5 c1rA�(J� �-, A+v-D y�...e:-�-Y u;tr�vT'�''a.
3. Explain how the strict appliration of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance wouid result in peculiar or exceptional
practical difficulties or exceptional undue hardships. w F .� r .� ` ��; E-p�6t S t"r'S`9� � yg �
,l�.va Cec.�}iTan/ ,F tX�STint6 C` AnrP /L�T�FwE�'^�d}'-;- �`FT h�i�'� Srd�
e� PRa�� ���D Gt uvA6� to P�r 1N 7r�. D�LZV Yt+�r- 1
Wa�Tt-� 0� � Ns}�ee tS:.;��--i 6nJ 71i-iS $ iiti�.
4. Explain how the granting of a variance will not be a substantial detriment
to the public good or a substantial impairment of the intent and purpose
oftheZoningOrdinance. 7-� S�i�� r f�� R�
�.t; �i.i 5 i l�` le�� �� /f�6; jE li+f-feI'f2� oFF 77fc
5:"��ZT i tf A"� �t�'�"1ZS ,�'i�[�97� 6,n/ i Zf`'c fJ �tK.
�t�a 3���- � o��-o tNo s�� r�+t,eL rs �
Oj7t-�,=(L `�l�.N LUtt�L I�O�SF ����
(Attach additional sheets if needed.)
CASHIERS USE ONLY
� , � p��V �
� �08 r o
Applicant's
Date ���JO /
i� o�-�l
! 57� uc;� r� r rcH�:'u- ""
:i ---- - � l�-3 irIRC:-wix� �5�
:; 5� �r�L _ . s .�rJ S�S�r7
i T. 8. so.� �R5 H D/)irlc,� 7c
i ST .!'qUL i.oTS a..$ t,Z(.,
'1"O W 1�0++7 !T M A� C'o a1 Ci= '
� .W�U ,.t.C:: A.Jd i ACa= A�GL✓inti.- �'e2 r'� 111Af�.lAn�Ct_. Bi-P.rar�SY'
�
� i`f� .-� 0 6� ,M J cA 'T� �h+`eNS�v c, qN � � fK F�� �'J37�J rJ cc��-D
I{��SS�hLS la�+Sc 5�:✓7c ?it:.ficE»'I� ul,- i_r;uKL:fl ;..tZ ,.Y,avi.�tr
�
w ti
�v �
> � � f�T
;v�n,�G�_
� � /yc .;
au �` C,e
AJ � L`�T" '
� ,�
-urv� 5i,
�� a � �
L
� �'7 E 2� � 27� �
7
r,
�i � �
/3Ac!(
Tfti. eX+Si'I+�v Lc�Cv.rj�o�l c7� T/�
R�/ +�c= }.�t=�c j U T✓i�i= Tlf� NvM L c �
'I'l� �p�rc-rfT' t�a� d4�- ti'/ G.-t2✓i0 � woc��
J�i�,�'�t jF��rO ?� c� S� 1� 1 i vJ � 3
��v-� RL r��.�- �:� �� . AN� ,�� N
N�L �o� ,vE Z-c� {�i� c'Jlr9.n/
�/ rH� 6t,J�IL r���L�� gu't-r3,�94�, o��'L P
. .... �
y
u
. Ls
i
�
�oo�ttp 5
`7 f'� V�-'"� iMI �CF�L7L
c.�. o �- < <�
�4�
.� ��
d�=��q���
��
3 d
c �� G
U 1
ai
� C
ae S '
Z �
N �
w � a '
'�_'' �.
c•
_-�� �-Z-��-<
��
0
��
„=
s�
�
� L�
J �C S
,�
G •
60
' ' _ _ _ ' _ ' . �� a � ... . . . . . . _
� prc
_ _ _ �� � � Pt. ..-.� d � �
n E c [ I
� Bn �
`'� � �' �
Gpa
' _ ' ' _ .pw`.� c _ _� . _ .
