01-92�
�RIGI�A�
Council File # � `� Q ..L,
��
Presented By
Referred To � t°�
RESOLUTION
CITY OF SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA
i� ;r� � _
Green Sheet # 1�fe O 1C
�
Committee: Date
2 WFIEREAS, Buffalo Sober Group, LLC, (hereinafter "Buffalo") made application in
3 Zoning File 00-122-234 to the Saint Paul Planning Commission (hereinafter the "Commission")
4 pursuant to the provisions of Saint Paul Legislative Code § 62.102(i)(3) for a change of non-
5 conforxning use permit for property commonly known as 97 North Oxford Street and legally
6 described as noted in the said zoning file. The subject property had previously been occupied by
7 a legal non-conforming human service licensed community residenrial facility which had served
8 32 residents. Buffalo sought the permit to operate a non-conforming rooming house for 24
9 residents; and
10
il
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
WHEREAS, the Commission's Zoning Committee conducted a public hearing after
having provided notice to affected property owners on October 12, 2000 where all persons were
given an opportunity to be heard. The Committee submitted to the Commission a
recommendation to deny the application. By its resolurion no. 00-64 adopted October 2Q 2000,
the Commission moved to deny the application based upon the following findings and
conclusions:
On January 15, 2000, four members of Buffalo Sober Group, LLC purchased the property
at 97 North Oxford and, on February 15, 2000, Buffalo Sober House was opened,
providing permanent housing and supportive services to 24 men in the eazly stages of
sobriety.
2. A subsequent inspection by City staff from the Department of License, Inspection and
Environmental Protection (LIEP) concluded that the use-a rooming house-- at this
location was inconsistent with the zoning code. Rooming houses are first permitted as
speciai condition uses in the RM-1 zoning district.
An application for a Change in Nonconforming Use Permit was submitted on March 21,
2000.
Evidence submitted in support of the applicanYs contention that the use had not been
discontinued were:
1. A statement from the building/business owner that she had operated her business
out ofthe structure until January 15, 2000.
2
3
4
5
7
10
11
12
13
14
��R��i�.�,! o�-9a.
2. Electric bill indicating that electrical and gas service to the buiiding was not
interrupted over the period.
3. A statement from US West indicating that the building owner was responsible for
the phone bill associated with her business in the building over the period.
3. On April l l, 2000, plauuing staff wrote a letter to the applicant detailing its conclusion
that the previous use had, indeed, been discontinued and that pemussion to continue to
use the property as a rooming house would require a pemut to re-establish a
nonconforming use. The applicants were given the option of withdrawing their
application for a Change in Nonconforming Use Permit and applying, instead, for a
permit to re-establish a non-conforniing use. Their application fee would be applied
towazd a new applicarion.
15 In a subsequent phone conversation on April 14, 2000, the attorney representing the
16 applicant agreed with the plauuiug staff's interpretation of the code and asked that the
17 Zoning Committee's consideration of the case be delayed for 30 days so that they could
18 review their options and begin work on obtaining the consent petition required for an
19 appiication to re-establish a non-conforming use. He further indicated that his clients
20 were led to believe by the building's owner and/or realtor that the building's use as a
21 residential facility had somehow been "grandfathered in." Later that afternoon, he faxed
22 a formal Request for Continuance, waiving the statutory requirements for a decision on
23 the application within 60 days of its being filed.
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
On May 22, 2000, a request for an additiona160-day continuance-until the August 17,
2000 Zoning Committee meeting--was faxed to the Zoning Committee by the applicant's
attorney, again waiving the requirement for a decision within 60 days.
4. On August, 28, 2000, unable to obtain a sufficient number of signatures on a consent
petition, the applicants resubmitted an application for a Change in Nonconforming Use
Perxnit. The substanrial additions to the applicaUon-beyond those submitted in
Mazch-were:
�
1. A copy of the Caldwell Banker Burnet listing (list date: February 25, 1999) for
the property indicating that the building was a"fully functional group home-32
person brick structure."
2. A copy of the lodger agreement.
Sec. 62.102(i)(3) of the Zoning Code outlines four conditions for a Change in
Nonconforming Use. Those conditions and the applicanYs ability to meet them aze as
follows:
Page 2 of 5
fl 3��° t;;
� i',
(� S [ � � � E � � i
t31-9a-
2 1. The proposed use is egually appropriate or more appropriate to the neighborhood than
3 the existing nonconforming use;
4
5 This condirion is met. Both uses are congregate living facilities. The proposed use is
6 smaller than the previous use, and, therefore, may be judged to be more appropriate.
7 Boarding houses-like licensed human service comxnunity residential facilities for 17 or
8 more residents--aze first pernutted, with a special condirion use permit, in the RM-1
0
10
11
12
(mulriple family) zoning district.
2. The traffic generated by the proposed use is similar to that generated by the existing
nonconforming use;
13 This condition is not met. While there are fewer total residents of the current facility than
14 lived in the previous facility, none of the previous residents owned cars or had licenses.
15 There were transported in a van and had, neighbors report, few visitors. The cars on the
16 site belonged to program staff. While the current applicant reports that many of the
17 current residents have lost their driving privileges for some period of time, surrounding
18 residents report a marked increase in traffic related to both residents and visitors.
19 Were this facility located in an RM-1 (Multiple family) zoning district and required to
20 obtain a special condition use permit as a rooming house, among the conditions would be
21 that the lot area for 24 residents in 18 guest rooms be 21,000 squaze feet. The current lot
22 is 7500 square feet. It would also be required to haue 12 off-street parking spaces. While
23 12 parking spaces are shown on the site plan submitted with the application, 9 of the
24 spaces are 8 feet wide rather than 9 feet as is normally required, 1 space is in the required
25 front yazd (not allowed under Sec 64.104(11), 10 spaces are in the required side yard (not
26 allowed under Sec. 64.104(11), and the other 2 spaces ue within 4 feet of a side lot line
27 (not allowed under Sec. 64.104(11).
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
3. The use will not be detrimental to the existing character of development in the immediate
neighborhood or endanger the public health, safety, or general welfare;
This condition is met. There is no evidence that facilities of this type have any
detrimental impact on property values, or on public health, safety or welfare.
4. The use is consistent with the comprehensive plan.
This condition is met. The City's Housing Plan calls for the preservation of existing
rental units and creation of new units providing supportive housing for persons who are
or are at risk of being homeless.
6. On the central point, however, of the appropriateness of the application, staff finds the
following:
a. The Zoning Code (Sec. 60.221) defines Use as the "principal purpose for which land or a
building is being occupied."
Page 3 of 5
�"�"1E�`'i't; %� #
�;(�:��;.,;,
�U� tL
O �-�11�
2 b. A previous use-a Licensed Human Service Community Residential Facility--had been
3 discontinued for more than 365 days when the applicants assumed ownership of the
4 building on January 15, 2000. Ramsey County staff indicates that the last resident moved
5 out of the building on August 21, 1998. T'he conh�act between Ramsey CounTy and the
6 building owner/service provider formally eapired on September 30, 1998.
7
8 c. The Zoning Code states: When a nonconforming use is discontinued or ceases to exist
9 for a continuous period of tluee hundred sixty-five (365) days, the building, or building
10 and land in combination, shall thereafter be used in conformance with the regulations of
11 the district in which it is located, unless the planning commission approves a permit to
12 reestablish the nonconfomung use as set forth in clause (i)(5). (Sec. 62.102( fl(7))
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
d. The applicant has not applied for a permit to re-establish a nonconforming use.
e. It is the intent of the Zoning Code that this building revert to a use permitted in the zoning
district unless this or some other non-confornung use which can meet the condirions
detailed in Sec. 62.102(i)(5) - including a consent perition of 2/3 of the surrounding
properry owners-is established.
WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of Saint Paul Legislative Code § 64.206 Buffalo
filed an appeal from the determination made by the Commission and requested a hearing before
the City Council (hereinafter "Council") for the purposes of considering the action taken by the
Commission; and
WHEREAS, acting pursuant to Saint Paul Legislative Code § 64.206 -§ 64.208 and upon
notice to affected parties, a public hearing was duly conducted by the Council on November 15,
2000. At the close of the public hearing and upon the request of the City Attorney's Office, the
matter was laid over for the purpose of obtaining an opinion from the City Attorney on the
appellanYs claim for a reasonable accommodation of the City zoning regulations; and
WHEREAS, on December 6, 2000, the Council received the opinion of the City Attorney
and, having heard the statements made, hauing considered the application, the staff reports and
the record, minutes and resolution of the Zoning Committee and of the Planning Commission;
does hereby
RESOLVE, that Council affirms the decision of the Planning Commission in this matter
based upon the following reasons:
1. The Planning Commission did not err in its facts, findings or procedures. The traffic
from the proposed non-conforming use is more intensive than the prior non-conforxning use. The
application did not meet the requirements of Legislative Code § 62.102(i)(3)(b);
2. Although Buffalo did not specify what reasonable accommodation it sought, the proposed
use is first pernutted in an R-Ml zoning district subject to a special condition use permit. The
proposed use is not pernutted in a R-Tl zoning district. Granting this type of
Page 4 of 5
.� ry; i r� � s S f 2 ! §
�..v 4 � : 'v` I 't �i �'l t.� O � � g'ti'
1
2 accommodation would constitute a substantial modification of the City's zoning code and its
3 goal to eliminate non-conforming uses from neighborhoods. The applicants have not
4 demonstrated why the zoning restrictions for this building and in this neighborhood need
5 modification;
6
7 3. Granting the application is contrary to the needs of other handicapped persons who must
8 follow the City's zoning code in order to operate their facilities;
9
10 4. Granting the application will influence future non-conforniing use applications and could
11 negatively impact the City's overall zoning scheme especially as it applies to neighborhood
12 housing;
13
14 AND, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the appeal of Buffalo Sober Group be and
15 is hereby denied in all things;
16
17 AND, BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED, that the City Clerk shall mail a copy of this
18 resolution to Buffalo Sober Group, the Zoning Administrator and the Planning Commission.
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
Requested by Department of:
By:
Form Appr ed by City Attomey
By: .� G✓/�/GM�'^
Approved by Mayor Eor Submission to Council
By: \ \ C F� w\ � `� ^ By:
Approved by Mayor: Date �U �� Gr�/�
By:
Adopted by Council: Date ��. � �e Q,
l
Adoption Certified by Council Secretary
o�_9a
GREEN SHEET
reter wazner
February 7, 2001 - Consent
TOTAL # OF SIGNATURE PAGES
Resolution memorializing City Council action taken December 6, 2001, denying the appeal of Buffalo Sober
Group, LLC to a decision of the Plannnig Commission denying an application for a Nonconfoiming Use Permit
to establish a rooxning house at 97 North Oxford Slreet.
PLANNING CAMMISSION
CIB CAMMIITEE
dVIL SERVICE CAMMISSION
L�:LiL=�I•�':ii•=3
❑ OIY�TlCIOEY ❑ CIIYCli11K
❑ nuiry�ac�eF,o¢ � wwai�a�w�eera
� r�raR��umr�xn ❑ -
(CUP ALL LOCATIONS FOR SIGNATUR�
Hes u;re pe�sonlfirm ever workea under a� ru uic aepa�hnenn
vES tao
Flae tlxe PaaoMrm ever been e ciq' ompbyee?
VES NO
Daes Uiic Oe�soMUm P� a sldll not namellYO�essed M�Y cuneM ci�/ emPbyee4
VES NO
Is Mis pemoNfqm a taryetetl verMoY7
VES MO
No106015
aTrca.¢�
114?Ti
OF TRANSACTION S
COSTrttEVQ1UE BUDOETED (CIRCLE ONE)
YES NO
SOURCE
ACTNITY NtMM�ER
(��M
OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY
Clayton M. Robinson, Jc, Ciry Attorney
n�_
CITY OF SAINT PAUL
Norm Coleman, Mayor
January 18, 2001
Nancy Anderson
Council Secretary
310 City Hall
15 West Kellogg Blvd.
St. Paul, MN 55102
Re: Appeal of Buffalo Sober Crroup, LLC
City Council Action Date: December 6, 2000
Deaz Nancy:
Telephorse: 657 266-8710
FacsimtZe: 65/ 298-i619
v'�ia.":� `_'�`'-°.52c.'vf s1cP,�E(
� ft � ?S 4 � ���3
�::•:,� _ �;
Enclosed please find a signed Resolution memorializing the Council's decision of December 6,
2000, in the above-entitled matter. Please place this on the Council's Consent Agenda at your
earliest convenience.
If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me.
Very truly yours,
�����
Peter W. Warner
Assistant City Attorney
Civil Division
400 Ciry Hall
I S West Kellogg Blvd.
Saint Paul, Mirsnuota 55102
Hand Delivered
PWW/rmb
Enclosure
DEPARTMENT OF PL AI JNING
& ECONOMIC DEVEI,OPMENT
BrianSweeney, InterimDirector
orgZ
3a
CTTY OF SAINT PAUL
Norm Coleman, Mayor
November 3, 2000
Ms. Nancy Anderson
City Council Reseazch Office
Room 310 City Hall
Saint Paul, Minnesota 55102
Dear Ms. Anderson:
25 WestFwrth Street
SmntPau{ MT755102
Telephone: 651-26G6655
Facstmile: 651-228-33I4
I would like to confinn that a public hearing before the Ciry Council is scheduled for Wednesday,
November 15, 2000, for the following appeal of a Planning Commission decision:
Appellant: Buffalo Sober Group, LLC
File Number: Appeal of file #00-122-234
Purpose: Appeal a Pl anninn Commission decision to deny an application for a Change of
Nonconfoiming Use Permit to establish a rooming house providing permaxient living
" facilities for 24 men in early sobriety.
Address: 97 North O�cford
Legal Descriprion of Properry: North 75 feet of Lots 27 and 28, Block 42, Summit Pazk Addition to
Saint Paul, Ramsey Counry, Minnesota
Previous Acrion:
Zoning Committee Recommendarion: Denial; vote: unanunous; October 12, 2000
Plamiiiig Commission Decision: Denial; vote: unanimous; October 20, 2000
My understandina is that this public hearing request will appear on the agenda for the November 8, 2000
City Council meeting and that you will publish notice of the heariug in the Saint Paul Legal Ledger. Please
call me at 266-6557 if you have any questions.
SIDCEIELY,
.��� ����.�
City Planner
cc: File #00-122-234
Paul Dubruiel, PED
Cazol Martineau, PED
Wendy Lane, LIEP
Walter Dinalko
Mazk Gehan
• �rsrxuiv •
NQTICE OF PUBLIC HEARII�iG �
1he Saint Paul, Ciry�Council. will con-
duct a public �ea±'nno on Wednesday,
November' 15; 2000, at 5:30 p.m. in the
GYty-Council Ci�ambers, Third Floor City
Hall-Gonrthouse, 15 -West Kellogg
Boulevazd, Saint Paul, MN, to consider the
appeal of BufTalo �Sober Group, LLC �to a
decision of the Plaz�ning Comnussi.on deny-
ing an application for a-change of a
Nonconforming Use Permit to establish a
roomin� house provtding permanent livi��g
facilities for 24 men in eazly sobriety at 9Z
North O�'ord Street. -
Dated: November 8, 2000 _
tvatveYnrmEasorr
Assisiant city-council.-secretary �
, �(NwemUer33) -- .
_'__'_ ST. PADL IEGAL I�DGER — �-c
", p: 02014703 _ . - - �
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNNG
& ECONOMIC DEVELAPMEVI"
Brian Sweeney, Director
•
•
CTTY OF SAII�IT PAUL
Norm Coleman, Mayar
November 7, 2000
Ms. Nancy Anderson
Secretary to the City Council
Room 310 City Hall
Saint Paul, Minnesota 55102
RE: Zoning File #00-149-255:
City Council Hearing:
/
vi-9z
25WestFou�ihSbeet Telephone:612-266-6565
SainrPaul,MN55102 Facsimile:67 2-22 83 3 7 4
BUFFALO SOBER GROUP, LLC
November 15, 200Q 530 p.m. City Council Chambers
PURPOSE: Appeal a plamiing commission decision to deny a Change of Nonconforming Use Pernut for a rooming
house providing permanent living facilities for 24 men in eazly sobriety at 97 North O�ord.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: Denial; Unanimous
ZONIlVG COMMITTEE ACTION: Denial; 4-0
STAFF RECOMMENDATION Denial
SUPPORT: Two people spoke in support. The Snmmit University Plaminig Council submitted a letter indicating
that they found no reason not to support the application. Si�teen letters were received in support.
OPPOSITION: Five people spoke in opposition. Four letters and one perition were received in opposition.
Dear Ms. Anderson:
The BI7FFAL0 SOBER GROUP, LLC has appealed the decision of the Saint Paul Planniiig Commission to deny
them a Change in Nonconfornvng Use Pernut to establish a rooming house providing permanent living facilities for
24 men in eazly sobriety on properry located at 97 North O�ord, between Laurel and Ashland. The zoning
committee held a public hearing on the application on October 12, 2000. The applicant addressed the committee.
At the close of the public hearing the committee voted 4-0 to deny the application. The Plaxming Commission
upheld the zoning committee's recommendation for denial on a unanimous voice vote at its October 20, 2000
meeting.
This appeal is scheduled to be heard by the City Council on November 15, 2000. Please notify me if any member
of the City Council wishes to have slides of the site—or a short video of the facility prepared by the applicant--
presented at the public hearing.
Sincerely,
L ���
Platming Administrator
• Attachments
ca City Council members
APPLICATION FOR APPEAL
��� j �� Departmerri of Planning and Economic Development
• �RTT�� Zoning Section
I��J
+�+� 1100 City Hall Anner
25 Lf'est Founh Street
Saint Paul, M_N 55101
266-6589
APPELLANT
PROPERTY
LOCATION
Name Bu°�alo Sober Group, y.L.C.
Address 97 fiorth O�_for� Street
City Saint Paul gtr�N ZiP 55104 Daytime phone 651-602-0
[�
Zoning File Name 00-122-234
Address/Location Same
TYPE OF APPEAL: Application is hereby made for an appeai to the:
� Board of Zoning Appeals CQ City Council
•
under the provisions of Chapter 64, Section 206 , Paragraph a of the Zoning Code, to
appeal a decision made by the R�` Pre', ai ��,n >�,� ('nmm^ a�� nn
on October 2G, 2000 ,� File number. CO-�22-234
(dat of decis
GROUNDS FOR APPEAL: Explain why you feei there has been an error in any requirement,
permit, decision or refusal made by an administrative official, or an error in fact, procedure or
finding made by the Board of Zoning Appeais or the Planning Commission.
Sze ut�achec, c.oc�:r.�e��.
�� �!J O
. � Attach additiona/ sheet if necessary)
l7 r7 il/,
ApplicanYs
Date ed City
��
r
� ATTACIIlV�NT TO APPLICATION FOR APPEAL
OF BUFFALO SOSER GROUP, L.L.C.
The principals of Buffalo Sober Group, L.L.C., aze Walter Ainalko and Jeff Gardner. In the fall of
1999, they entered into negotiations to purchase the building located at 9'7 North O�'ord Sh�eet, Saint
Paul, Minnesota. The building had previously been operated as the Oakland Home, as described
more fully in the decision of the Planning Coxnmission dated October 20, 2000. Buffalo Sober
Group, L.L.C., hoped to rehabilitate the property and operate it as a"sober house," i.e. a facility
where chemically dependent persons in early recovery could safely reside in a sober environment.
Dinalko and Gazdner believed at the time that they had neighborhood support far the proj ect. They
also believed that they were supported by the St. Paul Councii Member in whose district the building
is located. They were refened by that Council Member for financing to the University Bank. That
bank agreed to provide financing to the project and also guaranteed the loan with $60,000 of city
money.
As part of the fmancing transaction, an appraisal was done for the bank. Attached is the cover sheet
of an Appraisal Report dated September 16, 1999, and page 14 of that report, relating to the subject
of "zoning." Messrs. Dinalko and Gardner and, appazently, the University Bank, relied upon this
language in going forwazd with the project. Everyone thought that the building could be operated
� as a"sober house" without zoning complications. On January 15, 2000, Buffalo Sober Group,
L.L.C., closed on the purchase.
In early 2000, there was a complaint that the Buffalo Sober House violated St. Paul zoning
ordinances. The City's interpretation of Section 62.102 of the zoning code, relating to non-
conforming uses, was that because the Oakland Home had not had residents for over 365 days prior
to the purchase of the property by Buffalo Sober Group, L.L.C., appellants could not legally apply
for a"change of nonconforming use." Instead, it would be necessary for them to apply for a
"reestablishment of nonconforming use." Such an application requires the approval of two-thirds
of the properry owners within 100 feet of the properiy in question. Appeliants were unable to obtain
such approval. The application now pending, therefore, is for a change of nonconforming use.
In its application, Buffalo Sober Group, L.L.C., made the following statement:
"The new residents [i.e. residents of Buffalo Sober House] as former sufferers of
chemical dependency are subject to protection under the Federal Fair Housing
Amendments Act of 1988 and as such aze entitled to reasonable accommodation in
the administration of zoning ordinances by the City of St. Paul."
The City is obliged to make reasonable accommodations in its rules, including zoning ordinances
in order to afford handicapped persons equal opporhuiity in housing. 42 U.S.C. 3604 ( fl(3b). The
meaning of the word "handicapped" within the federal statute is broad and has been construed to
• include persons disadvantaged by alcoholism and drug addiction. See e.g.. Oxford House v. The
Township of Hill, 799 F. Supp. 450 (1991). Appellant renews its request for reasonable
accommodation by the City of St. Paul in order that the residents of Buffalo Sober House may
continue to reside in that smxcture without discrim;nation on the basis of handicap. •
It has also been appellant's contention throughout the application process that it is unreasonable to
interpret Section 62.102 (fl(7) as requiring the reestablishment of a nonconforming use, given the
facts of tkus case. Although the Oakland Home did not have residents for over 365 days prior to the
purchase of the building by appellants, the owner of the structure was, at that time, actively
attempting to sell the building and was marketing it on the basis of its nonconformiug use. Under
those circumstances, it is reasonable to exclude, from the 365-day period, the time the property was
on the market for sale. If that were to be done in this case, appellanY s pending application would
easily fall within the 365-day "statute of limitations" and would be evaluated on the basis of a
change of nonconforming use. A case remazkably similaz is now pending in the Minnesota Court
of Appeals. Haefele v. City of Eden Prairie.
•
��
� �
.,
��._�_...,
i
�
1
.�
,
h t
)
�
�
�
�
�
� �
�
!
�
l
i
,
Mr. John Bennet
Property Located At:
97 North Oxford Street
St. Paul, Minnesota
OI'4z
��
-�--�-
� j�2�r��
_. p�"-�-
� - ' - -- _ �
ZONING
a The subject pr� e Mis�eanolis�B �esidence District , under the zoning ordinance
dministered by the Ci of P )
See the Addenda for the zoninb or�inance.
DISCUSSION OF ZONIlVG
The subject facility is zoned R2B (Residence Disfrict .
constructed prior to the adoption of the current ordinance and is non-confomlin
ordinance but is aijowed as a non-eoafotmin � The subject improvemenfs were
g �e. S to �he current
are descnbed� th por�o� Di�e or y be found m the dd nd� ous
types that
Pertnitted uses in thiS �S�ct include a1I uses allowed in the other Residenfial Districfs. The
existing use is non but is allowed as a non �
The subject proper�, appeaz.s to be "grand fathered" as a result of being const��t� p�or to
�e adoption of tlxe current zoning ordinan�e �d is, the�.efore, considered to be a legal use.
Furthermore, the subject appears to be non with respect to parlcing requirements as well
as lot, yard and densl�y requix �� �e subject is non-conforming its use ma co
so long as no more than 50 percent of it is not destroyed or damaged. Givea that there is
hazazd insurance to cover potenfialloss, there does not appear to be a negative impact as a resu of
the non �
g use.
14
n
L.I
�
�
;�;�
> �.�� ;�
.� �
( 9•
ry „
�
t u;fk" 3qa .
;t. .
,
5
� � ��
�,
A•Y �rmYt G 4'�'K"-' W..�e^ » t.":iri
k�
r+ys•s � Ym u.c? � ttl d
t
A i,.:�yt w r , e ,.?z
r
ss��n � �r�
�t+rr x S ,�, . _ vz " S�.�iA�. t f3
,ry
s+xt 3k�e:Y s. ; � e+�wKd �a�Ea. .��e�^* rn wgw;w�x v x �`+r.
�,�' STn4^�zlt � '?,! -�N3.3 rm+ d�s,< a». : y �wX •..
� P o-y C -� �
V?� ky� s.:.: l '( 3sS d„
��la...... 4 � }�...tf y �r bTT 5
'I 1� �14v p ?
f
+
5r v � � �
ttd F�� �
� i a t
V' ;.
d� � �
3
C i 4
I
( 14 �.
i X��+ . .J%i. YA� � �.n V
� e!m" N} ra Y' p. Y 5'r'.I" �tY1 rv. k.a
1 � �!
� 9F �� t o4 �� . Y
+ . , ,.v� , ., ,x . _ . . . „
µ�trFs 3'y � t Y'�L� s AC:.*
R
+�A. ' A
� 3
�
p t; i:
'V'� � {b� 8 SK^ �:lR
�
Z
W
city of saint paul �
� planning commission resolution
file number 00-64
date October Zo. 2000
WHEREAS, BUFFALO SOBER GROUP, LLC, file #00-122-234, has applied for a Change
of Non-Conforming Use Permit for the properiy at 97 North Oxford, situated between Laurel
and Ashland, to allow the property to be used as a rooming house providing permanent living
facilities for 24 men in early sobriety; and
WHEREAS, the Zoning Committee of the Planning Commission, on October 12, 2000, held a
public hearing at which all persons present were given an opportunity to be heard pursuant to
said application in accordance with the requirements of Section 64.400 of the Saint Paul
Legislative Code; and
WHEREAS, the staff report prepared for the Zoning Committee included the following
recitation of the history of the property:
1. Oakland Home, a licensed community residential facility for persons with mental illness, was
� established at 97 North O3cford in about 1968.
2. On September 25, 1980, the City Council adopted amendments to the Zoning Code defining
community residential facilities and regulating them as special condition uses consistent with
the provisions of State law included in the Human Services Licensing Act. The amendment:
allowed community residential facilities for 7 or more facility residents in the RT-1 (Two-
family) zoning district as special condition uses.
3. On April 11, 1986, a Planning Commission resolution (�86-28) was adopted establishing legal
status for the Oakland Home as an existing community residential facility licensed by the
Minnesota Department of Human Services for 36 residents with mental illness in an RT-1
zoning district. In granting the special condition use permit, the Commission modified the
following conditions:
a Number of residents served. The code limited the number of residents to 16. The
condition was modified to allow 36 residents.
moved by Kramer
seconded by
� in favor Unanimous �o��e �ote
against_
Zoning File #00-122-234
Page Two ofResolution
b. Minimum distance between community residential facilities_ The code required_that
residential facilities be a minimum of 1320 feet apart. Two facilities were within the
required distance (Turning Point at 1089 Portland and Pineview Residence at 69 N.
Milton). The condition was modified.
c. Off-street parking. The code required that there be one parking spaces for every two
facility residents—or 18 spaces for the facility. At the time there was parking for 2 vehicles
available on the property. Because no residents owned or operated their own vehicles, the
Commission modified the requirement.
4. The Zoning Code was subsequently amended on June 27, 1991 to define Licensed Human
Service Community Residential Facilities and to first allow such facilities for 17 or more .
persons in the RM-1 Multiple Family zoning district as special condition uses. As a result, the
Oakland Home became a legally nonconforming use.
5. Chan�es in health caze financing provisions and State policy resulted in the general
downsizing of residential facilities for persons with mental illness throughout Minnesota
beginning in the mid-1990s.
�
6. Ramsey County initiated a down-sizing plan for Oakland Home and the last resident moved
out on August 21, 1998. The county's contract with Oakland Home expired on September �
30, 1998 and was not renewed.
WHEREAS, the Saint Paul Planning Commission, based on the evidence presented to its
Zoning Conmittee at the public hearing, as substantially reflected in the minutes, made the
following findings of fact:
1. On 7anuary 15, 2000, four members of Buffalo Sober Group, LLC purchased the property at
97 North O�'ord and, on February 15, 2000, Buffalo Sober House was opened, providing
permanent housing and supportive services to 24 men in the early stages of sobriety.
2. A subsequent inspection by City stafffrom the Department ofLicense, Inspection and
Environmental Protection (LIEP) concluded that the use—a rooming house-- at this location
was inconsistent with the zoning code. Rooming houses are first pernutted as special
condition uses in the RM-1 zoning district.
An application for a Change in Nonconforming Use Permit was submitted on Mazch Z 1, 2000.
Evidence submitted in support of the applicant's contention that the use had not been
discontinued were:
1. A statement from the building/business owner that she had operated her business out of
the structure until January 15, 2000.
2. Electric bill indicating that electrical and gas service to the buildin� was not interrupted
overthe period.
3. A statement from US West indicating that the building owner was responsible for the �
phone bill associated with her business in the building over the period.
r
Zoning File #00-122-234 �
� Page Three of Resolution
3. On April 11, 2000, plannin� staffwrote a letter to the applicant detailing its conclusion that
the previous use had, indeed, been discontinued and that pemrission to continue to use the
property as a rooming house would require a pemut to re-establish a nonconformin� use. The
applicants were given the option of withdrawing their application for a Change in
Nonconforming Use Permit and applying, instead, for a permit to re-establish a non-
conforming use. Their application fee would be applied towazd a new application.
In a subsequent phone conversation on April 14, 2000, the attorney representing the applicant
agreed with the planning staf�'s interpretation of the code and asked that the Zoning
Committee's consideration of the case be delayed for 30 days so that they could review their
options and begin work on obtaining the consent petition required for an application to re-
establish a non-conforming use. He further indicated that his clients were led to believe by the
building's owner and/or realtor that the building's use as a residential facility had somehow
been "grandfathered in." Later that afternoon, he faxed a fonnal Request for Continuance,
waiving the statutory requirements for a decision on the application within 60 days of its being
filed.
On May 22, 2000, a request for an additional 60-day continuance—until the August 17, 2000
Zoning Committee meetin� -was faxed to the Zoning Committee by the applicant's attomey,
a�ain waiving the requirement for a decision within 60 days.
� 4. On August, 28, 2000, unable to obtain a sufficient number of signatures on a consent petition,
the applicants resubmitted an application for a Change in Nonconforming Use Permit. The
substantial additions to the application—beyond those submitted in March—were:
1. A copy of the Coldwell Banker Burnet listing (list date: February 25, 1999) for the
property indicating that the building was a"fully functional group home-32 person brick
structure."
2. A copy of the lodger agreement.
Sec. 62.102(i)(3) of the Zoning Code outlines four conditions for a Change in Nonconforming
Use. Those conditions and the applicant's ability to meet them are as follows:
1. The proposed a�se is eqzraZly appropriate or more appropriate to the neighborhood than
the existing nonconforming use;
This condition is met. Both uses are congregate livin� facilities. The proposed use is
smaller than the previous use, and, therefore, may be judged to be more appropriate.
Boardin� houses—like licensed human service community residential facilities for 17 or
more residents--are first permitfed, with a special condition use permit, in the RM-1
(multiple family) zonin� district.
�
Zoning File #00-122-234
Page Four of Resolution
2. 7he traffzc generated by the proposed use is similar to that generated by the existing
nonconforming use;
This condition is not met. While there are fewer total residents of the current facility than
lived in the previons facility, none of the previous residents owned cars or had ]icenses.
There were transpoited in a van and had, neighbors report, few visitors. The cars on the
site belonged to program staff.
While the cunent applicant reports that many ofthe current residents have lost their
driving privileges for some period of time, sunounding residents report a marked increase
in traffic related to both residents and visitors.
Were this facility located in an RM-i (Multiple family) zoning district and required to
obtain a special condition use pernut as a rooming house, among the conditions would be
that the lot area fbr 24 residents in 18 guest rooms be 21,000 squaze feet. The current lot
is 7500 square feet.
�
It would also be required to have 12 off-street parking spaces. While 12 parking spaces
are shown on the site plan subcnitted with the application, 9 of the spaces are 8 feet wide
rather than 9 feet as is normally required, 1 space is in the required front yard (not allowed
under Sec 64.104(11), 10 spaces are in the required side yazd (not allowed under Sec.
64.104(11), and the other 2 spaces are within 4 feet of a side lot line (not allowed under �
Sec. 64.104(11).
3. The zrse will not be detrimental to the existing character of development in the i»zmediate
neighborhood or endanger the pubZic health, safety, or general weZfare;
This condition is met. There is no evidence that facilities ofthis type have any detrimental
impact on property values, or on public health, safety or welfare.
4. The z�se is consistent with the comprehensive plan.
This condition is met. The City's Housing PIan calls for the preservation of existing rental
units ana creation of new units providing suppor�ive nousing for psrsons w i� are �r �e at
risk of being homeless.
6. On the central point, however, of the appropriateness of the application, staff finds the
following:
a. The Zoning Code (Sec. 60.221) defines Use as the "principal purpose for which land or a
building is being occupied."
b. A previous use—a Licensed Human Service Community Residential Facility--had been
discontinued for more than 365 days when the applicants assumed ownership of the
building on January 15, 2000. Ramsey County staff indicates that the last resident moved
out of the building on August 21, 1998. The contract between Ramsey County and the
buildin� owner/service provider formally expired on September 30, 1998
a The Zoning Code states: When a nonconforming use is discontinued or ceases to exist for �
a continuous period of three hundred sixty-five (365) days, the building, or building and
land in combination, shall thereafter be used in conformance with the regulations of the
Zoning File #00-122-234
� Page Five of Resolution
o�-9a
district in which it is located, unless the planning commission approves a pernut to
reestablish the nonconfornung use as set forth in clause (i)(5). (Sec. 62.102(�(7))
d. The applicant has not applied for a permit to re-establish a nonconfomun� use.
e. It is the intent of the Zoning Code that this building revert to a use pemutted in the zonin�
district unless ttus or some other non-conforming use which can meet the conditions
detailed in Sec. 62.102(i)(5) —including a consent petition of 2/3 of the surrounding
property owners—is established.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Saint Paul Planning Commission, that the
application of BIJFFALO SOBER GROUP, LLC for a Change in Non-Conforming Use Pemut to
allow the property at 97 North Oxford to be used as a rooming house providing permanent living
facilities for 24 men in eazly sobriety is hereby denied.
C�
C�
o� -9Z
�
MINUTES OF THE ZONING COMMITTEE
Thursday, October 12, 2000 - 3:30 p.m.
City Council Chambers, 3` Fioor
City Hail and Court House
15 West Kellogg Boulevard
PRESENT:
EXCUSED:
ABSENT:
Gervais, Gordon, Kramer, and Morton
Engh, Faricy, and Field
Mardell
OTHERS Peter Warner
PRESENT: Nancy Homans and Carol Martineau of PED
The meeting was chaired by Commissioner Gervais.
BUFFALO SOBER GROUP, LLC - 00-122-234 - Change of Nonconforming Use Permit to allow
a rooming house that provides permanent living facilities for men in early sobriety. 97 North
Oxford, between Laurel and Ashland.
Nancy Homans showed slides and presented the staff report:
The case invoives a variety of issues related to non-conforming uses. The application is for
� a change in non-conforming use—a process provided for in the Zoning Code when one non-
conforming use has been out of existence for fewer than 365 days and the proposed use is
equaliy or less non-conforming than the existing or previous use. A permit may be. issued by
the Planning Commission upon its making four specific findings. The Code also provides for
a re-establishment of a non-conforming use when a non-conforming is discontinued orceases
to exist for a period of more than 365 days. In such cases, the Planning Commission must
make nine specific findings including a finding that a petition of two-thirds of the property
owners within 100 feet of the property stating their support for the use has been submitted.
�
The history of this case begins with Oakland Home, a licensed community residential facility
for 36 persons with mental illness, that was established in about 1968. In 1980, amendments
to the Zoning Code first defined community residential facilities and first allowed such facilities
for seven or more residents in the RT-1 zoning district as special condition uses.
On April 11, 1986, the Planning Commission granted a special condition use permit to the
Oakland Home, modifying three conditions including the requirement that there be one off-
street parking space for every two facility residents. At the time there was parking for 2
vehicles on the property. Because no residents could drive, the Commission modified the
requirement.
The Zoning Code was once again amended in 1991 to define Licensed Human Service
Community Residential Faciiities and io first aiiow facifities for 17 or more persons in the RM-1
zoning district as special condition uses. Oakland Home, once again, became a legaily
nonconforming use.
There was a general downsizing of residential facilities for persons with mental
iliness—including the Oakland Home--during the 1990s. Ramsey County's contract with
Oakland Home expired on September 30, 1998 and was not renewed. The last resident had
moved out on August 21, 1998.
Zoning Committee Minutes
October 12, 2000
File #: 00-122-234
Page 2
On February 17, 2000, the City's office of License, lnspections and Environmental Protection
(LIEP) received a complaint retative fo the bui(ding. The inspector went out and determined
that the structure was being used as a rooming house. Rooming houses are first ailowed in
the RM-1 zoning district as special condition uses. in a discussion with LIEP staff, the
applicants suggested that the previous use had not been discontinued insofar as the owner
of the building maintained an office in the building and continued to pay for utilities. The
Zoning Administrator indicated that such a case would need to be made with substantial
documentation to the Planning Commission.
On March 21, 2000, the applicant submitted an application for a change in non-conforming
use. On April 22, 2000, Ms. Homans sent a letter to the applicant outiining the difference
between a change in non-conforming use and a re-establishmentofa non-conforming use and
indicated that she believed that the use required a re-estabiishment permit. She offered the
applicants the option of withdrawing their application and submitting an appiication for the re-
establishment at no additional fee. In a phone conversation on April 14, 2000, the applicanYs
attorney agreed with staff's interpretation of the Code and asked thatthe Zoning Committee's
consideration of the case be delayed for 30 days. Later fhat aftemoon, he faxed a formal
Request for Continuance, waiving the requirement that a decision be made within 60 days.
�
A request for an additional 60-day continuance was faxed to the Zoning Committee on May
22, 2000.
On August 28, 2000, the applicant resubmitted an application fora Change in Nonconforming �
Use Permit with two additional attachments: (1) a copy of the Coldwell Banker Burnet listing
for the property; and (2) a copy of the lodger agreement.
Ms. Homans reviewed the findings related to a change in non-conforming use. Staff finds that
the proposed use meets the findings related to the appropriateness of the use, the impact of
the use on the character of development and public health, safety and general welfare and
consistency with the comprehensive pian. On the finding related to whefher the traffic
generated by the proposed use is similarto that generated by the existing nonconforming use;
a a �A... F3G. 'nian} nf he nrnnncc`-1 f litv h v
SiBii iOUfiG ili8i i�12 CO�CSiiiGi i i5 ��G� ;n2c. �v�v�E :.+� :�:8 ;&5�....,,.5 t�e.. r ...�,....--- 3CI.._, , a-2
cars than did previous residents, neighbors reporf a marked increase in visitor traffic, and the
number of people living on the lot is greater than would othervvise be allowed in a rooming
house.
Related to off-street parking, Ms. Homans stated that, while the site plan submitted with the
application indicates 10 striped parking spaces on the north side of the building and two
spaces on the west side, there are now seven striped diagonal parking spaces on the north
side and two stacked spaces on the west side. (There was no site plan submitted for the
increase in parking spaces over the two parking spaces that were availabie for the previous
use.) The applicant has indicated there is room for five additional parking spaces that are not
currently striped.
On the central issue, however, Ms. Homans explained the staff found that the previous �
nonconforming use had been out of existence for more than 365 days when the new use was
estabiished. An application for a reestablishment of a nonconforming use with a sufficient
petition has not been filed. Inasmuch as an appropriate and compiete application has not
been submitted, the Zoning Staff recommends denial of the application.
Zoning Committee Minutes
� October 12, 2000
File #: 00-122-234
Page 5
Commissioner Gordon restated the issue befo�e the committee: Did the previous use cease to
exist for 365 days? If the previous use wasn't disconfinued, then the committee needs to look at
the four findings ouflined in the Code.
Mr. Dinalko reiterated that they limit the number of cars allowed among residents to 10. There are
seven cars there now. As to the 365 days, he indicated that, when they purchased the building,
the interior wasn't very pleasant, but there was a caretaker and the phone service and other
utilities were operating.
Jeff Priest, 4724 Lund Avenue, Eagan, said that he had intended to provide testimony on the need
for sober house facilities, but would confine his remarks to the issue of the 365 days. He indicated
that the committee may have some discretion in establishing when the 365 days begins and ends:
at the time a purchase agreement was submitted, at closing or with occupancy.
Karen Mead, Executive Director of Emotions Anonymous, 1752 Iglehart Street, stated she
supported the need for sober houses in St. Paul. She further suggested that whatever the
applicants did relative to occupying the property, they did with good intentions. There was no
intent to deceive.
Anne Heinricks,1060 Laurel Avenue, stated they have about 40 signatures of people in opposition
to the Sober House. She also explained that the neighborhood cannot absorb 30 people and the
�' zbning laws shouldn't be violated at the neighborhood's expense. She also indicated that
remodeling work is continuing on the property and she is concerned that continuing financial
investment should not be used as a basis for approving the permit.
Shannon O'Keefe, 1053 Ashland Avenue, testified she bought her building in November of 1998
and there were no residents living at 97 North Oxford at that time. The caretaker was not residing
in the building but would come and go according to the need for snow shoveling, lawn mowing
and the like. She also explained the residents of the neighborhood called Northern States Power
shortly afterthe Summit-University Planning Commission meeting and there was a decline in NSP
bilis which proved a decline in the usage of the building.
In response to questions from CommissionerGordon, Ms. O'Keefe stated the parking is not limited
to ten vehicles. Vehicles are parked back to back in the alley and crammed between the building
and a garbage dumpster. The maximum number of vehicles observed have been between 15
to 20. Evenings are more saturated with three to four cars parked during the day. The residents
are not permanent so there are also occasions when vans moving people in and out of this facility
block the entrance to the alley.
Diane Lunderborg, 1039 Ashiand, appeared and stated the house for mentally ill women closed
down in August of 1998. They were hoping that the building would become a fourvplex—like the
identical building next door--in order to reduce the traffic in the neighborhood. The neighborhood
is mainly made up of single-family dwellings and they would like to see the traffic reduce in the
neighborhood. She said that she and her husband toured the building in September 1998 to
� determine whether they would be interested in purchasing it. She said that it was in tough shape
and they did not submit a bid. She also stated she had called the real estate agent selling the
property and informed him of the zoning restrictions related to selling the building to another non-
conforming use.
Zoning Committee Minutes
October'12, 2000
File #: 00-122-234
Page 6
In response to a question from Commissioner Kramer, Ms. Lunderborg stated that when she
toured the building in September of 1998 there were no residents living there. The owner had
an office that she was using and the building was up for sale. The fact that the building was for
sale was not made public.
Eric Rez, 1056 Laurel Avenue, appeared and stated their opposition is not against the business
itseif. They are opposed to any business operating without proper zoning and licensing.
Ann Drives, 1072 Laurel Avenue, reiterated the parking problems, indicating that the aliey is
sometimes biocked overnight. She thought that using the buiiding as a duplex for 8-10 residents
wouid be more compatibie.
Mr. Dinalko reappeared and addressed the similarities between the previous and current use.
They both have group dining facilities, centralized management and rules and group bathroom
facilities. He aiso stated the current residents are considered mentally disabled under the ADA.
The group activities, inciude weekiy AA and other related in-house meetings, are considered
treatments focused towards the disability.
�
Jeff Gardner, 428 Dayton Avenue, a partner of Mr. Dinalko's, appeared and stated there is one �
vehicle parked behind the dumpster that belongs to one of the residents who cannot drive
because of a lack of a license. He aiso explained that traffic is aiso generated from a house
directly to the north of them (North Star Restorations) that frequently has construction vehicles
and other cars parked in the alley that could be confused with their vehicles.
The public hearing was closed.
Commissioner Gordon stated that the critical issue was whether the nonconforming use was
discontinued or ceased to exist for 365 days. Someone can continue to own the building and not
continue to use it for the nonconforming use. In this case the last day for the nonconforming use
Wfl5 f�UgiiSi L I, ly�o, tiV�i2i i��i2 iaSE i�jl( iiiV'YCV :J::l. T �ci:vu vc �'r ��, ?naR
and January 15, 2000 was well over 365 days.
CommissionerGordon moved denial of the Change of Nonconforming Use Permit. Commissioner
Kramer seconded it.
Adopted Yeas - 4
Drafted by:
Nays - 0
Submitted by:
�Gc, �
Carol Martineau Nancy H mans
Recording Secrefary Zoning Section
Approved by:
Dennis Gervais �
Chair
1�'� z �� 1 ,- p , ., . a u 5 r . 1 i ��M� w 1 � � y.
� Lb r ..., r a..4' x '�e Sn 5 �?f " w�, :r � j, M K,? i 3�'t'a' '�r'1 u� -�r r -'° J. 3 w �., "? t '^�. l Usi^]" n.
� � Y ' ' '� �� 'i � �'... ( . �Y V� 1�� 4
4
J � Y .' k "'� 'M1 x.`i . 4 "'�.l` 6'.y ' 1[ � �
� � S� v
� j „ � ; . �. .�.; . .,.
s t y �.r �ppba�i` ;�:�'ha c!S `k.,"�✓'-�'.kt at,.r''r�y�#��,M'r � Y �,� ''^s*.s a"� ' �' x'v�d�`X'�+�'�..tYr°w5}.-'e'C .'.� k- a°gw� .. �ass�'?:�a� vFrC � d .d.-+ vkG '+<". l�Yi,r,^ +.M"
r ¢. t" w . T.'k r. �',+vu;yG"' 2 hx..� ;a ^� sS+K�?.{` �. :� 4� �..�e .wa m s. A�av.w: �.,n* � a�,:.:�.5^^ v s f ....ro'x . v.�� .? ,
�� _ ✓ �,S -. _ �. _ A5 - .l q:� � .
p
�t «�. d�.. �• • .• «'.
x
t_ �+i ��. r i 1' � r
4§y__ � � � - A ..'S
�! f t�'�
a' '� _ ,, [ ' , ' �, _ '
. 9k�*."ir �v+c� �ri �+ u�>° n�va.� >Nv 1 w� c�_ y3 m^' tim.,�at rp.i�-.*: ,+ v^>_�.�..x �� _, w. .. z.r ,.i.��x.. -
{ y�%.� .4A ' .UM . ( : ,J.
� � �� i s �� $�E 2 Y .
R�: \. h
'py 4 .r 'ii } - f' S �.i.y } Y . r'T�,.
� ,.. ` t a Y ` .' .� 't :. ., y ..
� : x # � o-Co�.�res.pv►r�c�e�a.�e�;:C�ece���ed r., .. �, .. �
L
�� ., "��� � , s � : �' w i -E � a , � . .
_.., re ✓ .+ - . �
zhk $e`K.z,.'w.n g � � _ ,
.J� an:JV�tr„*?s E^ u-w^+'�,rw ++� �^ A� ux � ,k: fa NT4'«n ,�u".^� x � . � � �—+:4+ r- bt , .Src*
� � ��#�ar,� . � �,.A
� ,
t f j
urv a M .+'�'�z .�, w m ` s« w*� S&^r �� � � s"Na+..� a? rvr�,aw d �+ � i , �
s s C `.+� '�' M. aA a� b i S. i� Q
� q / . ! h � R ' � � ���
t V'. (L � . GRV'v, 4 C�
i
{u, et �., r . , �iMy� �a 4 *eq x �u, J t,:eo- eT ;y 'L.i V *v. -a t 1 n
f' � s atx i S �q? ., � 5 ���a. ? t�d �a� ry r ..*, h r
'�`� y� nd txr ��rt a��1 a � i x �r2e�r . �r .r .)�
�. t e r 4 � r �� :��i Y
� y � � 9 7 ) � . 1 f� . A � 1 .
� � r k � c ¢ � x )'rs`f ;fi " `�: f '�; ro i � r , r� n , ; n : J
as 'aw . � a"} r��a t✓ �r�s !� x. P '71 r/ �l • ^.
i( L'' !y ? l- i.� 4''yi .� h �' C,b ��� � r � a� m�ttee e �rl'� �� �� C
o
� t <<
, , r
� ,,,,> xr >_ � � n � r x � , � �
,� . , , '
ns � e {t `^t `� a di.,, S� �y 'r�aY� z�'f akt�Y�r, vZ.my _r n s� c�a " > e�h�a
M1
a ' � r + . • r ._ �
'�k , p 'j.� � ': ' � � +a � .' r. ' r -r� H s' ti .
t �i
�
, ,�.i. y v "� .� i'� Yt t i� � tl i 'Sx w � � ' � y:. ,. x ,} i+�� �t°"" _ ;
. _. 1 ,. :, . ....... �
'' �,.: E� . ' s s ' '' ' r ✓, , r; ri
�
�. q : j t ' a� y F a � E�� : '-�� �", s C �t �� aY�a on '.� ��
', i. L' i .4 °, � Yc t e�k s F .".� s I .3, k. . .
�
s .+ �� > i .. / t � 5. ""-0 r � . �� .�� a ty '� � �.y � z 4 a � >- *
p, '. 1 4 ry 5 . U •
� S� ° "r.9 a, +�, a� y ws s> �,�+',� �-r r d�S .'�� �` a'!� � - d�N5'� �� a N r�A x w C� d -
s>
� � i' K Y'�' a y � A r s� asa't e C'� r �� r :� ^, �. '
V`� { 4 �' d f f r !�. F i f.. S >
.
. "°S i �T �, r
'� > 5+� y�.r i pZw�' x.t �.. ��i�X r E � T$'rt ". ^` Y P. *'�
����.q���a.x.�`�da`i ; `kr�.Fnffit`:.rv..to-tx.0 S'+*.£"`"""i^��.✓'FY�4",�'2"�ar4b,ro*�4k4v�r,s�ym�'i` ktga ^.'+iM .m.x'^,�+n.y� n `�1r.a s:`i8" u.� >n?wr�:A`"^YY'n^� ro tePZo
� y� �i � f �i k-. 1� JY� � '� � t< � F
� y .:`��n" a �� ��� 1 a c , r t r . i , i �.
&l ` 5 �,, i p, ro ,% t� . w P� y ' c! .� t�.
;� '� s e s^. . a �, , r i ,. u� a . v y
, p`y�,»wwtrFi r r x 3 vf; f cy�z ✓k�. � s.<. "" �' �"+1ts., �.a �� sj �,�?,ar�d� 'm„ .X r r, v k a..R a. v ^, y : �+v :3; t �V ir
t ° �.
�` y l�i �. �1 V t :' q t ) � .,3 � "1 .q,b q � ,Y � `
J" `�� } �3'Y'! a`�.A' A,�4Px ,t'� K i5' f'�'w.'�'�F�'M1N`t�trSk�. ..l`��a�:.�n� "� R4 �) � i c� y, k i S 4 d 'G'4f Y 0.t .
y�
.� i ., ,J '. y*¢�` � 1 � r� � �5 ( :e 'w ',�a �.: � G , '� � , i . � � '^^ i �. .� 1 �. :
2 a
�,�� a ,�. 'ia . .:�• ..: � � i '� _ �.' ,
� 'eX� P 9 ' � .k
. ` y � � p x ., {
�
( W �
p�paDpr p'�t R'� h i ° at�,'6'Hfi�'N��i't t� �ffim� �sfv �•t �i�YRdq�" w 7w� � S" f�z �� 1 d �� � z��
ku4' w t e � y t . ,�,[ � �.aie. s i*.,.� x � s r o- ;
�� a a�' :�.e r �, , ' �`, � � � ; p 3„
.� °.::�,. , ; ,r5�. _ `�;,?`�;,�`,'� .fa,uy �,._t .A. �, ��.__ „ r . " . .,- _,H`. , ,..� ,,. t3r.`�' , .,.
> ,, ,
� � lr
r✓ r r.$�.epW 3 a i r �^ «iF �,u r k',u,fi.�s
r ''F
\ YH P
k N F"� � t .p� \ 1 4
k Y.
� P� � -
y r>wv�.��.s�r« Y+4ns ,+,wate � vgrrcv�
i � 5Y
� ��y:*.trt�r�k1'+d aa}us�'a:'ra .Ai"i'��
M 4�4 \;
hU t 2
�r _
�, ;
§ ur . n > ��..
��
� �� s
. , . , ., .. .v �
t
' a t
G` n , , ,f J3 a fuP� y 4 �., k �?'�' d4 3:...1 'uy L� �l a ,�',� � 1}�.., .,a �.
F
.'� - ... Nr h` . -
� x
".. i ) , `� k P � \ e�.
��� t K t �.. . 4 � �.�� T
� i
? �.;"� b'1. , ` '� k ° v . wr� t � +M ^. um✓ k d- " ;..y 9 o yr £ a� ., u r ^.aM'cz.?, �-. ��:4
* x a
a
z� z� .' rosc m�wa-r an' .u, �« � l vda F v"ti+'& u u<s .+o ns a^y xw �. {wn++y ;��e 1k n
�b v-tN, n :�� yt l� �.. d 3�e Y ^nSn. , ti , .
t
y,'3 f S U . k� ,�, ', f - x
s y s, x 4 - . : y;
r �
� r
� Vk s �. t r {� _h � �'s' f ^ a m ^�y �
_ ,r . " �. ,�'
f:
.. , ..�. . ... R, .r..t .A..n , ,. < r m . __ v .. ., r . .
r
OI -9L
�
w�nnsev counnv
Community Human Services Department
I60 Kellogg Blvd E
St. Paul, hfN 55101-149�
October 18, 2000
Ms. Nancy Homans, Planner
Department of Planning and Economic Development
1100 City Hall Annex
25 West Fourth Street
St. Paul, MN 55102
Dear Ms. Homans:
FinancialTDD: 6�1-26F-�7oU
Semices TDD: 651-266-000'?
GeneraiInfo: 651-260-44;-i
The purpose of this letter is to provide written confirmation regarding an earlier
telephone conversation concerning the ending date for a contract between
Ramsey County and Oakland Home, Inc. Through contractual agreement,
� Ramsey County purchased residential treatment services for adult women with
mental il)ness from Oakland Home, Inc. The residential site was located at 97
North Oxford in St. Paul.
The last contract was for the time period, January 1, 1998 through September
30, 1998. (The contract for the period January 1, 1998 through December 31,
1999 was formally amended by mutual agreement in July of 1998 to end the
agreement September 30, 1998.) All residents of this licensed facility were
actually discharged on August 21, 1998.
If you require any additional information, I can be reached at (651) 266-4332.
Sincerely,
� � � ^
, I ,�-
Mary Jo Gaskins
Contract Manager
Purchase of Service
�
Minnesota's �rst Home gule County
prin�sdon recycltd pace��N a minimum of W%yostm�umerm��sm
/
SLTMMIT-UNIVERSITY
PLANNING COUNCIL
Ol "gZ.
• Building a Better Community -
627 Selby Avenue . Saint Paul, MN 55104
Telephone 651-228-1855 • FAX 651-225-1108
October 12, 2000
Nancy Homans
City of St. Paul
Dept. of Planning and
Economic Development
25 West Fourth Street
St. Paul, MN 55102
RE: Buffalo Sober Group LLC application for Change of Nonconforn Use Permit to allow
a rooming house that provides permanent living facilities for men in early sobriety at 97
North Oxford, between Laurel and Ashland.
Dear Ms. Homans:
The Summit Universiry Planning Council has found no reason not to support the Buffalo Sober
� Group's application for the Change of Nonconforming Use Permit. SUPC takes this position for
the following reasons:
1) The Neighborhood Development Committee held two Community Issue Meetings regazding
this application (one in April, 2000 and one on Tuesday, October 10). The main concems
expressed at the meetings are: a) neighbors believe the Buffalo Sober Group did not follow
the required process for application of the license and zoning; b) the neighborhood does not
want multiple housing units because the nuxnber of moving vans, meal trucks, individual
cazs, etc., creates parking problems; and c) density is a problem to some of the residents.
Some would be ok with a residency that is limited to 10 or 12 residents but are not ok with
the current number of 24.
2) Votes taken at the meetings were in favor of the SUPC not supporting the Buffalo Sober
House, but several residents who live close to the business did not receive flyers announcing
the meeting and therefore, were not there to voice their opinion. These people spoke with
SUPC staff and stated that they have no problem with the Buffalo Sober House and aze in
favor of allowing them to operate the rooming house.
3) Residents opposed the rooming house assisted staff in distributing flyers in the neighborhood.
This resulted in accusations that a petition opposing the Buffalo Sober Group was delivered
along with the SUPC flyer, which may have led people to believe the SUPC was in favor of
the petition, and that the flyers were delivered only to the people that opposed the Buffalo
Sober Group. (It is important to note that these are only accusations and are unproved.)
�
4) The Buffalo Sober Group did not receive a flyer and did not know about the October 10 �
meeting unti146 minutes prior to the meeting, giving an unfair advantage to those opposed in
the voting process.
5) Walter Dinalko gave his phone numbers to the residents and asked them to call with any
problems regazding the residents, including pazking issues and said he would resolve the
problem immediately upon receiving a call. He stated that he did this at the eazlier meeting
but has not received any calls from residents regazding any problems. Walter stressed that
the doors are always open to the community. Everyone is welcome to come and see the
books or look at the building and talk with the residents.
This decision is made by the President of the Board of Directors, taking into account the fact that
the entire board was notified of the meeting by the Interim Executive Director and asked to
attend the meeting. Those that could not attend could call the office the following morning to get
details of the meeting and voice their opuuon at that time. Only one boazd member did so,
stating that she did not feet that SUPC could make a recommendation because of the above stated
reasons. The Chair of the Neighborhood Development Committee and the Interim Executive
Director did attend the meeting along with the Boazd President and agree with the
recommendation stated above.
�
/.1
President, Boazd of Directors
Cc: St. Paul CiTy Council
SUPC Boazd of Directors
Buffalo Sober Group
�
�
D1 r!Z
� October 10, 2000
Walter Dinalko
Managing Director
Buffalo Sober Group L.L.C.
97 NoRh Oxford Street
Saint Paul, MN 55104
To Whom it May Concern;
The building located at 97 North Oxford is restructured to a configuration containin� 19
separate rooms with one centrally located kitchen and dining facility, one electrical
hookup and one central heating plant. This restructuring was accomplished prior to the
City of Saint Paul's adoption of a zoning code in 1975 thereby making the building a
legal non-conforming structure. The intent of the zoning code is to allow such structures
and their uses to continue until they are removed. Generally when fifty percent or more of
the structure is destroyed, that is considered removal.
The Buffalo House meets and exceeds all the requirements for continuation of a non-
� conforming use with the exception of the signatures of two thirds of property owners
within 100 feet.
_ -.
The Buffalo Sober Group purchased 97 North Oxford in 7anuary 2000 for three hundred
thousand dollars. The interior of the building was a mess, and one hundred thousand
dolfars in up�rades were required. These included painting, drop ceilin� removal,
carpeting throujhout, earterior painting and awnings and repair and upgrading of fire
detection systems. We have invested a substantial sum of money (nearly one half a
million dollars). Because of the extensive restructurin� of the interior it would cost at
least another five hundred thousand dollars to reconfigure the interior to either a four-
plex or duplex.
If we are forced to discontinue the use of the property, as it exists we could not afford nor
would it be financially prudent to invest in these renovations.
Our use, as a sober house for twenty-four recovering individuals is a less intense use of
the non-conforming structure then previously existed.
Due mainly to the existence of centers such as the Hazelden treatment facility, Hazelden
Fellowship club, Twin-Town Treatment center and the Retreat at Upland Farms, Saint
Paul has evolved into one of the world's best known and most successful sober livin�
em ironments. Recovering alcoholics and addicts from around the world come to this city
and settle in Saint Paul because the support and recovery community is so well
� demonstrated.