I �
q � x�
ad c `
x
�
d �� �n
y <
� (,� 'J � m
° L � Z
� r r a
� � �' 3
r 3 Z y
� o Z n 2
r,
- � �, :-1 �
i �'
� J
�
W
�
r�>
3
'_��� _
D� trt` �
s
����ma��� �� �
'y� � �0o x �
c. ,� �° a -1 °
l� S ��
,S 00"��8���
— �
�m r ra
Z -�
`- -- - - �
�
�
�
�
0
�
R C
'{ p O
� �• o
!` L � ��� ` _,... (� � `� �.' �
n -S d
�y
�
G�
-Z --�
� � �
�
Na �� o � �: � # 1 �
� ;�
� D_.�,..c�A—S 1.�� � T
-,
=1 M1 I
a �Z � i
�,.� � � � .`�� c � °D
� �`'� �
���' �'�` �
� `
�!"' _ _ _ �. ._ �
� .�cr.r�-� ^ .�
� ,� _ .- _. � _ � ,.�� _ _ .�
1 ) ("'V
1 �', �:. �
� � \��y`. .., .i �
� ,�- ih\��
`�; ,__
--f � <.
� w �. i�
r-� :l `i�
Y :
r_Y , �' r
;f � � �
f'
�
�v�
sw
oh
� � o
_ _p o �
� U• �
� �t i� �
�
� X
I�
i �
f ��
I Z
i .g
i i
r„
�'� R
� j
�ti�
\ 4� � "�
� � �
� y
r c tr
��� �^9 �
�
v
�� �
{ y t,y �
R _ � :�
�G'� �#
�
��� -� -...�
� -�' — "� � _
��i�i ��
/
'� � _ � � �
" 3 � � c�
x �
� �
� � G l',
� 6� C _
�� U� �
1 1 � (� `�
v ti `
� u�
� � � � �
. �
� � � �
� � ya
�
� c
v, ('
�
�
v
�
���� �'—���
�'t�i� h
- �z
-� � �
�� n
� r
v n �
� c
s a. L
� `'
O � '
� ' �
�
� z�
�
r�
c x
� 4�
fa�
�^ �y
o � (
�� G
p�G
n
� b�
W� `
� A
a �
D �
�.�.�
�
a
3
�
O
-�
s �
G � �
�;I cy �
/' �
� �
a
0
O
Z
V
�
a
3
�
r
�
r
�
�
_� � �
� �
Z � 5
� V 1
e
�(-Il��
C.�'. o�-�!
PROPERTY WITHIN 100 FEET OF PARCEL: 1236 VIRGINIA STREET
�
W
�
�
W
S �
Q/,
� � �
� �
� �
� �
�
.
N
PREPARED BY: LI EP
nl-iims�
1. SUNRAY-BATTLECREEK-HIGHWOOD
2. HAZEL PARK HADEN-PROSPERITY HILLCREST
3. WEST SIDE _
4. BAYTON'S BLUPF
5. PAYNE-PFIALEN
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
• : y.i��l7
THOMAS-DALE
SUMMIT-UNIVERSTI'Y
WEST SEVENTT�
COMO
HAMLINE-MIDWAY
ST. ANTfIONY PARK
MERRTAM PARK-LEXINGTON HAMLINE-SNELLING HAMLINE
MACALESTER GROVEI..EIND
HIGHLAND
SiIMMiT HILL
DOWNTOIVN
� Z����� ���� �o�
CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PLANNING DISTRICTS
�
(� i - l l lv5
CITY OF SAINT PAUL
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS RESOLUTION
ZONING FII.E NU1vIBER: 01-189209
DATE; May 29, 2001
WHEREAS, Steven T. Mitchell bas applied for a variance from the strict application of the
provisions of Section 61.101 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code perta.iuing to the required front
setback of a new single fanuiy home in the RM-2 zoning district at 1236 Virginia Street; and
WHEREAS, the Saint Paul Boazd of Zoning Appeals conducted a public hearing on May 29,
2001 pursuant to said application in accordance with the requirements of Section 64.203 of the
Legislative Code; and
WHEREAS, the Saint Paul Board of Zoning Appeals based apon evidence presented at the
public hearing, as substantially reflected in the minutes, made the following findings of fact:
1. The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use under the strict provisions of the
code.
The previous owner of this property constnzcted the garage 30 feet from the alley because of
the difference in elevation between the alley and the lot. This limits the buildable area for a
new house without encroaching into the required front setback. The applicant is proposing to
construct a new home on the lot with the garage and to rent the existing home on the other
lots for about five years. The applicant needs the income from renting the existing house in
order to afford to build the new house. He eventually plans on demo2ishing the existing older
home and to recombine the two lots. In order to avoid moving the existing garage which
involve considerable expense, the applicant is requesting this front yard setback variance.
2. The plight of the land owner is due to circumstances unique to this property, and these
circumstances were not created by the land owner.
The location of the existing garage on the site as well as the average setback of the other
homes on this block are circuxnstances that were not created by the applicant.
3. The proposed variance is in keeping with the spirit and intent of the code, and is consistent
with the health, safety, comfort, morals and welfare of the inhabitants of the City of St. Paul.
The proposed variance will allow the applicant to construct a new single family home to
evenhxally replace the old house existing on the property. Presently, the two lots making up
this parcel are combined under one Property Identification Numbar as a single tas parcel.
The applicant needs to split these two lots before he can build a new house and he will need
to recombine the two lots a$er the old house is removed. Provided that the applicant obtains
the necessary subdivision approval, the proposed variance is in keeping with the spirit and
intent of the code.
Page I of 3
ot-c rces
File # O1-189209
Resolution
4. The proposed variance will not impair an adequate supply of Zight and air to adjacent
properzy, nor will it alter the essential character of the surrounding area or unreasonably
diminish established property vaZues within the surrounding area.
Other than the front yazd setback, the proposed new home will meet all of the setback
requirements. The average setback of the homes along this block ranges from 31 feet to 55
feet. The proposed setback of 34 feet falls within the this range and will not be out of
keeping with the character of the area. This block of Virginia Street is a dead end road and
the opposite side of the block is undeveloped land. The proposed variance will not
significantly affect the supply of light or air to adjacent properties.
S. The variance, ifgranted, would not permit any use that is not permitted under the provisions
of the code for the property in the district where the affected land is located, nor would it
alter or change the zoning diszrict classification of the property.
A single family home is a permitted use in this zoning district. The proposed variance, if
granted, will not change or alter the zoning classification of the property.
6. The request for variance is not based primarily on a desire to increase the value or income
potenlial of the parcel of land.
The applicant states that his primary desire is to provide a new home for his family.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Saint Paul Board of Zoning Appeals that the
provisions of Section 61.101 are hereby waived to allow a 34-foot front setback; subject to the
condition that the applicant obtains subdivision approval prior to construction of the new home•,
In arder to construct a new single family home on property located at 1236 Virginia Street; and
legally described as T. B. Somers Addition To St. Paul Subj To Alley Lots 25 And Lot 26; in
accordance with the application for variance and the site plan on file with the Zoning
Administrator.
MOVED BY: wi�son
SECONDED BY : Duckstad
IN FAVOR: a
AGAINST: s
MAILED: May 30, 2001
Page 2 of 3
dl-r1��
File # O1-189209
Resolurion
TIl1� LIlVIIT: No order oF the Board of Zoning Appeals permitting the erection or
alterafion of a building or off-street parldng Facility shall be valid for a
period longer than one year, unless a bnilding permit for such erection or
alteration is obtained within such period and snch erection or alteration is
proceeding pursuant to the terms of such permit. The Board of Zoning
Appeals or the City Council may grant an extension not to eaceed one year.
In granting such egtension, the Board of Zoning Appeals may decide to hold
a public hearing.
APPEAL: Decisions of the Board of Zoning Appeals are final subject to appeal to the
City Council within 15 days by anyone afFected by the decision. Building
permits shall not be issued after an appeal has been filed. If permits have
been issued before an appeal has been filed, then the permits are suspended
and construction shall cease until the City Council has made a final
determination of the appeal.