It is clear that the fortunate folks in early recovery from aicohol and drug dependency-the �
ones with the greatest success rate for recovery-are those who, after primary treatment __
spend a period of six to twelve months in a group setting. This group setting provides a
stable sober living environment, which emphasizes development of principles for living
with a strong spiritual content.
Buffalo House is an asset to the community since � individual that returns to the use of
alcohot and drugs either in or out ofBuffalo House, is immediately expelled. We can do
this because the residents aze required to sign a tested and proven sober contract, which
requires adherence to certain rules and absolute abstention from drug or alcohol use and
is enforced through the application of random drug testing. Living in this type of
environment, where attendance at twelve step meetings is encouraged and group
accountability is paramount, individuals develop a new responsible lifestyle free of
alcohol and drug use.
Please find attached letters of support from community members and residents of the
Buffalo House.
Thank you for your consideration in this matter.
Respectfully,
Walter Dinalko
�
�
�
�
] i HAZELDEN
Fellowship Club� St. Paul
October 10, 2000
To Whom It May Concern:
o! -gz.
680 StemartAaenue
St. Paul, MN SSIO2�199
Phane 612-509-3900
http:l/vnvm.hnzeiden.org
Hazelden Fellowship Cfub in St. Paul has been referring to Buffalo Sober
House at 97 N. Oxford in St. Paul since February, 2000.
Residents who go through Fellowship Club generally have compieted an
inpatient treatment experience and continue in Fellowship Club to learn daily
living skilis. They are asked to work or attend school during the day and
then attend groups in the evenings.
Foliowing their stay at Fellowship C1ub we generaily encourage them to find
a sober living environment. Buffalo House has been in existence since
February 2000 and we have found them a solid placement for men in
� recovery. When referring we look at the structure of a house and it appears
that Buffalo House is one with such structure.
We hope to continue referrals to Buffalo House in the future.
�
Sincerely,
�� �� �
Brenda J.
�
) ,�� i �
Iliff, Executive Director
Equai Opportunity Employer
University Bank
��
10/71/2000
Mr. Walter Dinalko
Managing Director
Buffalo Sober Group, LLC
97 North Oxford Street
St. Pau(, MN. 551Q4
Dear Walter,
As per your request I am writing this letter lo outline University Bank's interest in a
Ioan relationship with Buffalo Sober Group. We financed the purchase and remodeling
of a building localed at 97, North Oxford Street in St. Paul. The building had been emply
for several months and had shown considerable signs of negiect, and deterioration. After our
initial discussion I recognized a worthwhile business relationship that would greatly
serve our communily. The business plan had merit, bul lacked capital, and principals
lacked a proven track record. With this, i utilized a program exclusive to University Bank
and sponsored by the City of St. Paui. This program provided guarantee support to the
bank in the loan relationship.
As I am familiar with the project, bolh before and after the remodeling, t can say lhat
I am very pleased with the quality of your work. In addilion, I wouid like to nole lhat
the project was completed within a 45 day time frame. This completely surprised our
appraiser, as he didn't recog�ize the building when I called for a fina! inspection.
As always Waiter, it is a pleasure to be of service to you and the Buffalo Sober Group.
If you need anything else please feel free to call me at 298-6750.
Sinc el
Jo Bennett
r �i. viCc ic i�ci i
v Urnver ity ank
�
r�
200 Uui�crsicy Ave. W., Sc. Paul, MN 55103 pbone: (651) 265-5600 fax: (C51) 29S-G759
• Page 2
September 14, 2000
� Mc Biakey, we are not a group of high-powered, profit�driven developers. We embarked on
tSiis project in good faith and have poured a Iot of our spare change, spare time, a� spa2 enetgy irto
it We are pleased with the 2sults, the success of our residerrts, and our place in the commun'ity as
good neighbors.
We are pleased about the spiritual rightness of this project: NeaAy every dollar the building
generates is put back irrto it. Neady all of the residents perfoRn regular seNice work in the community.
We are doing what we a2 doing to inaease the value of the property and the quality of life in this
neighborhood.
Ptease accept ouc humble invitation to visit 97 No�th 0�6orti Street The door is always open. If
you wish, we wiii gladiy arrange transportation for you, your staff, and the other es[eemed members of
the City Councii to come see what we are really about.
Respectfuly,
WatterL. Dinalko
Managing Director
��..
�
�
o�coner s, z000
To Whom It Mav Concern:
I am wciting to esplain some of the benefits of living at the Buffalo sober house and to gn some
backgroundinformation abouz myself.
I am thirty-five years old I was bom and raised in Kenosb� Wisconsin, the youngest of five children.
I gaduated from the UnicersiN of Wisconsin — Madison in nineteen eighty-nine w�th a bachelors degree in
economics.
I am an alcoholic and liave been s�uggling R�th the disease for ten g ears. Mc father kas a recovering
alcoholic of twenn- years. I believe aicoholism Is a disease, however tliai topic falls outside the scope of
this letter.
I came to Minnesota in nineteen ninety-sit to go to Hazelden Treatment facility. I successfully wmpleted �,
their 30-da} program and then liced at Crossroads aftercare faciliri for one year. I remained sober for sia
months after leaving there.
I relapsed in 1998. I think many factors contributed to my relapse. one o� which was not lic•ing in a
supportice li�ring en«ronment a•hile continuing to rebuild mv life.
I entered Fainzew-Riverside treatment facility in August 1999, successfully completing their thirN-day
progrant.
I have been living at Buffalo sober house since Februai}� 2000.
I think I am fortunate to have this opportunih. I live with people c�ho uace ti�e same probiem and woric on
helping themseh�es. The Buff'alo house offers me a safe licing arrangement w�hile I con[inue to get my life
in order.
If I can be of anv assistance feeI free to contact me.
Sincereh�,
Cazl Alfredson
97 O�'ord SL N.
Saint Paul. MN. 55101
�
�l-9z r
� In additional to looking at this issue from a recovery stand point, I would think it is also important
to the twin cities area from a financial prospective. People come to ihe twin cities from all over
the world for treatment. Revenues from treatment and recovery aze an important part of our
economy. A recent example of this is the Intemationai AA Convention in Minneapolis which was
attended by more than 65,000 people. The city of St. Paul benefitted from this in terms of hotel
usage, restaurants, shopping, etc. One of the reasons that this convention happened here is the
strong recovery community in our area. Halfway Houses and Sober Houses play a part in that .
community.
I believe that our community, and the neighborhood in which it is located, benefit from Buffalo
House. Its residents are hard-working members of society that are working to insure a better
future for themselves and those who care about them. They should be applauded and supported in
their efforts. With the prevalence of chemical dependency in our society, they could also be your
pazent, child or siblings.
Sincerely,
/��7�GC'�' ' /`�-�
t
Kazen Mead
Executive Director
� ,
�
�,
buffalo sober group
September 14, 2000
I� ,�.�.�p:7t�s
,
� �
.�c-� � c11 � �� ���:{ :
f
�`�
Honorabie Jerty Btakey
City Hali Room 3t0-A
15 West Kellogg Boulevard
Saint Paui, MN 55101
Dear Mr. Blakey:
in January 2000 we purchased the property at the address below, located in your district The
seller, Serene La�son, had operated a group home acxommodating as many as 43 merrtally iil aduR
females at a time at this location for a number of years. After losing her license to provide services to
this population, the property was placed on the market as a muttiund group housing facii'dy.
A group of recovering alcoholics, induding myself, saw poterrtial in the property for housing
pe�sons in recovery from chemicai probiems specificaily due to the central location and the floor plan.
During the thorough due diligence provided by our bankers and Fred Gingas, a licensed master real
estate appraiser, it was revealed that, because of extensive interior reconstruction undertaken over 3�
years ago to convert the building irrto a group home, the property is qual'fied as a pre-e�asting, non-
conforming improvement.
Ourgroup spent neady $30(J,D00.00 in acquiring the property, ar�d neady $100,000.00 more to
renovate the interior. The building was a mess when we purchased it. Most of the money sperrt on
renovations went for painting, carpeting, drop-ceiling removal, fire alartn sys[em upgrading, etc...
Our non-confortning use of the property is signficanUy less intrusrve to aii neighbors than the
previous owners', and the property has become an asset to the neighbortrood. We have fewer
residents, strict rules, appropriate pariting demand, quiet, peacefui residents, and a spoUess facility. All
residenis are gainfuiiy empioyed, recovering gemiemen, wi�o G�ocse ta ��r2 i� 8 SuNp:..f:N°. v.hom�al
free ernironment Most are graduates of primary and e�Qended-care Veatrnent programs such as
Hazelden, Fairview-Riverside, IGnnic Fails, etc... They live at 97 No�th 0�6ord Street to receive the
supporf of other men in recovery. AII are productive, law-abiding, voting citizens wifh the unfortunate
handicap of a disease in rem'ission.
It seems that you are uncertain whether this pmjec[ is good for the neighborfiood. We are
quite sure that, shouid you choose to visit 97 North 0�6ord Street, your concems about the projed and
iis rightful place in this neighbortiood, wili vanish.
,�
97 North Oxford Street Saint Paul, Minnesota USA 55104
voice: 651.248.3387 data: 651.227.7782 bsgilc�uswest.net �
/ VLI lb 'IOFJ 141�k7irPi KCF+� c�inic cv�a�iL� "OI�Z
i
R��L Es�a. EQLITIF_.S
REAL ESTATE EOI.�T�ES. �`1C • RE�L ES'NTE EOU�'4E5 BROKERAGE CO
REAL ESTn7E ECV i'�ES DE`/E�OenErvT CC
�
�CIObfI �.�, ����
To W'hom It May Concern:
As a membcr of the communit} who has been professiona[ly cammined tu expanding
affordable housing options in Saint Paul for many yeazs, I�c�ish to voice my support for
the eontinued operation of Buffalo Housz. Specifically, I urge you to eontinue the non-
confoiming Lise privilege granted to the immediate previous ow�ner of the property.
From the information available to me, it appeazs that the owners have made every good
faith efforr to compl}• with ail applicable laws and regulations including the non-
conforming use provision currently under debatz.
� i
In addition to proyiding an important serv�ce to a protected class of persons, the
ownership has demonstrated that it can harmoniously re-integrace the property into the
neighborhood.
Your considzration is appreciated.
� a00 D[G�EL O� HO`+OR Bw�UiNG . 325 CEDhR 5'REET • ST Pn,�;,_ M�vN[50'/� 5510� •:E5�� 227-6925 • Fqx (65U 227-9001
tions
' onymous
October 12, 2000
To Whom it May Concem:
P.O. Box 4245 � Saint Paut, Minnesota • 55104
Statistics show us that one of every ten people is chemically dependent and that one in every five
people is involved with a person who is chemically dependent. Statistics have also shown us that
one of the essential ingredients for recovery is a supportive living environment. Buffalo House and
other sober housing provide such an environment for those in recovery.
I have been involved in the field of chemical dependency for the past twenty yeazs. Five of those
years were as manager of Outpatient Services and Aftercaze at what is now known as Fairview
Recovery Services. One of the most important functions of my aftercaze staffwas the placement
of newly recovery people in halfway houses and sober houses. The e�dstence of such homes is
essential to the field of chemical dependency where lvfinnesota enjoys the reputation of being a
leader in the treatment of chemical dependency. If this is to continue, it is important that
residences such as Buffalo House e�st.
I am a faculty member of Metro State University where I teach a coutse on Chemical Dependency
Intervention and Prevention with a special focus on relapse prevention. Some of the ingredients
that aze essential to relapse preventions are: 1) selfknowledge, 2) accountability, 3) responsible
behavior, 4) a supportive living environment, and 5) regular attendance at support meetings.
Buffalo House creates just such a setting.
My experience with Buffalo House is a personal one. My granddaughter's father has been there
Sl.^.C� 1t OYBP.P�. Tn that tirrZg ha hgc ar„Caimiilatp� ritO2C Lh�n nine EROI1tt1S ,Of COIIYIDUOUS SObI'ICIv.
He is enrolied in school and has completed an emergency medical technician course and has
passed the national registry test. He is now working in that field and continues schooling. He
attends regular AA meetings and works on recovery issues with a therapist. He has a sponsor who
he interacts with on a regular basis. He is an asset to society and his communiry. Buffalo House is
a big part of his recovery.
The residents at Buffato are held accounfable for taking the right step fo insure a good recovery.
If they don't adhere to the rules and regulations, they have to leave. $uffalo House has a zero
tolerance policy. Some of the rules of Buffalo House aze: 1) each resident has weekly household
tasks that must be attended to, 2) each resident must be employed, 3) residents must maintain
sobriety, 4) and agree to a monthly lottery for random urine screens. Residents aze strongly
encouraged to attend weekly meeting and have a sponsor.
�
�
�
Phone: 65ll647-9712 • �'ax: 65ll647-1593
E-mail: eaiscC�mtn.org • Web Page: http!/www.EmotionsAnonymous.org
oi - yz,
Zoning Committee Minutes
� October 12, 2000
File #: 00-122-234
Page 3
She also presented a letter submitted by the SummiUUniversity Planning Council stating they
have found no reason notto support the Buffato Sober Group's application for the Change of
Nonconforming Use Permit.
In response to a question from Commissioner Gordon, Ms. Homans stated she does not have a
copy of the contract between the County and Oakland Home. She received information on the
dates on which the contract was terminated and the residents moved out in a conversation with
the contract manager from Ramsey County.
In response to a question from Commissioner Kramer, Ms. Homans stated the applicant was
provided with a packet of information and an appiication for a permit to reestablish a non-
conforming use.
Mark Gehan, the attorney for Buffalo Sober Group, appeared and presented a packet that
contained several documents pertaining to the case. He noted that his client, Mr. Dinalko, would
respond to the findings related to traffic and parking outlined in the staff report. He commented,
however, that the reference to neighbors noting an increase in traffic is difficult to respond to but
that it should be noted that those same neighbors are part of an organized opposition to the
facility.
� He went on to give a history of the building at 97 North Oxford, acknowledging that the residents
of the previous facility were gone in 1998. He also stated the building was listed as a fully
functional group home by the owner when it was put on the real estate market and that listing is
attached to the permit application. The bui{ding was for sale for over a year. They have
information that one of the property's neighbors Diane Lunderborg wanted to buy the building at
one point. She later, he stated, made negative comments about "drug addicts" in a letter to her
neighbors after the Sober House was established.
Mr. Gehan described some of the financial circumstances surrounding the building. In purchasing
the building, the Buffalo Sober Group invested $82,000, took out a$280,000 loan (a portion of
which was secured by the City) and spent $100,000 to upgrade the sfructure. They are now
making only $1,000 per month. The building was recentiy re-appraised at $528,000, indicating
that they have added value to the structure. He reported that estimates his client has received
from contractors are that it would take $490,000 to �600,000 to convert the structure to a duplex
allowed under the zoning code.
Mr. Gehan went on to propose that the previous nonconforming use was not discontinued or
abandoned. He described a case pending in Hennepin County before the Court of Appeals. The
District Court, in that case, found that a building's not being in use did not constitute
"abandonment." He explained that the argument was made that abandonment of a
nonconforming use must be proved against the property owner. A decision is expected wifhin
30-60 days. Relative to this case, he suggested that because the previous owner was markefing
the building as a non-conforming use, continued to maintain an office and pay utility bills and a
� caretaker, there was no intention to abandon the use.
Commissioner Kramer pointed out that ihe Zoning Code refers to "discontinuing" rather than
"abandoning" a use and that the specific language in the Code is that a nonconforming use is
"discontinued or ceases to exist."
Zoning Committee Minutes
October 12, 2000
File #: 00-122-234
Page 4
In response to a question from Commissioner Gordon about the nature of the business the
building ownerwas maintaining, Mr. Gehan stated thaf fhe ownerwas managing fhe safe of the
property and conducting personal business.
In response to a question from Commissioner Kramer, Mr. Gehan explained that the home was
for people in recovery coming out of facilities such as Hazeidon.
Commission Gordon directed Mr. Gehan's attention to the Coidwell Banker Bumet listing
submitted with the application. After estabiishing that the listing detailed a series of specific
attributes of the building (e.g., nature of the mortgage, numberof ranges), Commissioner Gordon
highlighted the attributes listed under "Current Use": Hotel/Motel, Business Service, Professional
Service. He noted that Group Home, Residentiaf Facifity or Rooming House were nof listed. -
Commissioner Gordon went on to highlight an excerpt from the first paragraph from the letterfrom
University Bank dated October 11, 2000 submitted by the applicant at the meeting: "We financed
the purchase and remodeling of a building located at 97 North Oxford in St. Paui. The building
had been empty for severai months and had shown considerab(e signs of neglecf, and
deterioration."
�
In response to a question from Commissioner Gordon, Mr. Gehan indicated that, unless the
Zoning Committee has discretion, if they find the use was discontinued, they would have to require �
an application to reestablish a nonconforming use. Mr. Gordon then outlined a hypofheficat
scenario of an owner of a non-conforming barbershop who decided to no longer cut_ hair but
confinued to own the building for more than 365 days and went in periodicaily to read the paper
or attend to personal business. He asked Mr. Gehan if he would agree that the use had been
discontinued. Mr. Gehan responded that it would depend on the owner's intent.
Waiter Dinalko (400 Selby Avenue), the applicant and managing direcfor of the Buffalo Sober
House, appeared and showed a video of the property and explained the parking set-up. He stated
they limit the number of automobiles owned by residents to ten and there is enough off street
parking available.
After describing some of his personal history, Mr. Dinalko discussed his conclusion, as a
recovering alcoholic, that a sober environment is an essentiai part of the recovery process. There
is a much higher success rate for people able to find and live in a sober environment. With the
notion of "giving back" to the community, he said found the property in November 1999 (staff note:
I believe he meant September 1999). His original offerwas turned down, but he was recontacfed
by the selling agent at the end of November.
His intention has been to estabiish a sober house--providing a stable network for a group of inen
in recovery. There is a house manager on site. House rules include drug and afcohol testing and
requirements related to being good neighbors.
He outlined the nature of the seven police calis related to the property.
In response to questions from Commissioner Kramer, he said that they began to occupy the �
property on February 15, 2000 and thatthey occupied the properfy without a permit because they
didn't need a permit for occupancy.
OI - 4 Z-
�
� G��
��._O�� �
�.�� ��� �
�� �
��� ���� ���
�� f�
�
� � �
�
buffalo house
� �/���G
�U� .��-�°�ui �-��%' �",��r�.X'
�� `� �S �-/�. � ��f�
-y'�_ y -�d/�i✓�� G' �
�
>�� � � ��� �� �.
�
���� ��c_. � �.� � �
�. �.�� _�ti, ��au�e_ /��
��
��'��,
,• �� T�o
� �f�� �ti�
�� J
� - r �
�/,7/' �� _.����U� � � Q ����r�?2e-- ✓`zC�' .
,, // / / _.�i'U U(J \ (j/� ( � �� '�" " `-
G�'�'!G� � �� • �-� \I �
� G J ,/ ,�/� �����
��'��, C�' d�Gtl���/✓l� � f C� �`c�i/'�� � G�
�� -, �
,
����r��,�,z�a�.�e ��'` -�-�"; — �-�- �o 1���, ����; ��c ���:�;�-�
, � , �� �
� � � ��� l�—t'��L ;'' .��..1j�� ��� �
�� � ,
� � ,� � �� � ' ✓ �, , ,6�r��'� o�
��1 _�%�y,? ��� ./'(/,��l�%v,' //��—C' �-'/ ,.�-� �I'�G'vC%� GC' � — c�Gr/
� , / v � i � � i �`�i�� �C � � �' l � G��'�C. v' L�✓ G'`�! ��/7 .
% /
��`� � "'!�'�,? 7"� 1 �`�-C� �%-�!_/� �/��%/ ��l -
� L� �I
V /�� �
C/ �
� 97 North Ouford Street Saint Paui, Minnesota USA 5104 ` �
voice: 65'1.227.7781 data: 651.227.7782 buffalohouseQuswest.net
_ �- �
1�1:.���� � _ti��
�� �
��-��
�/G
�D��l� ""'r ''"^-c-f
� M
r
��,{,� � �;�L Y ���
��� Z �� �,ry/ ti
.}n �
/ � ��
(� � �
(�//L/tt ��
�,,�,'�rh �
�fiOZ�r s
�( ��
btt�
0�
o�
{,-�t �,
(d�� ��
(�i��l '"
�+1�✓� r
�v�►
�
dUi�
`��
eGd
/t Mh�^
� ��
7R� {L° ! �GL
{✓1 1/��O�f'ti � � �t 1/`�-
1 �� R / owL ,c- l,��y�
�
g v ��'r Gd !�1-rJlC . !/�.,
,{ � � 1 J �� �-� / M, y(c�F R�-
� !� r /
� l!'vt
G ��,K�L /1— C � �-N tt
���
��
�
�� ,�...� �
�
/ Q/� t, ,o,�^ � �.� ��� Mr
��/v � ( �r/ d d��/ L �v� " N C.�! 1/i � � f� �l V ��
✓ (n.f�
/ , , � �'o �/�f� �`+�C- ,
(.b��y/' f}^! ,� �r�fiYy7 �ifT��'[� t✓�n� � �°� �
J, l �' '" �%" , �N 6 v( ��L
��i��� oFf%�� y ` �;�z,�t. �"
{/ - / ' O( �
�� S7 / �L�f G L f�JfL / /
� ° ^ � �d „�i� � � �-C �� �t� � ,a„e �- '� "'��`� (,�
y�
� ���7`� �iJ(L / C P� �� �1�.s�1-�-� �i�t��kf 5���"s�7/
. � �� � �r !� � .,�
s�����'� , � y � � ,�,.Z,�, � �
� .�-�f'f %/L' P�` `����,1� �,^��,^,/c �7� �� N � r�
^ / �
� 97 North O�ord Stree� Samt Paul, Minnesota USA 55104! ��� �
voice:651.227.7781 data:65'1.227.7782 buffalohouse@uswest,net ���
� �� I
�
ot -9�
S
_ __ �
�i r- ;• � •: �:
�� � G �G',� lu• ��a�vi.e� � �"� .
S ,
�°'�-�-( �' `�- ��� � � �
�� l . � � u�� � c�
l �" k 1 �[,L � , / l �� �/ "� �
� 1 "� � . � o' �
��� ��� ���.
`�� e__.� �� � cy 1, �v- G ,�� _ ' ,,
!� ,
`"�`-� � �� �•� �..��- ``��y
� c� �,L �``? ��,1'a/�-c�-v� r''�-e.. _ c � � - �
�k�. �- �, � �.�,
��n�� � -�
� �� � �� ���rn� ��
�'�.�� �.�.� � �
�� � � � � � � �.� .
� ��
� ���v , , �r -, �, 2 s�
�
�,� �
C
� �� � ��-� �,.� . �?�� �`� .
c� �
�� � � �J� �`�'- ��
'�'� � J� � z cs� �c `�'S-C
Y � �-
� 97 North Oxford Street Saint Paui, Minnesota USA 55104
voice: 651.227.7781 data: 651.227.7782 buffalohouse@uswest.net
�-
buffalo house
,
� l..il/fo� /T
�o m�-y cow���� . � ���� ,���w i����
��; -3 `-� ��S /��o w s��-T % >f�s 0°.�.sc c ,l�7cs�-�✓s /6 /h � .
f.S S C G�/�P� � y - SC�Li✓l /y � i "' �SCi��/N[' �-/'�� 1 v1 �L OGn'' _
���c� pc.-., /o F��✓r� �i� u�,q y �,'.� �� .Sa3/�'�ci�, %�✓.o %o
��,P,� f1 Sv�i�I �J•�sc 10 S%r�� sc/��,� _ �y �iv,.vb .r.� Sel�
I�� d,�F�.�Tu,�.� j % ��wq % HC D�Sc,���.�� .� Nc,� t� T
c;�,�wE � � ��% z ,�-��,� ��,� � Sa /.�/,'�cl y . �--,� �, � .
7 ;.s 1� 1 /��20 , � ' ffi9 - se ���.�,d 1� �S'a.��i�Ty �
�� �s,.G F.�C's% i-S %h�c�T�-,�-�i SCco.�d /f�� ��y /�dos�
� �, o % /,'��o � Sc r� � ,-'�a �sE . � /h ��Qc ,� 6P�-T� /�,� ��✓�
��� U� ccn /6 �G �rCC�/°T�,O �/� /�'c , /��.�E .-� C/� �✓ �iv�
C.�o�,�� �w� h3� �,�� �� ��E i� 5��� �'�q�.�,��� , i/�s /��
I.S ,�I? � b �.l J /�c /o�- .S =C� �,/�a 6�/,ir, - � �c�L. % �'i �
��� �fc usc �s � �S'�r �=�✓��a�c n���; rc� /y
/'� �'�
f�l�/J �m C�ft/�Fiu�-- �v �C �EpE' �
,LJ ./���---� � }��
/ D � �a / �
97 North Oxford StreeY�Saint Aaul, Mienesota USA 55904 �
voice:651.227.7781 data: 657.227.7782 buffalohouse@uswest.net
�
OI-�j2
�
1 � -a-cs�
�
':�ii'r.T.• i •� _ �:
� �v� �v I ��v `�e ���scs�� e:
�vseJ c�s ��- �� � s��� � -
��5c-��ec� ��r��r ��� �.V������
� `s � � o .� - �,�e
��,�,� �o � �
� ���\ �-c\a � ���� 1`��S�ld ����,
� �- �� �� ��vi i��cQ' -4-�z `�� s�
�c�5 �o� �V1 .
� ''C��OYeY ��35 ��`��\���
�� � '�`� E?��; � � ,
�,�5 ��\ �`�� J ���v� C� �� ��"�� �
� : � �V�-� C�� V �, Y� �' `�`(��' � S \ O� �QC ��' ��
�
. � ��6� �
� �
��1 � /
I --
� 97 North Oxford Street Saint Paul, Minnesota USA 55104
voice: 651.227.778'i data: 651.227.7782 buffalohouse@uswest.net
�'
buf�alo house
�
���eE n�,,,� '��� ���.�,alo �SF A� t�
rt" l�w� bt�a Ve� y Cs�r�� E,r bi � 6�ere , r� c�cie ;�.
�Eo_.�,\,� e\osE �r�an9., l,:hv � L'an �'Ur'�v 'tc ;^� �•^" c�>
n� 1�,Q O. hete ;s R�41nZ: ,�.�-,Q l<.�s�
1
YS C.\i.Xti� C�eor1 t�eres G�w`c��S ��la Qr�ti1,�o� c5c�,, cv'
)
n ; S 1�} - �p' �.1�� w•�. �:✓�J�QSb�u l.uc� �e�cr t�,.,
��^�o� sE ia 1� �e b.; i- S i,�{��t- � s +1.: a�ac.e ? nee c� fv
b t� Sk�,� Sobe�. ewd cj e+ rn� I• 4e. �ek ;.v crdr.�.
I neJz.- ��.w�l.� i e� "�-nc4 S�ch Ctr� Qx��..-o.-,rnz+�j" a.o
�.� 9� JeJ O-�wC-`15 {1P.Li: Ll c�. �o/'ro.^ S}Cnes C� �b�.1
� mc�rw,s � .� �, .1. :'h t4c�.
�ne�;se5 t�� � ; a � / �`Je¢� l.ere � �
L �`hc�c�e. -�'�.�, C�-+o�'r- .'— D�' �'� ' ea„ -srvs� a.L)
ca, cS v� i� s �• k e o� �n , �� h.cne . ft�id -�
�,os� .
��rrc�'
54ar��.s ��e t�ecv-c� �.-u< ft•z o�e,� hvuc Mak�S
rv� u�cx.c�v. u5�7 - t�c�E c� + f 1, V4e �'� 3 o'�e,
� ol�r5.� l;.�wl laC�
97 North Oxford Street Saint Paui, Minnesota USA 55104 �
voice: 657.227.77$1 data: 651.227.7782 buffalohouse�uswest.net
/
�
- � �—.S�__._
� Z�'3�f��4G ��LE 0l�-lZZ-23y�
October 4, 2000
St. Paul Planning Commission
GJRiilg i.:SiivaaiuG:.
Planning & Economic Development
1400 City Hall Annex
25 West Fourth Street
St Paul MN 55102-1634
To Whom It May Concern:
Re: File #00-122-234 • Public Hearing on 97 North Oxford, Buffalo Sober Group
� to be held October 12, 2000 at 3:30 p.m.
I received notice of this meeting and want to forward some information to you. It has come to my
attention that it is alleged that someone from the Buffalo Group reported to the Zoning Commission
that St. Paul-Reformation Lutheran Church gave the group pernussion to use our pazking lot..0ur
church is located across the street from 97 North Oxford and our parking lot is located a half block
north of that properiy.
We did not give the Buffalo Sober Group any blanket permission to use our parking lot. As good
neighbors in the area we aiways tell inquirers that if they need to use our lot to get their cars off the
sireet in a snow emergency they may do so temporarily. We would not be able to give any blanket,
sustained permission for use of our lot because we need it for our purposes.
On other matters pertanung to this property, we have not had any difficulty with the residents,
though several things of concern have been reported to me by other neighbors. When the building
was first purchased and rehabilitated we met the owner, who at the tnne was Ralph Castagno, and
thought that we would have a good relationship with him since he would be living there. Aowever,
it is my understanding that Mr. Castagno has moved out of town.
My concern at this point is that this appeazs to be a facility that is in some kind of way serving
persons who have been chemically dependent. I am very sensitive to the needs of people who have
� been through treatment, but I am wondering about the wisdom of having a facility like this that, as
I understand it, has no staff. Neither am I clear how the facility is being physically cared for.
Paul A. Tidemann, Pastor Anita C. Hill, Pastoral Minister Lynne F. Lorenzen, Pastor
700 North Oxford Street, St. Paul, MN 5 5 7 046540 (651) 2243371 FAX (651) 224-fi228
E-mail: STPAULREFC�aol.com Website: www.cybenvord.com/spr
St. Faul-Reformation Lutheran Church
Evangelical Lutheran Church in America
l
� �ONING �ILE o�-�ZZ-Z3��
Perhaps there are others who have adequate answers to these matters. Our position as a church is �
neither for nor against the zoning of this property lazgely because we do not have adequate
informaUon about it. I raise the above concerns to indicate that I couldiunagine a situation arising
that may turn out to be difficult in the neighborhood.
Please contact me if you wish.
Sincerely,
�' . � ��a.�,..
Paul A. Tidemann, Pastor
c: �'��r.cii�::�� �er 7e.=� E:al:e�
�
�
_ o�-yZ
ZONII�G
� The subject property is zoned R2B (Residence District), under the zoning ordinance
administered by the City of Minneapolis.
See the Addenda for the zoning ordinance.
DISCUSSION OF ZONIAIG
The subject facility is zoned RZB (Residence District). The subject improvements were
constructed prior to the adoption of the current ordinance and is non-confomiing to the curtent
ordinance but is allowed as a non-conforming use.
"The R2B Residence District is desi�ed primarily for residential use of various types that
are described in the portions of the ordinance that may be found in the Addendum.
Permitted uses in this district inciude all uses ailowed in the other Residential Dish The
existing use is non-conforming but is allo�ved as a non-conformin� use.
The subject property appeazs to be "grand fathered" as a result ofbeing constructed prior to
the adoption of the current zoning ordinance and is, therefore, considered to be a legal use.
Furthermore, the subject appears to be non-conforming with respect to pazking requirements as well
as lot, yazd and density requirements. Although the subject is non-conformin�, its use may continue
� so long as no more than 50 percent of it is not destroyed or damaged. Given that there is sufficient
hazard insurance to cover potentiai'loss, there does not appear to be a negative impact as a result of
the non-conforming use.
14
8$/22/2000 13:39
< ?'
`��
�
:r;;.:�:.s
SPPD RMS QUERY
Address Search
Address Search: 37 OXFORD ST N(Sector. t Grid: 127 ) from 01 /0112 0 0 0 to 0812il2000
RMrieved 7 records
Complaint 3t
i 00153580
� 00150886
�p OOQ92887
- U Q0091793
�&9379
F WQ78900
.j 00011634
- �a.�� � �
` � � �',t
1`�' vvh�-es s ��� 4 S y, v-c_ o_ � 4 '� Q. w
�.�.l�s , �� ,�r��� �s,�r � r�,%e �.�� .��t�-�-��4. �o�
v S�r``j ��_ C^,,�.,•� �' �� os �� c�t� o. `' ��}��
� a., � 1 0. T W�c�t��" ���) �`�t iN T�'�j' e
T"�SC' l .- 1�Y <<_��,t �- �
N � i
��v., ,�t� r
6122226881
6122226881 HTLL PLAZA
Occur Dafa S Time incident Type Disposltion Api#
���z���`-+� DISTURBCALLS� ADV � '
9&Ot/2ppp2325 DEATH � RCV v' 121 �.
05/21i2000 75:35 INVESTIGATE ADV ,__� � �-
05f20/200007�4^_ OTHERASSAUI�- RCV."1 �
' � �l�l, ) Q V-� Y`-Q,'( Z• .
s � �����,
�
r
S c_� "� J 2�tn.
����1 -�-�
N � �� � � �,e_� - �.�
YJ U w��->-r 1- v�-z— ��'�°=
�.x.X.� � z�c � �•. �� �
�
J
���v� � 5 �._�. ��--� '
Info�mation requesied by: (130000)
1
OSH8200022;0'I DISTURB CALLS . UNF- Z +
04l30t200001:03 FIGHTS qpV 2 �}rp.-�q .�J�����
OflZOl20001227 _._—�p�s._.'_—_..._._--ADV ' l
� w :-•-S
� ��
� �'��S"� c� a a �D� ti�� t�
� G�-U � 1 -� �_,�-- ? ,
� �, ��,t 1 -�-z-� -� �,�.
L.�.���- �`��� �
���- �
-J-z-C-�
��
�
Printed af:08/21/2000 7Dr01
PAGE 01
/
MAIN LEVEL
�
�
'� 1 b e�1
�
� �'
�k �
La ��� E
(3
2 beds
�beds
���
���
S tairs
°�'Y 'r 3 z
Ba h h
R oms
Stairs
Entry
Kitchen
Dining
Room
��
i beds
� ���_
I beds
io�
t ��
� � Porch � � ,�,('r
�'C �
O l "�j Z
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�:J
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�\ .-.�`:- � ���� �
OF
A Proposed Group Home
LOCATED AT
97 North Oxford Street
St. Paul, Minnesota 55104
AS OF
December 16,1999
FOR
University National Bank
200 University Avenue West
St. Paul, Minnesota, 55103
Atfention: John Bennett Phone: 298-6750
C.�
LENDERS APPRAISAL SERVICES, INC.
F. W. Gergen, MAI
Appraiser
File #: 11256-L
�
�
�
t <: _.._ _ � �,� , -- _
�
�`
�
/
/6-�-cv
��
buffalo house
01-qz
i l� ' .
�'`'�'�G..�- �� ��� �< < _ < <`� , , �� - � �- .�.-t� :�
?fi :` �"-(-' L� --�_ C"d = x C/t �C Lt, � =,l�._ �.�/' _ _ . ti - -.. -. . .. � - T� .
� �i
.. '�-� !�-'i�iu./ : . /',iYJ ✓�� :<y.nJ . //� //.�1ii/ /i i/�
�� �J" �
� /
� ,��� _ ��-f �� ��l�J� ,�����- .1.i, ' ��
- �,,, ���,,,.�,�-��
,,
iP�� � ,/ 1 � ✓
9 � r,
�i/ii/,��,n'�n,�/ �,��> / //� //�i2��> /
� • .Z/'/!/i,l.i _� /,.�iT �
i
�';:J ,; ;> f��> � =
- ;%���_, i�� 'ii�� .
j/� �: !__ l, ���t' �, ; ��
�
- '�—'�--'� f .i��% 3 , ,
, , c-.t�c.cv� .Z�i!/�.�'-�"�� / �� /)ii �`X
/� i/
!./Si�JJ ,.:.G�,/�� _� ' `�'`�iY'll ` ' �/l.?/_!�'� �}/� J � /`. �
/-.•, � /_ r'? � -`�,�_L�„ �i� � .%!) /, T�/'/>
✓ �� • ��1.�i / /�i/. � ��� � /� ✓ ' l i� (, �
�� /" �J��i/,�/ ��, � Z..- i .
/' c • � . .�
� � / �.�/✓Ll��'ry ���J
G i�. � G'` (:,C_ C � - � _' Z� : . � , . � . ��/ .
" � / ..�'t�. �3 � �i,��/i///�J'��i
� // �
��✓_ �L�rri'.�i4 � �- ./-, . <. L -. . -: C � . . _., ; ` .
/ �.-, . . ._ . . �_� .
' � � / / " Ci� �/'� �
l��C.i�� . �t!.�'ZZ/•' / - 9
, L�'��•��i LX .d � ..i._ //JJ./�1_� ,!J� � .�i� � 1�iii�
�'�� �i�Ji) �i.t�J/� ///is��; T� - �'
�! �%�CC�7.�
�
����i» � O
.
! �: <„ � =/,�. � ,% - --
,_.
97 North Oxford Street Saint Paul, Minnesota USA 55104
voice: 65'1.227.7781 data: 651.227.7782 buffalohouse@uswest.net
�PPER LEVEL
��'� ����
�a.(�ir�
: � � C r �
;�, � ; ��.-�
t ( 1`� ✓��^ u �� 5
�
�
.
� Q' _ Z
�
o�tot�r 6, Z000
I ���1�VG �1LE do-�z2-���
�
�
City of Saint Paul
PED
Nancy Homans
1400 City Aall Annex
25 West 4th St.
St. Paul, MN 55102
RE: Buffalo Sober Group L.L.C.
97 North O�ord St. N.
Deaz Nancy:
I have received a public hearing notice for the appeal for the certificate of occupancy
and for the nonconforming use permit.
I have owned my hoine at 1053/1051 Ashland since November 1998. My property is
immediately adjacent to 97 N. Oxford. The winter of 98-99, I had several conversations
with the cazetaker at 97 N. Oxford. He only came by when it snowed or needed
maintenance. The only part that was kept clear of snow was the front sidewaik and the
back driveway. The pazking azea nea�t to the building was never plowed until the new
owners took over in 7an. 2000. I was interested in knowing, why there was no one living
at this building. He reported that the faciiity for mentally ill women had closed down. I
had not seen any one living in this building from the tune I moved into my home in
November 1998. The residents had vacated the premises prior to November 1998. The
only person that I ever had seen coming and going from this building was the cazetaker. I
never saw any lights on in this building.
I have seen the packet of information that was provided to the city by the 97 N. O�ord,
with the Buffalo Sobriety Group appeal. There were a few records from NSP included in
this appeal packet. I sent you a letter dated April 17, 2000, which stated ttiat the electric
and gas bills had dramatically decreased from 1998 to 1999. Please see the enclosed
letter. The nonconfornvng use permit that was given to the previous owner had eacpired
prior to the Buffalo Sobriety Group purchasing it. The pernut was issue to the Oakland
Home to house mentally ili women, not to run an office by Seren M. Larson. As I have
stated before, the only person I had ever seen at the building up until the Buffalo Sobriety
Group entered in January 2000, was the cazetaker.
The Certificate of Occupancy has been revoked because the buiiding is currently zoned
as a duplex. This building is an exact duplicate of the building at 89 North O�ord,
which is currently operating as a 4-Plex. It houses 8-10 people. There aze additional3
apartment buildings on the corner of Ashland & Oxford, which are also multiple dweliing
units. This is creating an over saturation of the community. The building was built for
the purpose of apartments not a boazding house. This type of facility is not agpropriate in
this community because of the quantity of muitiple dwelling units that aze straining this
neighborhood. This facility will place 3 times the quantity of people that a 4-plex would.
This presents this community with a huge pazking problem because the owners want to
place 26 residents this building. They only have 12 off sireet pazking spaces. Where do
� Z4NiNG F1LE °°.�u-Z3�
the other 14 people park? It also creates traffic congestion for the neighborhood with not �
only the tenants but also the food delivery trucks, gazbage trucks and other utility
vehicles that go in and out of this property that aze not associated with the other
apartment buildings in this neighborhood We also have a church with a food shelve and
a junior high school within one block of 97 N. Oxford. This building has only halfthe
number of parking spot as it does residences which leaves the rest to park on the over
crowed streets.
The currenY owners of 97 North Oacford have been in this building illegally since
3anuary 2000. They report that they have invested approximately $100,000 in
remodeling and repairs. T'his building was renovated without the pre-approval of the city
zoning. They still continue to renovate this ficility without regard to the fact that they
may not be able to run their business out of this building legally. The most recent
renovation has continued to take place over the past several weeks. This money that they
have spent should not be considered by the city, as a reason why this building could not
reasonably or economically be used as a confornvng purpose as a 4-plex.
This type of facility does cause a detriment to the character of this neighborhood with
the quantity and type of facility that they aze rnnning. I have enclosed a police report for
the 97 North Oxford building. The death that is listed on 08/Oi/00 was an overdose as
stated by the Homicide Department of St. PauL There was an additional incident on
08/OS/00 that is not listed on the enclosed report this was also a disturbance cali. This
neighborhood is full of young chiidren that aze living around the building and are coming
and going from the near by school.
This neighborhood is adamantly against allowing this building to be rezoned for
nonconforming use. The re-establishment of a nonconforming use requires the owner to �
obtain signatures from two-thirds of the property owner's within 100 feet of the property.
They have failed to provide the St. Paul Planniug Commission (Zoning Section) with this
required portion of their appIication.
The Planning Commission has no other choice but to deny their application for the re-
establishment of a nonconforming use permit.
We are holding a neighborhood meeting on October 9, 2000 at 1060 Laurel Ave.
between 7-8 PM. If someone from your office could attended, to inform the
neighborhood of the process that will take place and the guideline for this permit it would
be greatly appreciated by the neighborfiood to help understand the City's position.
Si#lcerely,
� � -o �_
;
Shannon A. O`Keefe
105�/ 1053 Ashland Ave.
St. Paul, MN 55104
�
. ,...
Y 1
• - � �_ .�_....
� ausuc a�aoRr
r
Compiaint #
�� �:'.
���• :-
���• •c
..•-.
��� .-.•
I�I .G�
, �_
Occur Date & Tune
� - t� Ol-4Z
I ef froti��
Shacif�ci� G' ��e��.
C � ���o/ o��
Address Search: 97 OXFORD ST N(Sector. 1 Grid: 127 ) from �9/01/1999 to 08/03/2000
Retrieved 8 records
0&0111000 23:15
05/21/200p 15:35
�51202000 01:42
OS/162000 22:01
04/30l2000 01:03
��YLO/2000 �22�
10/06/1999 1223
10/O4/1999 08:18
�'�
SPPD RMS QUERY
Address Search
IncideM Type
DEATH
INVESTIGATE
OTHERASSAULT
DISTURB CALLS
FIGHTS
DOBS ,
ALARMS
ALARMS
Disposition Apt#
RCV 127
ADV
RCV
UNF
V �
2 � �
Aov —�l�YWS_ 1
ADV
ADV
I�st�'b
��.
��� ��
� ,�.�
. ��,
� � ✓�'� � I -�
� ZC}�919VG FILF o���ZZ�z3y�
�
Information requested by: (72100Q)
�t !o%« dePz` G�/-a9�- i�i/.
1
Printed at:08/03/2000 11:18:26
��.�". � �:» � '� � � "'"� � :
°��� � � ,? . �= �� _ _ .:
�--, - _ . � -
�.��� --
���- - � -
- ��
- ��� ��'
� ���i1NG FtLE 6�-=`� = �
� _ , Disposition (Disp� Key w� _ _ ..__. - �
for -
- = - � Address Printouts -
RCV = RECEIYED A Police report was written.
CAN = CANCELED
The call was cancaled. No police report was
writfen.
GOA = Gone On Arrival The police went to the scene of the cail and upon
arrival the disturbance(suspects were not there.
No police report was writGen.
� SNR = Services Not Rendered Police services were not required. No police �
report was written. _ .
° ADV = Advised Poiice ha�dled the situation at the scene and .
advised the peopie involved how to deal with it_ _�- .�fi: '�
No police report was writtsn. �� °-=�_ _�`
TRF = Traffc A Traffic Tag (tickeUcitation) was issued. No .� _-�
police report was written.
PCN = Previous Case Number A case number (C.N.) Was previously assigned to __ _
this incident at another time. Check that casa "-:"
numbePs disposition. -= = =
UNF = Unfouoded There was no reason for the cali. No police report =.
was written. _ -_ -
DUP = Duplicate Cali A case number (C.N.) Was previousiy assigned to ;:_ _
-- this incident at another tirne. Cheek that case �:'_
numbe�'s disposition.
DTX = Detox
RPT
The police brought an individual to the Detox _
Cente�. No police report was written.
No Report see advised ( �} �� �
--- �
�
= ��'
' A fic o�-yz
� �ONIl�lG FILE o�-�u�23y le �prYl �a��' �
. D`1Cee � Ctol��cL�
Buffal er roup, .L.C. purchased this�property in January 2000 for approacimately $300,00
Since that time, the owner has invested approximately $100,000 more in remodeling and repairs.
In St. Paul, the revocation of a Certificate of Occupancy has historicaily been used as a remedy for
health and safety violations. The St. Paul Fue Marshall has affirmatively stated that he has no health
or safety concerns regazding the premises in question.
The issue in this case is one of non-confimung use. The building had been operated as "Oakland
Homes Inc.", a Rule 36 community residential facility for mentally ill women. It was sold to
appellanu in February 2000 and an application for a change in non-conforming use permit was fust
filed in Mazch 2000. The owner ofthe building, Serene Lazson, operated her business from Oakland
Homes, Inc. until January 15, 2000, but during a substantial portion of the time the building was
listed for sale, it was not being used as a residential facility.
Appellant now has a pending application fo: a non-conferming use permit pending, and a copy of
that petition is attached as Exhibit A.
Appellant believes that it is eligible for a non-conforming use permit pursuant to the provisions of
Chapter 62, Section 102, subsection i, ¶ 3 of the zoning code because the proposed use of the
properiy, a rooming use for chemically dependent men in recovery, is equally appropriate or more
appropriate to the neighborhood than the previous non-conforming use, because the traffic generated
would be similar to that �enerated by the previous non-conforming use, because the use would not
be detrimental to the existing character of development in the immediate neighborhood, nor would
it endanger the public health, safety or general welfaze, and because the proposed use is consistent
with the comprehensive plan.
Some of the issues presented by the application for a non-conforming use permit aze:
Whether the use made by the previous owner of the building until January 2000
constituted a continuing non-conforming use of the premises such that there was no
"one yeaz gap" between the time appellant purchased the building and the tune
appellant made its own application for a permit.
F�
Even ifthere was a"one year gap", did the fact that the premises were then listed for
sale operate to toll the ruruiing of the clock.
Whether the denial of a non-coFyforming use permit, under the circumstances of this
case, would operate to create an unconstitutional "taking" of the property.
�
Whether the Federal Fair Housing Act required the City to make a reasonable
accommodation in its zoning policies for the residents of the building owned by
appellant. 42 U.S. Code § 3604(fl(3)(B).
The revocation of the Certificate of Occupancy is based upon the fact that appellant has not yet been
� granted a non-conforming use permit. If the Certificate of Occupancy were to be revoked prior to
. .
- " � s �ONING FtLE bG-l22�Z3
-- �
a deternvnation of the permit appiication, the residenu of appellant's building be required to leave
and find new places to live. These persons are valuable but fragile members of the St. Paul �
community. Each is empioyed and sober, and the facility in which they live provides invaluable
support to them in maintaining that sobriety.
Appeilant respectfuily contends that ali interests of all parties will be protected if the Certificate of
Occupancy is reinstated, and if the ultimate question of non-confornung use is resolved wiihin the
zoning arena where it more appropriately belongs.
�
�
/
�!-�'i2
�
From: <Deqni@aol.com>
To: <nancy.homans@ci.stpaul.mn.us>
Date: 10/11/00 1025PM
Subject: Public Hearing
j��o��N� �t�E b n '! 2 Z - Z 3
_ �
�
Deaz Saint Paul Planning Commission and Zoning Committee,
Reference your public hearing notice, file number 00-122-234 conceming the
applicants (Buffalo Sober Group) request for a change of non-confomung use
permit.
Due to work requirements I will be unable to attend the public hearing on 12
October 2000. I would like to express my thoughts on the subject.
We are supposed to be a society governed by laws applicable to all. Ifthe
investors who own 97 North O�'ord are in violation of city rules and have
failed to obtain the required consent of their neighbors within 100 feet,
then the rules require enforcement.
It is my understanding that the investors started operations without
obtaining permission from the proper authorities. If that is indeed the
case, investors should not be able to do what they want and then get approval
after the fact.
From my perspective, deternuning what the procedures should have been, and if
they were followed, is the only issue. At the meeting last night the
investors talked about the need for their type of facility. That use did not
appear to be an issue. The concerns I heard were population density in the
local area and 24 or more people residing in that one building. Since
similar type apartment buildings aze located ne�t to each other along Oxford,
the concerns are reasonable.
In conclusion, your office will have to review the process and procedures.
If those policies were not followed, then the property should conform to the
zoning code.
Sincerely,
David E. Quimby
�
�
�
� o I-9z
_ ( Zt�NtNG FItE bU"fZZ�23�
PETTTION �
We, the undersigned neighbors (homeowners and residents), affected by the
property located at 97 N. Oxford, wis� to express our united opposition to •
the re-zoning and/or re-establishment of a 26year old "non-conformin� Use
permit issued in 1974. We believe that our fragile and densely populated
neighborhood is best served by maintaining the current zoning ordinances
which designate the building as a two=family residence.
.
. ����-��� - � �-
�G. , �3�
. .l I,'llll ��
� ,
�/
���)1J.w.
w
� , �
,. _� , !Y ;.. �
_ %/�
!1'�1`�
....1�
�_ �
�
�
��
�
��
� i
/
�
ADDRESS
pHO1V� lv�'�lvtval.i
z
�
/a�5��.��
/oas �,
/(� l� o C ,�/�
ii �
��� 3 1� s ���
��
�- �j / iJ t LI A
� �/
Kl�-�— / � 2 � A. �
' or7 G�'rh��
2� � - � l -i
aa s�-a ��7
a�� ��� 7
`)'^;oov'
�%'��' � l
r , ',
Zz�
�-Z- � - �z� l
z z � - �s�� z
((7 J � .
�t � !� �3�.
G sl-Za�-7j
� ����
.
i zor��N� F��E o�.�22.z3
PETITION
We, the undersigned neighbors (homeowners and residents), affected by the
property located at 97 N. Oxford, wish to express our united opposition to
the re-zoning and/or re-establishment of a 26year old "non-conformin� Use
permit issued in 1974. We believe thaf our fragile and densely populated
neighborhood is best served by maintaining the current zoning ordinances
which designate the building as a two-family residence.
NAME
���
, ha��
ADDRESS
l0�-� �I ��
�0�{5 1���--�lan�
PHUNE I(/l't�urv�i
E MAIL
L5t- �l'��1 b
65i- 225 -S.�t,6
�5-1- zz,� -�°3�u�
ZZ� �`�
C�
�
�
f
-.
� O1-9Z
. `� ; ZONING FtL.� ��-«Z�23 �
PETTTION ,
We, the undersigned neighbors (homeowners and residents), affected by the
properiy located at 97 N. O�ord, wish to express our united opposition to
the re-zoning andlor re-establishment of a 26year old "non-conformin� Use"
pernvt issued in 1974. We believe that our fragile and densely populated
neighborhood is best served by maintaining the current zoning ordinances
which designate the building as a two-family residence.
NAME
ADDRESS
1�n9 ��
ia�"/ ��,s���� .9�-r
��, /%lS /.v���-�=s
�
1055 Ash�Q�d
�o�� �shl�r�
� .�
-, � �-
� v � i�sa Ashdu�
r
C
PHONE (OPTIONAL)
E-MAIL
�oSl a`'i� - �5
G�Si -L92 —�o7a-
GS/ , -;>—° U— � / ��
� �
�„�-, _'7 Gt Sr -�l 2� 2
l�i� ��b�� 03g3
(�5 ( -2 Z�-��3�
(�S ( - aa�� - oy�,
�
� Zf3NING FILEo�.�z2�Z3 �
PETITION
We, the undersigned neighbors (homeowners and residents), affected by the
property located at 97 N. Oxford, wish to express our united opposition to
the re-zoning and/or re-establishment of a 26year old "non-conformin� Use"
permit issued in 1974. We believe that our fragile and densely populated
neighborhood is best served by maintaining the current zoning ordinances
which designate the building as a two-family residence.
NAME
- „ .�
. � � •
! ./ ' ' �
�� �
)1�.! , i� t=
! � ..1��
. ..s
'[iL'.� � '
. .
r. i .,, t�� i
� , ��
l_J
PHONL'� (UCLlU1VALl
A . �'
: prr } }1 `;�X XK"i N '...^f�' `f 1 �0V`Y � ih.�� Yd
t.
� 5 1 " 4 .✓.�yFi.
`t-m�:,'1"itawrtr.s"44k .3,,{�Ek2«Y""da�FC�a`�"'43'd.i^5' �y'�n$t"&a'wq^
-a�� >e+ n, s. �,-� biu��wu�.. , . q_� s N: w.. ¢�,} ,�ueq�
J b f .+(' ` ' i .
� y sri i
� �k-.""`n ✓ 4 +� 4 ��s�, G6 f ' l+ ��.r= 'tVS;+
:.�'� � T r5' Y
e : : F � lY� .is4�.
�r . . � _�.b . rt '^z F . . ..
y .tr
�i � � �
..,dnSGxww ta .rFr:� � f.�4r � 'T.
e
�
0
1,➢ . ���`�_
... . ..x . . ..
S
(
�
ti jAV_� 1Y'�"i;p.!, qF 4�..k �8" �+t d 4 Y.. h ttF[w '"n"4'iy�Y �^'l P N
. b+x � �+ . � �
t > � ' ..� � , ,, y.J .
�.:;f r.,�+�. ,?i c v s . u:�.i«�o-4m ,'.+6 'k�;�^+'4 " w�,3a^�! a� aPx '�k �&� ni�t
. c r�v...nr� . �„eM�.u:�:u fF�+,�.�i.. ,�..�xinr^-
, �� . ^ : i rv ( � S.. �N�'.� i,; �
h "
a.Y 'C.0 d i _ 41J. M✓p Yt
t Y . ' .. �.
�
���t��� � .Fx� . � , wv. .. e�
i
j
Y r �;
���M �''w.-a� ?. � »£ f a e�.� �t z1 .�"K4'� .r r�£+a' � rvt '& ✓,
� .
�'i.�* .'S.,�,�+�° �,w�,.; w F .s X � ,4 r nw�rxGn i:
:.,� e r 7 s r' r Js
',i„�.u�..v ! .a 2'7. u ._ 4 .,,a...< s w a' ., ... $ '.
�
I n. „ t 6 "' p l:. 1 i, ; M�'
s
.r�;r' rc+' �.. a.w.«, x� 1 w ) ��F•-1
i w � .
� ne
� r'
� � ti
.r ¢ z�.., e F y
� �,
< ri kp � 4z � r � a
�r :, � e � r.', �' y �'� ,�, q � y � < 5;�
4 �
� •5•• f . '� J � � #'a
�' � � c �;
M� y��21 n Y A'f�v6 1`.� aPM � �' 3 Nn,�.r',!"t
s�c �;n t n: v,c�f r F^a�'3�� tr � ..'�5
� ��i
a } � � j� � )
y k
' � A�} ik < M' C ,.. � " 1
1 ]
L ' n � %� F t ., � Y � e
. ,�1 t nb },� �M.v �,. � A !�
+, ;�$ t 8 ; .f Y . d �s C', "` S
1
i,���, �x4 , , ��if , i n.i�',^; � .a � .e!' �'4m � # �� , , ,
.., � rz. �, .,
n T,: s : b
�1� .z. . ::'�.. _
i
k
i
� f:ti �.rA��.�`NrG.N,�>n �+' ' Y ��e+ u!"� ��x r xu9,iv �r ' t� rak a�. R.ers asdcg �:z, -A ,.n`y xV� `��+ v':y
�
,� ri� r: � o iz.. F y nu x .�"
Y l` � ".: t ,' 1 Y '� �T i !
.l A �+T' P .
:�.r,"i +ae�',� �+.y �� %' ,� u r i �Y°' " , 1 R°.
.p k . 4 a i
l t . 1
Dl-gZ
. ZONING COMNIITTEE STAFF REPORT
FTI,E # 00-122-234
1. APPLICANT: BUFFALO SOBER GROUP, LLC AATE OF HEARING: 10/12/00
2. CLASSIFICATION: Change of Non-conforming Use Pemut
3. LOCATION: 97 North O�ord (west side between Ashland and Laurel)
4. PLANNING DISTRICT: 8
5. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: North 75 feet of Lots 27 and 28, Block 42, Summit Park Addition
to Saint Paul, Ramsey County, Minnesota
�
6. PRESENT ZONING: RT-1 ZONING CODE REFERENCE: 62.102(i)(3)
7. STAFF INVESTIGATION AND REPORT: DATE:10/4100 ,. BY: Nancy Homans
8. DATE RECEIVED: March 21, 2000/
August 28, 2000
DEADLINE FOR ACTION: Applicant requested
extension/October 27, 2000
A. PURPOSE: Change ofNon-confornung Use Permit to allow a property previously used as a
Human Service Licensed Community Residential Facility for 32 residents to be used as a
rooming house for 24 residents.
B. PARCEL SIZE: 75 x 100 = 7500 squaze feet
C. EXIST`ING LAND USE: Rooming house for 24 men in early sobriety (established without
zoning pennits on February 15, 2000).
D. 5URROUNDING LANA USE:
North: One and two-family residential, zoned RT-1
East: Single family residentiaUchurch, zoned RT-1
South: Four-family residential (a twin building to 97 N. Oaford), zoned RT-1
West: One and two-family residential, zoned RT-1
E. ZONING CODE CITATION:
Sec. 62.102 (a) details the intent of the Zoning Code's provisions related to nonconforming
uses:
(a) Intent. There exist within the districts established by this code and subsequent
amendments lots, structures, and uses of land and structures that were lawful before this
�
Zoning File #00-122-234
Page two
code was passed or amended that would be prohibited, regulated or restricted under the
terms of this code or future amendments. It is the intent of this code to permit legal
nonconfornring lots, stnxctures or uses to continue until they are removed.
The code recognizes that in some circumstances allowing nonconfornung uses to be
changed to similar or less intense nonconfornring uses, or allowing nonconforming uses to
be reestablished in vacant buildings, may benefit the city and surrounding nei�hborhood.
Some buildings have a long useful life and allowing their continued occupancy for
nonconfornung uses can be more desirable than requiring them to be vacant if they cannot
be converted to conforming uses. Consequently, the code allows conversion of
nonconfomung uses to similar nonconforming uses and allows the planning commission to
reestablish nonconforming uses in vacant buildings if regulated so as to be compatible with
the surrounding neighborhood.
The code recognizes that enlazgements of nonconfornung uses which improve the
appearance and functioning ofthe use can benefit the sunounding neighborhood. The
code allows the enlargement of nonconforming uses when found to be compatible with
surrounding neighborhoods.
•
Sec. 62.102(fl details the Zoning Code's provisions related to Nonconforming uses of �
structures. (Relevant provisions excerpted.)
( fl Nonconforming uses of structures, or structures and Zand in combination.
Nonconfornung uses of structures, or structures and land in combination, are subject to
the following regulations:
(1) A nonconfomvng use may continue.
(2) A nonconforming use may be changed to a use pemutted in the district in
which it is loca4ed or to a new nonconforming use if the new nonconlornung use is
also listed in the same clause of the code as the nonconfomung use. A
nonconforming use may be changed to a use pemutted in the district in which the
nonconforming use is first allowed, or a principle use pernritted in a district that is
more restrictive than the district in which the nonconforming use is first allowed,
provided the planning commission approves a pemut for the change as set forth in
clause (i)(3).
(3) When a nonconfomung use changes to a use permitted in the district or in a
more restrictive district, the nonconforming use shall not thereafter be resumed.