CERTIFICATION: I, the undersigned Secretary to the Board of Zoning Appeals for the City of
Saint Paul, Minnesota, do hereby certify that I have compared the foregoing
copy with the original record in my office; and Snd the same to be a true and
correct copy af said original and of the whole thereof, as based on approved
minutes of the Saint Paul Board of Zoning Appeals meeting held on May 29,
2001 and on record in the Office of License InspecYion and Environmental
Protection, 350 St. Peter Street, Saint Paul, Minnesota.
SAINT PAUL BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
Debbie Crippen
Secretary to the Board
Page 3 of 3
o�-i«y
MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE BOARD OF ZOIVING APPEALS
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 330 CITY HALL
ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA, MAY 29, 2001
PRFSENT: Mmes. Maddox, and Morton; Messrs. Courtney, Duckstad, Faricy, Galles, �a wason
of the Board of Zoning Appeals; Mr. Warner, Assistant City Attomey; Mr, Hazdwick
and Ms. Crippen of ffie Office of License, Inspection, and Environmental Protecrion.
ABSENT None
The meeting was chaired by Joyce Maddox, Chair.
Steven T. Mitchell (#O1-189209) 1236 Vir¢inia Street: A front setback variance in order
to build a new single family home. The required front setback is 49 feet and a 34-foot setback is
proposed, for a variance of 15 feei.
Mr. Hardwick showed slides of the site and reviewed the staff report with a recommenda6on for
approval, subject to the condiuon that the applicant obtains subdivision approval prior to construction
of the new home.
There was no correspondence received in opposition to ffie variance request.
One letter was received in suppozt of the variance from District 6.
The applicant STEVEN T. MPPCHELL, 1236 Virginia Street, was present. There was opposition
present at the hearing. Mr. Mitchell stated he had nothing to add.
Mike Ross, 1244 Virginia Street, stated that the south property line was four inches from the south
wall of his house. Mr. Ross stated that if Mr. Mitchell's garage was not placed correctly. Mr. Ross
had a bid to move the garage and rebuild the crumbling retaining wall for a cost of $6,300. He stated
that if Mr. Mitchell moved the gazage where it should be he could place the new house where it should
be according to the Zoning Code. Mr. Ross stated he was not opposed to the new house, however, if
the garage was not moved the house and the garage would be too close to his home.
Mr. Duckstad questioned whether Mr. Ross had spoken to Mr. Mitchell. Mr. Ross stated he had not.
Mr. Mitchell stated that he did not know if the bid had included having to excavate three feet of earth
behind the retaining wa1L Mr. Mitchell stated that he would have a hard time getting into the garage
because of the height of the alley. He stated that if the bid Mr. Ross had did not include the excavation
of three feet of dirt the price would be higher.
Ms. Maddox questioned whether Mr. Mitchell had spoken to Mr. Ross about the project. Mr.
Mitchell replied that he had menUOned that they were going to build a house there and wouid need a
variance for the front of the house. He stated that Mr. Ross did not say anything then.
Mr. Wilson questioned whether Mr. Mitchell's neighbor had been present at the District meeting. Mr.
Mitchell stated that Mr. Ross had not been there.
Mr. Courtney questioned Mz Mitchell whether the new house would be blocking Mr. Ross's view.
�/ ! � � L �Q�
File # O1-189209
Minutes OS-29-01
Page Two
Mr. Mitchell stated that he was unsure if his neighbor's small side window on the south side would be
blocked.
Mr. Courtney questioned whether Mr. Mitchell would be willing to move the garage if the bid were
correct and included the excavation necessary. Mr. Mitchell stated he could look at it, however, the
driveway would have to be re-sloped. He stated that he had enough tilt now and he would not be able
to use the garage in the winter.
Hearing no further testunony, Ms. Maddox closed the public pordon of the meeting.
Mr. Wilson moved to approve the variance and resolution based on findings 1 through 6, subject to the
condition that the applicant obtains subdivision approvai prior to construcrion of the new home.
Mr. Duckstad seconded the mouon, which passed on a roll call vote of 43(Courtney, Galles,
Maddox).
Submitted by:
John Hardwick
Approved by:
Jon Duckstad, Secretary