(7) When a nonconfornung use is discontinued or ceases to exist for a continuous
period of three hundred si�y-five (365) days, the building, or building and land in
combination, shall thereafter be used in conformance with the regulations of the �
Ol�`t L
. Zoning File #00-122-234
Page three
district in wkuch it is located, unless the planning commission approves a permit to
reestablish the nonconfomung use as set forth in clause (i)(5).
Sec. 62.102(i) outlines the planning commission's authority in granting pernuts for the
establishment and change of nonconfornung uses.
(i) Nonconforming use permits The planning commission may approve, modify and
approve, or deny nonconfomung use pernuts. To ensure the public welfaze is served, the
commission may attach conditions to the pernuts including, but not limited to, conditions
concerning appearance, signs, off-street parking or loading, lighting, or perFormance
characteristics, such as noise, vibration, glare, dust, or smoke.
The planning commission in approving nonconfornung use permits may allow a
nonconforming use for a specified period of time and then require its removal by attaching
an expiration date to the permit if the commission makes the following findings: (1)
termination of the nonconforming use or the continued vacancy of the building in which
the nonconforming use was located would cause significant hardship; (2) permitting the
nonconforming use for a period of time will facilitate the transition to a conforming use;
and (3) permitting the nonconforming use for a period of time is consistent with the public
health, safety, comfort, morals, and welfare. The period of time for which the permit is
valid shall be deternuned in each case by the commission and shall be based on the extent
of the hardship.
'�' ..
The planning commission shall heaz and decide nonconforming use permits in accordance
with the procedures and requirements of section 64300. The planning commission may
consider the fotlowing nonconforming use permits:
(1) Establishment of legal nonconforming use status. The planning commission
may grant legal nonconforming status to the use of structures which fail to meet
the standards of section 62.102(b) if the commission makes the following findings:
a. The use occurs entirely witlun an existing structure;
b. The use is similar to other uses pemutted within the district;
c. The use or use of similar intensity permitted in the same clause of the zoning
code or in a more restrictive zoning district has been in existence continuously for
a period of at least ten (10) years prior to the date of the application.
d. The off-street parking is adequate to serve the use;
e. Hardship would result if the use were discontinued;
£ Rezoning the property would result in "spot" zoning or a zoning inappropriate to
surrounding land uses;
u
Zoning File #00-122-234
Page four
g. The use will not be detrimental to the existing character of development in the
unmediate neighborhood or endanger the public health, safety, or general welfare;
h. The use is consistent with the comprehensive plan; and
i. A notarized petition of two-thirds of the property owners within one hundred
(100) feet of the property has been submitted stating their support for the use.
The application for the pernut shall include the petition, evidence of a ten-yeaz
period of existence, evidence that conversion of the use and structure would result
in hardship, a site plan meeting the requirements of section 64.102, floor plans, and
other information as required to substantiate the pemut.
(3) Change of nonconfornung use. The planning commission may allow a
nonconforining use to change to a use pernutted in the district in which the
nonconfoz�ming use is first allowed, or a use pernutted in a district that is more
restrictive than the district in which the nonconfornting use is first allowed if the
commission makes the following findings:
�
a. The proposed use is equally appropriate or more appropriate to the
neighborhood than the existing nonconfomung use;
b. The traffic generated by tke proposed use is similaz to that generated by the �
existing nonconfomung use;
c. The use will not be detrimental to the existing character of development in the
immediate neighborhood or endanger the public heakh, safety, or general welfare;
and
d. The use is consistent with the comprehensive plan.
The planning commission's findings may be a general rule or findings in a specific
- -
- - -
case.
F. HISTORY/DISCUSSION:
Oakland Home, a licensed community residential facility for persons with mental iliness, was
established at 97 N. O�cford in about 1968.
On September 25, 1980, the City Council adopted amendments to the Zoning Code defining
community residential facilities and regulating them as special condition uses consistent with
the provisions of State law included in the Human Services Licensing Act. The amendments
allowed community residential faciliries for 7 or more facility residents in the RT-1 (Two-
family) zoning district as special condition uses.
�
� Zoning File #00-122-234
Page five
On April 11, 1986, a Planning Commission resolution (#86-28) was adopted establishing legal
status for the Oakland Home as an eacisting community residential facility licensed by the
Minnesota Department of Human Services for 36 residents with mental illness in an RT-1
zoning district. In granting the special condition use permit, the Commission modified the
following conditions:
A. Number of residents served. The code limited the number of residents to 16. The
condition was modified to allow 36 residents.
B. Minimum distance between community residential facilities. The code required that
residential facilities be a minimum of 1320 feet apart. Two facilities were within the
required distance (Turning Point at 1089 Portland and Pineview Residence at 69 N
Milton). The condition was modified.
C. Off-street parking. The code required that there be one parking spaces for every two
facility residents—or 18 spaces for the facility. At the time there was parking for 2 vehicles
available on the property. Because no residents owned or operated their own vehicles, the
Commission modified the requirement.
� The Zoning Code was subsequently amended on June 27, 1991 to define Licensed Human
' . Service Community Residential Facilities and to first allow such facilities for 17 or more
persons in the RM-1 Multiple Family zoning district as special condition uses. As a result, the
Oakland Home became a legally nonconfornung use.
Changes in health care financing provisions and State policy, resulted in the general
downsizing of residential facilities for persons with mental illness throughout Minnesota
beginning in the mid-1990s.
Ramsey County initiated a down-sizing plan for Oakland Home and the last resident moved
out on August 21, 1998. The county's contract with Oakland Home expired on September
30, 1998 and was not renewed.
In a discussion with LIEP staff the applicant posited that the use had not been discontinued
because the owner of the building had maintained an office in the building and continued to
pay for telephone, electricity and heat. The Zoning Administrator responded that that case
would best be made to the Planning Commission and that substantial documentation would be
required.
G. DISTRICT COUNCIL COMMENT: No comment had been received at the time this staff
report was prepared.
�
Zoning File #00-122-234
Page six
H. FINDINGS:
1. On 7anuary 15, 200Q four members of Buffalo Sober Group, LLC purchased the property at
97 North O�'ord and, on February 15, 2000, Buffalo Sober House was opened, providing
permanent housing and supportive services to 24 men in the early stages of sobriety.
2. A subsequent inspection by City staff from the Department of License, Inspecrion and
Environmental Protection (LTEP) concluded that the use—a rooming house--was inconsistent
with the zoning code. Rooming houses are first pemutted as special condition uses in the
RM-1 zoning district.
An application for a Change in Nonconfomung Use Pemut was submitted on March 21, 2000.
Evidence submitted in support ofthe applicant's contention that the use had not been
discontinued were:
a. A statement from the building/business owner that she had operated her business out of
the structure until January 15, 2000.
b. Electric bill indicating that electrical and gas service to the building was not interrupted
over the period.
c. A statement from US West indicating that the buiiding owner was responsible for the
phone bill associated with her business in the building over the period.
�
On April 11, 2000, planning staffwrote a letter to the applicant detailing its conclusion that �
the previous use had, indeed, been discontinued and that permission to continue to use the
property as a rooming house would require a pemut to re-establish a nonconfornung use. The
applicants were given the option of withdrawing their application for a Change in
Nonconfornung Use Pernut and applying, instead, for a pernnt to re-establish a non-
conforming use. Their application fee would be applied toward a new application.
In a subsequent phone conversation on April 14, 2000, the attomey representing the applicant
agreed with the planning staff's interpretarion of the code and asked that the zoning
committee's consideration of the case be delayed for 30 days so thaf they could review their
options and begin work on obtauung the consent petition required for an application to re-
establish a non-conforming use. He further indicated that his clients were led to believe by the
building's owner and/or realtor that the building's use as a residential facility had somehow
been "grandfathered in." Later that afternoon, he faYed a formal Request for Continuance,
waiving the statutory requirements for a decision on the application within 60 days of its being
filed.
On May 22, 2000, a request for an additiona160-day continuance—until the August 17, 2000
zomng committee meeting—was faxed to the Zoning Committee by the applicant's attorney,
again waiving the requirement for a decision within 60 days.
�
i
� Zoning File #00-122-234
Page seven
a!-q z
4. On August, 28, 2000, unable to obtain a sufficient number of signatures on a consent petition,
the applicants resubmitted an application for a Change in Nonconfomung Use Pemut. The
substantial additions to the application—beyond those submitted in March—were:
a. A copy of the Coldwell Banker Burnet listing (list date: February 25, 1999) for the
property indicating that the building was a"fully functional group home-32 person brick
structure."
b. A copy of the lodger agreement.
Sec. 62.102(i)(3) of the Zoning Code outlines four conditions for a Change in Nonconfornung
Use. Those conditions and the applicant's ability to meet them are as follows:
a. The proposed use is equally appropriate or mare appropriate to the neighborhood than
the existing nonconforming use;
This condition is met. Both uses are congregate living facilities. The proposed use is
smaller than the previous use, and, therefore, may be judged to be more appropriate.
Boarding houses—like licensed human service community residential facilities for 17 or
more residents--aze first pernutted, with a special condition use permit, in the RM-1
(multiple family) zoning district.
��; b. The traffic generated by the proposed use is similar to that generated by the existing
nonconforming use;
This condition is not met. While there are fewer total residents of the current facility than
lived in the previous facility, none of the previous residents owned cazs or had licenses.
There were transported in a van and had, neighbors report, few visitors. The cars on the
site belonged to program staff
While the current applicant reports that many of the current residents have lost their
driving privileges for some period of time, surrounding residents report a marked increase
in traffic related to both residents and visitors.
Were this facility located in an RM-1 (Multiple family) zoning district and required to
obtain a special condition use pemut as a rooming house, among the conditions would be
that the lot area for 24 residents in 18 guest rooms be 21,000 square feet. The current loi
is 7500 square feet.
It would also be required to haue 12 off-street pazking spaces. While 12 parking spaces
are shown on the site plan, 9 of the spaces are 8 feet wide rather than 9 feet as is normally
required, 1 space is in the required front yazd (not allowed under Sec 64.104(11), 10
spaces are in the required side yard (not allowed under Sec. 64.104(11), and the other 2
spaces are within 4 feet of a side lot line (not allowed under Sec. 64.104(11).
�
Zoning File #00-122-234
Page eight
c. The use will not be detrimentaZ fo the existing characfer of development in the immediate
neighborhood or endanger the pubZic health, safety, or general welfare;
This condition is met. There is no evidence that facilities of this type have any detrimental
impact on properry values, or on public health, safety or welfare.
d. The use is consistent with the comprehensive plan.
This condition is met. The City's Housing Plan calls for the preservation of existing rentai
units and creation of new units providing supportive housing for persons who are or are at
risk of being homeless.
6. On the central point, however, of the appropriateness of the application, staff finds the
following:
a. The Zoning Code (Sec. 60.221) defines Use as the "principal purpose for which Iand or a
building is being occupied."
s
b. A previous use—a Licensed Human Service Community Residential Facility--had been
discontinued for more than 365 days when the applicants assumed ownership of the
building on 7anuary 15, 2000. Ramsey County staff indicates that the last resident moved
out of the building on August 21, 1998. The contract between Ramsey County and the
building owner/service provider formally eacpired on September 30, 1998.
c. The Zoning Code states: When a nonconfornung use is discontinued or ceases to exisY for •
a continuous period of three hundred sixty-five (365) days, the building, or building and
land in combination, shall thereafter be used in conformance with the rea lations of the
district in which it is located, unless the planning commission approves a permit to
reestablish the nonconfomung use as set forth in clause (i)(5). (Sec. 62.102(fl(7))
d. The applicant has not applied for a permit to re-establish a nonconforming use.
e. It is the intent of the zoning code that this building revert to a use permitted in the zoning
district unless this or some other non-confomung use which can meet the conditions
detaiied in Sec. 02. i"v2(i3(5 j—inciuding a sor.ser,t getit;�n �f `L�� ^vF �ii.°. S:1'_; Q`.1.^.`�:^.g
property owners—is established.
L STAFF RECOMMENDATTON:
Based on findings 1-6 above, staff recommends denial of the application.
�
/
NONCONFORMING USE PERIYIIT APPLICATION
: 'F, ` �I Department of Planning and Economic Development
�� Zoning Seclion
II00 City Hall Anner
25 West Fou�th St�eet
Saint Paul, MN 55101
266-6589
o i-qZ
APPLICANT I Name Buffalo Sober Groun LT�
1 Address 400 Selby Avenue, Apt, 22g
City St. Paul St � Zip 55102 Daytime Phone 651/602-0226
Name of owner (if different)
Contact person (if
PRdPERTY Address/Location 97 North O:cford Street St. Paul N1nI
LOCATION
Le al description North 75 ft. of Lots 27 and 28 Block 42
S�nit Park Addition to St. Paul,
Ramsev Countv. ��iinnesota Current 2oning g�-1
(atfach additiona/ sheet ii necessary)
:. ���
TYPE OF PERMIT: Appfication is hereby made for a Nonconforming Use Permit under provisions of
Chapter 62, Section 102, subsection i, Paregraph 3 of the Zoning Code.
The permit is for:
� Change from one nonconfortning use to another (para. 3 in Zoning Code)
❑ f2e-estabfishment of a nonconforming use vacant for more than one year (para. 5)
� Legal establishment of a nonconforming use in existence at least 10 years (para. 1)
❑ Enlargement of a nonconforming use (para. 4)
SUPPORTING INFORMATION: supply the information that is applicabie to your type of permit.
CHANGE IN USE: P�/Past use Oakland Home, a 32-resident DHS Ru1e 36
or ca?gmu�ity residential facility
RE-ESTABLISHMENT: Proposed use _ Rocsninq House for 24 residents
Additional information for all applications (attach additional sheets 'rf necessary}:
See attached SuDnorting Infornation sheet
�
site pian is attached ❑
ApplicanYs signature �
Dates�-t�? City agent
.
Supportinp Information Attachment
The property wili be used as a rooming house, providing permanent living
facilities for men in eariy sobriety. Admission is limited to men demonstrafing 30
days of continuance of abstinence from mood-altering chemicals, current
employment, and a commitment to continuing recovery. Exemplary behavior by
all residents will be assured by the daily presence of an owner and an on-site
manager. Residents will occupy 12 single rooms, four double rooms and two
double suites, and all have access to six fuil bathrooms, two large lounges, a
library, laundry facilities, and a professional quality kitchen. The physical
facilities have been upgraded (but not expanded) from the past use as a Rule 36
community residential facility through the investment of approximately $100,000
by the new owner. The new residents, as former sufferers of chemical
dependency, are subject to protection under the Federai Fair Housing
Amendments Act of 1988 and as such are entitled to reasonabie accommodation
in the administration of zoning ordinances by the City of St. Paui.
The property qualifies for a Non-conforming Use Permit under Section
52.102(I)3 for the following reasons:
�
(a) Use as a rooming house for sober and
recovering men with healthy lifestyles �
and oufside empioyment is equally or
more appropriate to the district than the
previous non-conforming use as a
D.H.S. Rule 36 community residential
facility, which continued through
September, 1998. Shortly thereafter,
the property was put up for sale, as a
group home, with the formal listing with
Coldwell banker first appearing on
February 25, 1999. See attached MLS
"Property fnformation° sheet, reflecting
the property listing as a"fuliy functional
group home -- 32-person brick
structure." Meanwhile, the former
owner, Oakiand Home, Inc. continued
doing business at the facility until
January 14, 2000 (see attached letter of
Serene M. Larson, together with
Dac# 1258810\1
�
� ;�'
*�
�
Telephone and utility
bi!{s/notices}. The proposed use
as a rooming house began in
February, 2000, and an
application for a change in non-
conforming use permit was first
filed in March, 2000.
(b) The proposed use wili not be
detrimentai to the existing character of
development in the immediate
neighborhood, nor will it endanger the
public health, safety or general welfare;
(c) The proposed use will have less impact
upon neighborhood traffic and parking
than the former non-conforming use,
since there will be fewer residents (24
opposed to 32). Also, a higher
percentage of the residents will use
public transportation rather than private
vehicies, due to past problems with
substance abuse. The facility has
available 12 off-street parking spots.
No on-site programming atfracting
visitors will take place; and
(d) The proposed use is consistent with the
comprehensive plan.
Attachments
M�S listing for 97 North Oxford
2. Statement of former owner
3. Buffalo House brochure
4. Lodger Agreement (residency rules)
Dock 1258819\1
2
a!-9z
AUG MON 11:32 AM CB BURNEI HIGHLAND _ FRX N0. 651 698 9356 P, 02
� .
Proper#y Irrformation � �
gurtrrE r,�:� .
�..+�w aoaw.. u w:, ��c>
fr•:o�ma•JM Oeem�id FoOabie 6ul No� (ivarn :!eea
LN:1404882
PF24pE RTY TYpE - 6 INVESTMENT - IV
SP: $290,040 pMD:i1/18l98 DOM: 26B SO:
tP: $299,QOQ LD: 02/25l99 Xp
ADDRESS:9'l OX�ORD ST N ' 7AX: $5,026
MUN: Sf Paul ZJP; 55104 TWA:$5,374
Aft: 746 SU6:1 bIV; 9 C�7U:RAMS ASB:$0
LOT: 7$X100 iJE: 0 N1: N2:
DtR: N ON LEX FR.SUMN1iT TO ASHLAND(E)TO OXFORD (N)
FULLY FUNC710NAL GROUP HOME-32 PERSON BRfCK STRUC7URE,4000
F'SF,fMPECCABGF MECFif\NICS,RESIDENTIAL LOCATlON,IMPRESSIVE
OPERATION,$50Ct000++y�ARLY GROSS,FULLY FURNISHED.
LGL: N 75' OF LOTS z7 AND 28 SLK 42 ZON: 4+'
#U MO$ ANN$ ANIV EXPENSE
1 �a $a $OFU: GAS
Scecia! Funding
Czsh
Z@ S0 SOEL• �Q FSZ: 1600 PID: 022823230130
3 @ �Q SOWSW: $0 FSF: 400� M7G:S0 INT; O.D00
4@ Sd SOIN: OD: 0
5 a� �ytl $OTR: �Sp AGI: $525,000 PlN; 5Q MC2: N MA2: N
5@ $0' 30MN; $0 AGE: $Q FR1: CALL LIS7ER FOR DETAILS
7 �°� g0' SpC7: Sp ANl: s�0 pf22: YEAR BUILT UNCERTAfN
i'dS: / RP: SQ
71: `�0 �O7E: 3Q SpN: G25 St. Paul SDP; 632-3730
AGN: B MC�I.ALElH SMITH 83G-1725 BC:2.7 SA: 0 NA: N
OFC: RE/N7l1X 12LAL ESTA7c GUI6E t.0: 6077 APT: 612$87-�208
Assumablc
Nct Ass�mahin
B�somQnt
Walkout
rWI
Finished (Liveabte}
UaytighVLOOkout Windows
Egress Windpw;
Cxi�Gng Financing
Conyentional
Main Extcrior
Wood
Brick/SLOnc
Fuoi
hlaturaf Gos
lioat
Hot W2ter
Inclusions
c�r� s;;s
List Type
Exciusiv� qr�ency
Misc
Party Roo.m
HPI'dWOOd FIVOfS
Nalural Woodwork
Fire Spr�n�der System
Fencinc
Nfindow Air
220 Volt
Furnishod tJnits
Num6er of Ranges
Two
Num 12etrig
Two
Owncr Ezpenses
Taxes
tosurance
watedSe�n�er
Electric
Fu01
Maintenance/Rep�ir
Janitcriat
Trash
Snovr
Lewn
OfhEr
Parking
Open
Other
Roofing
Fla!
TarlGrave[
Other
Ren1 Per Foot
Other
SBWBY
Ciry Sewe: - Ccr,neoted
SaI¢ Includes
Busincss
Building
Land
Inventory
Fixture/Equipmea!
Other
Sfyle
A.oartrnants/t4tufti Eamity
Basiness Opportunity
7erms
Conventional
8234 SAG: �5346 - ST: SOLD
7t1: 32
/ 98 / N MAp; E4 107
LNA:
ASp; N
N3: YBL:1907 NNIC;N
TenantExpensas
o!har
�ac: a � ss
VAC; N �
Currenf UsB
HoteilMo;e�
8usines5 Service
Professianaf Service
L'( ii�c2S
Fea[ing Common
Electric Common
Hot Watar COmmon
Wafer
ciry Water- Connected
Phofo Code
Tof<e R4ain listing Photo
Pho:o 7aken
.
{c) Copyr�gttt, Earnet COLDWEL4, BANKER - �URt3E7
HomeQ�vst
o�-yz
AUG-21-2000 MON 11�32 AM CB BURNET HIGHLAND ; FAX N0, 651 E98 9356 P, 03
,� - ,
�� �` Property 1`r�fe�r�r�iation �
SCJl2N�'T �
; IIJVE'STMEIY? ��
�^�-�aikn Deemad Ro-taMO 8�: NG Gwrantr.cq
•�- ezg�� SALE PR10E: �290,000 - ST: SOLD
TU: 32 STY: AP7lMUL / BUS OPP
7ERMS: CO�! 1 SPC 1 CSH
DOM: 2fiG OMD: 11/18/99 FIN: 3
ADbRES5:97 OXFORD ST N 7AX� $5,026
M'JN: StPauf Z1P: 55104 T4VA:5�,374
AR: 740 SU8:1 DIV: 7 COU:R.4hAS AS8:50
tOT: 75X100 ME:O N1: ryp;
DIf2: N OM LEX FR.SUMMIT TO ASHLAND(E)TO OXFORD (N)
FL1LI_Y FUNCT10t�1n1_ GROUP HOME-32 PERSON BRIC3C STRUCTUftE,4000
FSF,4FAPECCAf.3LG MECHANiCS,RESIDENTIAL. LOCATION,IMPRESSIVE
OPERA71pN,�500000•i+YEARLY GROSS,FULLY FURNISHED.
LGL: M1! 7� OF LOTS 27 AND 28 BLK 42
#U MO$ ANN$ ANN EXPENSF EXT: WO / BS
� ��' SO' SO HEA: H4V
2 �+� $t7 �40FU; GAS
3 a, $Q $OEL: $0 $SM: W/ F/ L J D/ E
4 @ ga $OWSW: 50 WAT:CONNECT
$ @ SO' � $OIN: SEW:CONNECT
6 CG �(J SOTR�
L1ST NUMBER:'140488?
MAP:E4 i07
ASP: N
PRfC: OP I OT YBL- 1907
N3:
RUM.SX RFAL ESTATE GUiDE
8 MGHALEIH SM17H 836-t725
PHN: 952-884-5404 BC: 2.7 NA:
AP7: 6f2-B87-12Q8 SA: 0 1.!
ZON: 4+�•
PID: 022823230130
7RM: CON / 5PC 1 CSH
MTG: 30 lNT:0.000
SD FSZ: 1600 EXF: CON
��i S�7 SOMN: SO FSF: 4000 PIN: 022823230130
MS: / GT: $0 AGl: 5525,000 5DN:625S;.Pau1
T�� 50 $ORP: SO AGE: $0 TE: $Q ANI: 50
. �l . Z S � `� C
(cj L'apyright, 6urnet COLI7WELL'BANKER - gURNET
Ob; 0 ASM: N
2MC: N 2MA: N
SDp: 632-3736
VRC: N
HomeC]uzs:
��`'-l�0 ` �°
'-t:�-�: -� - �
=�%-
:�::-= _ . �
: _� :;�. "�
i::� =.�0.
__..0 �
C
O
�
�
�
�
d
�
�
3
�
�
s
V
H
W
W
�
X > �j 'o O
� - u �y
-� " �.�i m
� a r � a O
� 0 T L Q L
L A d
� � � � Q
C � C C ,�
U � C L
U � CI
0o p� `^ = O +�
a � � c � O
1] � 6. . v L N
� " `-' �e E n. �
a�+ � �� � � O C
o '"
Q V c �
u N � � m b
� � � � — v
� . � w
- o � K .`°,
� S °" � � o 0
a o �
c�i .i °' '� � „��_. °°
_ _ � > 'O �
m e� i r y
v c ro c � 3
� � � � w o
L Y �
N � d N �^ O_ U C
id u p � � C! � �
� k C L �
O O CJ � O V C v
'r- C C LL N Q L
�� -- `:
� �
�
O
O
N
„'� Y
N �
--N y
H
>-y — P ;
p. eo n
' N, n Q V l
z_y`=1� �O 3
= r �' �
N P N
� N N �
., y N O
� � � p
0. �
i+ _
< G . '
O O O
�n �n O
t� N T
rt t�1 tTl
���
�
N
���
m m m
N (V —
�
Q
F
�
�
C
O
�
O
O
a
�
�
C1
O
� O
C p
� O
�o
L �
3 �
V v�
C1 '
N y
� c
L
F v
Y� �
0
tPr
�
�
Y
w
3
O
L
O
a
i
�
0
� O
C p
� O
��
J �
U N
H
41 C
L �
F- �
N �
d
N
N �
� �
� �
� �
c �
N
E 'o
>. u
tE V
a n
O �
C
Q O
v
� b
G � C
q �O �
O � L
O � ��.
�
O � C
y} � a�
o�=
N � L
� � _>
� � >
= C
v v
Q E - �o
T y � �
O_ -
J L � � y
� F v � �
N . � G! L
� � � � W
O ,- `e s
L 'o � � O
T � N � �
L L N � Q
c -� v " ai
o � o '„ u `
E ai o�o y� L
p C V , �� N
�l pQ
W � � � Q� '�
w �_�
C�J N - �i � L U'
OO V C C �- Y
O � � ro (�
C Qj V '
N � v v � �
i n O "O �
O O V �'= v
O s_ C i C
C � �
O rl a`d a L
. V'? p � � N
� O v d 3
� N
C � in N W O
� c u
h
�
L
�N
C
�
s
Y
�
L
�
�
�.
0
s
�
C1 'p
� � j
C � "O
N v C
� � �
� i N
L C .
v �n O G
,'�] y T CI
m v 'u aa
> F. � d
�
� � � O
L U �
,e � eo Y
N � L G
n o � L
4. �
bp � W
C v
� �Y y l
� t �
� 3 � d
� O
� � L - O
� - � ;
u
� � � N
C v � �
_ a
Q , �`v �
�
/
��
�
�.
�-
3
.�
O
_
�
�
m
0
b0
�
d
d
m
L
C
N
N
L
.
V
L
�
O
�
H
�
0
O
E
�
d
N
.N
�
N
3
�
�
c
.�
O
u =
V
° �v
� u
c
u 'L
i QJ
� Y
--
W
.�
c
�
�
v
C C
G
O
U
N
C
�
u
C
h
v
E
N
w
Q
C
u
d
A
N
N
m
H
O
L
�
V
O
L
bU
�
�
N
3
0
N
3
Q
a
w
�'_.+
N
�
N
w
N
J
d
C
c
.�
.�
O
t
L
m
O
�
0
C
0
.�
d c
L
0
>
O
=
T
C
CJ
3
�
ti
C
O
.�
�
0
u
-�
L
0
�
O
N
c
0
ci
Y
�
�
�
u
O
n.
�
.3
s
3
N
a c
C
O
�
T
�
0��0 �
v
� a
C
L
� C
0. C1
� �
L
C O
O
� �
� O
.�
� i
N
. �
c Y
O ,
L
�V �
CJ t
'a u
� -�
O s
'� N
V C
d �
a �
i° u
� _
Z_ v
� �
�E m
n �
O
L U
� L
v o
L N
� O N
O
c
d
i O_ 3
O �
Y �
S K C
y u �
� � L
�
L
� � �
L �
J . �
O
;3v
Y 3
� d v
� p N
a
� c >.
w` ° E
L
C
V
a
A
m
�
Q
O
�
3
m
O
v
�
C
a
a
a
F
c
a
�
d
�
:c
0
£
N
c
O
O
C
v
(E
>
c
a
d
N
v
.
O
L
a
�
V
.?
�
N �.
F L OO
n �
�
d v v
N j
L � �
C N Z
O �N O
E a �
C �
L � m
C
N N �
C
L O
� O �
G
n p_ s
r
a+ Ql �
m
o. N O
CI 41 y
� "' L
� �. c
N � N
� C V
0
O � O
(E V �
L 7
% v
W
n u
�
Q
�
v
.3
�
C
�
O
V
n
�
v
7
�
d
O
�
A
R
d
u
L
N
d
�
L
�
�
C
O
u
�
;
�
c
�
N
�
'�o
v
ro
C
v
�
�
c
L
�
c
�
ot =9�--
�; -�--�' .'�;-�., ,
��_ _' _
�r_ � .C;6e_-j.
�"y - .
•� '�
� ❑
:�`" �''._:-._ .
i 3� -
'- '
s+
� c
N E
O
O 0
= v
v �
N
� 'Q
T u
c�
U `�
a �
_ y
u �
C '
W �
c
_ 3
� �
�
J �:'
u d
° v
L
C
u m
c �
m
J N
� d
O
m
b
a
L
N
o'
_
�
m
N
2
N
�
Q
N
�
O
s
m
d
o'
O
w
m
N
�
Q
C
0
c
.�
O
N
w
�
O
1)
� p
� N
P �
W �
:° w
L '�
v C
�
= �
c
J �
�a C
d W
V y�j
G t
't3 3
N
�
O L
L �
y c
C �
N �
U
U �
—a — ° r '
L G
O "'
b�0 —'�
v d
a C
O
C
�
L
v
>
�
v
3
N
v
�
a
�
0
0
L
�
v
N
N
v
L
�
?
�
w
N
N
a
�
�
c
d
N
0
0
m
B
0
v
L
�
E
O
O
W
1
3
L
m
'o
_
�
�
m
N
C
m
m
m
�
d
Y
�
:n
0
O
N
b
�
O
O
y L R1
� <u c
a � O
�
� �a .°�'
�
X F a
V1
�
� °' v
L � �
O V `
�C �
N L v
� 3 ;�
C �
N N
M T
C p �
G
v �
� N N
v � '
d. �
O u
� � n
c �
O '
� � i
C � i
� o c
�
�
r
0
m
f'i
c
c�
L
—
.�,
_
c
�
WO
K
�
�
0
�
y ^
�.�/
O
s
0
�
�
.�Q
O
�
W r
C
P
m
v
W
ti
b
3
2
O
W
m
'D G
W N
L Qf
ro D
�
H
.c s
� u
N
d
N
� �
W W
a
N Y
�V
�
� �
� L
h
U ,
:°. v
� �
O C
�
m
H a L i
ro
N �
O C
N
i L
j �
O Y
C
�
N
N
C
O
a
L
n.
�
0
W
w
>
O
d.
u
N
N
�
�
N
�
C
L
O
c
�
O
.�
�
0
�
�
61
v
v �
w v
� �L
W -0
L �
U
N
C
�
b
A
7
G
>
Q
E
�
O
L
�
�
O
O
N
d
O
J
u
i
�
W
�
O
c
O
.�
Y
u
�
U�
v
d
�
u
d
W
�
� Y O
O �
� ro ;
w r
� .'
O
O - �
N
m > a
u W u
� o w
'_ d
G O
v ° a
� L
N
b d C
o v �e
� L F
L N u
u �
V � �
� v �
i
y � V
"O _C =
c �
� � h
� y
� �C
H 3
� ry
T
v
i
d
O
C
L
N
O
L
u
Y
u
�
d
V
T
V
�
N
�
F-
�
0
N
�
t
�3
L
N
w
C
7
0
�
L
O
�
� L
bo �
C
� O
3 L
C V
u
H �
3 �
N �
L �
b C
i N
N
� �
Y i
N
L �
m a
d p
� d
N
� v
C L
�
� N
O �
O
LL
ai
.n u
� G
V :".
O
C
3
v
O
3
iU
O
d
�
�.
�
�
m
i
m
�
O
N
m
�
L
�
a
d
c
c
O
3
N
O
�
3
v
O
0
C
�
N
C
�
N
�
v
C
N
0
d
C
L
N �
2 �
N �
b '
2
H �
L
O �
� °°
v �
F L
ro
ci a
3
C W
> �
Q N
N
U
C
N
�L
W
a
�
0
�
N
O
n
O
�
N
W
=
�
�
u
� �
L L
a !"
ro
y� O
u x
c a
'° a
C
� �
O �
� �
L
O `
h m
3 �
C
� �
� �
_ u
N u
N
u L
�
H �
� c
O �
�
O �
� c
N
m �
� � O C
L y
; � �
C
� � U �
u O
� �
� = N
_ C � �
—� �� � o
i � O r+
O U V
d u V a'
� L � �
i �
C A �
r O u >
N C �L
v L � c
v
a
O ,� U �
n O � L
�
� � � n
U
= O � N �
= v L m
N a �,
O � L �
v
� 'X W >
� �y L O
m E o n.
�
N
>
O
U
W
0
_
�
L
0
bO
c
J
U
0
3
u
w
�
E
0
U
c
N
c
O
O
0
N
�
N
V
�
L
O
N
-
d
L
�
d O � 'D
~ N � A
O
E w ro �
.+ �,
a o- V ° - '
N
C V L Y
� � � Y
(d � L
� � 0.
'" .-' = -o
N v �
- p - O �y N
N
� ,� � �
L L �
A �
V
N � O �
� o �
� L
T N �
� �
�! b
-� N L
E o o c
�J L � �
i � � �
r L U �
� � 3 �
O s
� C u f-
C
�
�
L
C
?
�
4
0
�
O
� ^l
W
L
13
�
�
�
^
�
S
i
O
�_
= y
ro v
C �
o U
� C
L 3
L N
� u
O ,_
E °'
O '-�
w �
_
c �
r
v �
v
� " C
v
„ m
- �
N °'
>„ C
`O O
2' �
O �
N -
� �
C1 ._
G
O
L
O
�
L
O
V
m
W
Q
�
C
�
v
N
t^.
s
b
�
N
.�
0
N
3
N
�
u
m
u
V
�
f0
�
O
2
O
�
�
C
r
G
V
�
.�
L
W
N
V
C
�
L
N
�
N
G)
h
m
U
L
�
m
L
O
Y
�E
�X
Q
a
C
E
�
0
V
T
N
�
L
a
0
C
c
0
�
N
C
C
O
v
�
�1
>
0
T
U
O
V
0
0
CI
u
r
L
O
�
March 16, 2000
I ope-rated my business out of Oakland Home, Inc. at
97 North Oxford St. until January 15, 2000. The phone
number was 651-227-7781.
Sin re1y,
-��-yCN�2 Z �— - Li ��.��.
Serene M. Larson, President
Oakland Home, Inc.
�
�
�
O 1'-�Z
M1�r-16-2000 04:51pm From-U.S.NEST COA6IlINICATIONS 7012226096 T-i52 P.002/002 F-267
unextyod
bSasch 16, 2p00
To Who¢ Zt Mav Concarn:
Oaklan3 Home Inc, Serene Lazson, waa raponsable £or 551-227-7781 �
until Jauuary 15, 2000_
U9WE3T
Paga 1
0
s
Service7ype Gas ' SecviceStatus: Aclive
MeterjCantract U0��5745Q7 Nn�rMeterType:
CunrnlRate: 178 Large Commeruai firm [MN Gasj
❑ Display Canccled Bilis
Ul(28jU0 14
11JZ3(99 23 '
lOR5j9H 40
09/15(99 79
Ofij2Hf99 32
OS)27j49 29
Oa(LB(99 30
03(L9(S9 28
Servia Options
Spatt Heat •
Small C 81
a
99U 30.9 .UO� .UU00
590 427 .ODU .0000
U .000 .O�OU
iii iii�
sa� zt.e .ann .auon
5A� t8.6 .OQ¢ .RUaD
n .von .oao¢
U .�aU .�UUU
0 .00D .OU00
37 1.7 � ,R00 .�OW
?28 70.9 .000 .D000
744 26.6 .000 .00OU
Printftepnrt L(sL Sum...
03/17/Z000 14:51:15
OAKLAND HOME INC
97 OXFORD ST N
ST PAUL, MN 55104-6539
Detail...
fi�5.688 M P
348.828 M P
.DUB S P
�
487.68 B M
35U.75@ E
38.526 M
76.UHB L
2B9�B M
44.398 M
1H3.398 M
409.778 E
Ciose
C�
�
� � � / Z
ServittTypc Electric ' ServirlStatus: Active
Meter(Cnntrocl: OU82551807 NomMctcrType:
Cwrent Ra1e: At 4 General Service (MN ElecJ
[] Display Canceled Bills
Oij28(UO 74
7,680
�U
L'G:iiY
1,400
5,560
2UUa
3,52�
4.2UU
5,4B�
6,460
5.04U
781.2
120A
n.zno
1 D.BOU
.aa¢
.i�
15.600
6.800
6.800
7.6�0
70.4U0
12.HOU
72.000
73200
oansrys �s
U6(Lej99 67
U4(28j99 22
04jO6j99 36
03�01(99 32
OtJ2H)99 29
12j30f98 36
17RN9H 28
Print Report
u :�
03/17/2000 14:50:57
OAKLAND HOME INC
97 OXFORD ST N
17.7
9L1
90.9
97.8
1372
7 89.0
7 BU.O
160.0
ST PAIIL, MN 55104-6539
Sum...
Servfce Options
Small C & 1 •
Overhend
Singie Phase y
n. .oaou
11. .0000
.aoon
: IIII
7. .�U00
il. .ODUO
il. .OU00
72. .0000
12. .OU00
13. .0000
iz. .aaoo
73. .0000
Detail...
332.35W M P
118.57W M P
.90W S P
� 1 1
333.29 S P
4BS.SBM L
763.SOW M
284.77W M
28l.98 W M
335.77W M
363.02W M
32T.ZSW M
Close
i
s
Se�vi¢Type: Gas � ServiceStaNs: Aclive
Aleter(CantracC 0 05T45U1 Nart-MeterType:
Current Rate: 718 �arge Cammercial Frm (MN GasJ
❑ pispiay Canccicd Bllls
UZ/29(UO 32
OifId10V I 15
72(30�44 37
71R3199 29
70(25�99 40
osnsl9s 7a
�b(2Hry9 32
a5R7rye 2e
DA�ZHr99 30
03t29f99 2B
Se�vice Op4aas
Space Heat �
Small C 8 1
i
99U 30.9 .000 .0000
590 42.1 .000 .UOOU
i ii� iiii
558 37.9 .UOU .OUDO
BU7 27.8 .000 .0000
540 18.6 .000 .0000
0 .0�� .UUUO
n .non .nnoa
6 .606 .U6UQ
31 1.1 .000 .�OOU
328 70.9 .000 .�000
744 26.6 .OUO .�ODU
605.688 M
348.828 M
i�:
335.95B S P
487.668 M P
360.758 E P
3B.52B M P
76.�BB L P
28.9U8 M P
45.39 B M P
7H3.396 M P
409.17 6 E P
I Print pcport List Sum... Detait... Close f
r 1
�swc� �wMi�' �w�--� J �� `�—� � �_�_��_�_���
03/17/2000 14:42:44
BUFFALO HOUSE LLC
97 OXFORD ST N
ST PAUL, MN 5510?-6539
�
�
L
d
''s
�
�
� �
L
�
d�-9�
e
ServiceType: Electrie ServiceStatus: Active
Meter(Contrace U082557B07 NamMeterType:
Current 0.atc: A74 ' Geneml Service (MN EIe�
❑ Display Lanceied etils �
U2j29(l7U 32
U7(2Bn10 14
� .ii i
O1(I4(�0 121
U4t25j99 79
O6j28(99 61
Oy28j99 22
04�06(99 36
U3j01199 32
U1j28(99 29
iZj3U�48 36
„ n�roa za
Prini Repott
7,68�
�'
6,44U
t,4U�
5,SS0
2,OOU
3.520
4.2�0
5,480
6.48U
5,040
list
03/17/2000 14:a2:12
BUFFALO HOUSE LLC
Service Options
Small C 8 1 �
Overhead
Singie Phase �
187.2 11.20� 17. .U000
532
17.7
91.1
90.9
97.8
1372
189.0
IeU.0
78�.0
15.6U0
6.800
6.H00
7.600
70.400
72.600
i2.uaa
13.ZOU
B. .00OU
7. .auan
77. .DOUO
11. .0��0
72. .0000
12. .U000
13. .0000
i2. .aaaa
13. .0000
Sum...
oaaa...
332.35W M
118.SiW M
ii
63U.�7 W 5 P
333295 P P
495.58M t--P
163.SO W M P
284.77YJ M P
284.9614 M P
335.17W M P
363.62V{ M P
32725W M P
377.USW M P
Closc
�
X
�
Z
�4._
_ �
�` ,
�� rT
s �
o �
2
97 OXFORD ST N
ST PAUL, MII 55104-6539
- d
� To:
From:
Dafe:
Subject:
Walter,
Walter, Buffala House LLC
Laura, NSP Customer Service
M�rch 96, 2000
97 Oxford 5t N St. Paul MN 55104
This letter is written to verify that there was no interruption in the electrical
ar gas service from the time it was Oakland Home Inc., to Buffalo House
LL.C, Service was established in the nama of Buffalo House L.LC on
d1/14/2000:
if 3 can be of further assistance, please contact me back at 651/639-4944.
Thank you.
�_�.��'}"'���D
Laura Herbert
N5P Customer Service
�
�
•
IO 'd 'ON Sdd dSN Wd 55�Z0 I�Id Q�OZ-L[-�di�
Rug 28 �O 09:04a Buffalo SG, LLC 651-227-?782 �'_� Z
_ p.3
LODGER AGREEMENT
THE UNDERSIGNED ACKNOWLEDGES, UNDERSTANDS, AIVD ACCEPTS THAT BIIFFALO
HOUSEIS AN A�COHOL AND DRUG FREE SHARED HOUSING PROPERTY MANAGEO BY A
PROPERTY MANAGER. THE UNDERSIGNED ALSO ACKNOWLEDGES, UtJDERSTAfVDS,
AND ACCEPTS THAT RESIDENCY AT BUFFALO FiOUSE iS It�! THE CAPACITY OF A
LODGER SHARING A HOUSWG UNIT AND NOT AS A TENANT 1lUITH RfGHTS OR
POSSESSION OF SPACE EXCLUSIVELY.
7HE UNDERSlGNED FURTHER UNDERSTANDS THAT FAILURE TO COMPLY WITtt THE
RULES AND EXPECTATIONS OF BUFFALO HOUSE IS GROUNDS FOR IMMEDIATE
TERMtNATION OF OCCUPANCY. A MqNAGEMEAtT TERMlNATION W/LL RESULT 1N THE
FORFEITURE OF TFfE UNDERSIGNED'S DEPOSIT AND A(VY NOUSlNG FEES.
9) USE OF ALCOHOL, ILLEGAL DRUGS, OR POSSESSION OF PARAPHERNE�IA. USE OF ANY
A�COHOL OR OTHER MOOp-AL7ERWG SUBSTANCES (ILLEGAL DRUGS OR
_, PRESCRIPTiON MEDECATIONS IN ANY MANNER OTHER THAN PRESCREBEU), WHETHER IN
POSSESSIOPd OF OR ON THE PERSON OF THE RESIDENT, OR WITHIN THE LIVING SPACE
OCCUPIED BY 7HE RESIDENT, WILL RESULT IN IMMEDIA7E TERMINATION,
2) TRAFFICKtNG. ANY SUSPECTED ACTIVITY OF DRUG DEALING OR RUNNING WI�L RESU�.T
IN tUMEDtATE TERMINATION AND WIL� BE REFERRED 70 LAW ENFORCEMENT;
3) SIGNIFICANT OR WII,LFUL DAMAC-E TO THE HOUSING PROPERiY,
4) THREATS OR POSS�SSIOf! Or ANY WEqpONS. THREATS QF PHYSICAL VIOLENCE,
SUICIDE ATTEMPTS AND/OR OTHER ABUSE, OR POSSESSlON OF ANY WEApONS 6Y ANY
RESIDENT OR HIS GUEST{S) W1LL RESULT IN IMMEDIATE TERMINATION AN6 BE
REFERRED TO L4W ENFOftC�M�NT;
5) A6'JSE AfJY PHYSICAL O,q VERBAL ABUSE OF MA^JAGEMENT OR ANy OTHEF RESlDENT
OR H!5 GU=ST(St V�Ji�L RESULT IN IMMEDIATE TER�IINATION AM1D tv1AY Bc REFERRED TO
LA�N ENFORCEMENT;
6V SMOKING A�VWJHERE ON THE PREMISES EXCEPT FOR DESIGNFT�D QREA(S). SMOKING
IN SLEEPING qRGqS WILL RESULT IN IMMEDIATE TERMINATION;
7) SEXUA! RELATf:JNSHiPS SEXUAL RELATIONS ARE NOT PERMITTED WITHIN THE
BUILD!NG. ANY SEXUAL SO�ICITATION, PROSTITUTION OR pROh10TIOPJ THEREOF 4V1� L
RESUL7 IN IMMEDIATE TERi�t?hA710N. OVERNIGHT GUES75 ARE fdOT PERP�IITTED;
NONCOMPUANCE MAY RESUiT IN TERVIINATION;
S) ANY ACTIOtJ TNAT DISRUPTS A SAFE AND PEACCpUL RECOVERY-0RIENTED
ENVIRONMENT. NO PERSON PAAY INTERFERE W17H ANY RESIDENT'S QUIET ENJOYMENT �
OF TH� PREMISES COURTESY AR�D CONSIDERATION WILL BE SHOWN LNHEN US!NG
TELcVi5tON, RADIO, AND PERSONAL STEREO DEVICES. THE HOURS OF �0:00 PM TO
07:00 AM WILL BE CGNSI6ERED T€MES OF SP�CIAL Ai i ENTION AfdD CONSiDERATION TO
FHOSE TRYIt�G TC REST. NONCOMPLtANCE 41qY RESUL7 IN TERMENATION,
9� MAIL TAM?ERING_ ANY Psqi_ TA4IYERING VJtLL RcSULT W}MMEDIA7E TERMINATION AND
BE REFERRED TO LAW EN^ORCEMENT;
10) THEFT ANY THFFT OR SUS?EGTED THEFT B1' ANY RESID�Nr bVY_L RESULT Ih
iiw':N;�DI:,� E��ERlvih�::,710h! AND BE R�FERRE'J l�0 LAW ENFORGEME�l;
Rug 28 00 09:�4a Buffalo SG, LLC , 651-227-7782 P•
11} FAiLURE TO ADHERE TO PftOGRAM EXPECTA710NS.�ALL RESIDcNTS ARE EXPECTED TO
8E ACCOUNTABLE TO EACH OTHER AND MANAGEMENT AS TO THE[R SOBRtETY STATUS.
EXPECTATIONS fNCLUDE, BUT ARE NOT LIMITED TO: HOUSE JOBS AND DUTIES ANQ THE
WEEKLY HOUSE MEETING; KEEPING PERSbNAL ITEMS OUT 0= PUBLIC AREAS; KEEPING
BEDS MADE AND ROOMS CLEAN; KEEAING PUSLIC AREAS CLEAN; MAINTAINING
ACCEPTABLE PERSONAL HYGIENE. NONCOtviPLIANCE MAY RESVLT IN TERMINATION;
72) OTHER GIRGUMSTANCES. MANAGEMENT RESERVES THE RIGHT TO CONSIDER
TERMiNATION, CONTINUEO RES[DENCE, OR ACCEPTANCE O\ AN INDIV€DUAL BASIS.
MANAGEMENT INTERPRETATtON OF THE LODGER AGREEMENT WI�L NOT BE SUSJECT
TO DEBATE. MANAGEMENT RESERVES THE RfGHT TO TERMIt+lATE Ai�lY LODGER
AGREEMENT AT ANY TIME;
13) FAILURE TO GIVE WRfTTEN NOTICE OF VOLUNTARY TERMINATION. AT LEAST FOURTEEN
DAYS' ADVANGE NOTICE UF VOLUNTARY TERMINATION IS REQUIRED;
14) FAfLURE TO PROVIDE URINE OR BREATH SAMPLE. ALL RESI�ENTS AGREE TO PROVtDE
A URINE OR SREATH SAMPLE TO BE TESTED FOR TOXICI7Y AT THEIR [XPENSE.
REFUSAL TO DO SO VViLL RESULT IN IMMEDfATE TERMINAFION.
1 HAVE READ AND UNDERSTAND THE LODGER AGREEMENT AND AGREE TO FOL�OW
THE EXPECTATIOIdS AS STATED HEREfN AND INTERPRETED BY HOUSE MANAGEMENT.
I Ut�1DERSTAND THAT IT ES MY RESPONSIBILiTY TO BE FAMILIAR WITH ALL RULES AND
EXPECTATfONS. I 11NDERSTAND ThiAT IF I DO NOT TERMINATE VOLUNTAf21LY I WILL
FOR�E(T MY SECURITY DEPOSIT AND ANY FEES PAID OR OWED.
APPLICANT SIGNATURE / QATE :
MANAGEMENT SIGiJATURE ! DATE :
C J
.
•
�
�
� � 01'92.
�
--- �x�°Ctf� - ��7-�E
�L[��L..O Ho<%ts�
T� c-� ���P�lc- ��N
� � ox �o�T7 S
�`�f � i�,��t L. , M 6�.1
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT
SPECIFICATION OR REPOI
PREPARED BY ME OR UI
SUPERVISION AND THAT
REGISTERED ARCHITECT
LAWS OF THE STATE OF
� �D��-I
c�� ; ��_
�
dY OIRECT
A DULY
7HE
� � Z�NitVG FiLE oo-�2z-
Y�
Shannon A. O'lCeefe
Doctor of Chiropractic
O'Kee�e Chiropractic Clinic
t 053 Ashiand Ave.
St. Paul, MIY 55104
Phone: (651) 292-8072 Fax: (651) 292-8722
April 17, 2000
St. Paul Planning and Economic Development
Ms. Nancy Holman
PED Zoning Department
1100 City Hall Annex
25 W. 4th St
St. Paul, MN 55102
Dear Nancy:
•
� Z4NING FlL���-��
��
This letter is to inform you of the information that the residents have established that
smround the building of 97 N. Oxford (Buffalo Sober House). Since the pwchase of the
building in 7an. 2000 by Walter Dinalko and Ralph Castagno for the use of a boazding
house for a group living facility for men in eazly sobriety, there has been a cloud of
misunderstanding and confusion by the residents that sunound this building.
I have placed many phone calls to the city of St. Paul, Mayor Norrn Coleman's office, the
Summit-University Planning Council, Jerry Blakey's office, St. Paul Zoning. The
outwme has been the same from aIl parties. NO ONE KNOWS ANYTHING! !!
This letter is to inform you that the above mentioned owners aze trying to establish that
the former owner was operating with a Non-confoxxning use permit at the time of
pwchase in 7an 2000. The previous owner was operating the non-profit facility from
1974 untzi approximately Sept. 1998 when the residents vacated the premises.
The sunounding residents ofthis building have contacted the electric company and have
found concrete evidence that the buildittg was vacant some time in 1998. The Electric
bill in 1998 was calculated for a 12-month period for $550 per month. 1999 it was $160
per month. The Gas bills were also significantly reduced from 1998 to 1999. The
average gas bill for 1998 was $536 and for 1999 they were $297 per month. It would be
appropriate if the city would find ouY when the specific c3ecline in utilities were, to
establish the exact date when the premise of 97 North Ox£ord was vacated by the
previous tenants that established the non-confornung permit. The current homeowners
•
•
/
Ol��j2
• s�urounding this building are willing to testify that this building has been vacant since
Sept. 1998. We are not trying to cornest the occupancy of an office by the previous
owners but the actual occupancy of the tenants that the non- confornung permit was
esitbilised for. The surrounding neighbors have also been exposed to a fire alar�n that
rang far appro�nately one week before the fire department came out to disengage the
alarm after the pervious owner had vacated the premises in the summer on 1998. We
vrge you to fiuther investigate the above information to establish the fact there were NO
RESIDE23TS in this building after Sept. 1998. The non-conforming permit requires that
there is no more than a 12-month lapse in residence for the old permit to be grandfathered
in for the new owners.
The residents of the neighborhood would like the new owner to have to re-establish the
non-conforming permit so that the residents wovld have an opportunity to say if this
business should be allowed in our neiborhood.
This neighborhood has been BUFFALOED by ali of the owners and appropriate officials
about the process that the new owner must follow. This matter should not come down to
who has the most expensive attomey because the neighborhood will lose since there is
NO attorney representiag us. We are counting on the CITY to make the new owner
follow a11 the appropriate zoning laws that apply to this building.
Please provide this case with due justice by making the new owner follow the law by
;�, establishing a new non-confornvng permit, which would require the support from two-
thirds ofthe property awner's located within 100 feet ofthe property.
Sincerely,
`��' ��--�-- ���'�g�--
Dr. Shannon A. O'Keefe
1053 Ashland Ave.
St. Paui, MN 55104
CC:
LEP
Jeiry Blakey
Mayor Norm CoTeman
Summit-University Planning Council
Neighbors of 97 North O�'ord
•
/
CITIZEN PARTICIPATIO DIS RI TS
•
•
1 . SUIV�(HT -t5H j�'I Ltl,Kttl�-tf'1GtItYUUC1
2.GREATER EAST SIDE
3.WEST SIOE
4.DAYTON'S BLUFF
5.PAYNE-PHALEN
6.NORTH EN�
7HOMAS-DALE
8. UMMIT-UNIVERSITY
.WEST SEVENTH
lO.COMO
11.HAMLINE-MID4IAY
12.ST. ANTHONY
13.MERRIAM PK.-LEXINGTON HAMI.INE
14.GROVELAND-MACALESTER
15.HIGNLAND
16.SUMMIT HILL
17. D041NTOWPI
�00-12Z2
C�
CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PLANNIN6 DISTRICTS
�
�
_ __ �
o�-qz
. . . . �-
•
��� � ��Cr,� ��'�, �t�� ,��,��rc6�- �',.r.+✓�Bfx��k
� ���a� ��
C1/��v�• ��T2 ,��� ���;Y:B�u �nL� 9��re���
�2z����� o� Gz¢�'e`�` ���
i��G;���'f.G1GP� ��! -������.�.�ee%LU� �.-c2CZ
'� °k�'GG2i r �� iyh%�G%�l�/�1�.�'�"""'" `Etiy�
� � i9��L�'GlY�'� ;Z2a�2� /
�
�
� Go��:������"�` ��
�� � =� ��r:��:�� � �
�G��►'� d _ ��G�,t�iji
. � /�'�'�z��� � ��
�� / � ( O� � � � �� �� ���
/ � I� ������
A��t'�_ � (/ f �� ' � e � . -
U
- -- � ��� '�°'� `���"���� �� 9 �
'�� ��I���� �
�e���
����
� G��
�
97 North Onfard Street Saint Paul, Minnesata USA 55104
voice: 651.227.778'I data: 651.227.7782 buffalohouse@uswest.net
�
bufFalo house
. � �,v�,� b��� �e% �r ��P�'/ ,1 b�� b�`f
���3 �C��"' s i; (ce °l �d fl�X (�� , 1 �� � t�s�t
� � r � � � � � n � V �.��,r p�t; � r� �...ow( v� �� e � ���/.�
j � �a� f��l o� c� ���,(eS5 .� ��k�
� l;� e o h t-�-t- s��� � f�, li�,>, s D T�, P���X
��r�f���,( � �� ��e�'e� Y'��L�t r��_
) a � �,
�
s
97 North Oxford Street Saint Paul, Minnesota USA 55104 �
voice: 657.227J78! data: 651.227.7782 buffalohouse(�uswest.net
� �_ g �
�
��
. . . . �-
�
� ' .fil��. .c,�; . , .�t'*� .�iu.� �/i-t��
� � �' �. - l�
/�k� � cG�—c���! -�st� �1 C ��� � i� fC��
�,r,�'��'v��.� : �.c� �� ._
���������
/1��u�,Cu.=� ����� � .�, z .� �
�� �,� �.
,
:����f,lf� �i� `� � ` ��2.��� %+�'� / �"'E�'!�' �-'C�
� �/'..�.��.--.� �
� 97 North O�dord Street Saint Paul, Minnesota USA 55104
voice; 651.227.778'1 data: 651.227.7782 bufFa{ohouse@uswest.net
�
: ii'r•1.7� � �.-
��� -- �
T hav� becn t;ving ak +ke bw�..lo kouse ��
7 wta n-�� s n o.� � � e.C}o./ �o.�irtc� � �\�ce \'��e � kk 2
��ato `l.a�Se ; ��-- v.�.s �e��+u\ �ro h..�c a �er'
e�v �� or�wt o�.� }� \��ve- o��- , w�el� Z ��d� v � � �
-}1,e. �� l( e�t'� P L\,�b . L;v�ng w�� �- b,,.nc.� o�'
sobu Yeog��- h���s ►m.2 w;�'� ,ny s an�
a�.��,� .�,�� ,�, � +� a,� ��o����, . -c�.�
�pe.v�X��S �t�v� 'i'�t �,A2e 4cG O��eq�
�.�, s �.,6,�� �,k� a-� �aa , ��,�
�S- �-� . `-� d�on`� �..ylo.r/. �� � Cor..�d �
i�l"� A�i 1"f^f p�.9 y �ve �pv+�l2. �
�.;,�� �.�
.ve wtc.�e
�
�
97 North Oxford StreeY Saint Paul, Minnesota USA 55'f 04 �,
voice: 651.227.7781 daYa: 65'l.227.7782 butfaiohouse�uswest.net
r o1
�
�
SU�WHIT-UNIVERSITY
�
a
DISTRICT 8 �N x° "°° r'°° '°°° "°`° "°°
. � scu= �x FEEf
.�����a�� ��� �
QO�� (Z.Z2�`�
�
, � j � � �'_,��—.� �
�_._�- `-�' �
U y �
: �a ����� ,;� �: �
�
�
4✓ Y Y. "V �A� �ld's f _ . �
__._ .�
�Q ��� �r� � �
�Q
����
� '� � cr .. ; —,.' .,
�,.�
�, i
� � � �� '^. r�
�. �� �
�
��.....�.a
� / � (h.; r�
� .� Y G
.F \.W
� .C3C} � V.V i-' L3,t�
__. 3 _ �
fl�� � �; �;��
���t��
�A . �
�i �1: �
a.� a.' �.II.�,� "�`'� ���
�
�
��
�-
� �;������J �p �
������
�
�
�
•
1flL r
': ��:�'�°��� �,��� �' � s c� � � �
� `�
� �
,,. �' �s..,._..
L '""°"' Y ^r .. - -----.-.—..-..._.�._,_... _
r
� � . 'i ' �p ' � �
- � �+ i �� ,E_.,� ..�.,._.
f
� ����;:���N��� �; �� �- �'� � � ��� � c�� c� _:
_ I �.
�
� � f.y�'
� (�. � V
��
�
� -�
� �
.`�.l �.7 k
� .J'�.. A � -.,..i
F
Y
�������
�' �� ; � . � , � t � , � .� � ,y
'�✓��cJ� '` .,r� `'} �' `. Yf' 1 t�= i s d:� �w,>
, ��
- ' rr..�v-..�..s.......-..z�.�._�r...�-w�....a..�-s....am.....
�" � .'i ('� � y �t�".�, ��.
�'�� �'�.����
;�'' �,; ,'. �E'���'
� � N : � `..S
W. � ,;
C
� �*�:�
0��,���"���3�
� � �'�^G � � � =; � �'.�
I � � n
�r r � �
2
CN __ i .. _
� y , _✓ r
_ n e�
APPLICANT ��� � �" ���� �C—� LEGEND
PURPOSE � � '—� zoning district boundary
a � � � � . � �: sub � � o �t
FlLE �"e%.,�.,.::� �2.� DATE`"' `" `° � �' G� Pe Y
PLNG. DIST�— MAP # o one tamily
_w ¢ two tamiiy
�
_--„ �-�Q multiple (amily
� (� " ,-.. ..-� I' s - , � "" , ;� `„' tJ C� !� � �
� �L' �v S � , „ �
n L �
• � ^ commerc
� o.,.. indusirial
V vacant
s:
��-�-�aoa
�
oi-gz.
� �C3i��NG F�tE b�-�ZZ.����
To Nancy HomanS PED,
My name i5 Arthur HiII ,1 live at 94 N. Oxford St directly
acro55 from 97 N. Oxford 5t. [ have lived thier 5ence May
1976 ancf are mo5t directly impacted by what goe5 on at - �hat
addre55 becau5e it i5 right acro55 from my front door.
On or about augu5t or 5eptember of 1998 a]( of the
tennent5 that Iived thier packed up and left for good, a great
day for me, The building 5tayed vacant un�Gil early 2000 except
for a per5on or two ,three or four day5 a week for two or three
hour5 a day, no more. No tennet5.
The buffalo people moved in (at time5 25 5trong) and the
traffic etarted loud car5, truck5 and mu5ic goe5 on until after
11f M daily. GroupS of inen out5ide in front and in the alley
� 5moking and throwing cigarett5 butt5 in the etreet and talking
LOUD on cell phone5 out5ide (5ometime5 in the 5treet} , i5 a
daily happening. DogS droping5 on the blvd (without picking it
up) . The only quiet time i5 during the day hour5 > but about 71'M
until after 11!'M noi5e and traff ic. The weekend5 are wor5e.
About twelve people that live thier have auto and or truck5.
The people that own the building have no ve5ted intere5t in
my neborhood, except too make money and be a blite too the
nieghborhood . The people that live thier ju5t don't have too care
at all.1 live here , pay taxe5 and take care of my property and
get no break from people who ju5t don't care. plea5e read too
the Zoning Gommittee.
Thank you , Arthur Hill 651-224-8971
94 N. Oxford St.
� 5t Paul, MN 55104
_—�a �_ _� / d
� ■ � I, ■ � ■
! � � � �.■ i� '�� 11 �
i
-
,
Ot�4�
� �
� �
,'�''� ��
; ,
�; � '�
_ ;.,��
m ;' i
� !!�
z ''
� �
0
z �
•
�
;#
LAIJREL
`
�r
� � .
� ,�
: ?
� '�
�---
�
�
�
�
���
o i-q2
��. �,��sjd�
PETITION
VVe the undersigned homeowners and residents are not opposed to
the egistance of the Buffalo Sober Aouse located at 97 N. Ogford.
NAME ADDRESS
e, r�I 5' i,n. o,�/ l� � 4 �� e�e, t--
�n� u��'�-�- �,� y �� i��
��n����r��*������
��_� �� �. .i��
`'� � � TaS/�fj�l�''►.vta'� e. A. ,
/'�_ � °:� /;
�- . � v � . . 1• !�ri_'J
. J.��..-_�1�1.. �� ,: ,
�!'�:/,� � �i� s �
, �i�� � j � � , ' '
� �� ,i'1.1�;!% ,/, , . �/
�060 ��,.�C �-
l �'Zo >�a,t,9.•�v.�l.
I � 7� ��r�Q,�-�
� � �l�ct..-�
/ � � � r�
#
"�` �ks�..��.,d -�
PHONE
�a��'�$S
� 3 -�I 6 �
� f� — gs-s
� -��_J�-, �
�91�
� �-�--,�,
�
3ai o3y�
z L Y—I33/
GS /-��ll
Gsr 3.a ��'�r23
��
�5 � �a� �-a y /
(�s � �Z z .
(,51 LZz -� b3
D�-Q'L
PETITION
We the undersigned homeowners and residents are not opposed to
the existance of the Buffalo Sober House located at 97 N. Oxford.
� �.,.r�ow��.o. u�� io� ��
� q7 r� . ox�a�� 0�-92
<<��
. ��
PETITION �
We, the undersigned neighbors (hom�:owners and residents), affected by the
property located at 97 N. Oxford, wis� to express our united opposition to
the re-zoning and/or re-establishment of a 26year old "non-conformin��Use"
permit issued in 1974. We believe that our fragile and densely populated
neighborhood is best served by maintaininS the current zoning ordinances
which designate the building as a two-family residence.
�
NAME
,�.
ADDRESS
/b-�s�
/oas
(�t�°r
��
�j'�t 3 � r l�
�
,
0
�v�
►� ,
�7�'��,`� ,
�
0
oJL�
l0/7
��
�;:,
�'r h � �
PHONE (OPTTONAL)
E MAIL
da �- ��Y
, 22 � "
J
22 2 - ?-�'i
, aa -a7�7
a�� ��� 7
� �, _ �;,e���
L��I�Gi l�
, , �,
Z zY - /33I
^��_
Z Z 7- 7s'� Z
�i J I .
��t/"'73i�
6Sl-2zs�
�;' �� �$�vD
PET� N
o�-yZ
We, the undersigned neigl�twrs (homeowners and residents), affected by the
property located at 97 N. Oxford, wish to express our united opposition to
the re-zoning and/or re-establishment of a 26year old "non-conformin� Use"
permit issued in 1974. We believe that our fragile and densely populated
neighborhood is best served by maintaining the current zoning ordinances
which designate the building as a two-family residence.
NAME
�/�n�ic- �
.�
ADDRESS
�AAJ
�
f!�! I! �
f ' r :
/ ,/.ii
i�[.. �,�
�-y��
�:
0
t
�
PHU�VL' ((1Cllv
E-MAIL
,
_�
� , ,
�
o �-yZ
PETITION
_`
We, the undersigned neighbors (homeowners and residents), affected by the
property located at 97 N. O�cford, wish to express our united opposition to,
the re-zoning and/or re-establishment of a 26year old "non-conforming Use"
permit issued in 1974. We believe that our fragile and densely populated
neighborhood is best served by maintaining the current zoning ordinances •
which desig�ate the building as a two-family residence.
NAME
ADDRESS
PHONE /OP"l'lU1vAL1
����
� /DcS/ ��s.fGfh✓A ,
a, /.//l S /..a��i
�
Gv - L92 -807�
6S/ , ?,� y � / ��
� �
f055 Ash�A�d
►05� hshlur�
r��- Za� -q :
(�5� � aa� �8a�
1a4����bfi 03�
Lo51-22�—��35
�i•r<I,�.r �ts � L�Sa Ashda�
(�SI-aay
o,-yz
PETIT_IOl!T
We, the undersigned neighbors (homeowners and residents), affected by the
property located at 97 N. O�cford, wish to express our united opposition to
the re-zoning and/or re-establishment of a 26year old "non conformin� Use"
permit issued in 1974. We believe that our fragile and densely populated
neighborhood is best served by maintaining the current zoning ordinances
which designate the building as a twafamily residence. �
�
�� ►' A�
��
�'�.ui�
%,7,�q
.:., �.
��
. � �
ADDRESS
IOZ� �I�Iwv�d
�o�{s }�
IU 3 civi.�[�
� �
�9 ����'� Sr u/-
PH01v� �ur����vA��
L 51-1Z'� y'7 b
651_ 2� - S.�'l.b
�s�1- ZZ� -�C���
ZZ� ��l
6 s�( � � YG ��6 3/ _
' I
oi-92
�
._ The Fair Amendments Act of 1988 and Group Homes for the
By John H. Foote
Hazel & Thomas, P.C., Manassas, V'uginia
Reprimed from the 7oumal of the Section on Locai Govemment Law of the Yuginia State Bar, Vol.
III, No, I, September 1997
Introduction. Reguiation of group homes for persons with one or more handicapping conditions, is a
volatile issue throughout the United States. Since the Generai Assembly's first foray into the Seld in
1977, directing certain local zoning controts over group homes for the mentally ill, mentally retarded,
and developmentally disabled (see Va. Code Ann. § 15.1-486.2, now repealed, and its current version,
§ 15.1-486.3), there have been major changes in federal law with direct impact on local authority to
deal with the locarion and control of group homes. Indeed, that law now creates sigiuficant and
importam restrictions on the extent of permissible local regulation. This article outlines the currern
state of affairs affecting group homes for thc handicapped. It offers clear warning to local
governments that ordinances and policies which are discriminatory in pwpose or effect, or which fail
to make reasonabie accommodation for the needs of the handicapped, can have costly consequences.
Congregate living arrangements among unrelated people are nothing new, of cowse, nor is their
treatment by the courts. There has been legisiation and litigation over whai constitutes a"family" for
years. Localiries are not powerless to deSne the term: more than twenty years ago, the United States
Supreme Court heid that local ordinances defining "family" to mean one or more persons related by
blood, adoption or marriage, or not more than two unrelated persons, living and cooking together as a
singte housekeeping unit, are constitutional. V"illage of Belle Tene v. Boraas, 416 U.S. i(1974). But
facially neutral ciassifications caa have unimended results or affirmatively discriminatory purposes or
effects, and not long after Belle Terre the Court held that a definition of "family" which criminalized a
grandmother's desire to live with her two grandsons — who were not brothers but cousins -- was an
unconstiturional deprivation of her due process rights. Moore v. City of East Cleveland. 431 U. S. 494
(1977).
The Fair Housing Amendments Act Restrictions on the definition of family, however, are only one
aspect of America's approach to housing and housing discrimination. For many years Congress has
made it national policy to eliminate such discrimination in all its forms, through the Fair Housing Act
of 1968. The originai Act (Title VIII ofthe Civil Rights Act of 1968, 42 U.S.C. §§ 3601-3619)
banned, among other things, housing discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, and national
origin, and provided for a variety of enforcement mechanisms. The Act was amended in 19T4 and
again in 1988, however, and it was these latter changes, known as the Fair Housing Amendments Act
http:/iwww.oxfordhouse.orgJfairhouse.html 10/25/00
ol
of 1988 (the "FfiAA"), which made truly substantive revisions in the law, and which form the source
of the principal resriictions on local comrol of group homes. See PL 100-430, 102 Stat. 1619 (1988),
42 U.S.C. 3601, et s�.
Even before the FHA.t�, the United States Supreme Court had held in City of Cleburne v. Cleburne
LivinQ Cemer. Inc.. 473 U.S. 432 (1985), that the Equal Protection Clause prolubits a city from
requiting a special use pernut for group homes for memally retarded persons, when such pemuts are
not required for other similar residemial uses. But it was the FHAA which truly attered the landscape.
Drawing heavily on existing law with respect to handicap discrimination in federally-supported
�� programs (See § 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 29 U.S.C. 701), the Act made it unlawfui for
azry one of a number of covered entities, including local govemmerns
to discriminate in the sale or rental, or to otherwise make unavaiiable or deny, a dwelling to any buyer
or renter because of a handicap of —
(A) that buyer or renter,
(B) a person residing in or intending to reside in that dwelling after it is so sold, rented or made
available; or
(C) any person associated with that buyer or renter.
42 U.S.C. 3604(�(1).
The Act defines discriminarion to include not oniy tradirional discriminatory pracrices, but aiso "refusai
to make reasonabie accommodations in rules, policies, practices, or services, when such
accommodations may be necessary to afford such person equal opportunity to use and enjoy a
dwelling." 42 U.S.C. 3604(�(3)(B). While localities need not do everything humanly possible to
accommodate a disabled persoq the "reasonable accommodation" requirement imposes a$rmative
duties to modify local requirements when they discriminate against the handicapped. Liddy v
Cisneros 823 F. Supp. 164, 776 (S.D.1VI' 1993).
The Act defines handicaD eactremely broadly as
(1) a physical or mentat impairment which substantially limits one or more of [a] person's major life
activities,
(2) a record of having such an impairment, or
(3) being regarded as having such an impairment.
Although there are exceptions to this definition, including those "whose tenancy would constitute a
direct threat to the health or safety of other individuals or whose tenancy would result in substantial
physical damage to the property of others" (42 U.S.C. 3604(�(9)), and people af�licted with the
"current, iilegal use of or addiction to a controlled substance" (42 U.S.C. § 3602(h)), handicap does
include people who take drugs tegatly, or people who were once, but no longer aze, iilegal drug users.
United States v. Southern Management Coro 955 F2d 914, 919-23 (4th Cv. 1492}.
Congress understood that one of the central problems for the establishment of group homes is baseless
http://www.o�'ordhouse.org/fairhouse.html 10/25/00
oi-yz
hostility on the part of neighbors and even local govemments themselves. It manifestly intended,
therefore, to preempt state and local laws which e$'ectuated or perpetuated housing discrimination.
The fIouse Judiciary Committee said that
{t]he FFiAA, like Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, is a clear pronouncemern
of a nationai commitmem to ead the unnecessary exclusion of persons with handicaps from the
American mainstream. It repudiates the use of stereotypes and ignorance, and mandates that persons
with handicaps be considered as individuals. Generatized perceptions about disabilities and unfounded
speailations about tlueats to safety are specifically rejected as grounds to justify exclusioa ..,
While state and local governmems have authority to protect safety and health, and to regulate use of
Iand, that authority has sometimes been used to restrict the ability of individuaLs with handicaps to live
in communities. This has been accomplished by such means as the enactmem of or imposition of
health, sa£ety or land-use requiremems on congregate living arrangements among non-related persons
with disabilities. Since these requirements are not imposed on families and groups of similaz size of
other uinelated people, these requiremems have the effect of diserimination against persons with
disabilities. The Committee i�ends that the prohibition against diaM+*±+±nation against those with
handicaps apply to zoning decision and practices. The Act is intended to pro}u'bit the application of
speciai requirements through land-use regulation, restricrive covenams, and conditional or special use
permits that have the effect of limiting the ability of such individual to Gve in the residence of their
choice in the community .... Another method of maldng housing unavailable to people with
disabilities has been the application or enforcement of otherwise neutral rules and regulations on
health, safety and land-use in a manner which discriminates against people with disabilities. Such
discrimination often results from false or overprotective assumptions about the needs of handicapped
peopie, as well as unfounded fears of difficulties about the problems that their tenancies may pose.
These and similar practices would be prohibited.
House Committee on the Judiciary, Fair Housing Amendments Act of 1988, I-I.R. Rep. No. 711,
100th Cong. 2d Sess., at 18, 24. Thus, with specific regard to the exercise of local powers, the Act
says clearly that "(a]ny law of a State, a political subdivisinn, or other such jurisdiction that purports
to require or permit any action that would be a discriminatory housing practice under this subchapter
shall to that extent be invalid." 42 U.S.C. 3615 (emphasis supplied).
Judicial treatment of "handicap." The decisions interpreting the FHAA have been far reaching in
detemvning what constitutes a handicap. In fact, it is difficuit to conceive a disability that does not
constitute a handicap. Thus the PHAA has been held to cover not oniy rather obviously handicapped
folks, such as the wheelchair-bound, or visually impaired, but atso those who are disadvantaged by
aicohofism and drug addiction (e,g,O�ord House v. TownshiQof Ii'ilL 799 F. Supp. 450 (D. N.7.
(1991)), those beset by emorional problems and mental illness or retardation (e.�.,Association for
Advancement of the Mentally Handicapped. Inc v City ofBlizabeth, 876 F. Supp. 614 (D. N.J.
1994)), and oid age. United States v. Commonwealth of Puerto Rico_ 764 F. Supp. 220, 224 (D.P.R
1991). It extends to communicable diseases, including AIDS and HIV. Support 1�Tinistry v. vlla�e of
Waterford, 808 F. Supp. 120, 133-35 (N.D. N.Y. 1992). The homeless can be deemed handicapped, if
oniy because their homelessness is related to other, specific handicaps. Stuart B. McKinnev
Foundation v. Town of Fairfield 790 F. Supp. 1197 (D. Conn. 1492).
It has been estimated that one out every six persons in America is handioapped under this definition.
Housing Discriminarion� Law and Liti ag ri°a by Robert G. Schwemm (Clark, Boazdman, Callaghan
1990), § 11.5(2), p. 11-56.
http://www.oxfordhouse.org/fairhouse.html 10/25/00
oi-qZ.
4. Judicial Treatment of Discriminatory Housing Practices. FHAA group home cases turn on one
— or more frequently all — of three differem theories: discriminatory imeat, di�+**!�na*ory effect, or
failure to make "reasonable accommodation" to the needs of the handicapped. While the decisions
often involve all three, there aze severai identifiable subclassifications af FHAA cases worthy of note.
Family composition rules. Many cases involve local ordinance definirions of "family" that preclude
group homes. Rarely do these defimtions survive sctutiny in the group home context. Although lower
courts had been roughly bandling "family composition rules" for some time, in C'rty of Edmonds v.
Oxford House. Inc. 514 U.S. 725 (1995) the Supreme Court held that such rutes are plainly subject to
the FHAA and while limitations on unrelated residents is not �er se invalid, they must be scrutinized
carefully for their discrimu�atory imern or effect.
An example of these cases is Oxford House v. Township of Cherry I-�iiL 799 F. Supp. 450 (D. N.J.
1991), the federal coutt rejected a state court tuling that residents of a group home for recovering
alcoholics were not a single family under the Township's ordinance, and that they were not
handicapped. The court noted that those handicapped by alcoholism or drug abuse aze persons more
likely than others to nced a living arrangemern in which sufficiemly large groups of unrelated people
live together in residential neighborhoods for mutual support during the recovery process. The
Township produced no evidence of a nondiscriminatory reason for its position. See also O�ord
House-Everareen v. Citv of Plainfield 769 F. Supp. 1329 (D. N.J. 1991)(nine residents necessary to
make a group home for recovering alcoholics viable.)
Special use permits and the imposition of restrictive conditions. Several cases have invoived
requiremems for special use permits, or the imposition of particular conditions on those permits. While
the Eastern District of vrginia has held that the mere requirement for a special use permit dces not
violate the Act (O�ord House v. Cii� of V'uginia Beach 825 F. Supp. 1251 (E.D. Va. 1993)), in fact
caurts rarely uphold denials of such permits, or the imposirion of bwdensome conditions. In Bangerter
v. Orem C�_ Utah. 46 F.3d 1491 (lOth Cir. 1995), for example, the court of appeals found that
requirements that a group home for memally retarded aduks give assurances its residents would be
properiy supervised on a 24-hour-a-day basis, and that the home establish a community advisory
committee to deal with neighbor's complaint, were not imposed on other communal living
azrangements under the City's zoning ordinance, and were intentionally discriminatory.
In Tumintr Point. Inc. v. City of CaldweLl Idaho 74 F.3d 941 (9th Cir. 1996), the City asserted that a
homeless shelter for 16 residents in a single-family district was a"boarding house" that required a
special use permit to exceed twelve persons. A pernrit was ganted, but for a limited number of
residents, and subject to requiremerns for residem staff, parl�ag spaces, a new sidewaik and
landscaping and an annual review of the permit. The cour# rejected these restrictions as having no
relationship to iegitimate zoning purposes, and set occupancy at 25 based on testimony from the Fire
Chief. It reduced the parking requirement, eliminated the sidewalk and landscaping, and suuck the
annusi review requiremetrt. See aiso Marbrunak. Inc. v. City of Stow. Ohio. 974 F2d 43, 46-48 (6Yh
Cir. 1992) (invalidating requirement that a home for four mentally retarded adult women install an
alazm system interconnected to ceiling sprinkler system, doors with push bars swinging outwazds with
lighted exit signs, and fire walls and flame reYardant wall coverings, as based on false and
overprotective assumptions); North Shore-Chicago Rehabilitation_ Inc v V'illage of 5kokie, 827 F.
Supp. 497, 499-502 (N.D. Ill. 1993) (enforcement of requirements on home for traumarically brain-
damaged adults that home consist of five or fewer residents on a permanent basis, with paid
professional sta� license from state, local occupancy pemrit and compliance with local, was
http:/1www.oafordhouse.org/fairhouse.html 10/25/00
o! �9z
discriminatory and constituted a failure to make reasonabie accommodarion).
Dispersat reqnirements. A number of localities have imposed requiremerns that group homes be
geograplrically dispersed in an effort to deinstitutionalize target populations. Dispersal rules do not
generally sutvive. In Larldn v. State of Ivfichisan_ 883 F. Supp. 172, 17� (E.D. Ivfich. 1994) a state
statutory scheme precluded issuance of a license if it would "substan6ally comn�rute to an excessive
concemration" of such faciiities, and required notificationbe given to the City Councii to review the
number of existing and proposed ficilities witUin 1500 feet of a proposed facility and to its neighbors.
The City argued that its dispersal requiremern prevemed formation of "ghettos" and normalized the
endsronme�. 'fhe Court found no rational legal basis for these provision, and held tbat they were
facially dis�`++*��n�ory, since "the absence of a malevolent motive does not com�ert a facially
disciiminatory policy into a neutral policy with a discriminatory effect."
In United States v. V'illage of Marshall. 787 F. Supp. 872, 878 (W.D. ws. 1991), a Wisconsin starirte
required that group homes be separated by 2,500 feet. A group home for six mentally ill persons was
proposed 1619 feet &om another existing home. The trial court found no evidence to support this
requirement and held that the reasonable accommodation requirement mandated the grarn of
pemussion.
In Association for Advancement of the Mentally Handicapped_ Inc. v. City of Elizabeth. 876 F. Supp.
614, 622-23 (D. N.J. 1994) a state statute permitted six residems but required a special use permit for
more than six, but wMch couid be denied if located within 1500 feet of an existing residence or
community sheiter for victims of domestic violence, or the number of persons other than resident staff
residing at the existing residence excced the greater of 50 persons or .5% of the municipal population.
The court invalidated the statute on the ground that there was no evidence that developmernally
disabled persons presern a danger to the community: "The record is devoid of any evidence upon a
fact finder could reasonably conclude that community residences housing more than six
developmentally disabled persons would detract from a neighborhood's residential character." See also
Horizon House v. TownshiQ of Upper South HamptOn, 804 F. Supp. 683, 695-97 (E.D. Pa. 1992)
(affd without opinion, 995 F.2d 217 (3rd Cir. 1993) (100Q foot dispersai rule was on based
unfounded fears about people with handicaps and facially invalid).
Not all courts have agreed with this approach. In Familystyle of St. Paul v. Cit�of St. Paul. Mmn..
923 F.2d 91 (8th Cir. 1991) the court was faced with a request for a speciai use pemut to �pand an
existing campus of homes from 119 to 130 mentally ill persons. The City issued temporary permits on
condition that Familystyle work to disperse its facilities consistently with Mumesota's
deinstitutionalizarion policy which required that community residential facilities for the mentally
impaired be located at least one-quarter mile apart. The court rejected the azgument that the dispersal
requirements impermissibly limited housing choices, holding that nondiscrimination and
deinstitutionalization are compah'bie goals. Contrary to the legislative history and treatment by other
courts, the Eight Circuit suggested that the FHAA did not intend simply to eliminate state and local
zoning authority.
Neighbor notification requirements. Yet another ciass of cases has involved requirements that
neighbors be specifically notified of the advent of group homes. None of these schemes has survived.
In Potomac Group Home v Montgomery Coutrtv 823 F. Supp. 1285, 1296-99 (D. Md. 1993), the
court shuck a requirement that neighbors of each group home adjacent and opposite and
neighborhood civic associations be notified prior to the location of a group home for disabled elderly,
as unsupported by legitimate justification. "The requirement is as offensive as would be a rule that a
http://www.oa-fordhouse.org/fairhouse.html 10/25/00
ol - 9z
minority family give notification and invite commem before moving into a predominantly white
neighborhood." See also Horizon House, suDra. (notification requirement based on discriminatory
imem and effect and violation of reasonable accommodation rule).
Reasonable accommodation reqnirements. Finally, a special subset of cases have involved a
locality's failure to make "reasonable accommodation" for the needs of the handicapped. The Act
requires localities to make such accommodation by amendmem to or variance of local ordinances and
policies when they stand in the way of the location and operation of gr� homes. An accommodation
is reasonable unless it requires a"fundamernal alteration ia the nature of a program or imposes undue
financial and administrative burdens." Southeastem Community Colle�e v. Davis_ 442 U.S. 397, 410.
412 (1979) (irnerpreting § 504 of the Rehabilitation Act). Mere adherence to existing zomng
requirements and land use policies is generally insufficiem to protect the locality, if those requiremems
and policies comravene the Act. A good example of the e�rtent to wluch the courts will go is Hovsons
Inc. v. Township of Brick 89 F3d 1096, 1104 (3rd Cir. 1996), where the court of appeals said there
that although "what the 'reasonable accommodation' standard requires is not a modei of clarity", a
failure to amend ordinances to pemrit nursing homes for handicapped persons in residential zones is a
failure to make reasonable accommodation.
In Judy B. v. Borough of Tioga, 889 F. Supp. 792, 799-800 (M.D. Pa. 1995), United Christian
Muristries wamed to convert a motel into SROs for the disabled. They were denied a use variance, and
the denial was upheld by the state courts, but the federal court held that the denial was a failure to
make reasonable accommodatioq and that changes must be affirmatively made so that peopie with
handicaps may use and enjoy a dwelling. Granting a use variance would require an "extremely modesY'
accommodarion in the zoning rules, and the proposed use was fundamentally consistent with the
neighborhood. See also United States v. City of Philadelphia, 838 F. Supp. 223 (E.D. Pa. 1993), affd
30 F.3d 1488 (3rd Cir. 1994) (requiremem for a rezoning constituted a failure to make reasonable
accommodation).
While localiries must make reasonable accommodations, it does appear that they must first be given an
opportunity to do so. In United States v. V'illage of Palatine. Illinois 37 F. 3d 1230 (7th Cir. 1994) the
Oxford House program, which has a policy of refusing to seek local permits, declined to seek a
required special use permit, The court heid that it had never invoked the procedures that wouid have
pemutted reasonable accommodation to be made. See also Oaford House-C v. City of St. Louis, 77
F.3d 249 (8th Cir. 1996) (restriction to eight residents by-right not discriminatory, and Oxford
House's refusal to apply for pecmits to house more than eight residems rendered reasonable
accommodation claim unripe).
Neighbor600d opposition as a d�ning characteristic. As has been suggested, there is frequently
hostile citize:� opposition to the location of group homes._It is perhaps fatal for the locality to accede
to such pressure, which the courts invariably find to be 6ased on groundless fears.
In Stuart B. McKinney Foundation v. Town of Fairfield 790 F. Supp. 1197, 1221-22 (D. Conn. 1992)
the court invalidated a requirement for a special exception for the use of a two-family residence as a
home for seven HIV-positive persons. Despite efforts to act quietiy, the location of the home was
leaked to the press, and there was a lazge gathering at a local firehouse and much political uproaz. The
trial court noted that meetings were marked by many bigoted remarks. Subsequemly, the Pianning
Birector sent the home a letter asking thirteen questions, inciuding inquiry into standards of admission,
number of people who would live at the property, average anticipated length of residence, type of
medicai care, how the determinarion of departure date was made, leases, payment of rent and other
http://www.oxfordhouse.org/fairhouse.html 10/25/00
o�-9Z
�Pe�, �S, services and facilities to be provided and transportation. The City admitted that
there were no legitimate dangers to public health and safety from HIV-positive residenu, and the court
found that the City's practices evidenced a clear discriminatory intern. See also S�port 11�inistry v
V�illape of Waterford 808 F. Supp. 120, 133-35 (N.D. N.Y. 1992) (citizen opposition and govemmeirt
hostilit}r manifested when Town passed ordinance to assure the defeat of a group home for AIDS
vichms and named opponents to the Zoning Boazd of Adjustmern. Uncontradicted evidence showed
that it was "[c]rystai clear" that locai ordinance was enacted to prevern Support IV�inistries from
establislvng its home.)
In O�£ord House-Evergreen v City of Plaiafieid 769 F. Supp. 1329 (D. N.J. 1991), the Mayor and
other city officials led hostile responses to a group home, and the Zoning Ad,t,;n;Mraror had first
armounced that Oxford House was a pennitted use but after a City Council mcefsng at which much
opposirion was expressed by the neighborhood, changed her position. The court found the City's
conduct irnentionally discriminatory.
A cautionary taie. Localities must not underestunate the time and difficuhy that FHAA cases can
cost. The lengthy saga of Smith & Lee Associates is instructive. The case involved efforts by a private
goup home operator to locate a foster care home for twelve elderly handicapped residents in a single
family residential district,ll�fichigan law authorized adult foster care homes for six or fewer residems in
all residenrial neighborhoods, but in order to house more than six the home required local approval,
which was denied.
The district court first held that the City had been guilty of discriminatory intent, dispazate impact, and
failure to make reasonable accommodation, and imposed a$50,000 civii penalty on the City. Smith &
L_ee Associates Inc v Taylor M'ic �eaci 798 F. Supp. 442 (E.D. M'ich. 1992). The court ofappeals
reversed. Smith & Lee Associate� Inc v Taylor M�chiga� 13 F.3d 920, 929-32 (6th Cir. 1993). It
upheld the constitutionality c�f Taylof s definition of "family", and reversed the lower court's finding as
to discriminatory intent. As to reasonable accommodation it concluded that the district court could not
simply order the locality to advise Smith & Lee that it could proceed.
On remand, however, the district court again held that City had been motivated by discriminatory
animus, and directed the City to amend its ordinance and to pay Smith & Lce profits from the
impermissible limitation on the number of residents. United States v. City of Taylor M'ichi� 872 F.
Supp. 423, 429-443 (E.D.14fich. 1945).
On a second appeal, Smith & Lee Associates Inc v Taylor M'ichig� 102 F3d 781 (6th Cir. 1996),
the court of appeals held that the trial judge had eaed in finding discriminatory inten but that he had
been conect to Snd that the City had failed to make rea5onable accommodarion by adapting its
processes to accommodate the group home. The court said that aithough Taylor had no duty to
approve Smith & I,ee's zoning application, it could not lawfull�deny that applicarion because of the
demonsuated hostitity of the City government to the handicapped. The FHAA is concemed with
achieving equal resuits and not just formal equality, and imposes an affinnative duty to reasonably
accommodate handicapped people.
Conciusion. This articie has oniy touched on major issues that aze presented by local regulation of
group homes. But the message is ciear: local regulation cannot discriminate against the handicapped,
and, moreover, localities must take affirmarive steps to accommodate them. Finally, localities must
steel themseives to the opposition that the location of group homes almost invariably attracts. To
aecede to political pressures growing out of ignorance and bias can lead to judicial intervention at the
httpJ/www.oxfordhouse.org/fairhouse.htmi 10/25/00
�
�RIGI�A�
Council File # � `� Q ..L,
��
Presented By
Referred To � t°�
RESOLUTION
CITY OF SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA
i� ;r� � _
Green Sheet # 1�fe O 1C
�
Committee: Date
2 WFIEREAS, Buffalo Sober Group, LLC, (hereinafter "Buffalo") made application in
3 Zoning File 00-122-234 to the Saint Paul Planning Commission (hereinafter the "Commission")
4 pursuant to the provisions of Saint Paul Legislative Code § 62.102(i)(3) for a change of non-
5 conforxning use permit for property commonly known as 97 North Oxford Street and legally
6 described as noted in the said zoning file. The subject property had previously been occupied by
7 a legal non-conforming human service licensed community residenrial facility which had served
8 32 residents. Buffalo sought the permit to operate a non-conforming rooming house for 24
9 residents; and
10
il
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
WHEREAS, the Commission's Zoning Committee conducted a public hearing after
having provided notice to affected property owners on October 12, 2000 where all persons were
given an opportunity to be heard. The Committee submitted to the Commission a
recommendation to deny the application. By its resolurion no. 00-64 adopted October 2Q 2000,
the Commission moved to deny the application based upon the following findings and
conclusions:
On January 15, 2000, four members of Buffalo Sober Group, LLC purchased the property
at 97 North Oxford and, on February 15, 2000, Buffalo Sober House was opened,
providing permanent housing and supportive services to 24 men in the eazly stages of
sobriety.
2. A subsequent inspection by City staff from the Department of License, Inspection and
Environmental Protection (LIEP) concluded that the use-a rooming house-- at this
location was inconsistent with the zoning code. Rooming houses are first permitted as
speciai condition uses in the RM-1 zoning district.
An application for a Change in Nonconforming Use Permit was submitted on March 21,
2000.
Evidence submitted in support of the applicanYs contention that the use had not been
discontinued were:
1. A statement from the building/business owner that she had operated her business
out ofthe structure until January 15, 2000.
2
3
4
5
7
10
11
12
13
14
��R��i�.�,! o�-9a.
2. Electric bill indicating that electrical and gas service to the buiiding was not
interrupted over the period.
3. A statement from US West indicating that the building owner was responsible for
the phone bill associated with her business in the building over the period.
3. On April l l, 2000, plauuing staff wrote a letter to the applicant detailing its conclusion
that the previous use had, indeed, been discontinued and that pemussion to continue to
use the property as a rooming house would require a pemut to re-establish a
nonconforming use. The applicants were given the option of withdrawing their
application for a Change in Nonconforming Use Permit and applying, instead, for a
permit to re-establish a non-conforniing use. Their application fee would be applied
towazd a new applicarion.
15 In a subsequent phone conversation on April 14, 2000, the attorney representing the
16 applicant agreed with the plauuiug staff's interpretation of the code and asked that the
17 Zoning Committee's consideration of the case be delayed for 30 days so that they could
18 review their options and begin work on obtaining the consent petition required for an
19 appiication to re-establish a non-conforming use. He further indicated that his clients
20 were led to believe by the building's owner and/or realtor that the building's use as a
21 residential facility had somehow been "grandfathered in." Later that afternoon, he faxed
22 a formal Request for Continuance, waiving the statutory requirements for a decision on
23 the application within 60 days of its being filed.
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
On May 22, 2000, a request for an additiona160-day continuance-until the August 17,
2000 Zoning Committee meeting--was faxed to the Zoning Committee by the applicant's
attorney, again waiving the requirement for a decision within 60 days.
4. On August, 28, 2000, unable to obtain a sufficient number of signatures on a consent
petition, the applicants resubmitted an application for a Change in Nonconforming Use
Perxnit. The substanrial additions to the applicaUon-beyond those submitted in
Mazch-were:
�
1. A copy of the Caldwell Banker Burnet listing (list date: February 25, 1999) for
the property indicating that the building was a"fully functional group home-32
person brick structure."
2. A copy of the lodger agreement.
Sec. 62.102(i)(3) of the Zoning Code outlines four conditions for a Change in
Nonconforming Use. Those conditions and the applicanYs ability to meet them aze as
follows:
Page 2 of 5
fl 3��° t;;
� i',
(� S [ � � � E � � i
t31-9a-
2 1. The proposed use is egually appropriate or more appropriate to the neighborhood than
3 the existing nonconforming use;
4
5 This condirion is met. Both uses are congregate living facilities. The proposed use is
6 smaller than the previous use, and, therefore, may be judged to be more appropriate.
7 Boarding houses-like licensed human service comxnunity residential facilities for 17 or
8 more residents--aze first pernutted, with a special condirion use permit, in the RM-1
0
10
11
12
(mulriple family) zoning district.
2. The traffic generated by the proposed use is similar to that generated by the existing
nonconforming use;
13 This condition is not met. While there are fewer total residents of the current facility than
14 lived in the previous facility, none of the previous residents owned cars or had licenses.
15 There were transported in a van and had, neighbors report, few visitors. The cars on the
16 site belonged to program staff. While the current applicant reports that many of the
17 current residents have lost their driving privileges for some period of time, surrounding
18 residents report a marked increase in traffic related to both residents and visitors.
19 Were this facility located in an RM-1 (Multiple family) zoning district and required to
20 obtain a special condition use permit as a rooming house, among the conditions would be
21 that the lot area for 24 residents in 18 guest rooms be 21,000 squaze feet. The current lot
22 is 7500 square feet. It would also be required to haue 12 off-street parking spaces. While
23 12 parking spaces are shown on the site plan submitted with the application, 9 of the
24 spaces are 8 feet wide rather than 9 feet as is normally required, 1 space is in the required
25 front yazd (not allowed under Sec 64.104(11), 10 spaces are in the required side yard (not
26 allowed under Sec. 64.104(11), and the other 2 spaces ue within 4 feet of a side lot line
27 (not allowed under Sec. 64.104(11).
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
3. The use will not be detrimental to the existing character of development in the immediate
neighborhood or endanger the public health, safety, or general welfare;
This condition is met. There is no evidence that facilities of this type have any
detrimental impact on property values, or on public health, safety or welfare.
4. The use is consistent with the comprehensive plan.
This condition is met. The City's Housing Plan calls for the preservation of existing
rental units and creation of new units providing supportive housing for persons who are
or are at risk of being homeless.
6. On the central point, however, of the appropriateness of the application, staff finds the
following:
a. The Zoning Code (Sec. 60.221) defines Use as the "principal purpose for which land or a
building is being occupied."
Page 3 of 5
�"�"1E�`'i't; %� #
�;(�:��;.,;,
�U� tL
O �-�11�
2 b. A previous use-a Licensed Human Service Community Residential Facility--had been
3 discontinued for more than 365 days when the applicants assumed ownership of the
4 building on January 15, 2000. Ramsey County staff indicates that the last resident moved
5 out of the building on August 21, 1998. T'he conh�act between Ramsey CounTy and the
6 building owner/service provider formally eapired on September 30, 1998.
7
8 c. The Zoning Code states: When a nonconforming use is discontinued or ceases to exist
9 for a continuous period of tluee hundred sixty-five (365) days, the building, or building
10 and land in combination, shall thereafter be used in conformance with the regulations of
11 the district in which it is located, unless the planning commission approves a permit to
12 reestablish the nonconfomung use as set forth in clause (i)(5). (Sec. 62.102( fl(7))
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
d. The applicant has not applied for a permit to re-establish a nonconforming use.
e. It is the intent of the Zoning Code that this building revert to a use permitted in the zoning
district unless this or some other non-confornung use which can meet the condirions
detailed in Sec. 62.102(i)(5) - including a consent perition of 2/3 of the surrounding
properry owners-is established.
WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of Saint Paul Legislative Code § 64.206 Buffalo
filed an appeal from the determination made by the Commission and requested a hearing before
the City Council (hereinafter "Council") for the purposes of considering the action taken by the
Commission; and
WHEREAS, acting pursuant to Saint Paul Legislative Code § 64.206 -§ 64.208 and upon
notice to affected parties, a public hearing was duly conducted by the Council on November 15,
2000. At the close of the public hearing and upon the request of the City Attorney's Office, the
matter was laid over for the purpose of obtaining an opinion from the City Attorney on the
appellanYs claim for a reasonable accommodation of the City zoning regulations; and
WHEREAS, on December 6, 2000, the Council received the opinion of the City Attorney
and, having heard the statements made, hauing considered the application, the staff reports and
the record, minutes and resolution of the Zoning Committee and of the Planning Commission;
does hereby
RESOLVE, that Council affirms the decision of the Planning Commission in this matter
based upon the following reasons:
1. The Planning Commission did not err in its facts, findings or procedures. The traffic
from the proposed non-conforming use is more intensive than the prior non-conforxning use. The
application did not meet the requirements of Legislative Code § 62.102(i)(3)(b);
2. Although Buffalo did not specify what reasonable accommodation it sought, the proposed
use is first pernutted in an R-Ml zoning district subject to a special condition use permit. The
proposed use is not pernutted in a R-Tl zoning district. Granting this type of
Page 4 of 5
.� ry; i r� � s S f 2 ! §
�..v 4 � : 'v` I 't �i �'l t.� O � � g'ti'
1
2 accommodation would constitute a substantial modification of the City's zoning code and its
3 goal to eliminate non-conforming uses from neighborhoods. The applicants have not
4 demonstrated why the zoning restrictions for this building and in this neighborhood need
5 modification;
6
7 3. Granting the application is contrary to the needs of other handicapped persons who must
8 follow the City's zoning code in order to operate their facilities;
9
10 4. Granting the application will influence future non-conforniing use applications and could
11 negatively impact the City's overall zoning scheme especially as it applies to neighborhood
12 housing;
13
14 AND, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the appeal of Buffalo Sober Group be and
15 is hereby denied in all things;
16
17 AND, BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED, that the City Clerk shall mail a copy of this
18 resolution to Buffalo Sober Group, the Zoning Administrator and the Planning Commission.
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
Requested by Department of:
By:
Form Appr ed by City Attomey
By: .� G✓/�/GM�'^
Approved by Mayor Eor Submission to Council
By: \ \ C F� w\ � `� ^ By:
Approved by Mayor: Date �U �� Gr�/�
By:
Adopted by Council: Date ��. � �e Q,
l
Adoption Certified by Council Secretary
o�_9a
GREEN SHEET
reter wazner
February 7, 2001 - Consent
TOTAL # OF SIGNATURE PAGES
Resolution memorializing City Council action taken December 6, 2001, denying the appeal of Buffalo Sober
Group, LLC to a decision of the Plannnig Commission denying an application for a Nonconfoiming Use Permit
to establish a rooxning house at 97 North Oxford Slreet.
PLANNING CAMMISSION
CIB CAMMIITEE
dVIL SERVICE CAMMISSION
L�:LiL=�I•�':ii•=3
❑ OIY�TlCIOEY ❑ CIIYCli11K
❑ nuiry�ac�eF,o¢ � wwai�a�w�eera
� r�raR��umr�xn ❑ -
(CUP ALL LOCATIONS FOR SIGNATUR�
Hes u;re pe�sonlfirm ever workea under a� ru uic aepa�hnenn
vES tao
Flae tlxe PaaoMrm ever been e ciq' ompbyee?
VES NO
Daes Uiic Oe�soMUm P� a sldll not namellYO�essed M�Y cuneM ci�/ emPbyee4
VES NO
Is Mis pemoNfqm a taryetetl verMoY7
VES MO
No106015
aTrca.¢�
114?Ti
OF TRANSACTION S
COSTrttEVQ1UE BUDOETED (CIRCLE ONE)
YES NO
SOURCE
ACTNITY NtMM�ER
(��M
OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY
Clayton M. Robinson, Jc, Ciry Attorney
n�_
CITY OF SAINT PAUL
Norm Coleman, Mayor
January 18, 2001
Nancy Anderson
Council Secretary
310 City Hall
15 West Kellogg Blvd.
St. Paul, MN 55102
Re: Appeal of Buffalo Sober Crroup, LLC
City Council Action Date: December 6, 2000
Deaz Nancy:
Telephorse: 657 266-8710
FacsimtZe: 65/ 298-i619
v'�ia.":� `_'�`'-°.52c.'vf s1cP,�E(
� ft � ?S 4 � ���3
�::•:,� _ �;
Enclosed please find a signed Resolution memorializing the Council's decision of December 6,
2000, in the above-entitled matter. Please place this on the Council's Consent Agenda at your
earliest convenience.
If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me.
Very truly yours,
�����
Peter W. Warner
Assistant City Attorney
Civil Division
400 Ciry Hall
I S West Kellogg Blvd.
Saint Paul, Mirsnuota 55102
Hand Delivered
PWW/rmb
Enclosure
DEPARTMENT OF PL AI JNING
& ECONOMIC DEVEI,OPMENT
BrianSweeney, InterimDirector
orgZ
3a
CTTY OF SAINT PAUL
Norm Coleman, Mayor
November 3, 2000
Ms. Nancy Anderson
City Council Reseazch Office
Room 310 City Hall
Saint Paul, Minnesota 55102
Dear Ms. Anderson:
25 WestFwrth Street
SmntPau{ MT755102
Telephone: 651-26G6655
Facstmile: 651-228-33I4
I would like to confinn that a public hearing before the Ciry Council is scheduled for Wednesday,
November 15, 2000, for the following appeal of a Planning Commission decision:
Appellant: Buffalo Sober Group, LLC
File Number: Appeal of file #00-122-234
Purpose: Appeal a Pl anninn Commission decision to deny an application for a Change of
Nonconfoiming Use Permit to establish a rooming house providing permaxient living
" facilities for 24 men in early sobriety.
Address: 97 North O�cford
Legal Descriprion of Properry: North 75 feet of Lots 27 and 28, Block 42, Summit Pazk Addition to
Saint Paul, Ramsey Counry, Minnesota
Previous Acrion:
Zoning Committee Recommendarion: Denial; vote: unanunous; October 12, 2000
Plamiiiig Commission Decision: Denial; vote: unanimous; October 20, 2000
My understandina is that this public hearing request will appear on the agenda for the November 8, 2000
City Council meeting and that you will publish notice of the heariug in the Saint Paul Legal Ledger. Please
call me at 266-6557 if you have any questions.
SIDCEIELY,
.��� ����.�
City Planner
cc: File #00-122-234
Paul Dubruiel, PED
Cazol Martineau, PED
Wendy Lane, LIEP
Walter Dinalko
Mazk Gehan
• �rsrxuiv •
NQTICE OF PUBLIC HEARII�iG �
1he Saint Paul, Ciry�Council. will con-
duct a public �ea±'nno on Wednesday,
November' 15; 2000, at 5:30 p.m. in the
GYty-Council Ci�ambers, Third Floor City
Hall-Gonrthouse, 15 -West Kellogg
Boulevazd, Saint Paul, MN, to consider the
appeal of BufTalo �Sober Group, LLC �to a
decision of the Plaz�ning Comnussi.on deny-
ing an application for a-change of a
Nonconforming Use Permit to establish a
roomin� house provtding permanent livi��g
facilities for 24 men in eazly sobriety at 9Z
North O�'ord Street. -
Dated: November 8, 2000 _
tvatveYnrmEasorr
Assisiant city-council.-secretary �
, �(NwemUer33) -- .
_'__'_ ST. PADL IEGAL I�DGER — �-c
", p: 02014703 _ . - - �
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNNG
& ECONOMIC DEVELAPMEVI"
Brian Sweeney, Director
•
•
CTTY OF SAII�IT PAUL
Norm Coleman, Mayar
November 7, 2000
Ms. Nancy Anderson
Secretary to the City Council
Room 310 City Hall
Saint Paul, Minnesota 55102
RE: Zoning File #00-149-255:
City Council Hearing:
/
vi-9z
25WestFou�ihSbeet Telephone:612-266-6565
SainrPaul,MN55102 Facsimile:67 2-22 83 3 7 4
BUFFALO SOBER GROUP, LLC
November 15, 200Q 530 p.m. City Council Chambers
PURPOSE: Appeal a plamiing commission decision to deny a Change of Nonconforming Use Pernut for a rooming
house providing permanent living facilities for 24 men in eazly sobriety at 97 North O�ord.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: Denial; Unanimous
ZONIlVG COMMITTEE ACTION: Denial; 4-0
STAFF RECOMMENDATION Denial
SUPPORT: Two people spoke in support. The Snmmit University Plaminig Council submitted a letter indicating
that they found no reason not to support the application. Si�teen letters were received in support.
OPPOSITION: Five people spoke in opposition. Four letters and one perition were received in opposition.
Dear Ms. Anderson:
The BI7FFAL0 SOBER GROUP, LLC has appealed the decision of the Saint Paul Planniiig Commission to deny
them a Change in Nonconfornvng Use Pernut to establish a rooming house providing permanent living facilities for
24 men in eazly sobriety on properry located at 97 North O�ord, between Laurel and Ashland. The zoning
committee held a public hearing on the application on October 12, 2000. The applicant addressed the committee.
At the close of the public hearing the committee voted 4-0 to deny the application. The Plaxming Commission
upheld the zoning committee's recommendation for denial on a unanimous voice vote at its October 20, 2000
meeting.
This appeal is scheduled to be heard by the City Council on November 15, 2000. Please notify me if any member
of the City Council wishes to have slides of the site—or a short video of the facility prepared by the applicant--
presented at the public hearing.
Sincerely,
L ���
Platming Administrator
• Attachments
ca City Council members
APPLICATION FOR APPEAL
��� j �� Departmerri of Planning and Economic Development
• �RTT�� Zoning Section
I��J
+�+� 1100 City Hall Anner
25 Lf'est Founh Street
Saint Paul, M_N 55101
266-6589
APPELLANT
PROPERTY
LOCATION
Name Bu°�alo Sober Group, y.L.C.
Address 97 fiorth O�_for� Street
City Saint Paul gtr�N ZiP 55104 Daytime phone 651-602-0
[�
Zoning File Name 00-122-234
Address/Location Same
TYPE OF APPEAL: Application is hereby made for an appeai to the:
� Board of Zoning Appeals CQ City Council
•
under the provisions of Chapter 64, Section 206 , Paragraph a of the Zoning Code, to
appeal a decision made by the R�` Pre', ai ��,n >�,� ('nmm^ a�� nn
on October 2G, 2000 ,� File number. CO-�22-234
(dat of decis
GROUNDS FOR APPEAL: Explain why you feei there has been an error in any requirement,
permit, decision or refusal made by an administrative official, or an error in fact, procedure or
finding made by the Board of Zoning Appeais or the Planning Commission.
Sze ut�achec, c.oc�:r.�e��.
�� �!J O
. � Attach additiona/ sheet if necessary)
l7 r7 il/,
ApplicanYs
Date ed City
��
r
� ATTACIIlV�NT TO APPLICATION FOR APPEAL
OF BUFFALO SOSER GROUP, L.L.C.
The principals of Buffalo Sober Group, L.L.C., aze Walter Ainalko and Jeff Gardner. In the fall of
1999, they entered into negotiations to purchase the building located at 9'7 North O�'ord Sh�eet, Saint
Paul, Minnesota. The building had previously been operated as the Oakland Home, as described
more fully in the decision of the Planning Coxnmission dated October 20, 2000. Buffalo Sober
Group, L.L.C., hoped to rehabilitate the property and operate it as a"sober house," i.e. a facility
where chemically dependent persons in early recovery could safely reside in a sober environment.
Dinalko and Gazdner believed at the time that they had neighborhood support far the proj ect. They
also believed that they were supported by the St. Paul Councii Member in whose district the building
is located. They were refened by that Council Member for financing to the University Bank. That
bank agreed to provide financing to the project and also guaranteed the loan with $60,000 of city
money.
As part of the fmancing transaction, an appraisal was done for the bank. Attached is the cover sheet
of an Appraisal Report dated September 16, 1999, and page 14 of that report, relating to the subject
of "zoning." Messrs. Dinalko and Gardner and, appazently, the University Bank, relied upon this
language in going forwazd with the project. Everyone thought that the building could be operated
� as a"sober house" without zoning complications. On January 15, 2000, Buffalo Sober Group,
L.L.C., closed on the purchase.
In early 2000, there was a complaint that the Buffalo Sober House violated St. Paul zoning
ordinances. The City's interpretation of Section 62.102 of the zoning code, relating to non-
conforming uses, was that because the Oakland Home had not had residents for over 365 days prior
to the purchase of the property by Buffalo Sober Group, L.L.C., appellants could not legally apply
for a"change of nonconforming use." Instead, it would be necessary for them to apply for a
"reestablishment of nonconforming use." Such an application requires the approval of two-thirds
of the properry owners within 100 feet of the properiy in question. Appeliants were unable to obtain
such approval. The application now pending, therefore, is for a change of nonconforming use.
In its application, Buffalo Sober Group, L.L.C., made the following statement:
"The new residents [i.e. residents of Buffalo Sober House] as former sufferers of
chemical dependency are subject to protection under the Federal Fair Housing
Amendments Act of 1988 and as such aze entitled to reasonable accommodation in
the administration of zoning ordinances by the City of St. Paul."
The City is obliged to make reasonable accommodations in its rules, including zoning ordinances
in order to afford handicapped persons equal opporhuiity in housing. 42 U.S.C. 3604 ( fl(3b). The
meaning of the word "handicapped" within the federal statute is broad and has been construed to
• include persons disadvantaged by alcoholism and drug addiction. See e.g.. Oxford House v. The
Township of Hill, 799 F. Supp. 450 (1991). Appellant renews its request for reasonable
accommodation by the City of St. Paul in order that the residents of Buffalo Sober House may
continue to reside in that smxcture without discrim;nation on the basis of handicap. •
It has also been appellant's contention throughout the application process that it is unreasonable to
interpret Section 62.102 (fl(7) as requiring the reestablishment of a nonconforming use, given the
facts of tkus case. Although the Oakland Home did not have residents for over 365 days prior to the
purchase of the building by appellants, the owner of the structure was, at that time, actively
attempting to sell the building and was marketing it on the basis of its nonconformiug use. Under
those circumstances, it is reasonable to exclude, from the 365-day period, the time the property was
on the market for sale. If that were to be done in this case, appellanY s pending application would
easily fall within the 365-day "statute of limitations" and would be evaluated on the basis of a
change of nonconforming use. A case remazkably similaz is now pending in the Minnesota Court
of Appeals. Haefele v. City of Eden Prairie.
•
��
� �
.,
��._�_...,
i
�
1
.�
,
h t
)
�
�
�
�
�
� �
�
!
�
l
i
,
Mr. John Bennet
Property Located At:
97 North Oxford Street
St. Paul, Minnesota
OI'4z
��
-�--�-
� j�2�r��
_. p�"-�-
� - ' - -- _ �
ZONING
a The subject pr� e Mis�eanolis�B �esidence District , under the zoning ordinance
dministered by the Ci of P )
See the Addenda for the zoninb or�inance.
DISCUSSION OF ZONIlVG
The subject facility is zoned R2B (Residence Disfrict .
constructed prior to the adoption of the current ordinance and is non-confomlin
ordinance but is aijowed as a non-eoafotmin � The subject improvemenfs were
g �e. S to �he current
are descnbed� th por�o� Di�e or y be found m the dd nd� ous
types that
Pertnitted uses in thiS �S�ct include a1I uses allowed in the other Residenfial Districfs. The
existing use is non but is allowed as a non �
The subject proper�, appeaz.s to be "grand fathered" as a result of being const��t� p�or to
�e adoption of tlxe current zoning ordinan�e �d is, the�.efore, considered to be a legal use.
Furthermore, the subject appears to be non with respect to parlcing requirements as well
as lot, yard and densl�y requix �� �e subject is non-conforming its use ma co
so long as no more than 50 percent of it is not destroyed or damaged. Givea that there is
hazazd insurance to cover potenfialloss, there does not appear to be a negative impact as a resu of
the non �
g use.
14
n
L.I
�
�
;�;�
> �.�� ;�
.� �
( 9•
ry „
�
t u;fk" 3qa .
;t. .
,
5
� � ��
�,
A•Y �rmYt G 4'�'K"-' W..�e^ » t.":iri
k�
r+ys•s � Ym u.c? � ttl d
t
A i,.:�yt w r , e ,.?z
r
ss��n � �r�
�t+rr x S ,�, . _ vz " S�.�iA�. t f3
,ry
s+xt 3k�e:Y s. ; � e+�wKd �a�Ea. .��e�^* rn wgw;w�x v x �`+r.
�,�' STn4^�zlt � '?,! -�N3.3 rm+ d�s,< a». : y �wX •..
� P o-y C -� �
V?� ky� s.:.: l '( 3sS d„
��la...... 4 � }�...tf y �r bTT 5
'I 1� �14v p ?
f
+
5r v � � �
ttd F�� �
� i a t
V' ;.
d� � �
3
C i 4
I
( 14 �.
i X��+ . .J%i. YA� � �.n V
� e!m" N} ra Y' p. Y 5'r'.I" �tY1 rv. k.a
1 � �!
� 9F �� t o4 �� . Y
+ . , ,.v� , ., ,x . _ . . . „
µ�trFs 3'y � t Y'�L� s AC:.*
R
+�A. ' A
� 3
�
p t; i:
'V'� � {b� 8 SK^ �:lR
�
Z
W
city of saint paul �
� planning commission resolution
file number 00-64
date October Zo. 2000
WHEREAS, BUFFALO SOBER GROUP, LLC, file #00-122-234, has applied for a Change
of Non-Conforming Use Permit for the properiy at 97 North Oxford, situated between Laurel
and Ashland, to allow the property to be used as a rooming house providing permanent living
facilities for 24 men in early sobriety; and
WHEREAS, the Zoning Committee of the Planning Commission, on October 12, 2000, held a
public hearing at which all persons present were given an opportunity to be heard pursuant to
said application in accordance with the requirements of Section 64.400 of the Saint Paul
Legislative Code; and
WHEREAS, the staff report prepared for the Zoning Committee included the following
recitation of the history of the property:
1. Oakland Home, a licensed community residential facility for persons with mental illness, was
� established at 97 North O3cford in about 1968.
2. On September 25, 1980, the City Council adopted amendments to the Zoning Code defining
community residential facilities and regulating them as special condition uses consistent with
the provisions of State law included in the Human Services Licensing Act. The amendment:
allowed community residential facilities for 7 or more facility residents in the RT-1 (Two-
family) zoning district as special condition uses.
3. On April 11, 1986, a Planning Commission resolution (�86-28) was adopted establishing legal
status for the Oakland Home as an existing community residential facility licensed by the
Minnesota Department of Human Services for 36 residents with mental illness in an RT-1
zoning district. In granting the special condition use permit, the Commission modified the
following conditions:
a Number of residents served. The code limited the number of residents to 16. The
condition was modified to allow 36 residents.
moved by Kramer
seconded by
� in favor Unanimous �o��e �ote
against_
Zoning File #00-122-234
Page Two ofResolution
b. Minimum distance between community residential facilities_ The code required_that
residential facilities be a minimum of 1320 feet apart. Two facilities were within the
required distance (Turning Point at 1089 Portland and Pineview Residence at 69 N.
Milton). The condition was modified.
c. Off-street parking. The code required that there be one parking spaces for every two
facility residents—or 18 spaces for the facility. At the time there was parking for 2 vehicles
available on the property. Because no residents owned or operated their own vehicles, the
Commission modified the requirement.
4. The Zoning Code was subsequently amended on June 27, 1991 to define Licensed Human
Service Community Residential Facilities and to first allow such facilities for 17 or more .
persons in the RM-1 Multiple Family zoning district as special condition uses. As a result, the
Oakland Home became a legally nonconforming use.
5. Chan�es in health caze financing provisions and State policy resulted in the general
downsizing of residential facilities for persons with mental illness throughout Minnesota
beginning in the mid-1990s.
�
6. Ramsey County initiated a down-sizing plan for Oakland Home and the last resident moved
out on August 21, 1998. The county's contract with Oakland Home expired on September �
30, 1998 and was not renewed.
WHEREAS, the Saint Paul Planning Commission, based on the evidence presented to its
Zoning Conmittee at the public hearing, as substantially reflected in the minutes, made the
following findings of fact:
1. On 7anuary 15, 2000, four members of Buffalo Sober Group, LLC purchased the property at
97 North O�'ord and, on February 15, 2000, Buffalo Sober House was opened, providing
permanent housing and supportive services to 24 men in the early stages of sobriety.
2. A subsequent inspection by City stafffrom the Department ofLicense, Inspection and
Environmental Protection (LIEP) concluded that the use—a rooming house-- at this location
was inconsistent with the zoning code. Rooming houses are first pernutted as special
condition uses in the RM-1 zoning district.
An application for a Change in Nonconforming Use Permit was submitted on Mazch Z 1, 2000.
Evidence submitted in support of the applicant's contention that the use had not been
discontinued were:
1. A statement from the building/business owner that she had operated her business out of
the structure until January 15, 2000.
2. Electric bill indicating that electrical and gas service to the buildin� was not interrupted
overthe period.
3. A statement from US West indicating that the building owner was responsible for the �
phone bill associated with her business in the building over the period.
r
Zoning File #00-122-234 �
� Page Three of Resolution
3. On April 11, 2000, plannin� staffwrote a letter to the applicant detailing its conclusion that
the previous use had, indeed, been discontinued and that pemrission to continue to use the
property as a rooming house would require a pemut to re-establish a nonconformin� use. The
applicants were given the option of withdrawing their application for a Change in
Nonconforming Use Permit and applying, instead, for a permit to re-establish a non-
conforming use. Their application fee would be applied towazd a new application.
In a subsequent phone conversation on April 14, 2000, the attorney representing the applicant
agreed with the planning staf�'s interpretation of the code and asked that the Zoning
Committee's consideration of the case be delayed for 30 days so that they could review their
options and begin work on obtaining the consent petition required for an application to re-
establish a non-conforming use. He further indicated that his clients were led to believe by the
building's owner and/or realtor that the building's use as a residential facility had somehow
been "grandfathered in." Later that afternoon, he faxed a fonnal Request for Continuance,
waiving the statutory requirements for a decision on the application within 60 days of its being
filed.
On May 22, 2000, a request for an additional 60-day continuance—until the August 17, 2000
Zoning Committee meetin� -was faxed to the Zoning Committee by the applicant's attomey,
a�ain waiving the requirement for a decision within 60 days.
� 4. On August, 28, 2000, unable to obtain a sufficient number of signatures on a consent petition,
the applicants resubmitted an application for a Change in Nonconforming Use Permit. The
substantial additions to the application—beyond those submitted in March—were:
1. A copy of the Coldwell Banker Burnet listing (list date: February 25, 1999) for the
property indicating that the building was a"fully functional group home-32 person brick
structure."
2. A copy of the lodger agreement.
Sec. 62.102(i)(3) of the Zoning Code outlines four conditions for a Change in Nonconforming
Use. Those conditions and the applicant's ability to meet them are as follows:
1. The proposed a�se is eqzraZly appropriate or more appropriate to the neighborhood than
the existing nonconforming use;
This condition is met. Both uses are congregate livin� facilities. The proposed use is
smaller than the previous use, and, therefore, may be judged to be more appropriate.
Boardin� houses—like licensed human service community residential facilities for 17 or
more residents--are first permitfed, with a special condition use permit, in the RM-1
(multiple family) zonin� district.
�
Zoning File #00-122-234
Page Four of Resolution
2. 7he traffzc generated by the proposed use is similar to that generated by the existing
nonconforming use;
This condition is not met. While there are fewer total residents of the current facility than
lived in the previons facility, none of the previous residents owned cars or had ]icenses.
There were transpoited in a van and had, neighbors report, few visitors. The cars on the
site belonged to program staff.
While the cunent applicant reports that many ofthe current residents have lost their
driving privileges for some period of time, sunounding residents report a marked increase
in traffic related to both residents and visitors.
Were this facility located in an RM-i (Multiple family) zoning district and required to
obtain a special condition use pernut as a rooming house, among the conditions would be
that the lot area fbr 24 residents in 18 guest rooms be 21,000 squaze feet. The current lot
is 7500 square feet.
�
It would also be required to have 12 off-street parking spaces. While 12 parking spaces
are shown on the site plan subcnitted with the application, 9 of the spaces are 8 feet wide
rather than 9 feet as is normally required, 1 space is in the required front yard (not allowed
under Sec 64.104(11), 10 spaces are in the required side yazd (not allowed under Sec.
64.104(11), and the other 2 spaces are within 4 feet of a side lot line (not allowed under �
Sec. 64.104(11).
3. The zrse will not be detrimental to the existing character of development in the i»zmediate
neighborhood or endanger the pubZic health, safety, or general weZfare;
This condition is met. There is no evidence that facilities ofthis type have any detrimental
impact on property values, or on public health, safety or welfare.
4. The z�se is consistent with the comprehensive plan.
This condition is met. The City's Housing PIan calls for the preservation of existing rental
units ana creation of new units providing suppor�ive nousing for psrsons w i� are �r �e at
risk of being homeless.
6. On the central point, however, of the appropriateness of the application, staff finds the
following:
a. The Zoning Code (Sec. 60.221) defines Use as the "principal purpose for which land or a
building is being occupied."
b. A previous use—a Licensed Human Service Community Residential Facility--had been
discontinued for more than 365 days when the applicants assumed ownership of the
building on January 15, 2000. Ramsey County staff indicates that the last resident moved
out of the building on August 21, 1998. The contract between Ramsey County and the
buildin� owner/service provider formally expired on September 30, 1998
a The Zoning Code states: When a nonconforming use is discontinued or ceases to exist for �
a continuous period of three hundred sixty-five (365) days, the building, or building and
land in combination, shall thereafter be used in conformance with the regulations of the
Zoning File #00-122-234
� Page Five of Resolution
o�-9a
district in which it is located, unless the planning commission approves a pernut to
reestablish the nonconfornung use as set forth in clause (i)(5). (Sec. 62.102(�(7))
d. The applicant has not applied for a permit to re-establish a nonconfomun� use.
e. It is the intent of the Zoning Code that this building revert to a use pemutted in the zonin�
district unless ttus or some other non-conforming use which can meet the conditions
detailed in Sec. 62.102(i)(5) —including a consent petition of 2/3 of the surrounding
property owners—is established.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Saint Paul Planning Commission, that the
application of BIJFFALO SOBER GROUP, LLC for a Change in Non-Conforming Use Pemut to
allow the property at 97 North Oxford to be used as a rooming house providing permanent living
facilities for 24 men in eazly sobriety is hereby denied.
C�
C�
o� -9Z
�
MINUTES OF THE ZONING COMMITTEE
Thursday, October 12, 2000 - 3:30 p.m.
City Council Chambers, 3` Fioor
City Hail and Court House
15 West Kellogg Boulevard
PRESENT:
EXCUSED:
ABSENT:
Gervais, Gordon, Kramer, and Morton
Engh, Faricy, and Field
Mardell
OTHERS Peter Warner
PRESENT: Nancy Homans and Carol Martineau of PED
The meeting was chaired by Commissioner Gervais.
BUFFALO SOBER GROUP, LLC - 00-122-234 - Change of Nonconforming Use Permit to allow
a rooming house that provides permanent living facilities for men in early sobriety. 97 North
Oxford, between Laurel and Ashland.
Nancy Homans showed slides and presented the staff report:
The case invoives a variety of issues related to non-conforming uses. The application is for
� a change in non-conforming use—a process provided for in the Zoning Code when one non-
conforming use has been out of existence for fewer than 365 days and the proposed use is
equaliy or less non-conforming than the existing or previous use. A permit may be. issued by
the Planning Commission upon its making four specific findings. The Code also provides for
a re-establishment of a non-conforming use when a non-conforming is discontinued orceases
to exist for a period of more than 365 days. In such cases, the Planning Commission must
make nine specific findings including a finding that a petition of two-thirds of the property
owners within 100 feet of the property stating their support for the use has been submitted.
�
The history of this case begins with Oakland Home, a licensed community residential facility
for 36 persons with mental illness, that was established in about 1968. In 1980, amendments
to the Zoning Code first defined community residential facilities and first allowed such facilities
for seven or more residents in the RT-1 zoning district as special condition uses.
On April 11, 1986, the Planning Commission granted a special condition use permit to the
Oakland Home, modifying three conditions including the requirement that there be one off-
street parking space for every two facility residents. At the time there was parking for 2
vehicles on the property. Because no residents could drive, the Commission modified the
requirement.
The Zoning Code was once again amended in 1991 to define Licensed Human Service
Community Residential Faciiities and io first aiiow facifities for 17 or more persons in the RM-1
zoning district as special condition uses. Oakland Home, once again, became a legaily
nonconforming use.
There was a general downsizing of residential facilities for persons with mental
iliness—including the Oakland Home--during the 1990s. Ramsey County's contract with
Oakland Home expired on September 30, 1998 and was not renewed. The last resident had
moved out on August 21, 1998.
Zoning Committee Minutes
October 12, 2000
File #: 00-122-234
Page 2
On February 17, 2000, the City's office of License, lnspections and Environmental Protection
(LIEP) received a complaint retative fo the bui(ding. The inspector went out and determined
that the structure was being used as a rooming house. Rooming houses are first ailowed in
the RM-1 zoning district as special condition uses. in a discussion with LIEP staff, the
applicants suggested that the previous use had not been discontinued insofar as the owner
of the building maintained an office in the building and continued to pay for utilities. The
Zoning Administrator indicated that such a case would need to be made with substantial
documentation to the Planning Commission.
On March 21, 2000, the applicant submitted an application for a change in non-conforming
use. On April 22, 2000, Ms. Homans sent a letter to the applicant outiining the difference
between a change in non-conforming use and a re-establishmentofa non-conforming use and
indicated that she believed that the use required a re-estabiishment permit. She offered the
applicants the option of withdrawing their application and submitting an appiication for the re-
establishment at no additional fee. In a phone conversation on April 14, 2000, the applicanYs
attorney agreed with staff's interpretation of the Code and asked thatthe Zoning Committee's
consideration of the case be delayed for 30 days. Later fhat aftemoon, he faxed a formal
Request for Continuance, waiving the requirement that a decision be made within 60 days.
�
A request for an additional 60-day continuance was faxed to the Zoning Committee on May
22, 2000.
On August 28, 2000, the applicant resubmitted an application fora Change in Nonconforming �
Use Permit with two additional attachments: (1) a copy of the Coldwell Banker Burnet listing
for the property; and (2) a copy of the lodger agreement.
Ms. Homans reviewed the findings related to a change in non-conforming use. Staff finds that
the proposed use meets the findings related to the appropriateness of the use, the impact of
the use on the character of development and public health, safety and general welfare and
consistency with the comprehensive pian. On the finding related to whefher the traffic
generated by the proposed use is similarto that generated by the existing nonconforming use;
a a �A... F3G. 'nian} nf he nrnnncc`-1 f litv h v
SiBii iOUfiG ili8i i�12 CO�CSiiiGi i i5 ��G� ;n2c. �v�v�E :.+� :�:8 ;&5�....,,.5 t�e.. r ...�,....--- 3CI.._, , a-2
cars than did previous residents, neighbors reporf a marked increase in visitor traffic, and the
number of people living on the lot is greater than would othervvise be allowed in a rooming
house.
Related to off-street parking, Ms. Homans stated that, while the site plan submitted with the
application indicates 10 striped parking spaces on the north side of the building and two
spaces on the west side, there are now seven striped diagonal parking spaces on the north
side and two stacked spaces on the west side. (There was no site plan submitted for the
increase in parking spaces over the two parking spaces that were availabie for the previous
use.) The applicant has indicated there is room for five additional parking spaces that are not
currently striped.
On the central issue, however, Ms. Homans explained the staff found that the previous �
nonconforming use had been out of existence for more than 365 days when the new use was
estabiished. An application for a reestablishment of a nonconforming use with a sufficient
petition has not been filed. Inasmuch as an appropriate and compiete application has not
been submitted, the Zoning Staff recommends denial of the application.
Zoning Committee Minutes
� October 12, 2000
File #: 00-122-234
Page 5
Commissioner Gordon restated the issue befo�e the committee: Did the previous use cease to
exist for 365 days? If the previous use wasn't disconfinued, then the committee needs to look at
the four findings ouflined in the Code.
Mr. Dinalko reiterated that they limit the number of cars allowed among residents to 10. There are
seven cars there now. As to the 365 days, he indicated that, when they purchased the building,
the interior wasn't very pleasant, but there was a caretaker and the phone service and other
utilities were operating.
Jeff Priest, 4724 Lund Avenue, Eagan, said that he had intended to provide testimony on the need
for sober house facilities, but would confine his remarks to the issue of the 365 days. He indicated
that the committee may have some discretion in establishing when the 365 days begins and ends:
at the time a purchase agreement was submitted, at closing or with occupancy.
Karen Mead, Executive Director of Emotions Anonymous, 1752 Iglehart Street, stated she
supported the need for sober houses in St. Paul. She further suggested that whatever the
applicants did relative to occupying the property, they did with good intentions. There was no
intent to deceive.
Anne Heinricks,1060 Laurel Avenue, stated they have about 40 signatures of people in opposition
to the Sober House. She also explained that the neighborhood cannot absorb 30 people and the
�' zbning laws shouldn't be violated at the neighborhood's expense. She also indicated that
remodeling work is continuing on the property and she is concerned that continuing financial
investment should not be used as a basis for approving the permit.
Shannon O'Keefe, 1053 Ashland Avenue, testified she bought her building in November of 1998
and there were no residents living at 97 North Oxford at that time. The caretaker was not residing
in the building but would come and go according to the need for snow shoveling, lawn mowing
and the like. She also explained the residents of the neighborhood called Northern States Power
shortly afterthe Summit-University Planning Commission meeting and there was a decline in NSP
bilis which proved a decline in the usage of the building.
In response to questions from CommissionerGordon, Ms. O'Keefe stated the parking is not limited
to ten vehicles. Vehicles are parked back to back in the alley and crammed between the building
and a garbage dumpster. The maximum number of vehicles observed have been between 15
to 20. Evenings are more saturated with three to four cars parked during the day. The residents
are not permanent so there are also occasions when vans moving people in and out of this facility
block the entrance to the alley.
Diane Lunderborg, 1039 Ashiand, appeared and stated the house for mentally ill women closed
down in August of 1998. They were hoping that the building would become a fourvplex—like the
identical building next door--in order to reduce the traffic in the neighborhood. The neighborhood
is mainly made up of single-family dwellings and they would like to see the traffic reduce in the
neighborhood. She said that she and her husband toured the building in September 1998 to
� determine whether they would be interested in purchasing it. She said that it was in tough shape
and they did not submit a bid. She also stated she had called the real estate agent selling the
property and informed him of the zoning restrictions related to selling the building to another non-
conforming use.
Zoning Committee Minutes
October'12, 2000
File #: 00-122-234
Page 6
In response to a question from Commissioner Kramer, Ms. Lunderborg stated that when she
toured the building in September of 1998 there were no residents living there. The owner had
an office that she was using and the building was up for sale. The fact that the building was for
sale was not made public.
Eric Rez, 1056 Laurel Avenue, appeared and stated their opposition is not against the business
itseif. They are opposed to any business operating without proper zoning and licensing.
Ann Drives, 1072 Laurel Avenue, reiterated the parking problems, indicating that the aliey is
sometimes biocked overnight. She thought that using the buiiding as a duplex for 8-10 residents
wouid be more compatibie.
Mr. Dinalko reappeared and addressed the similarities between the previous and current use.
They both have group dining facilities, centralized management and rules and group bathroom
facilities. He aiso stated the current residents are considered mentally disabled under the ADA.
The group activities, inciude weekiy AA and other related in-house meetings, are considered
treatments focused towards the disability.
�
Jeff Gardner, 428 Dayton Avenue, a partner of Mr. Dinalko's, appeared and stated there is one �
vehicle parked behind the dumpster that belongs to one of the residents who cannot drive
because of a lack of a license. He aiso explained that traffic is aiso generated from a house
directly to the north of them (North Star Restorations) that frequently has construction vehicles
and other cars parked in the alley that could be confused with their vehicles.
The public hearing was closed.
Commissioner Gordon stated that the critical issue was whether the nonconforming use was
discontinued or ceased to exist for 365 days. Someone can continue to own the building and not
continue to use it for the nonconforming use. In this case the last day for the nonconforming use
Wfl5 f�UgiiSi L I, ly�o, tiV�i2i i��i2 iaSE i�jl( iiiV'YCV :J::l. T �ci:vu vc �'r ��, ?naR
and January 15, 2000 was well over 365 days.
CommissionerGordon moved denial of the Change of Nonconforming Use Permit. Commissioner
Kramer seconded it.
Adopted Yeas - 4
Drafted by:
Nays - 0
Submitted by:
�Gc, �
Carol Martineau Nancy H mans
Recording Secrefary Zoning Section
Approved by:
Dennis Gervais �
Chair
1�'� z �� 1 ,- p , ., . a u 5 r . 1 i ��M� w 1 � � y.
� Lb r ..., r a..4' x '�e Sn 5 �?f " w�, :r � j, M K,? i 3�'t'a' '�r'1 u� -�r r -'° J. 3 w �., "? t '^�. l Usi^]" n.
� � Y ' ' '� �� 'i � �'... ( . �Y V� 1�� 4
4
J � Y .' k "'� 'M1 x.`i . 4 "'�.l` 6'.y ' 1[ � �
� � S� v
� j „ � ; . �. .�.; . .,.
s t y �.r �ppba�i` ;�:�'ha c!S `k.,"�✓'-�'.kt at,.r''r�y�#��,M'r � Y �,� ''^s*.s a"� ' �' x'v�d�`X'�+�'�..tYr°w5}.-'e'C .'.� k- a°gw� .. �ass�'?:�a� vFrC � d .d.-+ vkG '+<". l�Yi,r,^ +.M"
r ¢. t" w . T.'k r. �',+vu;yG"' 2 hx..� ;a ^� sS+K�?.{` �. :� 4� �..�e .wa m s. A�av.w: �.,n* � a�,:.:�.5^^ v s f ....ro'x . v.�� .? ,
�� _ ✓ �,S -. _ �. _ A5 - .l q:� � .
p
�t «�. d�.. �• • .• «'.
x
t_ �+i ��. r i 1' � r
4§y__ � � � - A ..'S
�! f t�'�
a' '� _ ,, [ ' , ' �, _ '
. 9k�*."ir �v+c� �ri �+ u�>° n�va.� >Nv 1 w� c�_ y3 m^' tim.,�at rp.i�-.*: ,+ v^>_�.�..x �� _, w. .. z.r ,.i.��x.. -
{ y�%.� .4A ' .UM . ( : ,J.
� � �� i s �� $�E 2 Y .
R�: \. h
'py 4 .r 'ii } - f' S �.i.y } Y . r'T�,.
� ,.. ` t a Y ` .' .� 't :. ., y ..
� : x # � o-Co�.�res.pv►r�c�e�a.�e�;:C�ece���ed r., .. �, .. �
L
�� ., "��� � , s � : �' w i -E � a , � . .
_.., re ✓ .+ - . �
zhk $e`K.z,.'w.n g � � _ ,
.J� an:JV�tr„*?s E^ u-w^+'�,rw ++� �^ A� ux � ,k: fa NT4'«n ,�u".^� x � . � � �—+:4+ r- bt , .Src*
� � ��#�ar,� . � �,.A
� ,
t f j
urv a M .+'�'�z .�, w m ` s« w*� S&^r �� � � s"Na+..� a? rvr�,aw d �+ � i , �
s s C `.+� '�' M. aA a� b i S. i� Q
� q / . ! h � R ' � � ���
t V'. (L � . GRV'v, 4 C�
i
{u, et �., r . , �iMy� �a 4 *eq x �u, J t,:eo- eT ;y 'L.i V *v. -a t 1 n
f' � s atx i S �q? ., � 5 ���a. ? t�d �a� ry r ..*, h r
'�`� y� nd txr ��rt a��1 a � i x �r2e�r . �r .r .)�
�. t e r 4 � r �� :��i Y
� y � � 9 7 ) � . 1 f� . A � 1 .
� � r k � c ¢ � x )'rs`f ;fi " `�: f '�; ro i � r , r� n , ; n : J
as 'aw . � a"} r��a t✓ �r�s !� x. P '71 r/ �l • ^.
i( L'' !y ? l- i.� 4''yi .� h �' C,b ��� � r � a� m�ttee e �rl'� �� �� C
o
� t <<
, , r
� ,,,,> xr >_ � � n � r x � , � �
,� . , , '
ns � e {t `^t `� a di.,, S� �y 'r�aY� z�'f akt�Y�r, vZ.my _r n s� c�a " > e�h�a
M1
a ' � r + . • r ._ �
'�k , p 'j.� � ': ' � � +a � .' r. ' r -r� H s' ti .
t �i
�
, ,�.i. y v "� .� i'� Yt t i� � tl i 'Sx w � � ' � y:. ,. x ,} i+�� �t°"" _ ;
. _. 1 ,. :, . ....... �
'' �,.: E� . ' s s ' '' ' r ✓, , r; ri
�
�. q : j t ' a� y F a � E�� : '-�� �", s C �t �� aY�a on '.� ��
', i. L' i .4 °, � Yc t e�k s F .".� s I .3, k. . .
�
s .+ �� > i .. / t � 5. ""-0 r � . �� .�� a ty '� � �.y � z 4 a � >- *
p, '. 1 4 ry 5 . U •
� S� ° "r.9 a, +�, a� y ws s> �,�+',� �-r r d�S .'�� �` a'!� � - d�N5'� �� a N r�A x w C� d -
s>
� � i' K Y'�' a y � A r s� asa't e C'� r �� r :� ^, �. '
V`� { 4 �' d f f r !�. F i f.. S >
.
. "°S i �T �, r
'� > 5+� y�.r i pZw�' x.t �.. ��i�X r E � T$'rt ". ^` Y P. *'�
����.q���a.x.�`�da`i ; `kr�.Fnffit`:.rv..to-tx.0 S'+*.£"`"""i^��.✓'FY�4",�'2"�ar4b,ro*�4k4v�r,s�ym�'i` ktga ^.'+iM .m.x'^,�+n.y� n `�1r.a s:`i8" u.� >n?wr�:A`"^YY'n^� ro tePZo
� y� �i � f �i k-. 1� JY� � '� � t< � F
� y .:`��n" a �� ��� 1 a c , r t r . i , i �.
&l ` 5 �,, i p, ro ,% t� . w P� y ' c! .� t�.
;� '� s e s^. . a �, , r i ,. u� a . v y
, p`y�,»wwtrFi r r x 3 vf; f cy�z ✓k�. � s.<. "" �' �"+1ts., �.a �� sj �,�?,ar�d� 'm„ .X r r, v k a..R a. v ^, y : �+v :3; t �V ir
t ° �.
�` y l�i �. �1 V t :' q t ) � .,3 � "1 .q,b q � ,Y � `
J" `�� } �3'Y'! a`�.A' A,�4Px ,t'� K i5' f'�'w.'�'�F�'M1N`t�trSk�. ..l`��a�:.�n� "� R4 �) � i c� y, k i S 4 d 'G'4f Y 0.t .
y�
.� i ., ,J '. y*¢�` � 1 � r� � �5 ( :e 'w ',�a �.: � G , '� � , i . � � '^^ i �. .� 1 �. :
2 a
�,�� a ,�. 'ia . .:�• ..: � � i '� _ �.' ,
� 'eX� P 9 ' � .k
. ` y � � p x ., {
�
( W �
p�paDpr p'�t R'� h i ° at�,'6'Hfi�'N��i't t� �ffim� �sfv �•t �i�YRdq�" w 7w� � S" f�z �� 1 d �� � z��
ku4' w t e � y t . ,�,[ � �.aie. s i*.,.� x � s r o- ;
�� a a�' :�.e r �, , ' �`, � � � ; p 3„
.� °.::�,. , ; ,r5�. _ `�;,?`�;,�`,'� .fa,uy �,._t .A. �, ��.__ „ r . " . .,- _,H`. , ,..� ,,. t3r.`�' , .,.
> ,, ,
� � lr
r✓ r r.$�.epW 3 a i r �^ «iF �,u r k',u,fi.�s
r ''F
\ YH P
k N F"� � t .p� \ 1 4
k Y.
� P� � -
y r>wv�.��.s�r« Y+4ns ,+,wate � vgrrcv�
i � 5Y
� ��y:*.trt�r�k1'+d aa}us�'a:'ra .Ai"i'��
M 4�4 \;
hU t 2
�r _
�, ;
§ ur . n > ��..
��
� �� s
. , . , ., .. .v �
t
' a t
G` n , , ,f J3 a fuP� y 4 �., k �?'�' d4 3:...1 'uy L� �l a ,�',� � 1}�.., .,a �.
F
.'� - ... Nr h` . -
� x
".. i ) , `� k P � \ e�.
��� t K t �.. . 4 � �.�� T
� i
? �.;"� b'1. , ` '� k ° v . wr� t � +M ^. um✓ k d- " ;..y 9 o yr £ a� ., u r ^.aM'cz.?, �-. ��:4
* x a
a
z� z� .' rosc m�wa-r an' .u, �« � l vda F v"ti+'& u u<s .+o ns a^y xw �. {wn++y ;��e 1k n
�b v-tN, n :�� yt l� �.. d 3�e Y ^nSn. , ti , .
t
y,'3 f S U . k� ,�, ', f - x
s y s, x 4 - . : y;
r �
� r
� Vk s �. t r {� _h � �'s' f ^ a m ^�y �
_ ,r . " �. ,�'
f:
.. , ..�. . ... R, .r..t .A..n , ,. < r m . __ v .. ., r . .
r
OI -9L
�
w�nnsev counnv
Community Human Services Department
I60 Kellogg Blvd E
St. Paul, hfN 55101-149�
October 18, 2000
Ms. Nancy Homans, Planner
Department of Planning and Economic Development
1100 City Hall Annex
25 West Fourth Street
St. Paul, MN 55102
Dear Ms. Homans:
FinancialTDD: 6�1-26F-�7oU
Semices TDD: 651-266-000'?
GeneraiInfo: 651-260-44;-i
The purpose of this letter is to provide written confirmation regarding an earlier
telephone conversation concerning the ending date for a contract between
Ramsey County and Oakland Home, Inc. Through contractual agreement,
� Ramsey County purchased residential treatment services for adult women with
mental il)ness from Oakland Home, Inc. The residential site was located at 97
North Oxford in St. Paul.
The last contract was for the time period, January 1, 1998 through September
30, 1998. (The contract for the period January 1, 1998 through December 31,
1999 was formally amended by mutual agreement in July of 1998 to end the
agreement September 30, 1998.) All residents of this licensed facility were
actually discharged on August 21, 1998.
If you require any additional information, I can be reached at (651) 266-4332.
Sincerely,
� � � ^
, I ,�-
Mary Jo Gaskins
Contract Manager
Purchase of Service
�
Minnesota's �rst Home gule County
prin�sdon recycltd pace��N a minimum of W%yostm�umerm��sm
/
SLTMMIT-UNIVERSITY
PLANNING COUNCIL
Ol "gZ.
• Building a Better Community -
627 Selby Avenue . Saint Paul, MN 55104
Telephone 651-228-1855 • FAX 651-225-1108
October 12, 2000
Nancy Homans
City of St. Paul
Dept. of Planning and
Economic Development
25 West Fourth Street
St. Paul, MN 55102
RE: Buffalo Sober Group LLC application for Change of Nonconforn Use Permit to allow
a rooming house that provides permanent living facilities for men in early sobriety at 97
North Oxford, between Laurel and Ashland.
Dear Ms. Homans:
The Summit Universiry Planning Council has found no reason not to support the Buffalo Sober
� Group's application for the Change of Nonconforming Use Permit. SUPC takes this position for
the following reasons:
1) The Neighborhood Development Committee held two Community Issue Meetings regazding
this application (one in April, 2000 and one on Tuesday, October 10). The main concems
expressed at the meetings are: a) neighbors believe the Buffalo Sober Group did not follow
the required process for application of the license and zoning; b) the neighborhood does not
want multiple housing units because the nuxnber of moving vans, meal trucks, individual
cazs, etc., creates parking problems; and c) density is a problem to some of the residents.
Some would be ok with a residency that is limited to 10 or 12 residents but are not ok with
the current number of 24.
2) Votes taken at the meetings were in favor of the SUPC not supporting the Buffalo Sober
House, but several residents who live close to the business did not receive flyers announcing
the meeting and therefore, were not there to voice their opinion. These people spoke with
SUPC staff and stated that they have no problem with the Buffalo Sober House and aze in
favor of allowing them to operate the rooming house.
3) Residents opposed the rooming house assisted staff in distributing flyers in the neighborhood.
This resulted in accusations that a petition opposing the Buffalo Sober Group was delivered
along with the SUPC flyer, which may have led people to believe the SUPC was in favor of
the petition, and that the flyers were delivered only to the people that opposed the Buffalo
Sober Group. (It is important to note that these are only accusations and are unproved.)
�
4) The Buffalo Sober Group did not receive a flyer and did not know about the October 10 �
meeting unti146 minutes prior to the meeting, giving an unfair advantage to those opposed in
the voting process.
5) Walter Dinalko gave his phone numbers to the residents and asked them to call with any
problems regazding the residents, including pazking issues and said he would resolve the
problem immediately upon receiving a call. He stated that he did this at the eazlier meeting
but has not received any calls from residents regazding any problems. Walter stressed that
the doors are always open to the community. Everyone is welcome to come and see the
books or look at the building and talk with the residents.
This decision is made by the President of the Board of Directors, taking into account the fact that
the entire board was notified of the meeting by the Interim Executive Director and asked to
attend the meeting. Those that could not attend could call the office the following morning to get
details of the meeting and voice their opuuon at that time. Only one boazd member did so,
stating that she did not feet that SUPC could make a recommendation because of the above stated
reasons. The Chair of the Neighborhood Development Committee and the Interim Executive
Director did attend the meeting along with the Boazd President and agree with the
recommendation stated above.
�
/.1
President, Boazd of Directors
Cc: St. Paul CiTy Council
SUPC Boazd of Directors
Buffalo Sober Group
�
�
D1 r!Z
� October 10, 2000
Walter Dinalko
Managing Director
Buffalo Sober Group L.L.C.
97 NoRh Oxford Street
Saint Paul, MN 55104
To Whom it May Concern;
The building located at 97 North Oxford is restructured to a configuration containin� 19
separate rooms with one centrally located kitchen and dining facility, one electrical
hookup and one central heating plant. This restructuring was accomplished prior to the
City of Saint Paul's adoption of a zoning code in 1975 thereby making the building a
legal non-conforming structure. The intent of the zoning code is to allow such structures
and their uses to continue until they are removed. Generally when fifty percent or more of
the structure is destroyed, that is considered removal.
The Buffalo House meets and exceeds all the requirements for continuation of a non-
� conforming use with the exception of the signatures of two thirds of property owners
within 100 feet.
_ -.
The Buffalo Sober Group purchased 97 North Oxford in 7anuary 2000 for three hundred
thousand dollars. The interior of the building was a mess, and one hundred thousand
dolfars in up�rades were required. These included painting, drop ceilin� removal,
carpeting throujhout, earterior painting and awnings and repair and upgrading of fire
detection systems. We have invested a substantial sum of money (nearly one half a
million dollars). Because of the extensive restructurin� of the interior it would cost at
least another five hundred thousand dollars to reconfigure the interior to either a four-
plex or duplex.
If we are forced to discontinue the use of the property, as it exists we could not afford nor
would it be financially prudent to invest in these renovations.
Our use, as a sober house for twenty-four recovering individuals is a less intense use of
the non-conforming structure then previously existed.
Due mainly to the existence of centers such as the Hazelden treatment facility, Hazelden
Fellowship club, Twin-Town Treatment center and the Retreat at Upland Farms, Saint
Paul has evolved into one of the world's best known and most successful sober livin�
em ironments. Recovering alcoholics and addicts from around the world come to this city
and settle in Saint Paul because the support and recovery community is so well
� demonstrated.
It is clear that the fortunate folks in early recovery from aicohol and drug dependency-the �
ones with the greatest success rate for recovery-are those who, after primary treatment __
spend a period of six to twelve months in a group setting. This group setting provides a
stable sober living environment, which emphasizes development of principles for living
with a strong spiritual content.
Buffalo House is an asset to the community since � individual that returns to the use of
alcohot and drugs either in or out ofBuffalo House, is immediately expelled. We can do
this because the residents aze required to sign a tested and proven sober contract, which
requires adherence to certain rules and absolute abstention from drug or alcohol use and
is enforced through the application of random drug testing. Living in this type of
environment, where attendance at twelve step meetings is encouraged and group
accountability is paramount, individuals develop a new responsible lifestyle free of
alcohol and drug use.
Please find attached letters of support from community members and residents of the
Buffalo House.
Thank you for your consideration in this matter.
Respectfully,
Walter Dinalko
�
�
�
�
] i HAZELDEN
Fellowship Club� St. Paul
October 10, 2000
To Whom It May Concern:
o! -gz.
680 StemartAaenue
St. Paul, MN SSIO2�199
Phane 612-509-3900
http:l/vnvm.hnzeiden.org
Hazelden Fellowship Cfub in St. Paul has been referring to Buffalo Sober
House at 97 N. Oxford in St. Paul since February, 2000.
Residents who go through Fellowship Club generally have compieted an
inpatient treatment experience and continue in Fellowship Club to learn daily
living skilis. They are asked to work or attend school during the day and
then attend groups in the evenings.
Foliowing their stay at Fellowship C1ub we generaily encourage them to find
a sober living environment. Buffalo House has been in existence since
February 2000 and we have found them a solid placement for men in
� recovery. When referring we look at the structure of a house and it appears
that Buffalo House is one with such structure.
We hope to continue referrals to Buffalo House in the future.
�
Sincerely,
�� �� �
Brenda J.
�
) ,�� i �
Iliff, Executive Director
Equai Opportunity Employer
University Bank
��
10/71/2000
Mr. Walter Dinalko
Managing Director
Buffalo Sober Group, LLC
97 North Oxford Street
St. Pau(, MN. 551Q4
Dear Walter,
As per your request I am writing this letter lo outline University Bank's interest in a
Ioan relationship with Buffalo Sober Group. We financed the purchase and remodeling
of a building localed at 97, North Oxford Street in St. Paul. The building had been emply
for several months and had shown considerable signs of negiect, and deterioration. After our
initial discussion I recognized a worthwhile business relationship that would greatly
serve our communily. The business plan had merit, bul lacked capital, and principals
lacked a proven track record. With this, i utilized a program exclusive to University Bank
and sponsored by the City of St. Paui. This program provided guarantee support to the
bank in the loan relationship.
As I am familiar with the project, bolh before and after the remodeling, t can say lhat
I am very pleased with the quality of your work. In addilion, I wouid like to nole lhat
the project was completed within a 45 day time frame. This completely surprised our
appraiser, as he didn't recog�ize the building when I called for a fina! inspection.
As always Waiter, it is a pleasure to be of service to you and the Buffalo Sober Group.
If you need anything else please feel free to call me at 298-6750.
Sinc el
Jo Bennett
r �i. viCc ic i�ci i
v Urnver ity ank
�
r�
200 Uui�crsicy Ave. W., Sc. Paul, MN 55103 pbone: (651) 265-5600 fax: (C51) 29S-G759
• Page 2
September 14, 2000
� Mc Biakey, we are not a group of high-powered, profit�driven developers. We embarked on
tSiis project in good faith and have poured a Iot of our spare change, spare time, a� spa2 enetgy irto
it We are pleased with the 2sults, the success of our residerrts, and our place in the commun'ity as
good neighbors.
We are pleased about the spiritual rightness of this project: NeaAy every dollar the building
generates is put back irrto it. Neady all of the residents perfoRn regular seNice work in the community.
We are doing what we a2 doing to inaease the value of the property and the quality of life in this
neighborhood.
Ptease accept ouc humble invitation to visit 97 No�th 0�6orti Street The door is always open. If
you wish, we wiii gladiy arrange transportation for you, your staff, and the other es[eemed members of
the City Councii to come see what we are really about.
Respectfuly,
WatterL. Dinalko
Managing Director
��..
�
�
o�coner s, z000
To Whom It Mav Concern:
I am wciting to esplain some of the benefits of living at the Buffalo sober house and to gn some
backgroundinformation abouz myself.
I am thirty-five years old I was bom and raised in Kenosb� Wisconsin, the youngest of five children.
I gaduated from the UnicersiN of Wisconsin — Madison in nineteen eighty-nine w�th a bachelors degree in
economics.
I am an alcoholic and liave been s�uggling R�th the disease for ten g ears. Mc father kas a recovering
alcoholic of twenn- years. I believe aicoholism Is a disease, however tliai topic falls outside the scope of
this letter.
I came to Minnesota in nineteen ninety-sit to go to Hazelden Treatment facility. I successfully wmpleted �,
their 30-da} program and then liced at Crossroads aftercare faciliri for one year. I remained sober for sia
months after leaving there.
I relapsed in 1998. I think many factors contributed to my relapse. one o� which was not lic•ing in a
supportice li�ring en«ronment a•hile continuing to rebuild mv life.
I entered Fainzew-Riverside treatment facility in August 1999, successfully completing their thirN-day
progrant.
I have been living at Buffalo sober house since Februai}� 2000.
I think I am fortunate to have this opportunih. I live with people c�ho uace ti�e same probiem and woric on
helping themseh�es. The Buff'alo house offers me a safe licing arrangement w�hile I con[inue to get my life
in order.
If I can be of anv assistance feeI free to contact me.
Sincereh�,
Cazl Alfredson
97 O�'ord SL N.
Saint Paul. MN. 55101
�
�l-9z r
� In additional to looking at this issue from a recovery stand point, I would think it is also important
to the twin cities area from a financial prospective. People come to ihe twin cities from all over
the world for treatment. Revenues from treatment and recovery aze an important part of our
economy. A recent example of this is the Intemationai AA Convention in Minneapolis which was
attended by more than 65,000 people. The city of St. Paul benefitted from this in terms of hotel
usage, restaurants, shopping, etc. One of the reasons that this convention happened here is the
strong recovery community in our area. Halfway Houses and Sober Houses play a part in that .
community.
I believe that our community, and the neighborhood in which it is located, benefit from Buffalo
House. Its residents are hard-working members of society that are working to insure a better
future for themselves and those who care about them. They should be applauded and supported in
their efforts. With the prevalence of chemical dependency in our society, they could also be your
pazent, child or siblings.
Sincerely,
/��7�GC'�' ' /`�-�
t
Kazen Mead
Executive Director
� ,
�
�,
buffalo sober group
September 14, 2000
I� ,�.�.�p:7t�s
,
� �
.�c-� � c11 � �� ���:{ :
f
�`�
Honorabie Jerty Btakey
City Hali Room 3t0-A
15 West Kellogg Boulevard
Saint Paui, MN 55101
Dear Mr. Blakey:
in January 2000 we purchased the property at the address below, located in your district The
seller, Serene La�son, had operated a group home acxommodating as many as 43 merrtally iil aduR
females at a time at this location for a number of years. After losing her license to provide services to
this population, the property was placed on the market as a muttiund group housing facii'dy.
A group of recovering alcoholics, induding myself, saw poterrtial in the property for housing
pe�sons in recovery from chemicai probiems specificaily due to the central location and the floor plan.
During the thorough due diligence provided by our bankers and Fred Gingas, a licensed master real
estate appraiser, it was revealed that, because of extensive interior reconstruction undertaken over 3�
years ago to convert the building irrto a group home, the property is qual'fied as a pre-e�asting, non-
conforming improvement.
Ourgroup spent neady $30(J,D00.00 in acquiring the property, ar�d neady $100,000.00 more to
renovate the interior. The building was a mess when we purchased it. Most of the money sperrt on
renovations went for painting, carpeting, drop-ceiling removal, fire alartn sys[em upgrading, etc...
Our non-confortning use of the property is signficanUy less intrusrve to aii neighbors than the
previous owners', and the property has become an asset to the neighbortrood. We have fewer
residents, strict rules, appropriate pariting demand, quiet, peacefui residents, and a spoUess facility. All
residenis are gainfuiiy empioyed, recovering gemiemen, wi�o G�ocse ta ��r2 i� 8 SuNp:..f:N°. v.hom�al
free ernironment Most are graduates of primary and e�Qended-care Veatrnent programs such as
Hazelden, Fairview-Riverside, IGnnic Fails, etc... They live at 97 No�th 0�6ord Street to receive the
supporf of other men in recovery. AII are productive, law-abiding, voting citizens wifh the unfortunate
handicap of a disease in rem'ission.
It seems that you are uncertain whether this pmjec[ is good for the neighborfiood. We are
quite sure that, shouid you choose to visit 97 North 0�6ord Street, your concems about the projed and
iis rightful place in this neighbortiood, wili vanish.
,�
97 North Oxford Street Saint Paul, Minnesota USA 55104
voice: 651.248.3387 data: 651.227.7782 bsgilc�uswest.net �
/ VLI lb 'IOFJ 141�k7irPi KCF+� c�inic cv�a�iL� "OI�Z
i
R��L Es�a. EQLITIF_.S
REAL ESTATE EOI.�T�ES. �`1C • RE�L ES'NTE EOU�'4E5 BROKERAGE CO
REAL ESTn7E ECV i'�ES DE`/E�OenErvT CC
�
�CIObfI �.�, ����
To W'hom It May Concern:
As a membcr of the communit} who has been professiona[ly cammined tu expanding
affordable housing options in Saint Paul for many yeazs, I�c�ish to voice my support for
the eontinued operation of Buffalo Housz. Specifically, I urge you to eontinue the non-
confoiming Lise privilege granted to the immediate previous ow�ner of the property.
From the information available to me, it appeazs that the owners have made every good
faith efforr to compl}• with ail applicable laws and regulations including the non-
conforming use provision currently under debatz.
� i
In addition to proyiding an important serv�ce to a protected class of persons, the
ownership has demonstrated that it can harmoniously re-integrace the property into the
neighborhood.
Your considzration is appreciated.
� a00 D[G�EL O� HO`+OR Bw�UiNG . 325 CEDhR 5'REET • ST Pn,�;,_ M�vN[50'/� 5510� •:E5�� 227-6925 • Fqx (65U 227-9001
tions
' onymous
October 12, 2000
To Whom it May Concem:
P.O. Box 4245 � Saint Paut, Minnesota • 55104
Statistics show us that one of every ten people is chemically dependent and that one in every five
people is involved with a person who is chemically dependent. Statistics have also shown us that
one of the essential ingredients for recovery is a supportive living environment. Buffalo House and
other sober housing provide such an environment for those in recovery.
I have been involved in the field of chemical dependency for the past twenty yeazs. Five of those
years were as manager of Outpatient Services and Aftercaze at what is now known as Fairview
Recovery Services. One of the most important functions of my aftercaze staffwas the placement
of newly recovery people in halfway houses and sober houses. The e�dstence of such homes is
essential to the field of chemical dependency where lvfinnesota enjoys the reputation of being a
leader in the treatment of chemical dependency. If this is to continue, it is important that
residences such as Buffalo House e�st.
I am a faculty member of Metro State University where I teach a coutse on Chemical Dependency
Intervention and Prevention with a special focus on relapse prevention. Some of the ingredients
that aze essential to relapse preventions are: 1) selfknowledge, 2) accountability, 3) responsible
behavior, 4) a supportive living environment, and 5) regular attendance at support meetings.
Buffalo House creates just such a setting.
My experience with Buffalo House is a personal one. My granddaughter's father has been there
Sl.^.C� 1t OYBP.P�. Tn that tirrZg ha hgc ar„Caimiilatp� ritO2C Lh�n nine EROI1tt1S ,Of COIIYIDUOUS SObI'ICIv.
He is enrolied in school and has completed an emergency medical technician course and has
passed the national registry test. He is now working in that field and continues schooling. He
attends regular AA meetings and works on recovery issues with a therapist. He has a sponsor who
he interacts with on a regular basis. He is an asset to society and his communiry. Buffalo House is
a big part of his recovery.
The residents at Buffato are held accounfable for taking the right step fo insure a good recovery.
If they don't adhere to the rules and regulations, they have to leave. $uffalo House has a zero
tolerance policy. Some of the rules of Buffalo House aze: 1) each resident has weekly household
tasks that must be attended to, 2) each resident must be employed, 3) residents must maintain
sobriety, 4) and agree to a monthly lottery for random urine screens. Residents aze strongly
encouraged to attend weekly meeting and have a sponsor.
�
�
�
Phone: 65ll647-9712 • �'ax: 65ll647-1593
E-mail: eaiscC�mtn.org • Web Page: http!/www.EmotionsAnonymous.org
oi - yz,
Zoning Committee Minutes
� October 12, 2000
File #: 00-122-234
Page 3
She also presented a letter submitted by the SummiUUniversity Planning Council stating they
have found no reason notto support the Buffato Sober Group's application for the Change of
Nonconforming Use Permit.
In response to a question from Commissioner Gordon, Ms. Homans stated she does not have a
copy of the contract between the County and Oakland Home. She received information on the
dates on which the contract was terminated and the residents moved out in a conversation with
the contract manager from Ramsey County.
In response to a question from Commissioner Kramer, Ms. Homans stated the applicant was
provided with a packet of information and an appiication for a permit to reestablish a non-
conforming use.
Mark Gehan, the attorney for Buffalo Sober Group, appeared and presented a packet that
contained several documents pertaining to the case. He noted that his client, Mr. Dinalko, would
respond to the findings related to traffic and parking outlined in the staff report. He commented,
however, that the reference to neighbors noting an increase in traffic is difficult to respond to but
that it should be noted that those same neighbors are part of an organized opposition to the
facility.
� He went on to give a history of the building at 97 North Oxford, acknowledging that the residents
of the previous facility were gone in 1998. He also stated the building was listed as a fully
functional group home by the owner when it was put on the real estate market and that listing is
attached to the permit application. The bui{ding was for sale for over a year. They have
information that one of the property's neighbors Diane Lunderborg wanted to buy the building at
one point. She later, he stated, made negative comments about "drug addicts" in a letter to her
neighbors after the Sober House was established.
Mr. Gehan described some of the financial circumstances surrounding the building. In purchasing
the building, the Buffalo Sober Group invested $82,000, took out a$280,000 loan (a portion of
which was secured by the City) and spent $100,000 to upgrade the sfructure. They are now
making only $1,000 per month. The building was recentiy re-appraised at $528,000, indicating
that they have added value to the structure. He reported that estimates his client has received
from contractors are that it would take $490,000 to �600,000 to convert the structure to a duplex
allowed under the zoning code.
Mr. Gehan went on to propose that the previous nonconforming use was not discontinued or
abandoned. He described a case pending in Hennepin County before the Court of Appeals. The
District Court, in that case, found that a building's not being in use did not constitute
"abandonment." He explained that the argument was made that abandonment of a
nonconforming use must be proved against the property owner. A decision is expected wifhin
30-60 days. Relative to this case, he suggested that because the previous owner was markefing
the building as a non-conforming use, continued to maintain an office and pay utility bills and a
� caretaker, there was no intention to abandon the use.
Commissioner Kramer pointed out that ihe Zoning Code refers to "discontinuing" rather than
"abandoning" a use and that the specific language in the Code is that a nonconforming use is
"discontinued or ceases to exist."
Zoning Committee Minutes
October 12, 2000
File #: 00-122-234
Page 4
In response to a question from Commissioner Gordon about the nature of the business the
building ownerwas maintaining, Mr. Gehan stated thaf fhe ownerwas managing fhe safe of the
property and conducting personal business.
In response to a question from Commissioner Kramer, Mr. Gehan explained that the home was
for people in recovery coming out of facilities such as Hazeidon.
Commission Gordon directed Mr. Gehan's attention to the Coidwell Banker Bumet listing
submitted with the application. After estabiishing that the listing detailed a series of specific
attributes of the building (e.g., nature of the mortgage, numberof ranges), Commissioner Gordon
highlighted the attributes listed under "Current Use": Hotel/Motel, Business Service, Professional
Service. He noted that Group Home, Residentiaf Facifity or Rooming House were nof listed. -
Commissioner Gordon went on to highlight an excerpt from the first paragraph from the letterfrom
University Bank dated October 11, 2000 submitted by the applicant at the meeting: "We financed
the purchase and remodeling of a building located at 97 North Oxford in St. Paui. The building
had been empty for severai months and had shown considerab(e signs of neglecf, and
deterioration."
�
In response to a question from Commissioner Gordon, Mr. Gehan indicated that, unless the
Zoning Committee has discretion, if they find the use was discontinued, they would have to require �
an application to reestablish a nonconforming use. Mr. Gordon then outlined a hypofheficat
scenario of an owner of a non-conforming barbershop who decided to no longer cut_ hair but
confinued to own the building for more than 365 days and went in periodicaily to read the paper
or attend to personal business. He asked Mr. Gehan if he would agree that the use had been
discontinued. Mr. Gehan responded that it would depend on the owner's intent.
Waiter Dinalko (400 Selby Avenue), the applicant and managing direcfor of the Buffalo Sober
House, appeared and showed a video of the property and explained the parking set-up. He stated
they limit the number of automobiles owned by residents to ten and there is enough off street
parking available.
After describing some of his personal history, Mr. Dinalko discussed his conclusion, as a
recovering alcoholic, that a sober environment is an essentiai part of the recovery process. There
is a much higher success rate for people able to find and live in a sober environment. With the
notion of "giving back" to the community, he said found the property in November 1999 (staff note:
I believe he meant September 1999). His original offerwas turned down, but he was recontacfed
by the selling agent at the end of November.
His intention has been to estabiish a sober house--providing a stable network for a group of inen
in recovery. There is a house manager on site. House rules include drug and afcohol testing and
requirements related to being good neighbors.
He outlined the nature of the seven police calis related to the property.
In response to questions from Commissioner Kramer, he said that they began to occupy the �
property on February 15, 2000 and thatthey occupied the properfy without a permit because they
didn't need a permit for occupancy.
OI - 4 Z-
�
� G��
��._O�� �
�.�� ��� �
�� �
��� ���� ���
�� f�
�
� � �
�
buffalo house
� �/���G
�U� .��-�°�ui �-��%' �",��r�.X'
�� `� �S �-/�. � ��f�
-y'�_ y -�d/�i✓�� G' �
�
>�� � � ��� �� �.
�
���� ��c_. � �.� � �
�. �.�� _�ti, ��au�e_ /��
��
��'��,
,• �� T�o
� �f�� �ti�
�� J
� - r �
�/,7/' �� _.����U� � � Q ����r�?2e-- ✓`zC�' .
,, // / / _.�i'U U(J \ (j/� ( � �� '�" " `-
G�'�'!G� � �� • �-� \I �
� G J ,/ ,�/� �����
��'��, C�' d�Gtl���/✓l� � f C� �`c�i/'�� � G�
�� -, �
,
����r��,�,z�a�.�e ��'` -�-�"; — �-�- �o 1���, ����; ��c ���:�;�-�
, � , �� �
� � � ��� l�—t'��L ;'' .��..1j�� ��� �
�� � ,
� � ,� � �� � ' ✓ �, , ,6�r��'� o�
��1 _�%�y,? ��� ./'(/,��l�%v,' //��—C' �-'/ ,.�-� �I'�G'vC%� GC' � — c�Gr/
� , / v � i � � i �`�i�� �C � � �' l � G��'�C. v' L�✓ G'`�! ��/7 .
% /
��`� � "'!�'�,? 7"� 1 �`�-C� �%-�!_/� �/��%/ ��l -
� L� �I
V /�� �
C/ �
� 97 North Ouford Street Saint Paui, Minnesota USA 5104 ` �
voice: 65'1.227.7781 data: 651.227.7782 buffalohouseQuswest.net
_ �- �
1�1:.���� � _ti��
�� �
��-��
�/G
�D��l� ""'r ''"^-c-f
� M
r
��,{,� � �;�L Y ���
��� Z �� �,ry/ ti
.}n �
/ � ��
(� � �
(�//L/tt ��
�,,�,'�rh �
�fiOZ�r s
�( ��
btt�
0�
o�
{,-�t �,
(d�� ��
(�i��l '"
�+1�✓� r
�v�►
�
dUi�
`��
eGd
/t Mh�^
� ��
7R� {L° ! �GL
{✓1 1/��O�f'ti � � �t 1/`�-
1 �� R / owL ,c- l,��y�
�
g v ��'r Gd !�1-rJlC . !/�.,
,{ � � 1 J �� �-� / M, y(c�F R�-
� !� r /
� l!'vt
G ��,K�L /1— C � �-N tt
���
��
�
�� ,�...� �
�
/ Q/� t, ,o,�^ � �.� ��� Mr
��/v � ( �r/ d d��/ L �v� " N C.�! 1/i � � f� �l V ��
✓ (n.f�
/ , , � �'o �/�f� �`+�C- ,
(.b��y/' f}^! ,� �r�fiYy7 �ifT��'[� t✓�n� � �°� �
J, l �' '" �%" , �N 6 v( ��L
��i��� oFf%�� y ` �;�z,�t. �"
{/ - / ' O( �
�� S7 / �L�f G L f�JfL / /
� ° ^ � �d „�i� � � �-C �� �t� � ,a„e �- '� "'��`� (,�
y�
� ���7`� �iJ(L / C P� �� �1�.s�1-�-� �i�t��kf 5���"s�7/
. � �� � �r !� � .,�
s�����'� , � y � � ,�,.Z,�, � �
� .�-�f'f %/L' P�` `����,1� �,^��,^,/c �7� �� N � r�
^ / �
� 97 North O�ord Stree� Samt Paul, Minnesota USA 55104! ��� �
voice:651.227.7781 data:65'1.227.7782 buffalohouse@uswest,net ���
� �� I
�
ot -9�
S
_ __ �
�i r- ;• � •: �:
�� � G �G',� lu• ��a�vi.e� � �"� .
S ,
�°'�-�-( �' `�- ��� � � �
�� l . � � u�� � c�
l �" k 1 �[,L � , / l �� �/ "� �
� 1 "� � . � o' �
��� ��� ���.
`�� e__.� �� � cy 1, �v- G ,�� _ ' ,,
!� ,
`"�`-� � �� �•� �..��- ``��y
� c� �,L �``? ��,1'a/�-c�-v� r''�-e.. _ c � � - �
�k�. �- �, � �.�,
��n�� � -�
� �� � �� ���rn� ��
�'�.�� �.�.� � �
�� � � � � � � �.� .
� ��
� ���v , , �r -, �, 2 s�
�
�,� �
C
� �� � ��-� �,.� . �?�� �`� .
c� �
�� � � �J� �`�'- ��
'�'� � J� � z cs� �c `�'S-C
Y � �-
� 97 North Oxford Street Saint Paui, Minnesota USA 55104
voice: 651.227.7781 data: 651.227.7782 buffalohouse@uswest.net
�-
buffalo house
,
� l..il/fo� /T
�o m�-y cow���� . � ���� ,���w i����
��; -3 `-� ��S /��o w s��-T % >f�s 0°.�.sc c ,l�7cs�-�✓s /6 /h � .
f.S S C G�/�P� � y - SC�Li✓l /y � i "' �SCi��/N[' �-/'�� 1 v1 �L OGn'' _
���c� pc.-., /o F��✓r� �i� u�,q y �,'.� �� .Sa3/�'�ci�, %�✓.o %o
��,P,� f1 Sv�i�I �J•�sc 10 S%r�� sc/��,� _ �y �iv,.vb .r.� Sel�
I�� d,�F�.�Tu,�.� j % ��wq % HC D�Sc,���.�� .� Nc,� t� T
c;�,�wE � � ��% z ,�-��,� ��,� � Sa /.�/,'�cl y . �--,� �, � .
7 ;.s 1� 1 /��20 , � ' ffi9 - se ���.�,d 1� �S'a.��i�Ty �
�� �s,.G F.�C's% i-S %h�c�T�-,�-�i SCco.�d /f�� ��y /�dos�
� �, o % /,'��o � Sc r� � ,-'�a �sE . � /h ��Qc ,� 6P�-T� /�,� ��✓�
��� U� ccn /6 �G �rCC�/°T�,O �/� /�'c , /��.�E .-� C/� �✓ �iv�
C.�o�,�� �w� h3� �,�� �� ��E i� 5��� �'�q�.�,��� , i/�s /��
I.S ,�I? � b �.l J /�c /o�- .S =C� �,/�a 6�/,ir, - � �c�L. % �'i �
��� �fc usc �s � �S'�r �=�✓��a�c n���; rc� /y
/'� �'�
f�l�/J �m C�ft/�Fiu�-- �v �C �EpE' �
,LJ ./���---� � }��
/ D � �a / �
97 North Oxford StreeY�Saint Aaul, Mienesota USA 55904 �
voice:651.227.7781 data: 657.227.7782 buffalohouse@uswest.net
�
OI-�j2
�
1 � -a-cs�
�
':�ii'r.T.• i •� _ �:
� �v� �v I ��v `�e ���scs�� e:
�vseJ c�s ��- �� � s��� � -
��5c-��ec� ��r��r ��� �.V������
� `s � � o .� - �,�e
��,�,� �o � �
� ���\ �-c\a � ���� 1`��S�ld ����,
� �- �� �� ��vi i��cQ' -4-�z `�� s�
�c�5 �o� �V1 .
� ''C��OYeY ��35 ��`��\���
�� � '�`� E?��; � � ,
�,�5 ��\ �`�� J ���v� C� �� ��"�� �
� : � �V�-� C�� V �, Y� �' `�`(��' � S \ O� �QC ��' ��
�
. � ��6� �
� �
��1 � /
I --
� 97 North Oxford Street Saint Paul, Minnesota USA 55104
voice: 651.227.778'i data: 651.227.7782 buffalohouse@uswest.net
�'
buf�alo house
�
���eE n�,,,� '��� ���.�,alo �SF A� t�
rt" l�w� bt�a Ve� y Cs�r�� E,r bi � 6�ere , r� c�cie ;�.
�Eo_.�,\,� e\osE �r�an9., l,:hv � L'an �'Ur'�v 'tc ;^� �•^" c�>
n� 1�,Q O. hete ;s R�41nZ: ,�.�-,Q l<.�s�
1
YS C.\i.Xti� C�eor1 t�eres G�w`c��S ��la Qr�ti1,�o� c5c�,, cv'
)
n ; S 1�} - �p' �.1�� w•�. �:✓�J�QSb�u l.uc� �e�cr t�,.,
��^�o� sE ia 1� �e b.; i- S i,�{��t- � s +1.: a�ac.e ? nee c� fv
b t� Sk�,� Sobe�. ewd cj e+ rn� I• 4e. �ek ;.v crdr.�.
I neJz.- ��.w�l.� i e� "�-nc4 S�ch Ctr� Qx��..-o.-,rnz+�j" a.o
�.� 9� JeJ O-�wC-`15 {1P.Li: Ll c�. �o/'ro.^ S}Cnes C� �b�.1
� mc�rw,s � .� �, .1. :'h t4c�.
�ne�;se5 t�� � ; a � / �`Je¢� l.ere � �
L �`hc�c�e. -�'�.�, C�-+o�'r- .'— D�' �'� ' ea„ -srvs� a.L)
ca, cS v� i� s �• k e o� �n , �� h.cne . ft�id -�
�,os� .
��rrc�'
54ar��.s ��e t�ecv-c� �.-u< ft•z o�e,� hvuc Mak�S
rv� u�cx.c�v. u5�7 - t�c�E c� + f 1, V4e �'� 3 o'�e,
� ol�r5.� l;.�wl laC�
97 North Oxford Street Saint Paui, Minnesota USA 55104 �
voice: 657.227.77$1 data: 651.227.7782 buffalohouse�uswest.net
/
�
- � �—.S�__._
� Z�'3�f��4G ��LE 0l�-lZZ-23y�
October 4, 2000
St. Paul Planning Commission
GJRiilg i.:SiivaaiuG:.
Planning & Economic Development
1400 City Hall Annex
25 West Fourth Street
St Paul MN 55102-1634
To Whom It May Concern:
Re: File #00-122-234 • Public Hearing on 97 North Oxford, Buffalo Sober Group
� to be held October 12, 2000 at 3:30 p.m.
I received notice of this meeting and want to forward some information to you. It has come to my
attention that it is alleged that someone from the Buffalo Group reported to the Zoning Commission
that St. Paul-Reformation Lutheran Church gave the group pernussion to use our pazking lot..0ur
church is located across the street from 97 North Oxford and our parking lot is located a half block
north of that properiy.
We did not give the Buffalo Sober Group any blanket permission to use our parking lot. As good
neighbors in the area we aiways tell inquirers that if they need to use our lot to get their cars off the
sireet in a snow emergency they may do so temporarily. We would not be able to give any blanket,
sustained permission for use of our lot because we need it for our purposes.
On other matters pertanung to this property, we have not had any difficulty with the residents,
though several things of concern have been reported to me by other neighbors. When the building
was first purchased and rehabilitated we met the owner, who at the tnne was Ralph Castagno, and
thought that we would have a good relationship with him since he would be living there. Aowever,
it is my understanding that Mr. Castagno has moved out of town.
My concern at this point is that this appeazs to be a facility that is in some kind of way serving
persons who have been chemically dependent. I am very sensitive to the needs of people who have
� been through treatment, but I am wondering about the wisdom of having a facility like this that, as
I understand it, has no staff. Neither am I clear how the facility is being physically cared for.
Paul A. Tidemann, Pastor Anita C. Hill, Pastoral Minister Lynne F. Lorenzen, Pastor
700 North Oxford Street, St. Paul, MN 5 5 7 046540 (651) 2243371 FAX (651) 224-fi228
E-mail: STPAULREFC�aol.com Website: www.cybenvord.com/spr
St. Faul-Reformation Lutheran Church
Evangelical Lutheran Church in America
l
� �ONING �ILE o�-�ZZ-Z3��
Perhaps there are others who have adequate answers to these matters. Our position as a church is �
neither for nor against the zoning of this property lazgely because we do not have adequate
informaUon about it. I raise the above concerns to indicate that I couldiunagine a situation arising
that may turn out to be difficult in the neighborhood.
Please contact me if you wish.
Sincerely,
�' . � ��a.�,..
Paul A. Tidemann, Pastor
c: �'��r.cii�::�� �er 7e.=� E:al:e�
�
�
_ o�-yZ
ZONII�G
� The subject property is zoned R2B (Residence District), under the zoning ordinance
administered by the City of Minneapolis.
See the Addenda for the zoning ordinance.
DISCUSSION OF ZONIAIG
The subject facility is zoned RZB (Residence District). The subject improvements were
constructed prior to the adoption of the current ordinance and is non-confomiing to the curtent
ordinance but is allowed as a non-conforming use.
"The R2B Residence District is desi�ed primarily for residential use of various types that
are described in the portions of the ordinance that may be found in the Addendum.
Permitted uses in this district inciude all uses ailowed in the other Residential Dish The
existing use is non-conforming but is allo�ved as a non-conformin� use.
The subject property appeazs to be "grand fathered" as a result ofbeing constructed prior to
the adoption of the current zoning ordinance and is, therefore, considered to be a legal use.
Furthermore, the subject appears to be non-conforming with respect to pazking requirements as well
as lot, yazd and density requirements. Although the subject is non-conformin�, its use may continue
� so long as no more than 50 percent of it is not destroyed or damaged. Given that there is sufficient
hazard insurance to cover potentiai'loss, there does not appear to be a negative impact as a result of
the non-conforming use.
14
8$/22/2000 13:39
< ?'
`��
�
:r;;.:�:.s
SPPD RMS QUERY
Address Search
Address Search: 37 OXFORD ST N(Sector. t Grid: 127 ) from 01 /0112 0 0 0 to 0812il2000
RMrieved 7 records
Complaint 3t
i 00153580
� 00150886
�p OOQ92887
- U Q0091793
�&9379
F WQ78900
.j 00011634
- �a.�� � �
` � � �',t
1`�' vvh�-es s ��� 4 S y, v-c_ o_ � 4 '� Q. w
�.�.l�s , �� ,�r��� �s,�r � r�,%e �.�� .��t�-�-��4. �o�
v S�r``j ��_ C^,,�.,•� �' �� os �� c�t� o. `' ��}��
� a., � 1 0. T W�c�t��" ���) �`�t iN T�'�j' e
T"�SC' l .- 1�Y <<_��,t �- �
N � i
��v., ,�t� r
6122226881
6122226881 HTLL PLAZA
Occur Dafa S Time incident Type Disposltion Api#
���z���`-+� DISTURBCALLS� ADV � '
9&Ot/2ppp2325 DEATH � RCV v' 121 �.
05/21i2000 75:35 INVESTIGATE ADV ,__� � �-
05f20/200007�4^_ OTHERASSAUI�- RCV."1 �
' � �l�l, ) Q V-� Y`-Q,'( Z• .
s � �����,
�
r
S c_� "� J 2�tn.
����1 -�-�
N � �� � � �,e_� - �.�
YJ U w��->-r 1- v�-z— ��'�°=
�.x.X.� � z�c � �•. �� �
�
J
���v� � 5 �._�. ��--� '
Info�mation requesied by: (130000)
1
OSH8200022;0'I DISTURB CALLS . UNF- Z +
04l30t200001:03 FIGHTS qpV 2 �}rp.-�q .�J�����
OflZOl20001227 _._—�p�s._.'_—_..._._--ADV ' l
� w :-•-S
� ��
� �'��S"� c� a a �D� ti�� t�
� G�-U � 1 -� �_,�-- ? ,
� �, ��,t 1 -�-z-� -� �,�.
L.�.���- �`��� �
���- �
-J-z-C-�
��
�
Printed af:08/21/2000 7Dr01
PAGE 01
/
MAIN LEVEL
�
�
'� 1 b e�1
�
� �'
�k �
La ��� E
(3
2 beds
�beds
���
���
S tairs
°�'Y 'r 3 z
Ba h h
R oms
Stairs
Entry
Kitchen
Dining
Room
��
i beds
� ���_
I beds
io�
t ��
� � Porch � � ,�,('r
�'C �
O l "�j Z
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�:J
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�\ .-.�`:- � ���� �
OF
A Proposed Group Home
LOCATED AT
97 North Oxford Street
St. Paul, Minnesota 55104
AS OF
December 16,1999
FOR
University National Bank
200 University Avenue West
St. Paul, Minnesota, 55103
Atfention: John Bennett Phone: 298-6750
C.�
LENDERS APPRAISAL SERVICES, INC.
F. W. Gergen, MAI
Appraiser
File #: 11256-L
�
�
�
t <: _.._ _ � �,� , -- _
�
�`
�
/
/6-�-cv
��
buffalo house
01-qz
i l� ' .
�'`'�'�G..�- �� ��� �< < _ < <`� , , �� - � �- .�.-t� :�
?fi :` �"-(-' L� --�_ C"d = x C/t �C Lt, � =,l�._ �.�/' _ _ . ti - -.. -. . .. � - T� .
� �i
.. '�-� !�-'i�iu./ : . /',iYJ ✓�� :<y.nJ . //� //.�1ii/ /i i/�
�� �J" �
� /
� ,��� _ ��-f �� ��l�J� ,�����- .1.i, ' ��
- �,,, ���,,,.�,�-��
,,
iP�� � ,/ 1 � ✓
9 � r,
�i/ii/,��,n'�n,�/ �,��> / //� //�i2��> /
� • .Z/'/!/i,l.i _� /,.�iT �
i
�';:J ,; ;> f��> � =
- ;%���_, i�� 'ii�� .
j/� �: !__ l, ���t' �, ; ��
�
- '�—'�--'� f .i��% 3 , ,
, , c-.t�c.cv� .Z�i!/�.�'-�"�� / �� /)ii �`X
/� i/
!./Si�JJ ,.:.G�,/�� _� ' `�'`�iY'll ` ' �/l.?/_!�'� �}/� J � /`. �
/-.•, � /_ r'? � -`�,�_L�„ �i� � .%!) /, T�/'/>
✓ �� • ��1.�i / /�i/. � ��� � /� ✓ ' l i� (, �
�� /" �J��i/,�/ ��, � Z..- i .
/' c • � . .�
� � / �.�/✓Ll��'ry ���J
G i�. � G'` (:,C_ C � - � _' Z� : . � , . � . ��/ .
" � / ..�'t�. �3 � �i,��/i///�J'��i
� // �
��✓_ �L�rri'.�i4 � �- ./-, . <. L -. . -: C � . . _., ; ` .
/ �.-, . . ._ . . �_� .
' � � / / " Ci� �/'� �
l��C.i�� . �t!.�'ZZ/•' / - 9
, L�'��•��i LX .d � ..i._ //JJ./�1_� ,!J� � .�i� � 1�iii�
�'�� �i�Ji) �i.t�J/� ///is��; T� - �'
�! �%�CC�7.�
�
����i» � O
.
! �: <„ � =/,�. � ,% - --
,_.
97 North Oxford Street Saint Paul, Minnesota USA 55104
voice: 65'1.227.7781 data: 651.227.7782 buffalohouse@uswest.net
�PPER LEVEL
��'� ����
�a.(�ir�
: � � C r �
;�, � ; ��.-�
t ( 1`� ✓��^ u �� 5
�
�
.
� Q' _ Z
�
o�tot�r 6, Z000
I ���1�VG �1LE do-�z2-���
�
�
City of Saint Paul
PED
Nancy Homans
1400 City Aall Annex
25 West 4th St.
St. Paul, MN 55102
RE: Buffalo Sober Group L.L.C.
97 North O�ord St. N.
Deaz Nancy:
I have received a public hearing notice for the appeal for the certificate of occupancy
and for the nonconforming use permit.
I have owned my hoine at 1053/1051 Ashland since November 1998. My property is
immediately adjacent to 97 N. Oxford. The winter of 98-99, I had several conversations
with the cazetaker at 97 N. Oxford. He only came by when it snowed or needed
maintenance. The only part that was kept clear of snow was the front sidewaik and the
back driveway. The pazking azea nea�t to the building was never plowed until the new
owners took over in 7an. 2000. I was interested in knowing, why there was no one living
at this building. He reported that the faciiity for mentally ill women had closed down. I
had not seen any one living in this building from the tune I moved into my home in
November 1998. The residents had vacated the premises prior to November 1998. The
only person that I ever had seen coming and going from this building was the cazetaker. I
never saw any lights on in this building.
I have seen the packet of information that was provided to the city by the 97 N. O�ord,
with the Buffalo Sobriety Group appeal. There were a few records from NSP included in
this appeal packet. I sent you a letter dated April 17, 2000, which stated ttiat the electric
and gas bills had dramatically decreased from 1998 to 1999. Please see the enclosed
letter. The nonconfornvng use permit that was given to the previous owner had eacpired
prior to the Buffalo Sobriety Group purchasing it. The pernut was issue to the Oakland
Home to house mentally ili women, not to run an office by Seren M. Larson. As I have
stated before, the only person I had ever seen at the building up until the Buffalo Sobriety
Group entered in January 2000, was the cazetaker.
The Certificate of Occupancy has been revoked because the buiiding is currently zoned
as a duplex. This building is an exact duplicate of the building at 89 North O�ord,
which is currently operating as a 4-Plex. It houses 8-10 people. There aze additional3
apartment buildings on the corner of Ashland & Oxford, which are also multiple dweliing
units. This is creating an over saturation of the community. The building was built for
the purpose of apartments not a boazding house. This type of facility is not agpropriate in
this community because of the quantity of muitiple dwelling units that aze straining this
neighborhood. This facility will place 3 times the quantity of people that a 4-plex would.
This presents this community with a huge pazking problem because the owners want to
place 26 residents this building. They only have 12 off sireet pazking spaces. Where do
� Z4NiNG F1LE °°.�u-Z3�
the other 14 people park? It also creates traffic congestion for the neighborhood with not �
only the tenants but also the food delivery trucks, gazbage trucks and other utility
vehicles that go in and out of this property that aze not associated with the other
apartment buildings in this neighborhood We also have a church with a food shelve and
a junior high school within one block of 97 N. Oxford. This building has only halfthe
number of parking spot as it does residences which leaves the rest to park on the over
crowed streets.
The currenY owners of 97 North Oacford have been in this building illegally since
3anuary 2000. They report that they have invested approximately $100,000 in
remodeling and repairs. T'his building was renovated without the pre-approval of the city
zoning. They still continue to renovate this ficility without regard to the fact that they
may not be able to run their business out of this building legally. The most recent
renovation has continued to take place over the past several weeks. This money that they
have spent should not be considered by the city, as a reason why this building could not
reasonably or economically be used as a confornvng purpose as a 4-plex.
This type of facility does cause a detriment to the character of this neighborhood with
the quantity and type of facility that they aze rnnning. I have enclosed a police report for
the 97 North Oxford building. The death that is listed on 08/Oi/00 was an overdose as
stated by the Homicide Department of St. PauL There was an additional incident on
08/OS/00 that is not listed on the enclosed report this was also a disturbance cali. This
neighborhood is full of young chiidren that aze living around the building and are coming
and going from the near by school.
This neighborhood is adamantly against allowing this building to be rezoned for
nonconforming use. The re-establishment of a nonconforming use requires the owner to �
obtain signatures from two-thirds of the property owner's within 100 feet of the property.
They have failed to provide the St. Paul Planniug Commission (Zoning Section) with this
required portion of their appIication.
The Planning Commission has no other choice but to deny their application for the re-
establishment of a nonconforming use permit.
We are holding a neighborhood meeting on October 9, 2000 at 1060 Laurel Ave.
between 7-8 PM. If someone from your office could attended, to inform the
neighborhood of the process that will take place and the guideline for this permit it would
be greatly appreciated by the neighborfiood to help understand the City's position.
Si#lcerely,
� � -o �_
;
Shannon A. O`Keefe
105�/ 1053 Ashland Ave.
St. Paul, MN 55104
�
. ,...
Y 1
• - � �_ .�_....
� ausuc a�aoRr
r
Compiaint #
�� �:'.
���• :-
���• •c
..•-.
��� .-.•
I�I .G�
, �_
Occur Date & Tune
� - t� Ol-4Z
I ef froti��
Shacif�ci� G' ��e��.
C � ���o/ o��
Address Search: 97 OXFORD ST N(Sector. 1 Grid: 127 ) from �9/01/1999 to 08/03/2000
Retrieved 8 records
0&0111000 23:15
05/21/200p 15:35
�51202000 01:42
OS/162000 22:01
04/30l2000 01:03
��YLO/2000 �22�
10/06/1999 1223
10/O4/1999 08:18
�'�
SPPD RMS QUERY
Address Search
IncideM Type
DEATH
INVESTIGATE
OTHERASSAULT
DISTURB CALLS
FIGHTS
DOBS ,
ALARMS
ALARMS
Disposition Apt#
RCV 127
ADV
RCV
UNF
V �
2 � �
Aov —�l�YWS_ 1
ADV
ADV
I�st�'b
��.
��� ��
� ,�.�
. ��,
� � ✓�'� � I -�
� ZC}�919VG FILF o���ZZ�z3y�
�
Information requested by: (72100Q)
�t !o%« dePz` G�/-a9�- i�i/.
1
Printed at:08/03/2000 11:18:26
��.�". � �:» � '� � � "'"� � :
°��� � � ,? . �= �� _ _ .:
�--, - _ . � -
�.��� --
���- - � -
- ��
- ��� ��'
� ���i1NG FtLE 6�-=`� = �
� _ , Disposition (Disp� Key w� _ _ ..__. - �
for -
- = - � Address Printouts -
RCV = RECEIYED A Police report was written.
CAN = CANCELED
The call was cancaled. No police report was
writfen.
GOA = Gone On Arrival The police went to the scene of the cail and upon
arrival the disturbance(suspects were not there.
No police report was writGen.
� SNR = Services Not Rendered Police services were not required. No police �
report was written. _ .
° ADV = Advised Poiice ha�dled the situation at the scene and .
advised the peopie involved how to deal with it_ _�- .�fi: '�
No police report was writtsn. �� °-=�_ _�`
TRF = Traffc A Traffic Tag (tickeUcitation) was issued. No .� _-�
police report was written.
PCN = Previous Case Number A case number (C.N.) Was previously assigned to __ _
this incident at another time. Check that casa "-:"
numbePs disposition. -= = =
UNF = Unfouoded There was no reason for the cali. No police report =.
was written. _ -_ -
DUP = Duplicate Cali A case number (C.N.) Was previousiy assigned to ;:_ _
-- this incident at another tirne. Cheek that case �:'_
numbe�'s disposition.
DTX = Detox
RPT
The police brought an individual to the Detox _
Cente�. No police report was written.
No Report see advised ( �} �� �
--- �
�
= ��'
' A fic o�-yz
� �ONIl�lG FILE o�-�u�23y le �prYl �a��' �
. D`1Cee � Ctol��cL�
Buffal er roup, .L.C. purchased this�property in January 2000 for approacimately $300,00
Since that time, the owner has invested approximately $100,000 more in remodeling and repairs.
In St. Paul, the revocation of a Certificate of Occupancy has historicaily been used as a remedy for
health and safety violations. The St. Paul Fue Marshall has affirmatively stated that he has no health
or safety concerns regazding the premises in question.
The issue in this case is one of non-confimung use. The building had been operated as "Oakland
Homes Inc.", a Rule 36 community residential facility for mentally ill women. It was sold to
appellanu in February 2000 and an application for a change in non-conforming use permit was fust
filed in Mazch 2000. The owner ofthe building, Serene Lazson, operated her business from Oakland
Homes, Inc. until January 15, 2000, but during a substantial portion of the time the building was
listed for sale, it was not being used as a residential facility.
Appellant now has a pending application fo: a non-conferming use permit pending, and a copy of
that petition is attached as Exhibit A.
Appellant believes that it is eligible for a non-conforming use permit pursuant to the provisions of
Chapter 62, Section 102, subsection i, ¶ 3 of the zoning code because the proposed use of the
properiy, a rooming use for chemically dependent men in recovery, is equally appropriate or more
appropriate to the neighborhood than the previous non-conforming use, because the traffic generated
would be similar to that �enerated by the previous non-conforming use, because the use would not
be detrimental to the existing character of development in the immediate neighborhood, nor would
it endanger the public health, safety or general welfaze, and because the proposed use is consistent
with the comprehensive plan.
Some of the issues presented by the application for a non-conforming use permit aze:
Whether the use made by the previous owner of the building until January 2000
constituted a continuing non-conforming use of the premises such that there was no
"one yeaz gap" between the time appellant purchased the building and the tune
appellant made its own application for a permit.
F�
Even ifthere was a"one year gap", did the fact that the premises were then listed for
sale operate to toll the ruruiing of the clock.
Whether the denial of a non-coFyforming use permit, under the circumstances of this
case, would operate to create an unconstitutional "taking" of the property.
�
Whether the Federal Fair Housing Act required the City to make a reasonable
accommodation in its zoning policies for the residents of the building owned by
appellant. 42 U.S. Code § 3604(fl(3)(B).
The revocation of the Certificate of Occupancy is based upon the fact that appellant has not yet been
� granted a non-conforming use permit. If the Certificate of Occupancy were to be revoked prior to
. .
- " � s �ONING FtLE bG-l22�Z3
-- �
a deternvnation of the permit appiication, the residenu of appellant's building be required to leave
and find new places to live. These persons are valuable but fragile members of the St. Paul �
community. Each is empioyed and sober, and the facility in which they live provides invaluable
support to them in maintaining that sobriety.
Appeilant respectfuily contends that ali interests of all parties will be protected if the Certificate of
Occupancy is reinstated, and if the ultimate question of non-confornung use is resolved wiihin the
zoning arena where it more appropriately belongs.
�
�
/
�!-�'i2
�
From: <Deqni@aol.com>
To: <nancy.homans@ci.stpaul.mn.us>
Date: 10/11/00 1025PM
Subject: Public Hearing
j��o��N� �t�E b n '! 2 Z - Z 3
_ �
�
Deaz Saint Paul Planning Commission and Zoning Committee,
Reference your public hearing notice, file number 00-122-234 conceming the
applicants (Buffalo Sober Group) request for a change of non-confomung use
permit.
Due to work requirements I will be unable to attend the public hearing on 12
October 2000. I would like to express my thoughts on the subject.
We are supposed to be a society governed by laws applicable to all. Ifthe
investors who own 97 North O�'ord are in violation of city rules and have
failed to obtain the required consent of their neighbors within 100 feet,
then the rules require enforcement.
It is my understanding that the investors started operations without
obtaining permission from the proper authorities. If that is indeed the
case, investors should not be able to do what they want and then get approval
after the fact.
From my perspective, deternuning what the procedures should have been, and if
they were followed, is the only issue. At the meeting last night the
investors talked about the need for their type of facility. That use did not
appear to be an issue. The concerns I heard were population density in the
local area and 24 or more people residing in that one building. Since
similar type apartment buildings aze located ne�t to each other along Oxford,
the concerns are reasonable.
In conclusion, your office will have to review the process and procedures.
If those policies were not followed, then the property should conform to the
zoning code.
Sincerely,
David E. Quimby
�
�
�
� o I-9z
_ ( Zt�NtNG FItE bU"fZZ�23�
PETTTION �
We, the undersigned neighbors (homeowners and residents), affected by the
property located at 97 N. Oxford, wis� to express our united opposition to •
the re-zoning and/or re-establishment of a 26year old "non-conformin� Use
permit issued in 1974. We believe that our fragile and densely populated
neighborhood is best served by maintaining the current zoning ordinances
which designate the building as a two=family residence.
.
. ����-��� - � �-
�G. , �3�
. .l I,'llll ��
� ,
�/
���)1J.w.
w
� , �
,. _� , !Y ;.. �
_ %/�
!1'�1`�
....1�
�_ �
�
�
��
�
��
� i
/
�
ADDRESS
pHO1V� lv�'�lvtval.i
z
�
/a�5��.��
/oas �,
/(� l� o C ,�/�
ii �
��� 3 1� s ���
��
�- �j / iJ t LI A
� �/
Kl�-�— / � 2 � A. �
' or7 G�'rh��
2� � - � l -i
aa s�-a ��7
a�� ��� 7
`)'^;oov'
�%'��' � l
r , ',
Zz�
�-Z- � - �z� l
z z � - �s�� z
((7 J � .
�t � !� �3�.
G sl-Za�-7j
� ����
.
i zor��N� F��E o�.�22.z3
PETITION
We, the undersigned neighbors (homeowners and residents), affected by the
property located at 97 N. Oxford, wish to express our united opposition to
the re-zoning and/or re-establishment of a 26year old "non-conformin� Use
permit issued in 1974. We believe thaf our fragile and densely populated
neighborhood is best served by maintaining the current zoning ordinances
which designate the building as a two-family residence.
NAME
���
, ha��
ADDRESS
l0�-� �I ��
�0�{5 1���--�lan�
PHUNE I(/l't�urv�i
E MAIL
L5t- �l'��1 b
65i- 225 -S.�t,6
�5-1- zz,� -�°3�u�
ZZ� �`�
C�
�
�
f
-.
� O1-9Z
. `� ; ZONING FtL.� ��-«Z�23 �
PETTTION ,
We, the undersigned neighbors (homeowners and residents), affected by the
properiy located at 97 N. O�ord, wish to express our united opposition to
the re-zoning andlor re-establishment of a 26year old "non-conformin� Use"
pernvt issued in 1974. We believe that our fragile and densely populated
neighborhood is best served by maintaining the current zoning ordinances
which designate the building as a two-family residence.
NAME
ADDRESS
1�n9 ��
ia�"/ ��,s���� .9�-r
��, /%lS /.v���-�=s
�
1055 Ash�Q�d
�o�� �shl�r�
� .�
-, � �-
� v � i�sa Ashdu�
r
C
PHONE (OPTIONAL)
E-MAIL
�oSl a`'i� - �5
G�Si -L92 —�o7a-
GS/ , -;>—° U— � / ��
� �
�„�-, _'7 Gt Sr -�l 2� 2
l�i� ��b�� 03g3
(�5 ( -2 Z�-��3�
(�S ( - aa�� - oy�,
�
� Zf3NING FILEo�.�z2�Z3 �
PETITION
We, the undersigned neighbors (homeowners and residents), affected by the
property located at 97 N. Oxford, wish to express our united opposition to
the re-zoning and/or re-establishment of a 26year old "non-conformin� Use"
permit issued in 1974. We believe that our fragile and densely populated
neighborhood is best served by maintaining the current zoning ordinances
which designate the building as a two-family residence.
NAME
- „ .�
. � � •
! ./ ' ' �
�� �
)1�.! , i� t=
! � ..1��
. ..s
'[iL'.� � '
. .
r. i .,, t�� i
� , ��
l_J
PHONL'� (UCLlU1VALl
A . �'
: prr } }1 `;�X XK"i N '...^f�' `f 1 �0V`Y � ih.�� Yd
t.
� 5 1 " 4 .✓.�yFi.
`t-m�:,'1"itawrtr.s"44k .3,,{�Ek2«Y""da�FC�a`�"'43'd.i^5' �y'�n$t"&a'wq^
-a�� >e+ n, s. �,-� biu��wu�.. , . q_� s N: w.. ¢�,} ,�ueq�
J b f .+(' ` ' i .
� y sri i
� �k-.""`n ✓ 4 +� 4 ��s�, G6 f ' l+ ��.r= 'tVS;+
:.�'� � T r5' Y
e : : F � lY� .is4�.
�r . . � _�.b . rt '^z F . . ..
y .tr
�i � � �
..,dnSGxww ta .rFr:� � f.�4r � 'T.
e
�
0
1,➢ . ���`�_
... . ..x . . ..
S
(
�
ti jAV_� 1Y'�"i;p.!, qF 4�..k �8" �+t d 4 Y.. h ttF[w '"n"4'iy�Y �^'l P N
. b+x � �+ . � �
t > � ' ..� � , ,, y.J .
�.:;f r.,�+�. ,?i c v s . u:�.i«�o-4m ,'.+6 'k�;�^+'4 " w�,3a^�! a� aPx '�k �&� ni�t
. c r�v...nr� . �„eM�.u:�:u fF�+,�.�i.. ,�..�xinr^-
, �� . ^ : i rv ( � S.. �N�'.� i,; �
h "
a.Y 'C.0 d i _ 41J. M✓p Yt
t Y . ' .. �.
�
���t��� � .Fx� . � , wv. .. e�
i
j
Y r �;
���M �''w.-a� ?. � »£ f a e�.� �t z1 .�"K4'� .r r�£+a' � rvt '& ✓,
� .
�'i.�* .'S.,�,�+�° �,w�,.; w F .s X � ,4 r nw�rxGn i:
:.,� e r 7 s r' r Js
',i„�.u�..v ! .a 2'7. u ._ 4 .,,a...< s w a' ., ... $ '.
�
I n. „ t 6 "' p l:. 1 i, ; M�'
s
.r�;r' rc+' �.. a.w.«, x� 1 w ) ��F•-1
i w � .
� ne
� r'
� � ti
.r ¢ z�.., e F y
� �,
< ri kp � 4z � r � a
�r :, � e � r.', �' y �'� ,�, q � y � < 5;�
4 �
� •5•• f . '� J � � #'a
�' � � c �;
M� y��21 n Y A'f�v6 1`.� aPM � �' 3 Nn,�.r',!"t
s�c �;n t n: v,c�f r F^a�'3�� tr � ..'�5
� ��i
a } � � j� � )
y k
' � A�} ik < M' C ,.. � " 1
1 ]
L ' n � %� F t ., � Y � e
. ,�1 t nb },� �M.v �,. � A !�
+, ;�$ t 8 ; .f Y . d �s C', "` S
1
i,���, �x4 , , ��if , i n.i�',^; � .a � .e!' �'4m � # �� , , ,
.., � rz. �, .,
n T,: s : b
�1� .z. . ::'�.. _
i
k
i
� f:ti �.rA��.�`NrG.N,�>n �+' ' Y ��e+ u!"� ��x r xu9,iv �r ' t� rak a�. R.ers asdcg �:z, -A ,.n`y xV� `��+ v':y
�
,� ri� r: � o iz.. F y nu x .�"
Y l` � ".: t ,' 1 Y '� �T i !
.l A �+T' P .
:�.r,"i +ae�',� �+.y �� %' ,� u r i �Y°' " , 1 R°.
.p k . 4 a i
l t . 1
Dl-gZ
. ZONING COMNIITTEE STAFF REPORT
FTI,E # 00-122-234
1. APPLICANT: BUFFALO SOBER GROUP, LLC AATE OF HEARING: 10/12/00
2. CLASSIFICATION: Change of Non-conforming Use Pemut
3. LOCATION: 97 North O�ord (west side between Ashland and Laurel)
4. PLANNING DISTRICT: 8
5. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: North 75 feet of Lots 27 and 28, Block 42, Summit Park Addition
to Saint Paul, Ramsey County, Minnesota
�
6. PRESENT ZONING: RT-1 ZONING CODE REFERENCE: 62.102(i)(3)
7. STAFF INVESTIGATION AND REPORT: DATE:10/4100 ,. BY: Nancy Homans
8. DATE RECEIVED: March 21, 2000/
August 28, 2000
DEADLINE FOR ACTION: Applicant requested
extension/October 27, 2000
A. PURPOSE: Change ofNon-confornung Use Permit to allow a property previously used as a
Human Service Licensed Community Residential Facility for 32 residents to be used as a
rooming house for 24 residents.
B. PARCEL SIZE: 75 x 100 = 7500 squaze feet
C. EXIST`ING LAND USE: Rooming house for 24 men in early sobriety (established without
zoning pennits on February 15, 2000).
D. 5URROUNDING LANA USE:
North: One and two-family residential, zoned RT-1
East: Single family residentiaUchurch, zoned RT-1
South: Four-family residential (a twin building to 97 N. Oaford), zoned RT-1
West: One and two-family residential, zoned RT-1
E. ZONING CODE CITATION:
Sec. 62.102 (a) details the intent of the Zoning Code's provisions related to nonconforming
uses:
(a) Intent. There exist within the districts established by this code and subsequent
amendments lots, structures, and uses of land and structures that were lawful before this
�
Zoning File #00-122-234
Page two
code was passed or amended that would be prohibited, regulated or restricted under the
terms of this code or future amendments. It is the intent of this code to permit legal
nonconfornring lots, stnxctures or uses to continue until they are removed.
The code recognizes that in some circumstances allowing nonconfornung uses to be
changed to similar or less intense nonconfornring uses, or allowing nonconforming uses to
be reestablished in vacant buildings, may benefit the city and surrounding nei�hborhood.
Some buildings have a long useful life and allowing their continued occupancy for
nonconfornung uses can be more desirable than requiring them to be vacant if they cannot
be converted to conforming uses. Consequently, the code allows conversion of
nonconfomung uses to similar nonconforming uses and allows the planning commission to
reestablish nonconforming uses in vacant buildings if regulated so as to be compatible with
the surrounding neighborhood.
The code recognizes that enlazgements of nonconfornung uses which improve the
appearance and functioning ofthe use can benefit the sunounding neighborhood. The
code allows the enlargement of nonconforming uses when found to be compatible with
surrounding neighborhoods.
•
Sec. 62.102(fl details the Zoning Code's provisions related to Nonconforming uses of �
structures. (Relevant provisions excerpted.)
( fl Nonconforming uses of structures, or structures and Zand in combination.
Nonconfornung uses of structures, or structures and land in combination, are subject to
the following regulations:
(1) A nonconfomvng use may continue.
(2) A nonconforming use may be changed to a use pemutted in the district in
which it is loca4ed or to a new nonconforming use if the new nonconlornung use is
also listed in the same clause of the code as the nonconfomung use. A
nonconforming use may be changed to a use pemutted in the district in which the
nonconforming use is first allowed, or a principle use pernritted in a district that is
more restrictive than the district in which the nonconforming use is first allowed,
provided the planning commission approves a pemut for the change as set forth in
clause (i)(3).
(3) When a nonconfomung use changes to a use permitted in the district or in a
more restrictive district, the nonconforming use shall not thereafter be resumed.
(7) When a nonconfornung use is discontinued or ceases to exist for a continuous
period of three hundred si�y-five (365) days, the building, or building and land in
combination, shall thereafter be used in conformance with the regulations of the �
Ol�`t L
. Zoning File #00-122-234
Page three
district in wkuch it is located, unless the planning commission approves a permit to
reestablish the nonconfomung use as set forth in clause (i)(5).
Sec. 62.102(i) outlines the planning commission's authority in granting pernuts for the
establishment and change of nonconfornung uses.
(i) Nonconforming use permits The planning commission may approve, modify and
approve, or deny nonconfomung use pernuts. To ensure the public welfaze is served, the
commission may attach conditions to the pernuts including, but not limited to, conditions
concerning appearance, signs, off-street parking or loading, lighting, or perFormance
characteristics, such as noise, vibration, glare, dust, or smoke.
The planning commission in approving nonconfornung use permits may allow a
nonconforming use for a specified period of time and then require its removal by attaching
an expiration date to the permit if the commission makes the following findings: (1)
termination of the nonconforming use or the continued vacancy of the building in which
the nonconforming use was located would cause significant hardship; (2) permitting the
nonconforming use for a period of time will facilitate the transition to a conforming use;
and (3) permitting the nonconforming use for a period of time is consistent with the public
health, safety, comfort, morals, and welfare. The period of time for which the permit is
valid shall be deternuned in each case by the commission and shall be based on the extent
of the hardship.
'�' ..
The planning commission shall heaz and decide nonconforming use permits in accordance
with the procedures and requirements of section 64300. The planning commission may
consider the fotlowing nonconforming use permits:
(1) Establishment of legal nonconforming use status. The planning commission
may grant legal nonconforming status to the use of structures which fail to meet
the standards of section 62.102(b) if the commission makes the following findings:
a. The use occurs entirely witlun an existing structure;
b. The use is similar to other uses pemutted within the district;
c. The use or use of similar intensity permitted in the same clause of the zoning
code or in a more restrictive zoning district has been in existence continuously for
a period of at least ten (10) years prior to the date of the application.
d. The off-street parking is adequate to serve the use;
e. Hardship would result if the use were discontinued;
£ Rezoning the property would result in "spot" zoning or a zoning inappropriate to
surrounding land uses;
u
Zoning File #00-122-234
Page four
g. The use will not be detrimental to the existing character of development in the
unmediate neighborhood or endanger the public health, safety, or general welfare;
h. The use is consistent with the comprehensive plan; and
i. A notarized petition of two-thirds of the property owners within one hundred
(100) feet of the property has been submitted stating their support for the use.
The application for the pernut shall include the petition, evidence of a ten-yeaz
period of existence, evidence that conversion of the use and structure would result
in hardship, a site plan meeting the requirements of section 64.102, floor plans, and
other information as required to substantiate the pemut.
(3) Change of nonconfornung use. The planning commission may allow a
nonconforining use to change to a use pernutted in the district in which the
nonconfoz�ming use is first allowed, or a use pernutted in a district that is more
restrictive than the district in which the nonconfornting use is first allowed if the
commission makes the following findings:
�
a. The proposed use is equally appropriate or more appropriate to the
neighborhood than the existing nonconfomung use;
b. The traffic generated by tke proposed use is similaz to that generated by the �
existing nonconfomung use;
c. The use will not be detrimental to the existing character of development in the
immediate neighborhood or endanger the public heakh, safety, or general welfare;
and
d. The use is consistent with the comprehensive plan.
The planning commission's findings may be a general rule or findings in a specific
- -
- - -
case.
F. HISTORY/DISCUSSION:
Oakland Home, a licensed community residential facility for persons with mental iliness, was
established at 97 N. O�cford in about 1968.
On September 25, 1980, the City Council adopted amendments to the Zoning Code defining
community residential facilities and regulating them as special condition uses consistent with
the provisions of State law included in the Human Services Licensing Act. The amendments
allowed community residential faciliries for 7 or more facility residents in the RT-1 (Two-
family) zoning district as special condition uses.
�
� Zoning File #00-122-234
Page five
On April 11, 1986, a Planning Commission resolution (#86-28) was adopted establishing legal
status for the Oakland Home as an eacisting community residential facility licensed by the
Minnesota Department of Human Services for 36 residents with mental illness in an RT-1
zoning district. In granting the special condition use permit, the Commission modified the
following conditions:
A. Number of residents served. The code limited the number of residents to 16. The
condition was modified to allow 36 residents.
B. Minimum distance between community residential facilities. The code required that
residential facilities be a minimum of 1320 feet apart. Two facilities were within the
required distance (Turning Point at 1089 Portland and Pineview Residence at 69 N
Milton). The condition was modified.
C. Off-street parking. The code required that there be one parking spaces for every two
facility residents—or 18 spaces for the facility. At the time there was parking for 2 vehicles
available on the property. Because no residents owned or operated their own vehicles, the
Commission modified the requirement.
� The Zoning Code was subsequently amended on June 27, 1991 to define Licensed Human
' . Service Community Residential Facilities and to first allow such facilities for 17 or more
persons in the RM-1 Multiple Family zoning district as special condition uses. As a result, the
Oakland Home became a legally nonconfornung use.
Changes in health care financing provisions and State policy, resulted in the general
downsizing of residential facilities for persons with mental illness throughout Minnesota
beginning in the mid-1990s.
Ramsey County initiated a down-sizing plan for Oakland Home and the last resident moved
out on August 21, 1998. The county's contract with Oakland Home expired on September
30, 1998 and was not renewed.
In a discussion with LIEP staff the applicant posited that the use had not been discontinued
because the owner of the building had maintained an office in the building and continued to
pay for telephone, electricity and heat. The Zoning Administrator responded that that case
would best be made to the Planning Commission and that substantial documentation would be
required.
G. DISTRICT COUNCIL COMMENT: No comment had been received at the time this staff
report was prepared.
�
Zoning File #00-122-234
Page six
H. FINDINGS:
1. On 7anuary 15, 200Q four members of Buffalo Sober Group, LLC purchased the property at
97 North O�'ord and, on February 15, 2000, Buffalo Sober House was opened, providing
permanent housing and supportive services to 24 men in the early stages of sobriety.
2. A subsequent inspection by City staff from the Department of License, Inspecrion and
Environmental Protection (LTEP) concluded that the use—a rooming house--was inconsistent
with the zoning code. Rooming houses are first pemutted as special condition uses in the
RM-1 zoning district.
An application for a Change in Nonconfomung Use Pemut was submitted on March 21, 2000.
Evidence submitted in support ofthe applicant's contention that the use had not been
discontinued were:
a. A statement from the building/business owner that she had operated her business out of
the structure until January 15, 2000.
b. Electric bill indicating that electrical and gas service to the building was not interrupted
over the period.
c. A statement from US West indicating that the buiiding owner was responsible for the
phone bill associated with her business in the building over the period.
�
On April 11, 2000, planning staffwrote a letter to the applicant detailing its conclusion that �
the previous use had, indeed, been discontinued and that permission to continue to use the
property as a rooming house would require a pemut to re-establish a nonconfornung use. The
applicants were given the option of withdrawing their application for a Change in
Nonconfornung Use Pernut and applying, instead, for a pernnt to re-establish a non-
conforming use. Their application fee would be applied toward a new application.
In a subsequent phone conversation on April 14, 2000, the attomey representing the applicant
agreed with the planning staff's interpretarion of the code and asked that the zoning
committee's consideration of the case be delayed for 30 days so thaf they could review their
options and begin work on obtauung the consent petition required for an application to re-
establish a non-conforming use. He further indicated that his clients were led to believe by the
building's owner and/or realtor that the building's use as a residential facility had somehow
been "grandfathered in." Later that afternoon, he faYed a formal Request for Continuance,
waiving the statutory requirements for a decision on the application within 60 days of its being
filed.
On May 22, 2000, a request for an additiona160-day continuance—until the August 17, 2000
zomng committee meeting—was faxed to the Zoning Committee by the applicant's attorney,
again waiving the requirement for a decision within 60 days.
�
i
� Zoning File #00-122-234
Page seven
a!-q z
4. On August, 28, 2000, unable to obtain a sufficient number of signatures on a consent petition,
the applicants resubmitted an application for a Change in Nonconfomung Use Pemut. The
substantial additions to the application—beyond those submitted in March—were:
a. A copy of the Coldwell Banker Burnet listing (list date: February 25, 1999) for the
property indicating that the building was a"fully functional group home-32 person brick
structure."
b. A copy of the lodger agreement.
Sec. 62.102(i)(3) of the Zoning Code outlines four conditions for a Change in Nonconfornung
Use. Those conditions and the applicant's ability to meet them are as follows:
a. The proposed use is equally appropriate or mare appropriate to the neighborhood than
the existing nonconforming use;
This condition is met. Both uses are congregate living facilities. The proposed use is
smaller than the previous use, and, therefore, may be judged to be more appropriate.
Boarding houses—like licensed human service community residential facilities for 17 or
more residents--aze first pernutted, with a special condition use permit, in the RM-1
(multiple family) zoning district.
��; b. The traffic generated by the proposed use is similar to that generated by the existing
nonconforming use;
This condition is not met. While there are fewer total residents of the current facility than
lived in the previous facility, none of the previous residents owned cazs or had licenses.
There were transported in a van and had, neighbors report, few visitors. The cars on the
site belonged to program staff
While the current applicant reports that many of the current residents have lost their
driving privileges for some period of time, surrounding residents report a marked increase
in traffic related to both residents and visitors.
Were this facility located in an RM-1 (Multiple family) zoning district and required to
obtain a special condition use pemut as a rooming house, among the conditions would be
that the lot area for 24 residents in 18 guest rooms be 21,000 square feet. The current loi
is 7500 square feet.
It would also be required to haue 12 off-street pazking spaces. While 12 parking spaces
are shown on the site plan, 9 of the spaces are 8 feet wide rather than 9 feet as is normally
required, 1 space is in the required front yazd (not allowed under Sec 64.104(11), 10
spaces are in the required side yard (not allowed under Sec. 64.104(11), and the other 2
spaces are within 4 feet of a side lot line (not allowed under Sec. 64.104(11).
�
Zoning File #00-122-234
Page eight
c. The use will not be detrimentaZ fo the existing characfer of development in the immediate
neighborhood or endanger the pubZic health, safety, or general welfare;
This condition is met. There is no evidence that facilities of this type have any detrimental
impact on properry values, or on public health, safety or welfare.
d. The use is consistent with the comprehensive plan.
This condition is met. The City's Housing Plan calls for the preservation of existing rentai
units and creation of new units providing supportive housing for persons who are or are at
risk of being homeless.
6. On the central point, however, of the appropriateness of the application, staff finds the
following:
a. The Zoning Code (Sec. 60.221) defines Use as the "principal purpose for which Iand or a
building is being occupied."
s
b. A previous use—a Licensed Human Service Community Residential Facility--had been
discontinued for more than 365 days when the applicants assumed ownership of the
building on 7anuary 15, 2000. Ramsey County staff indicates that the last resident moved
out of the building on August 21, 1998. The contract between Ramsey County and the
building owner/service provider formally eacpired on September 30, 1998.
c. The Zoning Code states: When a nonconfornung use is discontinued or ceases to exisY for •
a continuous period of three hundred sixty-five (365) days, the building, or building and
land in combination, shall thereafter be used in conformance with the rea lations of the
district in which it is located, unless the planning commission approves a permit to
reestablish the nonconfomung use as set forth in clause (i)(5). (Sec. 62.102(fl(7))
d. The applicant has not applied for a permit to re-establish a nonconforming use.
e. It is the intent of the zoning code that this building revert to a use permitted in the zoning
district unless this or some other non-confomung use which can meet the conditions
detaiied in Sec. 02. i"v2(i3(5 j—inciuding a sor.ser,t getit;�n �f `L�� ^vF �ii.°. S:1'_; Q`.1.^.`�:^.g
property owners—is established.
L STAFF RECOMMENDATTON:
Based on findings 1-6 above, staff recommends denial of the application.
�
/
NONCONFORMING USE PERIYIIT APPLICATION
: 'F, ` �I Department of Planning and Economic Development
�� Zoning Seclion
II00 City Hall Anner
25 West Fou�th St�eet
Saint Paul, MN 55101
266-6589
o i-qZ
APPLICANT I Name Buffalo Sober Groun LT�
1 Address 400 Selby Avenue, Apt, 22g
City St. Paul St � Zip 55102 Daytime Phone 651/602-0226
Name of owner (if different)
Contact person (if
PRdPERTY Address/Location 97 North O:cford Street St. Paul N1nI
LOCATION
Le al description North 75 ft. of Lots 27 and 28 Block 42
S�nit Park Addition to St. Paul,
Ramsev Countv. ��iinnesota Current 2oning g�-1
(atfach additiona/ sheet ii necessary)
:. ���
TYPE OF PERMIT: Appfication is hereby made for a Nonconforming Use Permit under provisions of
Chapter 62, Section 102, subsection i, Paregraph 3 of the Zoning Code.
The permit is for:
� Change from one nonconfortning use to another (para. 3 in Zoning Code)
❑ f2e-estabfishment of a nonconforming use vacant for more than one year (para. 5)
� Legal establishment of a nonconforming use in existence at least 10 years (para. 1)
❑ Enlargement of a nonconforming use (para. 4)
SUPPORTING INFORMATION: supply the information that is applicabie to your type of permit.
CHANGE IN USE: P�/Past use Oakland Home, a 32-resident DHS Ru1e 36
or ca?gmu�ity residential facility
RE-ESTABLISHMENT: Proposed use _ Rocsninq House for 24 residents
Additional information for all applications (attach additional sheets 'rf necessary}:
See attached SuDnorting Infornation sheet
�
site pian is attached ❑
ApplicanYs signature �
Dates�-t�? City agent
.
Supportinp Information Attachment
The property wili be used as a rooming house, providing permanent living
facilities for men in eariy sobriety. Admission is limited to men demonstrafing 30
days of continuance of abstinence from mood-altering chemicals, current
employment, and a commitment to continuing recovery. Exemplary behavior by
all residents will be assured by the daily presence of an owner and an on-site
manager. Residents will occupy 12 single rooms, four double rooms and two
double suites, and all have access to six fuil bathrooms, two large lounges, a
library, laundry facilities, and a professional quality kitchen. The physical
facilities have been upgraded (but not expanded) from the past use as a Rule 36
community residential facility through the investment of approximately $100,000
by the new owner. The new residents, as former sufferers of chemical
dependency, are subject to protection under the Federai Fair Housing
Amendments Act of 1988 and as such are entitled to reasonabie accommodation
in the administration of zoning ordinances by the City of St. Paui.
The property qualifies for a Non-conforming Use Permit under Section
52.102(I)3 for the following reasons:
�
(a) Use as a rooming house for sober and
recovering men with healthy lifestyles �
and oufside empioyment is equally or
more appropriate to the district than the
previous non-conforming use as a
D.H.S. Rule 36 community residential
facility, which continued through
September, 1998. Shortly thereafter,
the property was put up for sale, as a
group home, with the formal listing with
Coldwell banker first appearing on
February 25, 1999. See attached MLS
"Property fnformation° sheet, reflecting
the property listing as a"fuliy functional
group home -- 32-person brick
structure." Meanwhile, the former
owner, Oakiand Home, Inc. continued
doing business at the facility until
January 14, 2000 (see attached letter of
Serene M. Larson, together with
Dac# 1258810\1
�
� ;�'
*�
�
Telephone and utility
bi!{s/notices}. The proposed use
as a rooming house began in
February, 2000, and an
application for a change in non-
conforming use permit was first
filed in March, 2000.
(b) The proposed use wili not be
detrimentai to the existing character of
development in the immediate
neighborhood, nor will it endanger the
public health, safety or general welfare;
(c) The proposed use will have less impact
upon neighborhood traffic and parking
than the former non-conforming use,
since there will be fewer residents (24
opposed to 32). Also, a higher
percentage of the residents will use
public transportation rather than private
vehicies, due to past problems with
substance abuse. The facility has
available 12 off-street parking spots.
No on-site programming atfracting
visitors will take place; and
(d) The proposed use is consistent with the
comprehensive plan.
Attachments
M�S listing for 97 North Oxford
2. Statement of former owner
3. Buffalo House brochure
4. Lodger Agreement (residency rules)
Dock 1258819\1
2
a!-9z
AUG MON 11:32 AM CB BURNEI HIGHLAND _ FRX N0. 651 698 9356 P, 02
� .
Proper#y Irrformation � �
gurtrrE r,�:� .
�..+�w aoaw.. u w:, ��c>
fr•:o�ma•JM Oeem�id FoOabie 6ul No� (ivarn :!eea
LN:1404882
PF24pE RTY TYpE - 6 INVESTMENT - IV
SP: $290,040 pMD:i1/18l98 DOM: 26B SO:
tP: $299,QOQ LD: 02/25l99 Xp
ADDRESS:9'l OX�ORD ST N ' 7AX: $5,026
MUN: Sf Paul ZJP; 55104 TWA:$5,374
Aft: 746 SU6:1 bIV; 9 C�7U:RAMS ASB:$0
LOT: 7$X100 iJE: 0 N1: N2:
DtR: N ON LEX FR.SUMN1iT TO ASHLAND(E)TO OXFORD (N)
FULLY FUNC710NAL GROUP HOME-32 PERSON BRfCK STRUC7URE,4000
F'SF,fMPECCABGF MECFif\NICS,RESIDENTIAL LOCATlON,IMPRESSIVE
OPERATION,$50Ct000++y�ARLY GROSS,FULLY FURNISHED.
LGL: N 75' OF LOTS z7 AND 28 SLK 42 ZON: 4+'
#U MO$ ANN$ ANIV EXPENSE
1 �a $a $OFU: GAS
Scecia! Funding
Czsh
Z@ S0 SOEL• �Q FSZ: 1600 PID: 022823230130
3 @ �Q SOWSW: $0 FSF: 400� M7G:S0 INT; O.D00
4@ Sd SOIN: OD: 0
5 a� �ytl $OTR: �Sp AGI: $525,000 PlN; 5Q MC2: N MA2: N
5@ $0' 30MN; $0 AGE: $Q FR1: CALL LIS7ER FOR DETAILS
7 �°� g0' SpC7: Sp ANl: s�0 pf22: YEAR BUILT UNCERTAfN
i'dS: / RP: SQ
71: `�0 �O7E: 3Q SpN: G25 St. Paul SDP; 632-3730
AGN: B MC�I.ALElH SMITH 83G-1725 BC:2.7 SA: 0 NA: N
OFC: RE/N7l1X 12LAL ESTA7c GUI6E t.0: 6077 APT: 612$87-�208
Assumablc
Nct Ass�mahin
B�somQnt
Walkout
rWI
Finished (Liveabte}
UaytighVLOOkout Windows
Egress Windpw;
Cxi�Gng Financing
Conyentional
Main Extcrior
Wood
Brick/SLOnc
Fuoi
hlaturaf Gos
lioat
Hot W2ter
Inclusions
c�r� s;;s
List Type
Exciusiv� qr�ency
Misc
Party Roo.m
HPI'dWOOd FIVOfS
Nalural Woodwork
Fire Spr�n�der System
Fencinc
Nfindow Air
220 Volt
Furnishod tJnits
Num6er of Ranges
Two
Num 12etrig
Two
Owncr Ezpenses
Taxes
tosurance
watedSe�n�er
Electric
Fu01
Maintenance/Rep�ir
Janitcriat
Trash
Snovr
Lewn
OfhEr
Parking
Open
Other
Roofing
Fla!
TarlGrave[
Other
Ren1 Per Foot
Other
SBWBY
Ciry Sewe: - Ccr,neoted
SaI¢ Includes
Busincss
Building
Land
Inventory
Fixture/Equipmea!
Other
Sfyle
A.oartrnants/t4tufti Eamity
Basiness Opportunity
7erms
Conventional
8234 SAG: �5346 - ST: SOLD
7t1: 32
/ 98 / N MAp; E4 107
LNA:
ASp; N
N3: YBL:1907 NNIC;N
TenantExpensas
o!har
�ac: a � ss
VAC; N �
Currenf UsB
HoteilMo;e�
8usines5 Service
Professianaf Service
L'( ii�c2S
Fea[ing Common
Electric Common
Hot Watar COmmon
Wafer
ciry Water- Connected
Phofo Code
Tof<e R4ain listing Photo
Pho:o 7aken
.
{c) Copyr�gttt, Earnet COLDWEL4, BANKER - �URt3E7
HomeQ�vst
o�-yz
AUG-21-2000 MON 11�32 AM CB BURNET HIGHLAND ; FAX N0, 651 E98 9356 P, 03
,� - ,
�� �` Property 1`r�fe�r�r�iation �
SCJl2N�'T �
; IIJVE'STMEIY? ��
�^�-�aikn Deemad Ro-taMO 8�: NG Gwrantr.cq
•�- ezg�� SALE PR10E: �290,000 - ST: SOLD
TU: 32 STY: AP7lMUL / BUS OPP
7ERMS: CO�! 1 SPC 1 CSH
DOM: 2fiG OMD: 11/18/99 FIN: 3
ADbRES5:97 OXFORD ST N 7AX� $5,026
M'JN: StPauf Z1P: 55104 T4VA:5�,374
AR: 740 SU8:1 DIV: 7 COU:R.4hAS AS8:50
tOT: 75X100 ME:O N1: ryp;
DIf2: N OM LEX FR.SUMMIT TO ASHLAND(E)TO OXFORD (N)
FL1LI_Y FUNCT10t�1n1_ GROUP HOME-32 PERSON BRIC3C STRUCTUftE,4000
FSF,4FAPECCAf.3LG MECHANiCS,RESIDENTIAL. LOCATION,IMPRESSIVE
OPERA71pN,�500000•i+YEARLY GROSS,FULLY FURNISHED.
LGL: M1! 7� OF LOTS 27 AND 28 BLK 42
#U MO$ ANN$ ANN EXPENSF EXT: WO / BS
� ��' SO' SO HEA: H4V
2 �+� $t7 �40FU; GAS
3 a, $Q $OEL: $0 $SM: W/ F/ L J D/ E
4 @ ga $OWSW: 50 WAT:CONNECT
$ @ SO' � $OIN: SEW:CONNECT
6 CG �(J SOTR�
L1ST NUMBER:'140488?
MAP:E4 i07
ASP: N
PRfC: OP I OT YBL- 1907
N3:
RUM.SX RFAL ESTATE GUiDE
8 MGHALEIH SM17H 836-t725
PHN: 952-884-5404 BC: 2.7 NA:
AP7: 6f2-B87-12Q8 SA: 0 1.!
ZON: 4+�•
PID: 022823230130
7RM: CON / 5PC 1 CSH
MTG: 30 lNT:0.000
SD FSZ: 1600 EXF: CON
��i S�7 SOMN: SO FSF: 4000 PIN: 022823230130
MS: / GT: $0 AGl: 5525,000 5DN:625S;.Pau1
T�� 50 $ORP: SO AGE: $0 TE: $Q ANI: 50
. �l . Z S � `� C
(cj L'apyright, 6urnet COLI7WELL'BANKER - gURNET
Ob; 0 ASM: N
2MC: N 2MA: N
SDp: 632-3736
VRC: N
HomeC]uzs:
��`'-l�0 ` �°
'-t:�-�: -� - �
=�%-
:�::-= _ . �
: _� :;�. "�
i::� =.�0.
__..0 �
C
O
�
�
�
�
d
�
�
3
�
�
s
V
H
W
W
�
X > �j 'o O
� - u �y
-� " �.�i m
� a r � a O
� 0 T L Q L
L A d
� � � � Q
C � C C ,�
U � C L
U � CI
0o p� `^ = O +�
a � � c � O
1] � 6. . v L N
� " `-' �e E n. �
a�+ � �� � � O C
o '"
Q V c �
u N � � m b
� � � � — v
� . � w
- o � K .`°,
� S °" � � o 0
a o �
c�i .i °' '� � „��_. °°
_ _ � > 'O �
m e� i r y
v c ro c � 3
� � � � w o
L Y �
N � d N �^ O_ U C
id u p � � C! � �
� k C L �
O O CJ � O V C v
'r- C C LL N Q L
�� -- `:
� �
�
O
O
N
„'� Y
N �
--N y
H
>-y — P ;
p. eo n
' N, n Q V l
z_y`=1� �O 3
= r �' �
N P N
� N N �
., y N O
� � � p
0. �
i+ _
< G . '
O O O
�n �n O
t� N T
rt t�1 tTl
���
�
N
���
m m m
N (V —
�
Q
F
�
�
C
O
�
O
O
a
�
�
C1
O
� O
C p
� O
�o
L �
3 �
V v�
C1 '
N y
� c
L
F v
Y� �
0
tPr
�
�
Y
w
3
O
L
O
a
i
�
0
� O
C p
� O
��
J �
U N
H
41 C
L �
F- �
N �
d
N
N �
� �
� �
� �
c �
N
E 'o
>. u
tE V
a n
O �
C
Q O
v
� b
G � C
q �O �
O � L
O � ��.
�
O � C
y} � a�
o�=
N � L
� � _>
� � >
= C
v v
Q E - �o
T y � �
O_ -
J L � � y
� F v � �
N . � G! L
� � � � W
O ,- `e s
L 'o � � O
T � N � �
L L N � Q
c -� v " ai
o � o '„ u `
E ai o�o y� L
p C V , �� N
�l pQ
W � � � Q� '�
w �_�
C�J N - �i � L U'
OO V C C �- Y
O � � ro (�
C Qj V '
N � v v � �
i n O "O �
O O V �'= v
O s_ C i C
C � �
O rl a`d a L
. V'? p � � N
� O v d 3
� N
C � in N W O
� c u
h
�
L
�N
C
�
s
Y
�
L
�
�
�.
0
s
�
C1 'p
� � j
C � "O
N v C
� � �
� i N
L C .
v �n O G
,'�] y T CI
m v 'u aa
> F. � d
�
� � � O
L U �
,e � eo Y
N � L G
n o � L
4. �
bp � W
C v
� �Y y l
� t �
� 3 � d
� O
� � L - O
� - � ;
u
� � � N
C v � �
_ a
Q , �`v �
�
/
��
�
�.
�-
3
.�
O
_
�
�
m
0
b0
�
d
d
m
L
C
N
N
L
.
V
L
�
O
�
H
�
0
O
E
�
d
N
.N
�
N
3
�
�
c
.�
O
u =
V
° �v
� u
c
u 'L
i QJ
� Y
--
W
.�
c
�
�
v
C C
G
O
U
N
C
�
u
C
h
v
E
N
w
Q
C
u
d
A
N
N
m
H
O
L
�
V
O
L
bU
�
�
N
3
0
N
3
Q
a
w
�'_.+
N
�
N
w
N
J
d
C
c
.�
.�
O
t
L
m
O
�
0
C
0
.�
d c
L
0
>
O
=
T
C
CJ
3
�
ti
C
O
.�
�
0
u
-�
L
0
�
O
N
c
0
ci
Y
�
�
�
u
O
n.
�
.3
s
3
N
a c
C
O
�
T
�
0��0 �
v
� a
C
L
� C
0. C1
� �
L
C O
O
� �
� O
.�
� i
N
. �
c Y
O ,
L
�V �
CJ t
'a u
� -�
O s
'� N
V C
d �
a �
i° u
� _
Z_ v
� �
�E m
n �
O
L U
� L
v o
L N
� O N
O
c
d
i O_ 3
O �
Y �
S K C
y u �
� � L
�
L
� � �
L �
J . �
O
;3v
Y 3
� d v
� p N
a
� c >.
w` ° E
L
C
V
a
A
m
�
Q
O
�
3
m
O
v
�
C
a
a
a
F
c
a
�
d
�
:c
0
£
N
c
O
O
C
v
(E
>
c
a
d
N
v
.
O
L
a
�
V
.?
�
N �.
F L OO
n �
�
d v v
N j
L � �
C N Z
O �N O
E a �
C �
L � m
C
N N �
C
L O
� O �
G
n p_ s
r
a+ Ql �
m
o. N O
CI 41 y
� "' L
� �. c
N � N
� C V
0
O � O
(E V �
L 7
% v
W
n u
�
Q
�
v
.3
�
C
�
O
V
n
�
v
7
�
d
O
�
A
R
d
u
L
N
d
�
L
�
�
C
O
u
�
;
�
c
�
N
�
'�o
v
ro
C
v
�
�
c
L
�
c
�
ot =9�--
�; -�--�' .'�;-�., ,
��_ _' _
�r_ � .C;6e_-j.
�"y - .
•� '�
� ❑
:�`" �''._:-._ .
i 3� -
'- '
s+
� c
N E
O
O 0
= v
v �
N
� 'Q
T u
c�
U `�
a �
_ y
u �
C '
W �
c
_ 3
� �
�
J �:'
u d
° v
L
C
u m
c �
m
J N
� d
O
m
b
a
L
N
o'
_
�
m
N
2
N
�
Q
N
�
O
s
m
d
o'
O
w
m
N
�
Q
C
0
c
.�
O
N
w
�
O
1)
� p
� N
P �
W �
:° w
L '�
v C
�
= �
c
J �
�a C
d W
V y�j
G t
't3 3
N
�
O L
L �
y c
C �
N �
U
U �
—a — ° r '
L G
O "'
b�0 —'�
v d
a C
O
C
�
L
v
>
�
v
3
N
v
�
a
�
0
0
L
�
v
N
N
v
L
�
?
�
w
N
N
a
�
�
c
d
N
0
0
m
B
0
v
L
�
E
O
O
W
1
3
L
m
'o
_
�
�
m
N
C
m
m
m
�
d
Y
�
:n
0
O
N
b
�
O
O
y L R1
� <u c
a � O
�
� �a .°�'
�
X F a
V1
�
� °' v
L � �
O V `
�C �
N L v
� 3 ;�
C �
N N
M T
C p �
G
v �
� N N
v � '
d. �
O u
� � n
c �
O '
� � i
C � i
� o c
�
�
r
0
m
f'i
c
c�
L
—
.�,
_
c
�
WO
K
�
�
0
�
y ^
�.�/
O
s
0
�
�
.�Q
O
�
W r
C
P
m
v
W
ti
b
3
2
O
W
m
'D G
W N
L Qf
ro D
�
H
.c s
� u
N
d
N
� �
W W
a
N Y
�V
�
� �
� L
h
U ,
:°. v
� �
O C
�
m
H a L i
ro
N �
O C
N
i L
j �
O Y
C
�
N
N
C
O
a
L
n.
�
0
W
w
>
O
d.
u
N
N
�
�
N
�
C
L
O
c
�
O
.�
�
0
�
�
61
v
v �
w v
� �L
W -0
L �
U
N
C
�
b
A
7
G
>
Q
E
�
O
L
�
�
O
O
N
d
O
J
u
i
�
W
�
O
c
O
.�
Y
u
�
U�
v
d
�
u
d
W
�
� Y O
O �
� ro ;
w r
� .'
O
O - �
N
m > a
u W u
� o w
'_ d
G O
v ° a
� L
N
b d C
o v �e
� L F
L N u
u �
V � �
� v �
i
y � V
"O _C =
c �
� � h
� y
� �C
H 3
� ry
T
v
i
d
O
C
L
N
O
L
u
Y
u
�
d
V
T
V
�
N
�
F-
�
0
N
�
t
�3
L
N
w
C
7
0
�
L
O
�
� L
bo �
C
� O
3 L
C V
u
H �
3 �
N �
L �
b C
i N
N
� �
Y i
N
L �
m a
d p
� d
N
� v
C L
�
� N
O �
O
LL
ai
.n u
� G
V :".
O
C
3
v
O
3
iU
O
d
�
�.
�
�
m
i
m
�
O
N
m
�
L
�
a
d
c
c
O
3
N
O
�
3
v
O
0
C
�
N
C
�
N
�
v
C
N
0
d
C
L
N �
2 �
N �
b '
2
H �
L
O �
� °°
v �
F L
ro
ci a
3
C W
> �
Q N
N
U
C
N
�L
W
a
�
0
�
N
O
n
O
�
N
W
=
�
�
u
� �
L L
a !"
ro
y� O
u x
c a
'° a
C
� �
O �
� �
L
O `
h m
3 �
C
� �
� �
_ u
N u
N
u L
�
H �
� c
O �
�
O �
� c
N
m �
� � O C
L y
; � �
C
� � U �
u O
� �
� = N
_ C � �
—� �� � o
i � O r+
O U V
d u V a'
� L � �
i �
C A �
r O u >
N C �L
v L � c
v
a
O ,� U �
n O � L
�
� � � n
U
= O � N �
= v L m
N a �,
O � L �
v
� 'X W >
� �y L O
m E o n.
�
N
>
O
U
W
0
_
�
L
0
bO
c
J
U
0
3
u
w
�
E
0
U
c
N
c
O
O
0
N
�
N
V
�
L
O
N
-
d
L
�
d O � 'D
~ N � A
O
E w ro �
.+ �,
a o- V ° - '
N
C V L Y
� � � Y
(d � L
� � 0.
'" .-' = -o
N v �
- p - O �y N
N
� ,� � �
L L �
A �
V
N � O �
� o �
� L
T N �
� �
�! b
-� N L
E o o c
�J L � �
i � � �
r L U �
� � 3 �
O s
� C u f-
C
�
�
L
C
?
�
4
0
�
O
� ^l
W
L
13
�
�
�
^
�
S
i
O
�_
= y
ro v
C �
o U
� C
L 3
L N
� u
O ,_
E °'
O '-�
w �
_
c �
r
v �
v
� " C
v
„ m
- �
N °'
>„ C
`O O
2' �
O �
N -
� �
C1 ._
G
O
L
O
�
L
O
V
m
W
Q
�
C
�
v
N
t^.
s
b
�
N
.�
0
N
3
N
�
u
m
u
V
�
f0
�
O
2
O
�
�
C
r
G
V
�
.�
L
W
N
V
C
�
L
N
�
N
G)
h
m
U
L
�
m
L
O
Y
�E
�X
Q
a
C
E
�
0
V
T
N
�
L
a
0
C
c
0
�
N
C
C
O
v
�
�1
>
0
T
U
O
V
0
0
CI
u
r
L
O
�
March 16, 2000
I ope-rated my business out of Oakland Home, Inc. at
97 North Oxford St. until January 15, 2000. The phone
number was 651-227-7781.
Sin re1y,
-��-yCN�2 Z �— - Li ��.��.
Serene M. Larson, President
Oakland Home, Inc.
�
�
�
O 1'-�Z
M1�r-16-2000 04:51pm From-U.S.NEST COA6IlINICATIONS 7012226096 T-i52 P.002/002 F-267
unextyod
bSasch 16, 2p00
To Who¢ Zt Mav Concarn:
Oaklan3 Home Inc, Serene Lazson, waa raponsable £or 551-227-7781 �
until Jauuary 15, 2000_
U9WE3T
Paga 1
0
s
Service7ype Gas ' SecviceStatus: Aclive
MeterjCantract U0��5745Q7 Nn�rMeterType:
CunrnlRate: 178 Large Commeruai firm [MN Gasj
❑ Display Canccled Bilis
Ul(28jU0 14
11JZ3(99 23 '
lOR5j9H 40
09/15(99 79
Ofij2Hf99 32
OS)27j49 29
Oa(LB(99 30
03(L9(S9 28
Servia Options
Spatt Heat •
Small C 81
a
99U 30.9 .UO� .UU00
590 427 .ODU .0000
U .000 .O�OU
iii iii�
sa� zt.e .ann .auon
5A� t8.6 .OQ¢ .RUaD
n .von .oao¢
U .�aU .�UUU
0 .00D .OU00
37 1.7 � ,R00 .�OW
?28 70.9 .000 .D000
744 26.6 .000 .00OU
Printftepnrt L(sL Sum...
03/17/Z000 14:51:15
OAKLAND HOME INC
97 OXFORD ST N
ST PAUL, MN 55104-6539
Detail...
fi�5.688 M P
348.828 M P
.DUB S P
�
487.68 B M
35U.75@ E
38.526 M
76.UHB L
2B9�B M
44.398 M
1H3.398 M
409.778 E
Ciose
C�
�
� � � / Z
ServittTypc Electric ' ServirlStatus: Active
Meter(Cnntrocl: OU82551807 NomMctcrType:
Cwrent Ra1e: At 4 General Service (MN ElecJ
[] Display Canceled Bills
Oij28(UO 74
7,680
�U
L'G:iiY
1,400
5,560
2UUa
3,52�
4.2UU
5,4B�
6,460
5.04U
781.2
120A
n.zno
1 D.BOU
.aa¢
.i�
15.600
6.800
6.800
7.6�0
70.4U0
12.HOU
72.000
73200
oansrys �s
U6(Lej99 67
U4(28j99 22
04jO6j99 36
03�01(99 32
OtJ2H)99 29
12j30f98 36
17RN9H 28
Print Report
u :�
03/17/2000 14:50:57
OAKLAND HOME INC
97 OXFORD ST N
17.7
9L1
90.9
97.8
1372
7 89.0
7 BU.O
160.0
ST PAIIL, MN 55104-6539
Sum...
Servfce Options
Small C & 1 •
Overhend
Singie Phase y
n. .oaou
11. .0000
.aoon
: IIII
7. .�U00
il. .ODUO
il. .OU00
72. .0000
12. .OU00
13. .0000
iz. .aaoo
73. .0000
Detail...
332.35W M P
118.57W M P
.90W S P
� 1 1
333.29 S P
4BS.SBM L
763.SOW M
284.77W M
28l.98 W M
335.77W M
363.02W M
32T.ZSW M
Close
i
s
Se�vi¢Type: Gas � ServiceStaNs: Aclive
Aleter(CantracC 0 05T45U1 Nart-MeterType:
Current Rate: 718 �arge Cammercial Frm (MN GasJ
❑ pispiay Canccicd Bllls
UZ/29(UO 32
OifId10V I 15
72(30�44 37
71R3199 29
70(25�99 40
osnsl9s 7a
�b(2Hry9 32
a5R7rye 2e
DA�ZHr99 30
03t29f99 2B
Se�vice Op4aas
Space Heat �
Small C 8 1
i
99U 30.9 .000 .0000
590 42.1 .000 .UOOU
i ii� iiii
558 37.9 .UOU .OUDO
BU7 27.8 .000 .0000
540 18.6 .000 .0000
0 .0�� .UUUO
n .non .nnoa
6 .606 .U6UQ
31 1.1 .000 .�OOU
328 70.9 .000 .�000
744 26.6 .OUO .�ODU
605.688 M
348.828 M
i�:
335.95B S P
487.668 M P
360.758 E P
3B.52B M P
76.�BB L P
28.9U8 M P
45.39 B M P
7H3.396 M P
409.17 6 E P
I Print pcport List Sum... Detait... Close f
r 1
�swc� �wMi�' �w�--� J �� `�—� � �_�_��_�_���
03/17/2000 14:42:44
BUFFALO HOUSE LLC
97 OXFORD ST N
ST PAUL, MN 5510?-6539
�
�
L
d
''s
�
�
� �
L
�
d�-9�
e
ServiceType: Electrie ServiceStatus: Active
Meter(Contrace U082557B07 NamMeterType:
Current 0.atc: A74 ' Geneml Service (MN EIe�
❑ Display Lanceied etils �
U2j29(l7U 32
U7(2Bn10 14
� .ii i
O1(I4(�0 121
U4t25j99 79
O6j28(99 61
Oy28j99 22
04�06(99 36
U3j01199 32
U1j28(99 29
iZj3U�48 36
„ n�roa za
Prini Repott
7,68�
�'
6,44U
t,4U�
5,SS0
2,OOU
3.520
4.2�0
5,480
6.48U
5,040
list
03/17/2000 14:a2:12
BUFFALO HOUSE LLC
Service Options
Small C 8 1 �
Overhead
Singie Phase �
187.2 11.20� 17. .U000
532
17.7
91.1
90.9
97.8
1372
189.0
IeU.0
78�.0
15.6U0
6.800
6.H00
7.600
70.400
72.600
i2.uaa
13.ZOU
B. .00OU
7. .auan
77. .DOUO
11. .0��0
72. .0000
12. .U000
13. .0000
i2. .aaaa
13. .0000
Sum...
oaaa...
332.35W M
118.SiW M
ii
63U.�7 W 5 P
333295 P P
495.58M t--P
163.SO W M P
284.77YJ M P
284.9614 M P
335.17W M P
363.62V{ M P
32725W M P
377.USW M P
Closc
�
X
�
Z
�4._
_ �
�` ,
�� rT
s �
o �
2
97 OXFORD ST N
ST PAUL, MII 55104-6539
- d
� To:
From:
Dafe:
Subject:
Walter,
Walter, Buffala House LLC
Laura, NSP Customer Service
M�rch 96, 2000
97 Oxford 5t N St. Paul MN 55104
This letter is written to verify that there was no interruption in the electrical
ar gas service from the time it was Oakland Home Inc., to Buffalo House
LL.C, Service was established in the nama of Buffalo House L.LC on
d1/14/2000:
if 3 can be of further assistance, please contact me back at 651/639-4944.
Thank you.
�_�.��'}"'���D
Laura Herbert
N5P Customer Service
�
�
•
IO 'd 'ON Sdd dSN Wd 55�Z0 I�Id Q�OZ-L[-�di�
Rug 28 �O 09:04a Buffalo SG, LLC 651-227-?782 �'_� Z
_ p.3
LODGER AGREEMENT
THE UNDERSIGNED ACKNOWLEDGES, UNDERSTANDS, AIVD ACCEPTS THAT BIIFFALO
HOUSEIS AN A�COHOL AND DRUG FREE SHARED HOUSING PROPERTY MANAGEO BY A
PROPERTY MANAGER. THE UNDERSIGNED ALSO ACKNOWLEDGES, UtJDERSTAfVDS,
AND ACCEPTS THAT RESIDENCY AT BUFFALO FiOUSE iS It�! THE CAPACITY OF A
LODGER SHARING A HOUSWG UNIT AND NOT AS A TENANT 1lUITH RfGHTS OR
POSSESSION OF SPACE EXCLUSIVELY.
7HE UNDERSlGNED FURTHER UNDERSTANDS THAT FAILURE TO COMPLY WITtt THE
RULES AND EXPECTATIONS OF BUFFALO HOUSE IS GROUNDS FOR IMMEDIATE
TERMtNATION OF OCCUPANCY. A MqNAGEMEAtT TERMlNATION W/LL RESULT 1N THE
FORFEITURE OF TFfE UNDERSIGNED'S DEPOSIT AND A(VY NOUSlNG FEES.
9) USE OF ALCOHOL, ILLEGAL DRUGS, OR POSSESSION OF PARAPHERNE�IA. USE OF ANY
A�COHOL OR OTHER MOOp-AL7ERWG SUBSTANCES (ILLEGAL DRUGS OR
_, PRESCRIPTiON MEDECATIONS IN ANY MANNER OTHER THAN PRESCREBEU), WHETHER IN
POSSESSIOPd OF OR ON THE PERSON OF THE RESIDENT, OR WITHIN THE LIVING SPACE
OCCUPIED BY 7HE RESIDENT, WILL RESULT IN IMMEDIA7E TERMINATION,
2) TRAFFICKtNG. ANY SUSPECTED ACTIVITY OF DRUG DEALING OR RUNNING WI�L RESU�.T
IN tUMEDtATE TERMINATION AND WIL� BE REFERRED 70 LAW ENFORCEMENT;
3) SIGNIFICANT OR WII,LFUL DAMAC-E TO THE HOUSING PROPERiY,
4) THREATS OR POSS�SSIOf! Or ANY WEqpONS. THREATS QF PHYSICAL VIOLENCE,
SUICIDE ATTEMPTS AND/OR OTHER ABUSE, OR POSSESSlON OF ANY WEApONS 6Y ANY
RESIDENT OR HIS GUEST{S) W1LL RESULT IN IMMEDIATE TERMINATION AN6 BE
REFERRED TO L4W ENFOftC�M�NT;
5) A6'JSE AfJY PHYSICAL O,q VERBAL ABUSE OF MA^JAGEMENT OR ANy OTHEF RESlDENT
OR H!5 GU=ST(St V�Ji�L RESULT IN IMMEDIATE TER�IINATION AM1D tv1AY Bc REFERRED TO
LA�N ENFORCEMENT;
6V SMOKING A�VWJHERE ON THE PREMISES EXCEPT FOR DESIGNFT�D QREA(S). SMOKING
IN SLEEPING qRGqS WILL RESULT IN IMMEDIATE TERMINATION;
7) SEXUA! RELATf:JNSHiPS SEXUAL RELATIONS ARE NOT PERMITTED WITHIN THE
BUILD!NG. ANY SEXUAL SO�ICITATION, PROSTITUTION OR pROh10TIOPJ THEREOF 4V1� L
RESUL7 IN IMMEDIATE TERi�t?hA710N. OVERNIGHT GUES75 ARE fdOT PERP�IITTED;
NONCOMPUANCE MAY RESUiT IN TERVIINATION;
S) ANY ACTIOtJ TNAT DISRUPTS A SAFE AND PEACCpUL RECOVERY-0RIENTED
ENVIRONMENT. NO PERSON PAAY INTERFERE W17H ANY RESIDENT'S QUIET ENJOYMENT �
OF TH� PREMISES COURTESY AR�D CONSIDERATION WILL BE SHOWN LNHEN US!NG
TELcVi5tON, RADIO, AND PERSONAL STEREO DEVICES. THE HOURS OF �0:00 PM TO
07:00 AM WILL BE CGNSI6ERED T€MES OF SP�CIAL Ai i ENTION AfdD CONSiDERATION TO
FHOSE TRYIt�G TC REST. NONCOMPLtANCE 41qY RESUL7 IN TERMENATION,
9� MAIL TAM?ERING_ ANY Psqi_ TA4IYERING VJtLL RcSULT W}MMEDIA7E TERMINATION AND
BE REFERRED TO LAW EN^ORCEMENT;
10) THEFT ANY THFFT OR SUS?EGTED THEFT B1' ANY RESID�Nr bVY_L RESULT Ih
iiw':N;�DI:,� E��ERlvih�::,710h! AND BE R�FERRE'J l�0 LAW ENFORGEME�l;
Rug 28 00 09:�4a Buffalo SG, LLC , 651-227-7782 P•
11} FAiLURE TO ADHERE TO PftOGRAM EXPECTA710NS.�ALL RESIDcNTS ARE EXPECTED TO
8E ACCOUNTABLE TO EACH OTHER AND MANAGEMENT AS TO THE[R SOBRtETY STATUS.
EXPECTATIONS fNCLUDE, BUT ARE NOT LIMITED TO: HOUSE JOBS AND DUTIES ANQ THE
WEEKLY HOUSE MEETING; KEEPING PERSbNAL ITEMS OUT 0= PUBLIC AREAS; KEEPING
BEDS MADE AND ROOMS CLEAN; KEEAING PUSLIC AREAS CLEAN; MAINTAINING
ACCEPTABLE PERSONAL HYGIENE. NONCOtviPLIANCE MAY RESVLT IN TERMINATION;
72) OTHER GIRGUMSTANCES. MANAGEMENT RESERVES THE RIGHT TO CONSIDER
TERMiNATION, CONTINUEO RES[DENCE, OR ACCEPTANCE O\ AN INDIV€DUAL BASIS.
MANAGEMENT INTERPRETATtON OF THE LODGER AGREEMENT WI�L NOT BE SUSJECT
TO DEBATE. MANAGEMENT RESERVES THE RfGHT TO TERMIt+lATE Ai�lY LODGER
AGREEMENT AT ANY TIME;
13) FAILURE TO GIVE WRfTTEN NOTICE OF VOLUNTARY TERMINATION. AT LEAST FOURTEEN
DAYS' ADVANGE NOTICE UF VOLUNTARY TERMINATION IS REQUIRED;
14) FAfLURE TO PROVIDE URINE OR BREATH SAMPLE. ALL RESI�ENTS AGREE TO PROVtDE
A URINE OR SREATH SAMPLE TO BE TESTED FOR TOXICI7Y AT THEIR [XPENSE.
REFUSAL TO DO SO VViLL RESULT IN IMMEDfATE TERMINAFION.
1 HAVE READ AND UNDERSTAND THE LODGER AGREEMENT AND AGREE TO FOL�OW
THE EXPECTATIOIdS AS STATED HEREfN AND INTERPRETED BY HOUSE MANAGEMENT.
I Ut�1DERSTAND THAT IT ES MY RESPONSIBILiTY TO BE FAMILIAR WITH ALL RULES AND
EXPECTATfONS. I 11NDERSTAND ThiAT IF I DO NOT TERMINATE VOLUNTAf21LY I WILL
FOR�E(T MY SECURITY DEPOSIT AND ANY FEES PAID OR OWED.
APPLICANT SIGNATURE / QATE :
MANAGEMENT SIGiJATURE ! DATE :
C J
.
•
�
�
� � 01'92.
�
--- �x�°Ctf� - ��7-�E
�L[��L..O Ho<%ts�
T� c-� ���P�lc- ��N
� � ox �o�T7 S
�`�f � i�,��t L. , M 6�.1
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT
SPECIFICATION OR REPOI
PREPARED BY ME OR UI
SUPERVISION AND THAT
REGISTERED ARCHITECT
LAWS OF THE STATE OF
� �D��-I
c�� ; ��_
�
dY OIRECT
A DULY
7HE
� � Z�NitVG FiLE oo-�2z-
Y�
Shannon A. O'lCeefe
Doctor of Chiropractic
O'Kee�e Chiropractic Clinic
t 053 Ashiand Ave.
St. Paul, MIY 55104
Phone: (651) 292-8072 Fax: (651) 292-8722
April 17, 2000
St. Paul Planning and Economic Development
Ms. Nancy Holman
PED Zoning Department
1100 City Hall Annex
25 W. 4th St
St. Paul, MN 55102
Dear Nancy:
•
� Z4NING FlL���-��
��
This letter is to inform you of the information that the residents have established that
smround the building of 97 N. Oxford (Buffalo Sober House). Since the pwchase of the
building in 7an. 2000 by Walter Dinalko and Ralph Castagno for the use of a boazding
house for a group living facility for men in eazly sobriety, there has been a cloud of
misunderstanding and confusion by the residents that sunound this building.
I have placed many phone calls to the city of St. Paul, Mayor Norrn Coleman's office, the
Summit-University Planning Council, Jerry Blakey's office, St. Paul Zoning. The
outwme has been the same from aIl parties. NO ONE KNOWS ANYTHING! !!
This letter is to inform you that the above mentioned owners aze trying to establish that
the former owner was operating with a Non-confoxxning use permit at the time of
pwchase in 7an 2000. The previous owner was operating the non-profit facility from
1974 untzi approximately Sept. 1998 when the residents vacated the premises.
The sunounding residents ofthis building have contacted the electric company and have
found concrete evidence that the buildittg was vacant some time in 1998. The Electric
bill in 1998 was calculated for a 12-month period for $550 per month. 1999 it was $160
per month. The Gas bills were also significantly reduced from 1998 to 1999. The
average gas bill for 1998 was $536 and for 1999 they were $297 per month. It would be
appropriate if the city would find ouY when the specific c3ecline in utilities were, to
establish the exact date when the premise of 97 North Ox£ord was vacated by the
previous tenants that established the non-confornung permit. The current homeowners
•
•
/
Ol��j2
• s�urounding this building are willing to testify that this building has been vacant since
Sept. 1998. We are not trying to cornest the occupancy of an office by the previous
owners but the actual occupancy of the tenants that the non- confornung permit was
esitbilised for. The surrounding neighbors have also been exposed to a fire alar�n that
rang far appro�nately one week before the fire department came out to disengage the
alarm after the pervious owner had vacated the premises in the summer on 1998. We
vrge you to fiuther investigate the above information to establish the fact there were NO
RESIDE23TS in this building after Sept. 1998. The non-conforming permit requires that
there is no more than a 12-month lapse in residence for the old permit to be grandfathered
in for the new owners.
The residents of the neighborhood would like the new owner to have to re-establish the
non-conforming permit so that the residents wovld have an opportunity to say if this
business should be allowed in our neiborhood.
This neighborhood has been BUFFALOED by ali of the owners and appropriate officials
about the process that the new owner must follow. This matter should not come down to
who has the most expensive attomey because the neighborhood will lose since there is
NO attorney representiag us. We are counting on the CITY to make the new owner
follow a11 the appropriate zoning laws that apply to this building.
Please provide this case with due justice by making the new owner follow the law by
;�, establishing a new non-confornvng permit, which would require the support from two-
thirds ofthe property awner's located within 100 feet ofthe property.
Sincerely,
`��' ��--�-- ���'�g�--
Dr. Shannon A. O'Keefe
1053 Ashland Ave.
St. Paui, MN 55104
CC:
LEP
Jeiry Blakey
Mayor Norm CoTeman
Summit-University Planning Council
Neighbors of 97 North O�'ord
•
/
CITIZEN PARTICIPATIO DIS RI TS
•
•
1 . SUIV�(HT -t5H j�'I Ltl,Kttl�-tf'1GtItYUUC1
2.GREATER EAST SIDE
3.WEST SIOE
4.DAYTON'S BLUFF
5.PAYNE-PHALEN
6.NORTH EN�
7HOMAS-DALE
8. UMMIT-UNIVERSITY
.WEST SEVENTH
lO.COMO
11.HAMLINE-MID4IAY
12.ST. ANTHONY
13.MERRIAM PK.-LEXINGTON HAMI.INE
14.GROVELAND-MACALESTER
15.HIGNLAND
16.SUMMIT HILL
17. D041NTOWPI
�00-12Z2
C�
CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PLANNIN6 DISTRICTS
�
�
_ __ �
o�-qz
. . . . �-
•
��� � ��Cr,� ��'�, �t�� ,��,��rc6�- �',.r.+✓�Bfx��k
� ���a� ��
C1/��v�• ��T2 ,��� ���;Y:B�u �nL� 9��re���
�2z����� o� Gz¢�'e`�` ���
i��G;���'f.G1GP� ��! -������.�.�ee%LU� �.-c2CZ
'� °k�'GG2i r �� iyh%�G%�l�/�1�.�'�"""'" `Etiy�
� � i9��L�'GlY�'� ;Z2a�2� /
�
�
� Go��:������"�` ��
�� � =� ��r:��:�� � �
�G��►'� d _ ��G�,t�iji
. � /�'�'�z��� � ��
�� / � ( O� � � � �� �� ���
/ � I� ������
A��t'�_ � (/ f �� ' � e � . -
U
- -- � ��� '�°'� `���"���� �� 9 �
'�� ��I���� �
�e���
����
� G��
�
97 North Onfard Street Saint Paul, Minnesata USA 55104
voice: 651.227.778'I data: 651.227.7782 buffalohouse@uswest.net
�
bufFalo house
. � �,v�,� b��� �e% �r ��P�'/ ,1 b�� b�`f
���3 �C��"' s i; (ce °l �d fl�X (�� , 1 �� � t�s�t
� � r � � � � � n � V �.��,r p�t; � r� �...ow( v� �� e � ���/.�
j � �a� f��l o� c� ���,(eS5 .� ��k�
� l;� e o h t-�-t- s��� � f�, li�,>, s D T�, P���X
��r�f���,( � �� ��e�'e� Y'��L�t r��_
) a � �,
�
s
97 North Oxford Street Saint Paul, Minnesota USA 55104 �
voice: 657.227J78! data: 651.227.7782 buffalohouse(�uswest.net
� �_ g �
�
��
. . . . �-
�
� ' .fil��. .c,�; . , .�t'*� .�iu.� �/i-t��
� � �' �. - l�
/�k� � cG�—c���! -�st� �1 C ��� � i� fC��
�,r,�'��'v��.� : �.c� �� ._
���������
/1��u�,Cu.=� ����� � .�, z .� �
�� �,� �.
,
:����f,lf� �i� `� � ` ��2.��� %+�'� / �"'E�'!�' �-'C�
� �/'..�.��.--.� �
� 97 North O�dord Street Saint Paul, Minnesota USA 55104
voice; 651.227.778'1 data: 651.227.7782 bufFa{ohouse@uswest.net
�
: ii'r•1.7� � �.-
��� -- �
T hav� becn t;ving ak +ke bw�..lo kouse ��
7 wta n-�� s n o.� � � e.C}o./ �o.�irtc� � �\�ce \'��e � kk 2
��ato `l.a�Se ; ��-- v.�.s �e��+u\ �ro h..�c a �er'
e�v �� or�wt o�.� }� \��ve- o��- , w�el� Z ��d� v � � �
-}1,e. �� l( e�t'� P L\,�b . L;v�ng w�� �- b,,.nc.� o�'
sobu Yeog��- h���s ►m.2 w;�'� ,ny s an�
a�.��,� .�,�� ,�, � +� a,� ��o����, . -c�.�
�pe.v�X��S �t�v� 'i'�t �,A2e 4cG O��eq�
�.�, s �.,6,�� �,k� a-� �aa , ��,�
�S- �-� . `-� d�on`� �..ylo.r/. �� � Cor..�d �
i�l"� A�i 1"f^f p�.9 y �ve �pv+�l2. �
�.;,�� �.�
.ve wtc.�e
�
�
97 North Oxford StreeY Saint Paul, Minnesota USA 55'f 04 �,
voice: 651.227.7781 daYa: 65'l.227.7782 butfaiohouse�uswest.net
r o1
�
�
SU�WHIT-UNIVERSITY
�
a
DISTRICT 8 �N x° "°° r'°° '°°° "°`° "°°
. � scu= �x FEEf
.�����a�� ��� �
QO�� (Z.Z2�`�
�
, � j � � �'_,��—.� �
�_._�- `-�' �
U y �
: �a ����� ,;� �: �
�
�
4✓ Y Y. "V �A� �ld's f _ . �
__._ .�
�Q ��� �r� � �
�Q
����
� '� � cr .. ; —,.' .,
�,.�
�, i
� � � �� '^. r�
�. �� �
�
��.....�.a
� / � (h.; r�
� .� Y G
.F \.W
� .C3C} � V.V i-' L3,t�
__. 3 _ �
fl�� � �; �;��
���t��
�A . �
�i �1: �
a.� a.' �.II.�,� "�`'� ���
�
�
��
�-
� �;������J �p �
������
�
�
�
•
1flL r
': ��:�'�°��� �,��� �' � s c� � � �
� `�
� �
,,. �' �s..,._..
L '""°"' Y ^r .. - -----.-.—..-..._.�._,_... _
r
� � . 'i ' �p ' � �
- � �+ i �� ,E_.,� ..�.,._.
f
� ����;:���N��� �; �� �- �'� � � ��� � c�� c� _:
_ I �.
�
� � f.y�'
� (�. � V
��
�
� -�
� �
.`�.l �.7 k
� .J'�.. A � -.,..i
F
Y
�������
�' �� ; � . � , � t � , � .� � ,y
'�✓��cJ� '` .,r� `'} �' `. Yf' 1 t�= i s d:� �w,>
, ��
- ' rr..�v-..�..s.......-..z�.�._�r...�-w�....a..�-s....am.....
�" � .'i ('� � y �t�".�, ��.
�'�� �'�.����
;�'' �,; ,'. �E'���'
� � N : � `..S
W. � ,;
C
� �*�:�
0��,���"���3�
� � �'�^G � � � =; � �'.�
I � � n
�r r � �
2
CN __ i .. _
� y , _✓ r
_ n e�
APPLICANT ��� � �" ���� �C—� LEGEND
PURPOSE � � '—� zoning district boundary
a � � � � . � �: sub � � o �t
FlLE �"e%.,�.,.::� �2.� DATE`"' `" `° � �' G� Pe Y
PLNG. DIST�— MAP # o one tamily
_w ¢ two tamiiy
�
_--„ �-�Q multiple (amily
� (� " ,-.. ..-� I' s - , � "" , ;� `„' tJ C� !� � �
� �L' �v S � , „ �
n L �
• � ^ commerc
� o.,.. indusirial
V vacant
s:
��-�-�aoa
�
oi-gz.
� �C3i��NG F�tE b�-�ZZ.����
To Nancy HomanS PED,
My name i5 Arthur HiII ,1 live at 94 N. Oxford St directly
acro55 from 97 N. Oxford 5t. [ have lived thier 5ence May
1976 ancf are mo5t directly impacted by what goe5 on at - �hat
addre55 becau5e it i5 right acro55 from my front door.
On or about augu5t or 5eptember of 1998 a]( of the
tennent5 that Iived thier packed up and left for good, a great
day for me, The building 5tayed vacant un�Gil early 2000 except
for a per5on or two ,three or four day5 a week for two or three
hour5 a day, no more. No tennet5.
The buffalo people moved in (at time5 25 5trong) and the
traffic etarted loud car5, truck5 and mu5ic goe5 on until after
11f M daily. GroupS of inen out5ide in front and in the alley
� 5moking and throwing cigarett5 butt5 in the etreet and talking
LOUD on cell phone5 out5ide (5ometime5 in the 5treet} , i5 a
daily happening. DogS droping5 on the blvd (without picking it
up) . The only quiet time i5 during the day hour5 > but about 71'M
until after 11!'M noi5e and traff ic. The weekend5 are wor5e.
About twelve people that live thier have auto and or truck5.
The people that own the building have no ve5ted intere5t in
my neborhood, except too make money and be a blite too the
nieghborhood . The people that live thier ju5t don't have too care
at all.1 live here , pay taxe5 and take care of my property and
get no break from people who ju5t don't care. plea5e read too
the Zoning Gommittee.
Thank you , Arthur Hill 651-224-8971
94 N. Oxford St.
� 5t Paul, MN 55104
_—�a �_ _� / d
� ■ � I, ■ � ■
! � � � �.■ i� '�� 11 �
i
-
,
Ot�4�
� �
� �
,'�''� ��
; ,
�; � '�
_ ;.,��
m ;' i
� !!�
z ''
� �
0
z �
•
�
;#
LAIJREL
`
�r
� � .
� ,�
: ?
� '�
�---
�
�
�
�
���
o i-q2
��. �,��sjd�
PETITION
VVe the undersigned homeowners and residents are not opposed to
the egistance of the Buffalo Sober Aouse located at 97 N. Ogford.
NAME ADDRESS
e, r�I 5' i,n. o,�/ l� � 4 �� e�e, t--
�n� u��'�-�- �,� y �� i��
��n����r��*������
��_� �� �. .i��
`'� � � TaS/�fj�l�''►.vta'� e. A. ,
/'�_ � °:� /;
�- . � v � . . 1• !�ri_'J
. J.��..-_�1�1.. �� ,: ,
�!'�:/,� � �i� s �
, �i�� � j � � , ' '
� �� ,i'1.1�;!% ,/, , . �/
�060 ��,.�C �-
l �'Zo >�a,t,9.•�v.�l.
I � 7� ��r�Q,�-�
� � �l�ct..-�
/ � � � r�
#
"�` �ks�..��.,d -�
PHONE
�a��'�$S
� 3 -�I 6 �
� f� — gs-s
� -��_J�-, �
�91�
� �-�--,�,
�
3ai o3y�
z L Y—I33/
GS /-��ll
Gsr 3.a ��'�r23
��
�5 � �a� �-a y /
(�s � �Z z .
(,51 LZz -� b3
D�-Q'L
PETITION
We the undersigned homeowners and residents are not opposed to
the existance of the Buffalo Sober House located at 97 N. Oxford.
� �.,.r�ow��.o. u�� io� ��
� q7 r� . ox�a�� 0�-92
<<��
. ��
PETITION �
We, the undersigned neighbors (hom�:owners and residents), affected by the
property located at 97 N. Oxford, wis� to express our united opposition to
the re-zoning and/or re-establishment of a 26year old "non-conformin��Use"
permit issued in 1974. We believe that our fragile and densely populated
neighborhood is best served by maintaininS the current zoning ordinances
which designate the building as a two-family residence.
�
NAME
,�.
ADDRESS
/b-�s�
/oas
(�t�°r
��
�j'�t 3 � r l�
�
,
0
�v�
►� ,
�7�'��,`� ,
�
0
oJL�
l0/7
��
�;:,
�'r h � �
PHONE (OPTTONAL)
E MAIL
da �- ��Y
, 22 � "
J
22 2 - ?-�'i
, aa -a7�7
a�� ��� 7
� �, _ �;,e���
L��I�Gi l�
, , �,
Z zY - /33I
^��_
Z Z 7- 7s'� Z
�i J I .
��t/"'73i�
6Sl-2zs�
�;' �� �$�vD
PET� N
o�-yZ
We, the undersigned neigl�twrs (homeowners and residents), affected by the
property located at 97 N. Oxford, wish to express our united opposition to
the re-zoning and/or re-establishment of a 26year old "non-conformin� Use"
permit issued in 1974. We believe that our fragile and densely populated
neighborhood is best served by maintaining the current zoning ordinances
which designate the building as a two-family residence.
NAME
�/�n�ic- �
.�
ADDRESS
�AAJ
�
f!�! I! �
f ' r :
/ ,/.ii
i�[.. �,�
�-y��
�:
0
t
�
PHU�VL' ((1Cllv
E-MAIL
,
_�
� , ,
�
o �-yZ
PETITION
_`
We, the undersigned neighbors (homeowners and residents), affected by the
property located at 97 N. O�cford, wish to express our united opposition to,
the re-zoning and/or re-establishment of a 26year old "non-conforming Use"
permit issued in 1974. We believe that our fragile and densely populated
neighborhood is best served by maintaining the current zoning ordinances •
which desig�ate the building as a two-family residence.
NAME
ADDRESS
PHONE /OP"l'lU1vAL1
����
� /DcS/ ��s.fGfh✓A ,
a, /.//l S /..a��i
�
Gv - L92 -807�
6S/ , ?,� y � / ��
� �
f055 Ash�A�d
►05� hshlur�
r��- Za� -q :
(�5� � aa� �8a�
1a4����bfi 03�
Lo51-22�—��35
�i•r<I,�.r �ts � L�Sa Ashda�
(�SI-aay
o,-yz
PETIT_IOl!T
We, the undersigned neighbors (homeowners and residents), affected by the
property located at 97 N. O�cford, wish to express our united opposition to
the re-zoning and/or re-establishment of a 26year old "non conformin� Use"
permit issued in 1974. We believe that our fragile and densely populated
neighborhood is best served by maintaining the current zoning ordinances
which designate the building as a twafamily residence. �
�
�� ►' A�
��
�'�.ui�
%,7,�q
.:., �.
��
. � �
ADDRESS
IOZ� �I�Iwv�d
�o�{s }�
IU 3 civi.�[�
� �
�9 ����'� Sr u/-
PH01v� �ur����vA��
L 51-1Z'� y'7 b
651_ 2� - S.�'l.b
�s�1- ZZ� -�C���
ZZ� ��l
6 s�( � � YG ��6 3/ _
' I
oi-92
�
._ The Fair Amendments Act of 1988 and Group Homes for the
By John H. Foote
Hazel & Thomas, P.C., Manassas, V'uginia
Reprimed from the 7oumal of the Section on Locai Govemment Law of the Yuginia State Bar, Vol.
III, No, I, September 1997
Introduction. Reguiation of group homes for persons with one or more handicapping conditions, is a
volatile issue throughout the United States. Since the Generai Assembly's first foray into the Seld in
1977, directing certain local zoning controts over group homes for the mentally ill, mentally retarded,
and developmentally disabled (see Va. Code Ann. § 15.1-486.2, now repealed, and its current version,
§ 15.1-486.3), there have been major changes in federal law with direct impact on local authority to
deal with the locarion and control of group homes. Indeed, that law now creates sigiuficant and
importam restrictions on the extent of permissible local regulation. This article outlines the currern
state of affairs affecting group homes for thc handicapped. It offers clear warning to local
governments that ordinances and policies which are discriminatory in pwpose or effect, or which fail
to make reasonabie accommodation for the needs of the handicapped, can have costly consequences.
Congregate living arrangements among unrelated people are nothing new, of cowse, nor is their
treatment by the courts. There has been legisiation and litigation over whai constitutes a"family" for
years. Localiries are not powerless to deSne the term: more than twenty years ago, the United States
Supreme Court heid that local ordinances defining "family" to mean one or more persons related by
blood, adoption or marriage, or not more than two unrelated persons, living and cooking together as a
singte housekeeping unit, are constitutional. V"illage of Belle Tene v. Boraas, 416 U.S. i(1974). But
facially neutral ciassifications caa have unimended results or affirmatively discriminatory purposes or
effects, and not long after Belle Terre the Court held that a definition of "family" which criminalized a
grandmother's desire to live with her two grandsons — who were not brothers but cousins -- was an
unconstiturional deprivation of her due process rights. Moore v. City of East Cleveland. 431 U. S. 494
(1977).
The Fair Housing Amendments Act Restrictions on the definition of family, however, are only one
aspect of America's approach to housing and housing discrimination. For many years Congress has
made it national policy to eliminate such discrimination in all its forms, through the Fair Housing Act
of 1968. The originai Act (Title VIII ofthe Civil Rights Act of 1968, 42 U.S.C. §§ 3601-3619)
banned, among other things, housing discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, and national
origin, and provided for a variety of enforcement mechanisms. The Act was amended in 19T4 and
again in 1988, however, and it was these latter changes, known as the Fair Housing Amendments Act
http:/iwww.oxfordhouse.orgJfairhouse.html 10/25/00
ol
of 1988 (the "FfiAA"), which made truly substantive revisions in the law, and which form the source
of the principal resriictions on local comrol of group homes. See PL 100-430, 102 Stat. 1619 (1988),
42 U.S.C. 3601, et s�.
Even before the FHA.t�, the United States Supreme Court had held in City of Cleburne v. Cleburne
LivinQ Cemer. Inc.. 473 U.S. 432 (1985), that the Equal Protection Clause prolubits a city from
requiting a special use pernut for group homes for memally retarded persons, when such pemuts are
not required for other similar residemial uses. But it was the FHAA which truly attered the landscape.
Drawing heavily on existing law with respect to handicap discrimination in federally-supported
�� programs (See § 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 29 U.S.C. 701), the Act made it unlawfui for
azry one of a number of covered entities, including local govemmerns
to discriminate in the sale or rental, or to otherwise make unavaiiable or deny, a dwelling to any buyer
or renter because of a handicap of —
(A) that buyer or renter,
(B) a person residing in or intending to reside in that dwelling after it is so sold, rented or made
available; or
(C) any person associated with that buyer or renter.
42 U.S.C. 3604(�(1).
The Act defines discriminarion to include not oniy tradirional discriminatory pracrices, but aiso "refusai
to make reasonabie accommodations in rules, policies, practices, or services, when such
accommodations may be necessary to afford such person equal opportunity to use and enjoy a
dwelling." 42 U.S.C. 3604(�(3)(B). While localities need not do everything humanly possible to
accommodate a disabled persoq the "reasonable accommodation" requirement imposes a$rmative
duties to modify local requirements when they discriminate against the handicapped. Liddy v
Cisneros 823 F. Supp. 164, 776 (S.D.1VI' 1993).
The Act defines handicaD eactremely broadly as
(1) a physical or mentat impairment which substantially limits one or more of [a] person's major life
activities,
(2) a record of having such an impairment, or
(3) being regarded as having such an impairment.
Although there are exceptions to this definition, including those "whose tenancy would constitute a
direct threat to the health or safety of other individuals or whose tenancy would result in substantial
physical damage to the property of others" (42 U.S.C. 3604(�(9)), and people af�licted with the
"current, iilegal use of or addiction to a controlled substance" (42 U.S.C. § 3602(h)), handicap does
include people who take drugs tegatly, or people who were once, but no longer aze, iilegal drug users.
United States v. Southern Management Coro 955 F2d 914, 919-23 (4th Cv. 1492}.
Congress understood that one of the central problems for the establishment of group homes is baseless
http://www.o�'ordhouse.org/fairhouse.html 10/25/00
oi-yz
hostility on the part of neighbors and even local govemments themselves. It manifestly intended,
therefore, to preempt state and local laws which e$'ectuated or perpetuated housing discrimination.
The fIouse Judiciary Committee said that
{t]he FFiAA, like Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, is a clear pronouncemern
of a nationai commitmem to ead the unnecessary exclusion of persons with handicaps from the
American mainstream. It repudiates the use of stereotypes and ignorance, and mandates that persons
with handicaps be considered as individuals. Generatized perceptions about disabilities and unfounded
speailations about tlueats to safety are specifically rejected as grounds to justify exclusioa ..,
While state and local governmems have authority to protect safety and health, and to regulate use of
Iand, that authority has sometimes been used to restrict the ability of individuaLs with handicaps to live
in communities. This has been accomplished by such means as the enactmem of or imposition of
health, sa£ety or land-use requiremems on congregate living arrangements among non-related persons
with disabilities. Since these requirements are not imposed on families and groups of similaz size of
other uinelated people, these requiremems have the effect of diserimination against persons with
disabilities. The Committee i�ends that the prohibition against diaM+*±+±nation against those with
handicaps apply to zoning decision and practices. The Act is intended to pro}u'bit the application of
speciai requirements through land-use regulation, restricrive covenams, and conditional or special use
permits that have the effect of limiting the ability of such individual to Gve in the residence of their
choice in the community .... Another method of maldng housing unavailable to people with
disabilities has been the application or enforcement of otherwise neutral rules and regulations on
health, safety and land-use in a manner which discriminates against people with disabilities. Such
discrimination often results from false or overprotective assumptions about the needs of handicapped
peopie, as well as unfounded fears of difficulties about the problems that their tenancies may pose.
These and similar practices would be prohibited.
House Committee on the Judiciary, Fair Housing Amendments Act of 1988, I-I.R. Rep. No. 711,
100th Cong. 2d Sess., at 18, 24. Thus, with specific regard to the exercise of local powers, the Act
says clearly that "(a]ny law of a State, a political subdivisinn, or other such jurisdiction that purports
to require or permit any action that would be a discriminatory housing practice under this subchapter
shall to that extent be invalid." 42 U.S.C. 3615 (emphasis supplied).
Judicial treatment of "handicap." The decisions interpreting the FHAA have been far reaching in
detemvning what constitutes a handicap. In fact, it is difficuit to conceive a disability that does not
constitute a handicap. Thus the PHAA has been held to cover not oniy rather obviously handicapped
folks, such as the wheelchair-bound, or visually impaired, but atso those who are disadvantaged by
aicohofism and drug addiction (e,g,O�ord House v. TownshiQof Ii'ilL 799 F. Supp. 450 (D. N.7.
(1991)), those beset by emorional problems and mental illness or retardation (e.�.,Association for
Advancement of the Mentally Handicapped. Inc v City ofBlizabeth, 876 F. Supp. 614 (D. N.J.
1994)), and oid age. United States v. Commonwealth of Puerto Rico_ 764 F. Supp. 220, 224 (D.P.R
1991). It extends to communicable diseases, including AIDS and HIV. Support 1�Tinistry v. vlla�e of
Waterford, 808 F. Supp. 120, 133-35 (N.D. N.Y. 1992). The homeless can be deemed handicapped, if
oniy because their homelessness is related to other, specific handicaps. Stuart B. McKinnev
Foundation v. Town of Fairfield 790 F. Supp. 1197 (D. Conn. 1492).
It has been estimated that one out every six persons in America is handioapped under this definition.
Housing Discriminarion� Law and Liti ag ri°a by Robert G. Schwemm (Clark, Boazdman, Callaghan
1990), § 11.5(2), p. 11-56.
http://www.oxfordhouse.org/fairhouse.html 10/25/00
oi-qZ.
4. Judicial Treatment of Discriminatory Housing Practices. FHAA group home cases turn on one
— or more frequently all — of three differem theories: discriminatory imeat, di�+**!�na*ory effect, or
failure to make "reasonable accommodation" to the needs of the handicapped. While the decisions
often involve all three, there aze severai identifiable subclassifications af FHAA cases worthy of note.
Family composition rules. Many cases involve local ordinance definirions of "family" that preclude
group homes. Rarely do these defimtions survive sctutiny in the group home context. Although lower
courts had been roughly bandling "family composition rules" for some time, in C'rty of Edmonds v.
Oxford House. Inc. 514 U.S. 725 (1995) the Supreme Court held that such rutes are plainly subject to
the FHAA and while limitations on unrelated residents is not �er se invalid, they must be scrutinized
carefully for their discrimu�atory imern or effect.
An example of these cases is Oxford House v. Township of Cherry I-�iiL 799 F. Supp. 450 (D. N.J.
1991), the federal coutt rejected a state court tuling that residents of a group home for recovering
alcoholics were not a single family under the Township's ordinance, and that they were not
handicapped. The court noted that those handicapped by alcoholism or drug abuse aze persons more
likely than others to nced a living arrangemern in which sufficiemly large groups of unrelated people
live together in residential neighborhoods for mutual support during the recovery process. The
Township produced no evidence of a nondiscriminatory reason for its position. See also O�ord
House-Everareen v. Citv of Plainfield 769 F. Supp. 1329 (D. N.J. 1991)(nine residents necessary to
make a group home for recovering alcoholics viable.)
Special use permits and the imposition of restrictive conditions. Several cases have invoived
requiremems for special use permits, or the imposition of particular conditions on those permits. While
the Eastern District of vrginia has held that the mere requirement for a special use permit dces not
violate the Act (O�ord House v. Cii� of V'uginia Beach 825 F. Supp. 1251 (E.D. Va. 1993)), in fact
caurts rarely uphold denials of such permits, or the imposirion of bwdensome conditions. In Bangerter
v. Orem C�_ Utah. 46 F.3d 1491 (lOth Cir. 1995), for example, the court of appeals found that
requirements that a group home for memally retarded aduks give assurances its residents would be
properiy supervised on a 24-hour-a-day basis, and that the home establish a community advisory
committee to deal with neighbor's complaint, were not imposed on other communal living
azrangements under the City's zoning ordinance, and were intentionally discriminatory.
In Tumintr Point. Inc. v. City of CaldweLl Idaho 74 F.3d 941 (9th Cir. 1996), the City asserted that a
homeless shelter for 16 residents in a single-family district was a"boarding house" that required a
special use permit to exceed twelve persons. A pernrit was ganted, but for a limited number of
residents, and subject to requiremerns for residem staff, parl�ag spaces, a new sidewaik and
landscaping and an annual review of the permit. The cour# rejected these restrictions as having no
relationship to iegitimate zoning purposes, and set occupancy at 25 based on testimony from the Fire
Chief. It reduced the parking requirement, eliminated the sidewalk and landscaping, and suuck the
annusi review requiremetrt. See aiso Marbrunak. Inc. v. City of Stow. Ohio. 974 F2d 43, 46-48 (6Yh
Cir. 1992) (invalidating requirement that a home for four mentally retarded adult women install an
alazm system interconnected to ceiling sprinkler system, doors with push bars swinging outwazds with
lighted exit signs, and fire walls and flame reYardant wall coverings, as based on false and
overprotective assumptions); North Shore-Chicago Rehabilitation_ Inc v V'illage of 5kokie, 827 F.
Supp. 497, 499-502 (N.D. Ill. 1993) (enforcement of requirements on home for traumarically brain-
damaged adults that home consist of five or fewer residents on a permanent basis, with paid
professional sta� license from state, local occupancy pemrit and compliance with local, was
http:/1www.oafordhouse.org/fairhouse.html 10/25/00
o! �9z
discriminatory and constituted a failure to make reasonabie accommodarion).
Dispersat reqnirements. A number of localities have imposed requiremerns that group homes be
geograplrically dispersed in an effort to deinstitutionalize target populations. Dispersal rules do not
generally sutvive. In Larldn v. State of Ivfichisan_ 883 F. Supp. 172, 17� (E.D. Ivfich. 1994) a state
statutory scheme precluded issuance of a license if it would "substan6ally comn�rute to an excessive
concemration" of such faciiities, and required notificationbe given to the City Councii to review the
number of existing and proposed ficilities witUin 1500 feet of a proposed facility and to its neighbors.
The City argued that its dispersal requiremern prevemed formation of "ghettos" and normalized the
endsronme�. 'fhe Court found no rational legal basis for these provision, and held tbat they were
facially dis�`++*��n�ory, since "the absence of a malevolent motive does not com�ert a facially
disciiminatory policy into a neutral policy with a discriminatory effect."
In United States v. V'illage of Marshall. 787 F. Supp. 872, 878 (W.D. ws. 1991), a Wisconsin starirte
required that group homes be separated by 2,500 feet. A group home for six mentally ill persons was
proposed 1619 feet &om another existing home. The trial court found no evidence to support this
requirement and held that the reasonable accommodation requirement mandated the grarn of
pemussion.
In Association for Advancement of the Mentally Handicapped_ Inc. v. City of Elizabeth. 876 F. Supp.
614, 622-23 (D. N.J. 1994) a state statute permitted six residems but required a special use permit for
more than six, but wMch couid be denied if located within 1500 feet of an existing residence or
community sheiter for victims of domestic violence, or the number of persons other than resident staff
residing at the existing residence excced the greater of 50 persons or .5% of the municipal population.
The court invalidated the statute on the ground that there was no evidence that developmernally
disabled persons presern a danger to the community: "The record is devoid of any evidence upon a
fact finder could reasonably conclude that community residences housing more than six
developmentally disabled persons would detract from a neighborhood's residential character." See also
Horizon House v. TownshiQ of Upper South HamptOn, 804 F. Supp. 683, 695-97 (E.D. Pa. 1992)
(affd without opinion, 995 F.2d 217 (3rd Cir. 1993) (100Q foot dispersai rule was on based
unfounded fears about people with handicaps and facially invalid).
Not all courts have agreed with this approach. In Familystyle of St. Paul v. Cit�of St. Paul. Mmn..
923 F.2d 91 (8th Cir. 1991) the court was faced with a request for a speciai use pemut to �pand an
existing campus of homes from 119 to 130 mentally ill persons. The City issued temporary permits on
condition that Familystyle work to disperse its facilities consistently with Mumesota's
deinstitutionalizarion policy which required that community residential facilities for the mentally
impaired be located at least one-quarter mile apart. The court rejected the azgument that the dispersal
requirements impermissibly limited housing choices, holding that nondiscrimination and
deinstitutionalization are compah'bie goals. Contrary to the legislative history and treatment by other
courts, the Eight Circuit suggested that the FHAA did not intend simply to eliminate state and local
zoning authority.
Neighbor notification requirements. Yet another ciass of cases has involved requirements that
neighbors be specifically notified of the advent of group homes. None of these schemes has survived.
In Potomac Group Home v Montgomery Coutrtv 823 F. Supp. 1285, 1296-99 (D. Md. 1993), the
court shuck a requirement that neighbors of each group home adjacent and opposite and
neighborhood civic associations be notified prior to the location of a group home for disabled elderly,
as unsupported by legitimate justification. "The requirement is as offensive as would be a rule that a
http://www.oa-fordhouse.org/fairhouse.html 10/25/00
ol - 9z
minority family give notification and invite commem before moving into a predominantly white
neighborhood." See also Horizon House, suDra. (notification requirement based on discriminatory
imem and effect and violation of reasonable accommodation rule).
Reasonable accommodation reqnirements. Finally, a special subset of cases have involved a
locality's failure to make "reasonable accommodation" for the needs of the handicapped. The Act
requires localities to make such accommodation by amendmem to or variance of local ordinances and
policies when they stand in the way of the location and operation of gr� homes. An accommodation
is reasonable unless it requires a"fundamernal alteration ia the nature of a program or imposes undue
financial and administrative burdens." Southeastem Community Colle�e v. Davis_ 442 U.S. 397, 410.
412 (1979) (irnerpreting § 504 of the Rehabilitation Act). Mere adherence to existing zomng
requirements and land use policies is generally insufficiem to protect the locality, if those requiremems
and policies comravene the Act. A good example of the e�rtent to wluch the courts will go is Hovsons
Inc. v. Township of Brick 89 F3d 1096, 1104 (3rd Cir. 1996), where the court of appeals said there
that although "what the 'reasonable accommodation' standard requires is not a modei of clarity", a
failure to amend ordinances to pemrit nursing homes for handicapped persons in residential zones is a
failure to make reasonable accommodation.
In Judy B. v. Borough of Tioga, 889 F. Supp. 792, 799-800 (M.D. Pa. 1995), United Christian
Muristries wamed to convert a motel into SROs for the disabled. They were denied a use variance, and
the denial was upheld by the state courts, but the federal court held that the denial was a failure to
make reasonable accommodatioq and that changes must be affirmatively made so that peopie with
handicaps may use and enjoy a dwelling. Granting a use variance would require an "extremely modesY'
accommodarion in the zoning rules, and the proposed use was fundamentally consistent with the
neighborhood. See also United States v. City of Philadelphia, 838 F. Supp. 223 (E.D. Pa. 1993), affd
30 F.3d 1488 (3rd Cir. 1994) (requiremem for a rezoning constituted a failure to make reasonable
accommodation).
While localiries must make reasonable accommodations, it does appear that they must first be given an
opportunity to do so. In United States v. V'illage of Palatine. Illinois 37 F. 3d 1230 (7th Cir. 1994) the
Oxford House program, which has a policy of refusing to seek local permits, declined to seek a
required special use permit, The court heid that it had never invoked the procedures that wouid have
pemutted reasonable accommodation to be made. See also Oaford House-C v. City of St. Louis, 77
F.3d 249 (8th Cir. 1996) (restriction to eight residents by-right not discriminatory, and Oxford
House's refusal to apply for pecmits to house more than eight residems rendered reasonable
accommodation claim unripe).
Neighbor600d opposition as a d�ning characteristic. As has been suggested, there is frequently
hostile citize:� opposition to the location of group homes._It is perhaps fatal for the locality to accede
to such pressure, which the courts invariably find to be 6ased on groundless fears.
In Stuart B. McKinney Foundation v. Town of Fairfield 790 F. Supp. 1197, 1221-22 (D. Conn. 1992)
the court invalidated a requirement for a special exception for the use of a two-family residence as a
home for seven HIV-positive persons. Despite efforts to act quietiy, the location of the home was
leaked to the press, and there was a lazge gathering at a local firehouse and much political uproaz. The
trial court noted that meetings were marked by many bigoted remarks. Subsequemly, the Pianning
Birector sent the home a letter asking thirteen questions, inciuding inquiry into standards of admission,
number of people who would live at the property, average anticipated length of residence, type of
medicai care, how the determinarion of departure date was made, leases, payment of rent and other
http://www.oxfordhouse.org/fairhouse.html 10/25/00
o�-9Z
�Pe�, �S, services and facilities to be provided and transportation. The City admitted that
there were no legitimate dangers to public health and safety from HIV-positive residenu, and the court
found that the City's practices evidenced a clear discriminatory intern. See also S�port 11�inistry v
V�illape of Waterford 808 F. Supp. 120, 133-35 (N.D. N.Y. 1992) (citizen opposition and govemmeirt
hostilit}r manifested when Town passed ordinance to assure the defeat of a group home for AIDS
vichms and named opponents to the Zoning Boazd of Adjustmern. Uncontradicted evidence showed
that it was "[c]rystai clear" that locai ordinance was enacted to prevern Support IV�inistries from
establislvng its home.)
In O�£ord House-Evergreen v City of Plaiafieid 769 F. Supp. 1329 (D. N.J. 1991), the Mayor and
other city officials led hostile responses to a group home, and the Zoning Ad,t,;n;Mraror had first
armounced that Oxford House was a pennitted use but after a City Council mcefsng at which much
opposirion was expressed by the neighborhood, changed her position. The court found the City's
conduct irnentionally discriminatory.
A cautionary taie. Localities must not underestunate the time and difficuhy that FHAA cases can
cost. The lengthy saga of Smith & Lee Associates is instructive. The case involved efforts by a private
goup home operator to locate a foster care home for twelve elderly handicapped residents in a single
family residential district,ll�fichigan law authorized adult foster care homes for six or fewer residems in
all residenrial neighborhoods, but in order to house more than six the home required local approval,
which was denied.
The district court first held that the City had been guilty of discriminatory intent, dispazate impact, and
failure to make reasonable accommodation, and imposed a$50,000 civii penalty on the City. Smith &
L_ee Associates Inc v Taylor M'ic �eaci 798 F. Supp. 442 (E.D. M'ich. 1992). The court ofappeals
reversed. Smith & Lee Associate� Inc v Taylor M�chiga� 13 F.3d 920, 929-32 (6th Cir. 1993). It
upheld the constitutionality c�f Taylof s definition of "family", and reversed the lower court's finding as
to discriminatory intent. As to reasonable accommodation it concluded that the district court could not
simply order the locality to advise Smith & Lee that it could proceed.
On remand, however, the district court again held that City had been motivated by discriminatory
animus, and directed the City to amend its ordinance and to pay Smith & Lce profits from the
impermissible limitation on the number of residents. United States v. City of Taylor M'ichi� 872 F.
Supp. 423, 429-443 (E.D.14fich. 1945).
On a second appeal, Smith & Lee Associates Inc v Taylor M'ichig� 102 F3d 781 (6th Cir. 1996),
the court of appeals held that the trial judge had eaed in finding discriminatory inten but that he had
been conect to Snd that the City had failed to make rea5onable accommodarion by adapting its
processes to accommodate the group home. The court said that aithough Taylor had no duty to
approve Smith & I,ee's zoning application, it could not lawfull�deny that applicarion because of the
demonsuated hostitity of the City government to the handicapped. The FHAA is concemed with
achieving equal resuits and not just formal equality, and imposes an affinnative duty to reasonably
accommodate handicapped people.
Conciusion. This articie has oniy touched on major issues that aze presented by local regulation of
group homes. But the message is ciear: local regulation cannot discriminate against the handicapped,
and, moreover, localities must take affirmarive steps to accommodate them. Finally, localities must
steel themseives to the opposition that the location of group homes almost invariably attracts. To
aecede to political pressures growing out of ignorance and bias can lead to judicial intervention at the
httpJ/www.oxfordhouse.org/fairhouse.htmi 10/25/00
�
�RIGI�A�
Council File # � `� Q ..L,
��
Presented By
Referred To � t°�
RESOLUTION
CITY OF SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA
i� ;r� � _
Green Sheet # 1�fe O 1C
�
Committee: Date
2 WFIEREAS, Buffalo Sober Group, LLC, (hereinafter "Buffalo") made application in
3 Zoning File 00-122-234 to the Saint Paul Planning Commission (hereinafter the "Commission")
4 pursuant to the provisions of Saint Paul Legislative Code § 62.102(i)(3) for a change of non-
5 conforxning use permit for property commonly known as 97 North Oxford Street and legally
6 described as noted in the said zoning file. The subject property had previously been occupied by
7 a legal non-conforming human service licensed community residenrial facility which had served
8 32 residents. Buffalo sought the permit to operate a non-conforming rooming house for 24
9 residents; and
10
il
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
WHEREAS, the Commission's Zoning Committee conducted a public hearing after
having provided notice to affected property owners on October 12, 2000 where all persons were
given an opportunity to be heard. The Committee submitted to the Commission a
recommendation to deny the application. By its resolurion no. 00-64 adopted October 2Q 2000,
the Commission moved to deny the application based upon the following findings and
conclusions:
On January 15, 2000, four members of Buffalo Sober Group, LLC purchased the property
at 97 North Oxford and, on February 15, 2000, Buffalo Sober House was opened,
providing permanent housing and supportive services to 24 men in the eazly stages of
sobriety.
2. A subsequent inspection by City staff from the Department of License, Inspection and
Environmental Protection (LIEP) concluded that the use-a rooming house-- at this
location was inconsistent with the zoning code. Rooming houses are first permitted as
speciai condition uses in the RM-1 zoning district.
An application for a Change in Nonconforming Use Permit was submitted on March 21,
2000.
Evidence submitted in support of the applicanYs contention that the use had not been
discontinued were:
1. A statement from the building/business owner that she had operated her business
out ofthe structure until January 15, 2000.
2
3
4
5
7
10
11
12
13
14
��R��i�.�,! o�-9a.
2. Electric bill indicating that electrical and gas service to the buiiding was not
interrupted over the period.
3. A statement from US West indicating that the building owner was responsible for
the phone bill associated with her business in the building over the period.
3. On April l l, 2000, plauuing staff wrote a letter to the applicant detailing its conclusion
that the previous use had, indeed, been discontinued and that pemussion to continue to
use the property as a rooming house would require a pemut to re-establish a
nonconforming use. The applicants were given the option of withdrawing their
application for a Change in Nonconforming Use Permit and applying, instead, for a
permit to re-establish a non-conforniing use. Their application fee would be applied
towazd a new applicarion.
15 In a subsequent phone conversation on April 14, 2000, the attorney representing the
16 applicant agreed with the plauuiug staff's interpretation of the code and asked that the
17 Zoning Committee's consideration of the case be delayed for 30 days so that they could
18 review their options and begin work on obtaining the consent petition required for an
19 appiication to re-establish a non-conforming use. He further indicated that his clients
20 were led to believe by the building's owner and/or realtor that the building's use as a
21 residential facility had somehow been "grandfathered in." Later that afternoon, he faxed
22 a formal Request for Continuance, waiving the statutory requirements for a decision on
23 the application within 60 days of its being filed.
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
On May 22, 2000, a request for an additiona160-day continuance-until the August 17,
2000 Zoning Committee meeting--was faxed to the Zoning Committee by the applicant's
attorney, again waiving the requirement for a decision within 60 days.
4. On August, 28, 2000, unable to obtain a sufficient number of signatures on a consent
petition, the applicants resubmitted an application for a Change in Nonconforming Use
Perxnit. The substanrial additions to the applicaUon-beyond those submitted in
Mazch-were:
�
1. A copy of the Caldwell Banker Burnet listing (list date: February 25, 1999) for
the property indicating that the building was a"fully functional group home-32
person brick structure."
2. A copy of the lodger agreement.
Sec. 62.102(i)(3) of the Zoning Code outlines four conditions for a Change in
Nonconforming Use. Those conditions and the applicanYs ability to meet them aze as
follows:
Page 2 of 5
fl 3��° t;;
� i',
(� S [ � � � E � � i
t31-9a-
2 1. The proposed use is egually appropriate or more appropriate to the neighborhood than
3 the existing nonconforming use;
4
5 This condirion is met. Both uses are congregate living facilities. The proposed use is
6 smaller than the previous use, and, therefore, may be judged to be more appropriate.
7 Boarding houses-like licensed human service comxnunity residential facilities for 17 or
8 more residents--aze first pernutted, with a special condirion use permit, in the RM-1
0
10
11
12
(mulriple family) zoning district.
2. The traffic generated by the proposed use is similar to that generated by the existing
nonconforming use;
13 This condition is not met. While there are fewer total residents of the current facility than
14 lived in the previous facility, none of the previous residents owned cars or had licenses.
15 There were transported in a van and had, neighbors report, few visitors. The cars on the
16 site belonged to program staff. While the current applicant reports that many of the
17 current residents have lost their driving privileges for some period of time, surrounding
18 residents report a marked increase in traffic related to both residents and visitors.
19 Were this facility located in an RM-1 (Multiple family) zoning district and required to
20 obtain a special condition use permit as a rooming house, among the conditions would be
21 that the lot area for 24 residents in 18 guest rooms be 21,000 squaze feet. The current lot
22 is 7500 square feet. It would also be required to haue 12 off-street parking spaces. While
23 12 parking spaces are shown on the site plan submitted with the application, 9 of the
24 spaces are 8 feet wide rather than 9 feet as is normally required, 1 space is in the required
25 front yazd (not allowed under Sec 64.104(11), 10 spaces are in the required side yard (not
26 allowed under Sec. 64.104(11), and the other 2 spaces ue within 4 feet of a side lot line
27 (not allowed under Sec. 64.104(11).
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
3. The use will not be detrimental to the existing character of development in the immediate
neighborhood or endanger the public health, safety, or general welfare;
This condition is met. There is no evidence that facilities of this type have any
detrimental impact on property values, or on public health, safety or welfare.
4. The use is consistent with the comprehensive plan.
This condition is met. The City's Housing Plan calls for the preservation of existing
rental units and creation of new units providing supportive housing for persons who are
or are at risk of being homeless.
6. On the central point, however, of the appropriateness of the application, staff finds the
following:
a. The Zoning Code (Sec. 60.221) defines Use as the "principal purpose for which land or a
building is being occupied."
Page 3 of 5
�"�"1E�`'i't; %� #
�;(�:��;.,;,
�U� tL
O �-�11�
2 b. A previous use-a Licensed Human Service Community Residential Facility--had been
3 discontinued for more than 365 days when the applicants assumed ownership of the
4 building on January 15, 2000. Ramsey County staff indicates that the last resident moved
5 out of the building on August 21, 1998. T'he conh�act between Ramsey CounTy and the
6 building owner/service provider formally eapired on September 30, 1998.
7
8 c. The Zoning Code states: When a nonconforming use is discontinued or ceases to exist
9 for a continuous period of tluee hundred sixty-five (365) days, the building, or building
10 and land in combination, shall thereafter be used in conformance with the regulations of
11 the district in which it is located, unless the planning commission approves a permit to
12 reestablish the nonconfomung use as set forth in clause (i)(5). (Sec. 62.102( fl(7))
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
d. The applicant has not applied for a permit to re-establish a nonconforming use.
e. It is the intent of the Zoning Code that this building revert to a use permitted in the zoning
district unless this or some other non-confornung use which can meet the condirions
detailed in Sec. 62.102(i)(5) - including a consent perition of 2/3 of the surrounding
properry owners-is established.
WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of Saint Paul Legislative Code § 64.206 Buffalo
filed an appeal from the determination made by the Commission and requested a hearing before
the City Council (hereinafter "Council") for the purposes of considering the action taken by the
Commission; and
WHEREAS, acting pursuant to Saint Paul Legislative Code § 64.206 -§ 64.208 and upon
notice to affected parties, a public hearing was duly conducted by the Council on November 15,
2000. At the close of the public hearing and upon the request of the City Attorney's Office, the
matter was laid over for the purpose of obtaining an opinion from the City Attorney on the
appellanYs claim for a reasonable accommodation of the City zoning regulations; and
WHEREAS, on December 6, 2000, the Council received the opinion of the City Attorney
and, having heard the statements made, hauing considered the application, the staff reports and
the record, minutes and resolution of the Zoning Committee and of the Planning Commission;
does hereby
RESOLVE, that Council affirms the decision of the Planning Commission in this matter
based upon the following reasons:
1. The Planning Commission did not err in its facts, findings or procedures. The traffic
from the proposed non-conforming use is more intensive than the prior non-conforxning use. The
application did not meet the requirements of Legislative Code § 62.102(i)(3)(b);
2. Although Buffalo did not specify what reasonable accommodation it sought, the proposed
use is first pernutted in an R-Ml zoning district subject to a special condition use permit. The
proposed use is not pernutted in a R-Tl zoning district. Granting this type of
Page 4 of 5
.� ry; i r� � s S f 2 ! §
�..v 4 � : 'v` I 't �i �'l t.� O � � g'ti'
1
2 accommodation would constitute a substantial modification of the City's zoning code and its
3 goal to eliminate non-conforming uses from neighborhoods. The applicants have not
4 demonstrated why the zoning restrictions for this building and in this neighborhood need
5 modification;
6
7 3. Granting the application is contrary to the needs of other handicapped persons who must
8 follow the City's zoning code in order to operate their facilities;
9
10 4. Granting the application will influence future non-conforniing use applications and could
11 negatively impact the City's overall zoning scheme especially as it applies to neighborhood
12 housing;
13
14 AND, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the appeal of Buffalo Sober Group be and
15 is hereby denied in all things;
16
17 AND, BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED, that the City Clerk shall mail a copy of this
18 resolution to Buffalo Sober Group, the Zoning Administrator and the Planning Commission.
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
Requested by Department of:
By:
Form Appr ed by City Attomey
By: .� G✓/�/GM�'^
Approved by Mayor Eor Submission to Council
By: \ \ C F� w\ � `� ^ By:
Approved by Mayor: Date �U �� Gr�/�
By:
Adopted by Council: Date ��. � �e Q,
l
Adoption Certified by Council Secretary
o�_9a
GREEN SHEET
reter wazner
February 7, 2001 - Consent
TOTAL # OF SIGNATURE PAGES
Resolution memorializing City Council action taken December 6, 2001, denying the appeal of Buffalo Sober
Group, LLC to a decision of the Plannnig Commission denying an application for a Nonconfoiming Use Permit
to establish a rooxning house at 97 North Oxford Slreet.
PLANNING CAMMISSION
CIB CAMMIITEE
dVIL SERVICE CAMMISSION
L�:LiL=�I•�':ii•=3
❑ OIY�TlCIOEY ❑ CIIYCli11K
❑ nuiry�ac�eF,o¢ � wwai�a�w�eera
� r�raR��umr�xn ❑ -
(CUP ALL LOCATIONS FOR SIGNATUR�
Hes u;re pe�sonlfirm ever workea under a� ru uic aepa�hnenn
vES tao
Flae tlxe PaaoMrm ever been e ciq' ompbyee?
VES NO
Daes Uiic Oe�soMUm P� a sldll not namellYO�essed M�Y cuneM ci�/ emPbyee4
VES NO
Is Mis pemoNfqm a taryetetl verMoY7
VES MO
No106015
aTrca.¢�
114?Ti
OF TRANSACTION S
COSTrttEVQ1UE BUDOETED (CIRCLE ONE)
YES NO
SOURCE
ACTNITY NtMM�ER
(��M
OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY
Clayton M. Robinson, Jc, Ciry Attorney
n�_
CITY OF SAINT PAUL
Norm Coleman, Mayor
January 18, 2001
Nancy Anderson
Council Secretary
310 City Hall
15 West Kellogg Blvd.
St. Paul, MN 55102
Re: Appeal of Buffalo Sober Crroup, LLC
City Council Action Date: December 6, 2000
Deaz Nancy:
Telephorse: 657 266-8710
FacsimtZe: 65/ 298-i619
v'�ia.":� `_'�`'-°.52c.'vf s1cP,�E(
� ft � ?S 4 � ���3
�::•:,� _ �;
Enclosed please find a signed Resolution memorializing the Council's decision of December 6,
2000, in the above-entitled matter. Please place this on the Council's Consent Agenda at your
earliest convenience.
If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me.
Very truly yours,
�����
Peter W. Warner
Assistant City Attorney
Civil Division
400 Ciry Hall
I S West Kellogg Blvd.
Saint Paul, Mirsnuota 55102
Hand Delivered
PWW/rmb
Enclosure
DEPARTMENT OF PL AI JNING
& ECONOMIC DEVEI,OPMENT
BrianSweeney, InterimDirector
orgZ
3a
CTTY OF SAINT PAUL
Norm Coleman, Mayor
November 3, 2000
Ms. Nancy Anderson
City Council Reseazch Office
Room 310 City Hall
Saint Paul, Minnesota 55102
Dear Ms. Anderson:
25 WestFwrth Street
SmntPau{ MT755102
Telephone: 651-26G6655
Facstmile: 651-228-33I4
I would like to confinn that a public hearing before the Ciry Council is scheduled for Wednesday,
November 15, 2000, for the following appeal of a Planning Commission decision:
Appellant: Buffalo Sober Group, LLC
File Number: Appeal of file #00-122-234
Purpose: Appeal a Pl anninn Commission decision to deny an application for a Change of
Nonconfoiming Use Permit to establish a rooming house providing permaxient living
" facilities for 24 men in early sobriety.
Address: 97 North O�cford
Legal Descriprion of Properry: North 75 feet of Lots 27 and 28, Block 42, Summit Pazk Addition to
Saint Paul, Ramsey Counry, Minnesota
Previous Acrion:
Zoning Committee Recommendarion: Denial; vote: unanunous; October 12, 2000
Plamiiiig Commission Decision: Denial; vote: unanimous; October 20, 2000
My understandina is that this public hearing request will appear on the agenda for the November 8, 2000
City Council meeting and that you will publish notice of the heariug in the Saint Paul Legal Ledger. Please
call me at 266-6557 if you have any questions.
SIDCEIELY,
.��� ����.�
City Planner
cc: File #00-122-234
Paul Dubruiel, PED
Cazol Martineau, PED
Wendy Lane, LIEP
Walter Dinalko
Mazk Gehan
• �rsrxuiv •
NQTICE OF PUBLIC HEARII�iG �
1he Saint Paul, Ciry�Council. will con-
duct a public �ea±'nno on Wednesday,
November' 15; 2000, at 5:30 p.m. in the
GYty-Council Ci�ambers, Third Floor City
Hall-Gonrthouse, 15 -West Kellogg
Boulevazd, Saint Paul, MN, to consider the
appeal of BufTalo �Sober Group, LLC �to a
decision of the Plaz�ning Comnussi.on deny-
ing an application for a-change of a
Nonconforming Use Permit to establish a
roomin� house provtding permanent livi��g
facilities for 24 men in eazly sobriety at 9Z
North O�'ord Street. -
Dated: November 8, 2000 _
tvatveYnrmEasorr
Assisiant city-council.-secretary �
, �(NwemUer33) -- .
_'__'_ ST. PADL IEGAL I�DGER — �-c
", p: 02014703 _ . - - �
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNNG
& ECONOMIC DEVELAPMEVI"
Brian Sweeney, Director
•
•
CTTY OF SAII�IT PAUL
Norm Coleman, Mayar
November 7, 2000
Ms. Nancy Anderson
Secretary to the City Council
Room 310 City Hall
Saint Paul, Minnesota 55102
RE: Zoning File #00-149-255:
City Council Hearing:
/
vi-9z
25WestFou�ihSbeet Telephone:612-266-6565
SainrPaul,MN55102 Facsimile:67 2-22 83 3 7 4
BUFFALO SOBER GROUP, LLC
November 15, 200Q 530 p.m. City Council Chambers
PURPOSE: Appeal a plamiing commission decision to deny a Change of Nonconforming Use Pernut for a rooming
house providing permanent living facilities for 24 men in eazly sobriety at 97 North O�ord.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: Denial; Unanimous
ZONIlVG COMMITTEE ACTION: Denial; 4-0
STAFF RECOMMENDATION Denial
SUPPORT: Two people spoke in support. The Snmmit University Plaminig Council submitted a letter indicating
that they found no reason not to support the application. Si�teen letters were received in support.
OPPOSITION: Five people spoke in opposition. Four letters and one perition were received in opposition.
Dear Ms. Anderson:
The BI7FFAL0 SOBER GROUP, LLC has appealed the decision of the Saint Paul Planniiig Commission to deny
them a Change in Nonconfornvng Use Pernut to establish a rooming house providing permanent living facilities for
24 men in eazly sobriety on properry located at 97 North O�ord, between Laurel and Ashland. The zoning
committee held a public hearing on the application on October 12, 2000. The applicant addressed the committee.
At the close of the public hearing the committee voted 4-0 to deny the application. The Plaxming Commission
upheld the zoning committee's recommendation for denial on a unanimous voice vote at its October 20, 2000
meeting.
This appeal is scheduled to be heard by the City Council on November 15, 2000. Please notify me if any member
of the City Council wishes to have slides of the site—or a short video of the facility prepared by the applicant--
presented at the public hearing.
Sincerely,
L ���
Platming Administrator
• Attachments
ca City Council members
APPLICATION FOR APPEAL
��� j �� Departmerri of Planning and Economic Development
• �RTT�� Zoning Section
I��J
+�+� 1100 City Hall Anner
25 Lf'est Founh Street
Saint Paul, M_N 55101
266-6589
APPELLANT
PROPERTY
LOCATION
Name Bu°�alo Sober Group, y.L.C.
Address 97 fiorth O�_for� Street
City Saint Paul gtr�N ZiP 55104 Daytime phone 651-602-0
[�
Zoning File Name 00-122-234
Address/Location Same
TYPE OF APPEAL: Application is hereby made for an appeai to the:
� Board of Zoning Appeals CQ City Council
•
under the provisions of Chapter 64, Section 206 , Paragraph a of the Zoning Code, to
appeal a decision made by the R�` Pre', ai ��,n >�,� ('nmm^ a�� nn
on October 2G, 2000 ,� File number. CO-�22-234
(dat of decis
GROUNDS FOR APPEAL: Explain why you feei there has been an error in any requirement,
permit, decision or refusal made by an administrative official, or an error in fact, procedure or
finding made by the Board of Zoning Appeais or the Planning Commission.
Sze ut�achec, c.oc�:r.�e��.
�� �!J O
. � Attach additiona/ sheet if necessary)
l7 r7 il/,
ApplicanYs
Date ed City
��
r
� ATTACIIlV�NT TO APPLICATION FOR APPEAL
OF BUFFALO SOSER GROUP, L.L.C.
The principals of Buffalo Sober Group, L.L.C., aze Walter Ainalko and Jeff Gardner. In the fall of
1999, they entered into negotiations to purchase the building located at 9'7 North O�'ord Sh�eet, Saint
Paul, Minnesota. The building had previously been operated as the Oakland Home, as described
more fully in the decision of the Planning Coxnmission dated October 20, 2000. Buffalo Sober
Group, L.L.C., hoped to rehabilitate the property and operate it as a"sober house," i.e. a facility
where chemically dependent persons in early recovery could safely reside in a sober environment.
Dinalko and Gazdner believed at the time that they had neighborhood support far the proj ect. They
also believed that they were supported by the St. Paul Councii Member in whose district the building
is located. They were refened by that Council Member for financing to the University Bank. That
bank agreed to provide financing to the project and also guaranteed the loan with $60,000 of city
money.
As part of the fmancing transaction, an appraisal was done for the bank. Attached is the cover sheet
of an Appraisal Report dated September 16, 1999, and page 14 of that report, relating to the subject
of "zoning." Messrs. Dinalko and Gardner and, appazently, the University Bank, relied upon this
language in going forwazd with the project. Everyone thought that the building could be operated
� as a"sober house" without zoning complications. On January 15, 2000, Buffalo Sober Group,
L.L.C., closed on the purchase.
In early 2000, there was a complaint that the Buffalo Sober House violated St. Paul zoning
ordinances. The City's interpretation of Section 62.102 of the zoning code, relating to non-
conforming uses, was that because the Oakland Home had not had residents for over 365 days prior
to the purchase of the property by Buffalo Sober Group, L.L.C., appellants could not legally apply
for a"change of nonconforming use." Instead, it would be necessary for them to apply for a
"reestablishment of nonconforming use." Such an application requires the approval of two-thirds
of the properry owners within 100 feet of the properiy in question. Appeliants were unable to obtain
such approval. The application now pending, therefore, is for a change of nonconforming use.
In its application, Buffalo Sober Group, L.L.C., made the following statement:
"The new residents [i.e. residents of Buffalo Sober House] as former sufferers of
chemical dependency are subject to protection under the Federal Fair Housing
Amendments Act of 1988 and as such aze entitled to reasonable accommodation in
the administration of zoning ordinances by the City of St. Paul."
The City is obliged to make reasonable accommodations in its rules, including zoning ordinances
in order to afford handicapped persons equal opporhuiity in housing. 42 U.S.C. 3604 ( fl(3b). The
meaning of the word "handicapped" within the federal statute is broad and has been construed to
• include persons disadvantaged by alcoholism and drug addiction. See e.g.. Oxford House v. The
Township of Hill, 799 F. Supp. 450 (1991). Appellant renews its request for reasonable
accommodation by the City of St. Paul in order that the residents of Buffalo Sober House may
continue to reside in that smxcture without discrim;nation on the basis of handicap. •
It has also been appellant's contention throughout the application process that it is unreasonable to
interpret Section 62.102 (fl(7) as requiring the reestablishment of a nonconforming use, given the
facts of tkus case. Although the Oakland Home did not have residents for over 365 days prior to the
purchase of the building by appellants, the owner of the structure was, at that time, actively
attempting to sell the building and was marketing it on the basis of its nonconformiug use. Under
those circumstances, it is reasonable to exclude, from the 365-day period, the time the property was
on the market for sale. If that were to be done in this case, appellanY s pending application would
easily fall within the 365-day "statute of limitations" and would be evaluated on the basis of a
change of nonconforming use. A case remazkably similaz is now pending in the Minnesota Court
of Appeals. Haefele v. City of Eden Prairie.
•
��
� �
.,
��._�_...,
i
�
1
.�
,
h t
)
�
�
�
�
�
� �
�
!
�
l
i
,
Mr. John Bennet
Property Located At:
97 North Oxford Street
St. Paul, Minnesota
OI'4z
��
-�--�-
� j�2�r��
_. p�"-�-
� - ' - -- _ �
ZONING
a The subject pr� e Mis�eanolis�B �esidence District , under the zoning ordinance
dministered by the Ci of P )
See the Addenda for the zoninb or�inance.
DISCUSSION OF ZONIlVG
The subject facility is zoned R2B (Residence Disfrict .
constructed prior to the adoption of the current ordinance and is non-confomlin
ordinance but is aijowed as a non-eoafotmin � The subject improvemenfs were
g �e. S to �he current
are descnbed� th por�o� Di�e or y be found m the dd nd� ous
types that
Pertnitted uses in thiS �S�ct include a1I uses allowed in the other Residenfial Districfs. The
existing use is non but is allowed as a non �
The subject proper�, appeaz.s to be "grand fathered" as a result of being const��t� p�or to
�e adoption of tlxe current zoning ordinan�e �d is, the�.efore, considered to be a legal use.
Furthermore, the subject appears to be non with respect to parlcing requirements as well
as lot, yard and densl�y requix �� �e subject is non-conforming its use ma co
so long as no more than 50 percent of it is not destroyed or damaged. Givea that there is
hazazd insurance to cover potenfialloss, there does not appear to be a negative impact as a resu of
the non �
g use.
14
n
L.I
�
�
;�;�
> �.�� ;�
.� �
( 9•
ry „
�
t u;fk" 3qa .
;t. .
,
5
� � ��
�,
A•Y �rmYt G 4'�'K"-' W..�e^ » t.":iri
k�
r+ys•s � Ym u.c? � ttl d
t
A i,.:�yt w r , e ,.?z
r
ss��n � �r�
�t+rr x S ,�, . _ vz " S�.�iA�. t f3
,ry
s+xt 3k�e:Y s. ; � e+�wKd �a�Ea. .��e�^* rn wgw;w�x v x �`+r.
�,�' STn4^�zlt � '?,! -�N3.3 rm+ d�s,< a». : y �wX •..
� P o-y C -� �
V?� ky� s.:.: l '( 3sS d„
��la...... 4 � }�...tf y �r bTT 5
'I 1� �14v p ?
f
+
5r v � � �
ttd F�� �
� i a t
V' ;.
d� � �
3
C i 4
I
( 14 �.
i X��+ . .J%i. YA� � �.n V
� e!m" N} ra Y' p. Y 5'r'.I" �tY1 rv. k.a
1 � �!
� 9F �� t o4 �� . Y
+ . , ,.v� , ., ,x . _ . . . „
µ�trFs 3'y � t Y'�L� s AC:.*
R
+�A. ' A
� 3
�
p t; i:
'V'� � {b� 8 SK^ �:lR
�
Z
W
city of saint paul �
� planning commission resolution
file number 00-64
date October Zo. 2000
WHEREAS, BUFFALO SOBER GROUP, LLC, file #00-122-234, has applied for a Change
of Non-Conforming Use Permit for the properiy at 97 North Oxford, situated between Laurel
and Ashland, to allow the property to be used as a rooming house providing permanent living
facilities for 24 men in early sobriety; and
WHEREAS, the Zoning Committee of the Planning Commission, on October 12, 2000, held a
public hearing at which all persons present were given an opportunity to be heard pursuant to
said application in accordance with the requirements of Section 64.400 of the Saint Paul
Legislative Code; and
WHEREAS, the staff report prepared for the Zoning Committee included the following
recitation of the history of the property:
1. Oakland Home, a licensed community residential facility for persons with mental illness, was
� established at 97 North O3cford in about 1968.
2. On September 25, 1980, the City Council adopted amendments to the Zoning Code defining
community residential facilities and regulating them as special condition uses consistent with
the provisions of State law included in the Human Services Licensing Act. The amendment:
allowed community residential facilities for 7 or more facility residents in the RT-1 (Two-
family) zoning district as special condition uses.
3. On April 11, 1986, a Planning Commission resolution (�86-28) was adopted establishing legal
status for the Oakland Home as an existing community residential facility licensed by the
Minnesota Department of Human Services for 36 residents with mental illness in an RT-1
zoning district. In granting the special condition use permit, the Commission modified the
following conditions:
a Number of residents served. The code limited the number of residents to 16. The
condition was modified to allow 36 residents.
moved by Kramer
seconded by
� in favor Unanimous �o��e �ote
against_
Zoning File #00-122-234
Page Two ofResolution
b. Minimum distance between community residential facilities_ The code required_that
residential facilities be a minimum of 1320 feet apart. Two facilities were within the
required distance (Turning Point at 1089 Portland and Pineview Residence at 69 N.
Milton). The condition was modified.
c. Off-street parking. The code required that there be one parking spaces for every two
facility residents—or 18 spaces for the facility. At the time there was parking for 2 vehicles
available on the property. Because no residents owned or operated their own vehicles, the
Commission modified the requirement.
4. The Zoning Code was subsequently amended on June 27, 1991 to define Licensed Human
Service Community Residential Facilities and to first allow such facilities for 17 or more .
persons in the RM-1 Multiple Family zoning district as special condition uses. As a result, the
Oakland Home became a legally nonconforming use.
5. Chan�es in health caze financing provisions and State policy resulted in the general
downsizing of residential facilities for persons with mental illness throughout Minnesota
beginning in the mid-1990s.
�
6. Ramsey County initiated a down-sizing plan for Oakland Home and the last resident moved
out on August 21, 1998. The county's contract with Oakland Home expired on September �
30, 1998 and was not renewed.
WHEREAS, the Saint Paul Planning Commission, based on the evidence presented to its
Zoning Conmittee at the public hearing, as substantially reflected in the minutes, made the
following findings of fact:
1. On 7anuary 15, 2000, four members of Buffalo Sober Group, LLC purchased the property at
97 North O�'ord and, on February 15, 2000, Buffalo Sober House was opened, providing
permanent housing and supportive services to 24 men in the early stages of sobriety.
2. A subsequent inspection by City stafffrom the Department ofLicense, Inspection and
Environmental Protection (LIEP) concluded that the use—a rooming house-- at this location
was inconsistent with the zoning code. Rooming houses are first pernutted as special
condition uses in the RM-1 zoning district.
An application for a Change in Nonconforming Use Permit was submitted on Mazch Z 1, 2000.
Evidence submitted in support of the applicant's contention that the use had not been
discontinued were:
1. A statement from the building/business owner that she had operated her business out of
the structure until January 15, 2000.
2. Electric bill indicating that electrical and gas service to the buildin� was not interrupted
overthe period.
3. A statement from US West indicating that the building owner was responsible for the �
phone bill associated with her business in the building over the period.
r
Zoning File #00-122-234 �
� Page Three of Resolution
3. On April 11, 2000, plannin� staffwrote a letter to the applicant detailing its conclusion that
the previous use had, indeed, been discontinued and that pemrission to continue to use the
property as a rooming house would require a pemut to re-establish a nonconformin� use. The
applicants were given the option of withdrawing their application for a Change in
Nonconforming Use Permit and applying, instead, for a permit to re-establish a non-
conforming use. Their application fee would be applied towazd a new application.
In a subsequent phone conversation on April 14, 2000, the attorney representing the applicant
agreed with the planning staf�'s interpretation of the code and asked that the Zoning
Committee's consideration of the case be delayed for 30 days so that they could review their
options and begin work on obtaining the consent petition required for an application to re-
establish a non-conforming use. He further indicated that his clients were led to believe by the
building's owner and/or realtor that the building's use as a residential facility had somehow
been "grandfathered in." Later that afternoon, he faxed a fonnal Request for Continuance,
waiving the statutory requirements for a decision on the application within 60 days of its being
filed.
On May 22, 2000, a request for an additional 60-day continuance—until the August 17, 2000
Zoning Committee meetin� -was faxed to the Zoning Committee by the applicant's attomey,
a�ain waiving the requirement for a decision within 60 days.
� 4. On August, 28, 2000, unable to obtain a sufficient number of signatures on a consent petition,
the applicants resubmitted an application for a Change in Nonconforming Use Permit. The
substantial additions to the application—beyond those submitted in March—were:
1. A copy of the Coldwell Banker Burnet listing (list date: February 25, 1999) for the
property indicating that the building was a"fully functional group home-32 person brick
structure."
2. A copy of the lodger agreement.
Sec. 62.102(i)(3) of the Zoning Code outlines four conditions for a Change in Nonconforming
Use. Those conditions and the applicant's ability to meet them are as follows:
1. The proposed a�se is eqzraZly appropriate or more appropriate to the neighborhood than
the existing nonconforming use;
This condition is met. Both uses are congregate livin� facilities. The proposed use is
smaller than the previous use, and, therefore, may be judged to be more appropriate.
Boardin� houses—like licensed human service community residential facilities for 17 or
more residents--are first permitfed, with a special condition use permit, in the RM-1
(multiple family) zonin� district.
�
Zoning File #00-122-234
Page Four of Resolution
2. 7he traffzc generated by the proposed use is similar to that generated by the existing
nonconforming use;
This condition is not met. While there are fewer total residents of the current facility than
lived in the previons facility, none of the previous residents owned cars or had ]icenses.
There were transpoited in a van and had, neighbors report, few visitors. The cars on the
site belonged to program staff.
While the cunent applicant reports that many ofthe current residents have lost their
driving privileges for some period of time, sunounding residents report a marked increase
in traffic related to both residents and visitors.
Were this facility located in an RM-i (Multiple family) zoning district and required to
obtain a special condition use pernut as a rooming house, among the conditions would be
that the lot area fbr 24 residents in 18 guest rooms be 21,000 squaze feet. The current lot
is 7500 square feet.
�
It would also be required to have 12 off-street parking spaces. While 12 parking spaces
are shown on the site plan subcnitted with the application, 9 of the spaces are 8 feet wide
rather than 9 feet as is normally required, 1 space is in the required front yard (not allowed
under Sec 64.104(11), 10 spaces are in the required side yazd (not allowed under Sec.
64.104(11), and the other 2 spaces are within 4 feet of a side lot line (not allowed under �
Sec. 64.104(11).
3. The zrse will not be detrimental to the existing character of development in the i»zmediate
neighborhood or endanger the pubZic health, safety, or general weZfare;
This condition is met. There is no evidence that facilities ofthis type have any detrimental
impact on property values, or on public health, safety or welfare.
4. The z�se is consistent with the comprehensive plan.
This condition is met. The City's Housing PIan calls for the preservation of existing rental
units ana creation of new units providing suppor�ive nousing for psrsons w i� are �r �e at
risk of being homeless.
6. On the central point, however, of the appropriateness of the application, staff finds the
following:
a. The Zoning Code (Sec. 60.221) defines Use as the "principal purpose for which land or a
building is being occupied."
b. A previous use—a Licensed Human Service Community Residential Facility--had been
discontinued for more than 365 days when the applicants assumed ownership of the
building on January 15, 2000. Ramsey County staff indicates that the last resident moved
out of the building on August 21, 1998. The contract between Ramsey County and the
buildin� owner/service provider formally expired on September 30, 1998
a The Zoning Code states: When a nonconforming use is discontinued or ceases to exist for �
a continuous period of three hundred sixty-five (365) days, the building, or building and
land in combination, shall thereafter be used in conformance with the regulations of the
Zoning File #00-122-234
� Page Five of Resolution
o�-9a
district in which it is located, unless the planning commission approves a pernut to
reestablish the nonconfornung use as set forth in clause (i)(5). (Sec. 62.102(�(7))
d. The applicant has not applied for a permit to re-establish a nonconfomun� use.
e. It is the intent of the Zoning Code that this building revert to a use pemutted in the zonin�
district unless ttus or some other non-conforming use which can meet the conditions
detailed in Sec. 62.102(i)(5) —including a consent petition of 2/3 of the surrounding
property owners—is established.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Saint Paul Planning Commission, that the
application of BIJFFALO SOBER GROUP, LLC for a Change in Non-Conforming Use Pemut to
allow the property at 97 North Oxford to be used as a rooming house providing permanent living
facilities for 24 men in eazly sobriety is hereby denied.
C�
C�
o� -9Z
�
MINUTES OF THE ZONING COMMITTEE
Thursday, October 12, 2000 - 3:30 p.m.
City Council Chambers, 3` Fioor
City Hail and Court House
15 West Kellogg Boulevard
PRESENT:
EXCUSED:
ABSENT:
Gervais, Gordon, Kramer, and Morton
Engh, Faricy, and Field
Mardell
OTHERS Peter Warner
PRESENT: Nancy Homans and Carol Martineau of PED
The meeting was chaired by Commissioner Gervais.
BUFFALO SOBER GROUP, LLC - 00-122-234 - Change of Nonconforming Use Permit to allow
a rooming house that provides permanent living facilities for men in early sobriety. 97 North
Oxford, between Laurel and Ashland.
Nancy Homans showed slides and presented the staff report:
The case invoives a variety of issues related to non-conforming uses. The application is for
� a change in non-conforming use—a process provided for in the Zoning Code when one non-
conforming use has been out of existence for fewer than 365 days and the proposed use is
equaliy or less non-conforming than the existing or previous use. A permit may be. issued by
the Planning Commission upon its making four specific findings. The Code also provides for
a re-establishment of a non-conforming use when a non-conforming is discontinued orceases
to exist for a period of more than 365 days. In such cases, the Planning Commission must
make nine specific findings including a finding that a petition of two-thirds of the property
owners within 100 feet of the property stating their support for the use has been submitted.
�
The history of this case begins with Oakland Home, a licensed community residential facility
for 36 persons with mental illness, that was established in about 1968. In 1980, amendments
to the Zoning Code first defined community residential facilities and first allowed such facilities
for seven or more residents in the RT-1 zoning district as special condition uses.
On April 11, 1986, the Planning Commission granted a special condition use permit to the
Oakland Home, modifying three conditions including the requirement that there be one off-
street parking space for every two facility residents. At the time there was parking for 2
vehicles on the property. Because no residents could drive, the Commission modified the
requirement.
The Zoning Code was once again amended in 1991 to define Licensed Human Service
Community Residential Faciiities and io first aiiow facifities for 17 or more persons in the RM-1
zoning district as special condition uses. Oakland Home, once again, became a legaily
nonconforming use.
There was a general downsizing of residential facilities for persons with mental
iliness—including the Oakland Home--during the 1990s. Ramsey County's contract with
Oakland Home expired on September 30, 1998 and was not renewed. The last resident had
moved out on August 21, 1998.
Zoning Committee Minutes
October 12, 2000
File #: 00-122-234
Page 2
On February 17, 2000, the City's office of License, lnspections and Environmental Protection
(LIEP) received a complaint retative fo the bui(ding. The inspector went out and determined
that the structure was being used as a rooming house. Rooming houses are first ailowed in
the RM-1 zoning district as special condition uses. in a discussion with LIEP staff, the
applicants suggested that the previous use had not been discontinued insofar as the owner
of the building maintained an office in the building and continued to pay for utilities. The
Zoning Administrator indicated that such a case would need to be made with substantial
documentation to the Planning Commission.
On March 21, 2000, the applicant submitted an application for a change in non-conforming
use. On April 22, 2000, Ms. Homans sent a letter to the applicant outiining the difference
between a change in non-conforming use and a re-establishmentofa non-conforming use and
indicated that she believed that the use required a re-estabiishment permit. She offered the
applicants the option of withdrawing their application and submitting an appiication for the re-
establishment at no additional fee. In a phone conversation on April 14, 2000, the applicanYs
attorney agreed with staff's interpretation of the Code and asked thatthe Zoning Committee's
consideration of the case be delayed for 30 days. Later fhat aftemoon, he faxed a formal
Request for Continuance, waiving the requirement that a decision be made within 60 days.
�
A request for an additional 60-day continuance was faxed to the Zoning Committee on May
22, 2000.
On August 28, 2000, the applicant resubmitted an application fora Change in Nonconforming �
Use Permit with two additional attachments: (1) a copy of the Coldwell Banker Burnet listing
for the property; and (2) a copy of the lodger agreement.
Ms. Homans reviewed the findings related to a change in non-conforming use. Staff finds that
the proposed use meets the findings related to the appropriateness of the use, the impact of
the use on the character of development and public health, safety and general welfare and
consistency with the comprehensive pian. On the finding related to whefher the traffic
generated by the proposed use is similarto that generated by the existing nonconforming use;
a a �A... F3G. 'nian} nf he nrnnncc`-1 f litv h v
SiBii iOUfiG ili8i i�12 CO�CSiiiGi i i5 ��G� ;n2c. �v�v�E :.+� :�:8 ;&5�....,,.5 t�e.. r ...�,....--- 3CI.._, , a-2
cars than did previous residents, neighbors reporf a marked increase in visitor traffic, and the
number of people living on the lot is greater than would othervvise be allowed in a rooming
house.
Related to off-street parking, Ms. Homans stated that, while the site plan submitted with the
application indicates 10 striped parking spaces on the north side of the building and two
spaces on the west side, there are now seven striped diagonal parking spaces on the north
side and two stacked spaces on the west side. (There was no site plan submitted for the
increase in parking spaces over the two parking spaces that were availabie for the previous
use.) The applicant has indicated there is room for five additional parking spaces that are not
currently striped.
On the central issue, however, Ms. Homans explained the staff found that the previous �
nonconforming use had been out of existence for more than 365 days when the new use was
estabiished. An application for a reestablishment of a nonconforming use with a sufficient
petition has not been filed. Inasmuch as an appropriate and compiete application has not
been submitted, the Zoning Staff recommends denial of the application.
Zoning Committee Minutes
� October 12, 2000
File #: 00-122-234
Page 5
Commissioner Gordon restated the issue befo�e the committee: Did the previous use cease to
exist for 365 days? If the previous use wasn't disconfinued, then the committee needs to look at
the four findings ouflined in the Code.
Mr. Dinalko reiterated that they limit the number of cars allowed among residents to 10. There are
seven cars there now. As to the 365 days, he indicated that, when they purchased the building,
the interior wasn't very pleasant, but there was a caretaker and the phone service and other
utilities were operating.
Jeff Priest, 4724 Lund Avenue, Eagan, said that he had intended to provide testimony on the need
for sober house facilities, but would confine his remarks to the issue of the 365 days. He indicated
that the committee may have some discretion in establishing when the 365 days begins and ends:
at the time a purchase agreement was submitted, at closing or with occupancy.
Karen Mead, Executive Director of Emotions Anonymous, 1752 Iglehart Street, stated she
supported the need for sober houses in St. Paul. She further suggested that whatever the
applicants did relative to occupying the property, they did with good intentions. There was no
intent to deceive.
Anne Heinricks,1060 Laurel Avenue, stated they have about 40 signatures of people in opposition
to the Sober House. She also explained that the neighborhood cannot absorb 30 people and the
�' zbning laws shouldn't be violated at the neighborhood's expense. She also indicated that
remodeling work is continuing on the property and she is concerned that continuing financial
investment should not be used as a basis for approving the permit.
Shannon O'Keefe, 1053 Ashland Avenue, testified she bought her building in November of 1998
and there were no residents living at 97 North Oxford at that time. The caretaker was not residing
in the building but would come and go according to the need for snow shoveling, lawn mowing
and the like. She also explained the residents of the neighborhood called Northern States Power
shortly afterthe Summit-University Planning Commission meeting and there was a decline in NSP
bilis which proved a decline in the usage of the building.
In response to questions from CommissionerGordon, Ms. O'Keefe stated the parking is not limited
to ten vehicles. Vehicles are parked back to back in the alley and crammed between the building
and a garbage dumpster. The maximum number of vehicles observed have been between 15
to 20. Evenings are more saturated with three to four cars parked during the day. The residents
are not permanent so there are also occasions when vans moving people in and out of this facility
block the entrance to the alley.
Diane Lunderborg, 1039 Ashiand, appeared and stated the house for mentally ill women closed
down in August of 1998. They were hoping that the building would become a fourvplex—like the
identical building next door--in order to reduce the traffic in the neighborhood. The neighborhood
is mainly made up of single-family dwellings and they would like to see the traffic reduce in the
neighborhood. She said that she and her husband toured the building in September 1998 to
� determine whether they would be interested in purchasing it. She said that it was in tough shape
and they did not submit a bid. She also stated she had called the real estate agent selling the
property and informed him of the zoning restrictions related to selling the building to another non-
conforming use.
Zoning Committee Minutes
October'12, 2000
File #: 00-122-234
Page 6
In response to a question from Commissioner Kramer, Ms. Lunderborg stated that when she
toured the building in September of 1998 there were no residents living there. The owner had
an office that she was using and the building was up for sale. The fact that the building was for
sale was not made public.
Eric Rez, 1056 Laurel Avenue, appeared and stated their opposition is not against the business
itseif. They are opposed to any business operating without proper zoning and licensing.
Ann Drives, 1072 Laurel Avenue, reiterated the parking problems, indicating that the aliey is
sometimes biocked overnight. She thought that using the buiiding as a duplex for 8-10 residents
wouid be more compatibie.
Mr. Dinalko reappeared and addressed the similarities between the previous and current use.
They both have group dining facilities, centralized management and rules and group bathroom
facilities. He aiso stated the current residents are considered mentally disabled under the ADA.
The group activities, inciude weekiy AA and other related in-house meetings, are considered
treatments focused towards the disability.
�
Jeff Gardner, 428 Dayton Avenue, a partner of Mr. Dinalko's, appeared and stated there is one �
vehicle parked behind the dumpster that belongs to one of the residents who cannot drive
because of a lack of a license. He aiso explained that traffic is aiso generated from a house
directly to the north of them (North Star Restorations) that frequently has construction vehicles
and other cars parked in the alley that could be confused with their vehicles.
The public hearing was closed.
Commissioner Gordon stated that the critical issue was whether the nonconforming use was
discontinued or ceased to exist for 365 days. Someone can continue to own the building and not
continue to use it for the nonconforming use. In this case the last day for the nonconforming use
Wfl5 f�UgiiSi L I, ly�o, tiV�i2i i��i2 iaSE i�jl( iiiV'YCV :J::l. T �ci:vu vc �'r ��, ?naR
and January 15, 2000 was well over 365 days.
CommissionerGordon moved denial of the Change of Nonconforming Use Permit. Commissioner
Kramer seconded it.
Adopted Yeas - 4
Drafted by:
Nays - 0
Submitted by:
�Gc, �
Carol Martineau Nancy H mans
Recording Secrefary Zoning Section
Approved by:
Dennis Gervais �
Chair
1�'� z �� 1 ,- p , ., . a u 5 r . 1 i ��M� w 1 � � y.
� Lb r ..., r a..4' x '�e Sn 5 �?f " w�, :r � j, M K,? i 3�'t'a' '�r'1 u� -�r r -'° J. 3 w �., "? t '^�. l Usi^]" n.
� � Y ' ' '� �� 'i � �'... ( . �Y V� 1�� 4
4
J � Y .' k "'� 'M1 x.`i . 4 "'�.l` 6'.y ' 1[ � �
� � S� v
� j „ � ; . �. .�.; . .,.
s t y �.r �ppba�i` ;�:�'ha c!S `k.,"�✓'-�'.kt at,.r''r�y�#��,M'r � Y �,� ''^s*.s a"� ' �' x'v�d�`X'�+�'�..tYr°w5}.-'e'C .'.� k- a°gw� .. �ass�'?:�a� vFrC � d .d.-+ vkG '+<". l�Yi,r,^ +.M"
r ¢. t" w . T.'k r. �',+vu;yG"' 2 hx..� ;a ^� sS+K�?.{` �. :� 4� �..�e .wa m s. A�av.w: �.,n* � a�,:.:�.5^^ v s f ....ro'x . v.�� .? ,
�� _ ✓ �,S -. _ �. _ A5 - .l q:� � .
p
�t «�. d�.. �• • .• «'.
x
t_ �+i ��. r i 1' � r
4§y__ � � � - A ..'S
�! f t�'�
a' '� _ ,, [ ' , ' �, _ '
. 9k�*."ir �v+c� �ri �+ u�>° n�va.� >Nv 1 w� c�_ y3 m^' tim.,�at rp.i�-.*: ,+ v^>_�.�..x �� _, w. .. z.r ,.i.��x.. -
{ y�%.� .4A ' .UM . ( : ,J.
� � �� i s �� $�E 2 Y .
R�: \. h
'py 4 .r 'ii } - f' S �.i.y } Y . r'T�,.
� ,.. ` t a Y ` .' .� 't :. ., y ..
� : x # � o-Co�.�res.pv►r�c�e�a.�e�;:C�ece���ed r., .. �, .. �
L
�� ., "��� � , s � : �' w i -E � a , � . .
_.., re ✓ .+ - . �
zhk $e`K.z,.'w.n g � � _ ,
.J� an:JV�tr„*?s E^ u-w^+'�,rw ++� �^ A� ux � ,k: fa NT4'«n ,�u".^� x � . � � �—+:4+ r- bt , .Src*
� � ��#�ar,� . � �,.A
� ,
t f j
urv a M .+'�'�z .�, w m ` s« w*� S&^r �� � � s"Na+..� a? rvr�,aw d �+ � i , �
s s C `.+� '�' M. aA a� b i S. i� Q
� q / . ! h � R ' � � ���
t V'. (L � . GRV'v, 4 C�
i
{u, et �., r . , �iMy� �a 4 *eq x �u, J t,:eo- eT ;y 'L.i V *v. -a t 1 n
f' � s atx i S �q? ., � 5 ���a. ? t�d �a� ry r ..*, h r
'�`� y� nd txr ��rt a��1 a � i x �r2e�r . �r .r .)�
�. t e r 4 � r �� :��i Y
� y � � 9 7 ) � . 1 f� . A � 1 .
� � r k � c ¢ � x )'rs`f ;fi " `�: f '�; ro i � r , r� n , ; n : J
as 'aw . � a"} r��a t✓ �r�s !� x. P '71 r/ �l • ^.
i( L'' !y ? l- i.� 4''yi .� h �' C,b ��� � r � a� m�ttee e �rl'� �� �� C
o
� t <<
, , r
� ,,,,> xr >_ � � n � r x � , � �
,� . , , '
ns � e {t `^t `� a di.,, S� �y 'r�aY� z�'f akt�Y�r, vZ.my _r n s� c�a " > e�h�a
M1
a ' � r + . • r ._ �
'�k , p 'j.� � ': ' � � +a � .' r. ' r -r� H s' ti .
t �i
�
, ,�.i. y v "� .� i'� Yt t i� � tl i 'Sx w � � ' � y:. ,. x ,} i+�� �t°"" _ ;
. _. 1 ,. :, . ....... �
'' �,.: E� . ' s s ' '' ' r ✓, , r; ri
�
�. q : j t ' a� y F a � E�� : '-�� �", s C �t �� aY�a on '.� ��
', i. L' i .4 °, � Yc t e�k s F .".� s I .3, k. . .
�
s .+ �� > i .. / t � 5. ""-0 r � . �� .�� a ty '� � �.y � z 4 a � >- *
p, '. 1 4 ry 5 . U •
� S� ° "r.9 a, +�, a� y ws s> �,�+',� �-r r d�S .'�� �` a'!� � - d�N5'� �� a N r�A x w C� d -
s>
� � i' K Y'�' a y � A r s� asa't e C'� r �� r :� ^, �. '
V`� { 4 �' d f f r !�. F i f.. S >
.
. "°S i �T �, r
'� > 5+� y�.r i pZw�' x.t �.. ��i�X r E � T$'rt ". ^` Y P. *'�
����.q���a.x.�`�da`i ; `kr�.Fnffit`:.rv..to-tx.0 S'+*.£"`"""i^��.✓'FY�4",�'2"�ar4b,ro*�4k4v�r,s�ym�'i` ktga ^.'+iM .m.x'^,�+n.y� n `�1r.a s:`i8" u.� >n?wr�:A`"^YY'n^� ro tePZo
� y� �i � f �i k-. 1� JY� � '� � t< � F
� y .:`��n" a �� ��� 1 a c , r t r . i , i �.
&l ` 5 �,, i p, ro ,% t� . w P� y ' c! .� t�.
;� '� s e s^. . a �, , r i ,. u� a . v y
, p`y�,»wwtrFi r r x 3 vf; f cy�z ✓k�. � s.<. "" �' �"+1ts., �.a �� sj �,�?,ar�d� 'm„ .X r r, v k a..R a. v ^, y : �+v :3; t �V ir
t ° �.
�` y l�i �. �1 V t :' q t ) � .,3 � "1 .q,b q � ,Y � `
J" `�� } �3'Y'! a`�.A' A,�4Px ,t'� K i5' f'�'w.'�'�F�'M1N`t�trSk�. ..l`��a�:.�n� "� R4 �) � i c� y, k i S 4 d 'G'4f Y 0.t .
y�
.� i ., ,J '. y*¢�` � 1 � r� � �5 ( :e 'w ',�a �.: � G , '� � , i . � � '^^ i �. .� 1 �. :
2 a
�,�� a ,�. 'ia . .:�• ..: � � i '� _ �.' ,
� 'eX� P 9 ' � .k
. ` y � � p x ., {
�
( W �
p�paDpr p'�t R'� h i ° at�,'6'Hfi�'N��i't t� �ffim� �sfv �•t �i�YRdq�" w 7w� � S" f�z �� 1 d �� � z��
ku4' w t e � y t . ,�,[ � �.aie. s i*.,.� x � s r o- ;
�� a a�' :�.e r �, , ' �`, � � � ; p 3„
.� °.::�,. , ; ,r5�. _ `�;,?`�;,�`,'� .fa,uy �,._t .A. �, ��.__ „ r . " . .,- _,H`. , ,..� ,,. t3r.`�' , .,.
> ,, ,
� � lr
r✓ r r.$�.epW 3 a i r �^ «iF �,u r k',u,fi.�s
r ''F
\ YH P
k N F"� � t .p� \ 1 4
k Y.
� P� � -
y r>wv�.��.s�r« Y+4ns ,+,wate � vgrrcv�
i � 5Y
� ��y:*.trt�r�k1'+d aa}us�'a:'ra .Ai"i'��
M 4�4 \;
hU t 2
�r _
�, ;
§ ur . n > ��..
��
� �� s
. , . , ., .. .v �
t
' a t
G` n , , ,f J3 a fuP� y 4 �., k �?'�' d4 3:...1 'uy L� �l a ,�',� � 1}�.., .,a �.
F
.'� - ... Nr h` . -
� x
".. i ) , `� k P � \ e�.
��� t K t �.. . 4 � �.�� T
� i
? �.;"� b'1. , ` '� k ° v . wr� t � +M ^. um✓ k d- " ;..y 9 o yr £ a� ., u r ^.aM'cz.?, �-. ��:4
* x a
a
z� z� .' rosc m�wa-r an' .u, �« � l vda F v"ti+'& u u<s .+o ns a^y xw �. {wn++y ;��e 1k n
�b v-tN, n :�� yt l� �.. d 3�e Y ^nSn. , ti , .
t
y,'3 f S U . k� ,�, ', f - x
s y s, x 4 - . : y;
r �
� r
� Vk s �. t r {� _h � �'s' f ^ a m ^�y �
_ ,r . " �. ,�'
f:
.. , ..�. . ... R, .r..t .A..n , ,. < r m . __ v .. ., r . .
r
OI -9L
�
w�nnsev counnv
Community Human Services Department
I60 Kellogg Blvd E
St. Paul, hfN 55101-149�
October 18, 2000
Ms. Nancy Homans, Planner
Department of Planning and Economic Development
1100 City Hall Annex
25 West Fourth Street
St. Paul, MN 55102
Dear Ms. Homans:
FinancialTDD: 6�1-26F-�7oU
Semices TDD: 651-266-000'?
GeneraiInfo: 651-260-44;-i
The purpose of this letter is to provide written confirmation regarding an earlier
telephone conversation concerning the ending date for a contract between
Ramsey County and Oakland Home, Inc. Through contractual agreement,
� Ramsey County purchased residential treatment services for adult women with
mental il)ness from Oakland Home, Inc. The residential site was located at 97
North Oxford in St. Paul.
The last contract was for the time period, January 1, 1998 through September
30, 1998. (The contract for the period January 1, 1998 through December 31,
1999 was formally amended by mutual agreement in July of 1998 to end the
agreement September 30, 1998.) All residents of this licensed facility were
actually discharged on August 21, 1998.
If you require any additional information, I can be reached at (651) 266-4332.
Sincerely,
� � � ^
, I ,�-
Mary Jo Gaskins
Contract Manager
Purchase of Service
�
Minnesota's �rst Home gule County
prin�sdon recycltd pace��N a minimum of W%yostm�umerm��sm
/
SLTMMIT-UNIVERSITY
PLANNING COUNCIL
Ol "gZ.
• Building a Better Community -
627 Selby Avenue . Saint Paul, MN 55104
Telephone 651-228-1855 • FAX 651-225-1108
October 12, 2000
Nancy Homans
City of St. Paul
Dept. of Planning and
Economic Development
25 West Fourth Street
St. Paul, MN 55102
RE: Buffalo Sober Group LLC application for Change of Nonconforn Use Permit to allow
a rooming house that provides permanent living facilities for men in early sobriety at 97
North Oxford, between Laurel and Ashland.
Dear Ms. Homans:
The Summit Universiry Planning Council has found no reason not to support the Buffalo Sober
� Group's application for the Change of Nonconforming Use Permit. SUPC takes this position for
the following reasons:
1) The Neighborhood Development Committee held two Community Issue Meetings regazding
this application (one in April, 2000 and one on Tuesday, October 10). The main concems
expressed at the meetings are: a) neighbors believe the Buffalo Sober Group did not follow
the required process for application of the license and zoning; b) the neighborhood does not
want multiple housing units because the nuxnber of moving vans, meal trucks, individual
cazs, etc., creates parking problems; and c) density is a problem to some of the residents.
Some would be ok with a residency that is limited to 10 or 12 residents but are not ok with
the current number of 24.
2) Votes taken at the meetings were in favor of the SUPC not supporting the Buffalo Sober
House, but several residents who live close to the business did not receive flyers announcing
the meeting and therefore, were not there to voice their opinion. These people spoke with
SUPC staff and stated that they have no problem with the Buffalo Sober House and aze in
favor of allowing them to operate the rooming house.
3) Residents opposed the rooming house assisted staff in distributing flyers in the neighborhood.
This resulted in accusations that a petition opposing the Buffalo Sober Group was delivered
along with the SUPC flyer, which may have led people to believe the SUPC was in favor of
the petition, and that the flyers were delivered only to the people that opposed the Buffalo
Sober Group. (It is important to note that these are only accusations and are unproved.)
�
4) The Buffalo Sober Group did not receive a flyer and did not know about the October 10 �
meeting unti146 minutes prior to the meeting, giving an unfair advantage to those opposed in
the voting process.
5) Walter Dinalko gave his phone numbers to the residents and asked them to call with any
problems regazding the residents, including pazking issues and said he would resolve the
problem immediately upon receiving a call. He stated that he did this at the eazlier meeting
but has not received any calls from residents regazding any problems. Walter stressed that
the doors are always open to the community. Everyone is welcome to come and see the
books or look at the building and talk with the residents.
This decision is made by the President of the Board of Directors, taking into account the fact that
the entire board was notified of the meeting by the Interim Executive Director and asked to
attend the meeting. Those that could not attend could call the office the following morning to get
details of the meeting and voice their opuuon at that time. Only one boazd member did so,
stating that she did not feet that SUPC could make a recommendation because of the above stated
reasons. The Chair of the Neighborhood Development Committee and the Interim Executive
Director did attend the meeting along with the Boazd President and agree with the
recommendation stated above.
�
/.1
President, Boazd of Directors
Cc: St. Paul CiTy Council
SUPC Boazd of Directors
Buffalo Sober Group
�
�
D1 r!Z
� October 10, 2000
Walter Dinalko
Managing Director
Buffalo Sober Group L.L.C.
97 NoRh Oxford Street
Saint Paul, MN 55104
To Whom it May Concern;
The building located at 97 North Oxford is restructured to a configuration containin� 19
separate rooms with one centrally located kitchen and dining facility, one electrical
hookup and one central heating plant. This restructuring was accomplished prior to the
City of Saint Paul's adoption of a zoning code in 1975 thereby making the building a
legal non-conforming structure. The intent of the zoning code is to allow such structures
and their uses to continue until they are removed. Generally when fifty percent or more of
the structure is destroyed, that is considered removal.
The Buffalo House meets and exceeds all the requirements for continuation of a non-
� conforming use with the exception of the signatures of two thirds of property owners
within 100 feet.
_ -.
The Buffalo Sober Group purchased 97 North Oxford in 7anuary 2000 for three hundred
thousand dollars. The interior of the building was a mess, and one hundred thousand
dolfars in up�rades were required. These included painting, drop ceilin� removal,
carpeting throujhout, earterior painting and awnings and repair and upgrading of fire
detection systems. We have invested a substantial sum of money (nearly one half a
million dollars). Because of the extensive restructurin� of the interior it would cost at
least another five hundred thousand dollars to reconfigure the interior to either a four-
plex or duplex.
If we are forced to discontinue the use of the property, as it exists we could not afford nor
would it be financially prudent to invest in these renovations.
Our use, as a sober house for twenty-four recovering individuals is a less intense use of
the non-conforming structure then previously existed.
Due mainly to the existence of centers such as the Hazelden treatment facility, Hazelden
Fellowship club, Twin-Town Treatment center and the Retreat at Upland Farms, Saint
Paul has evolved into one of the world's best known and most successful sober livin�
em ironments. Recovering alcoholics and addicts from around the world come to this city
and settle in Saint Paul because the support and recovery community is so well
� demonstrated.
It is clear that the fortunate folks in early recovery from aicohol and drug dependency-the �
ones with the greatest success rate for recovery-are those who, after primary treatment __
spend a period of six to twelve months in a group setting. This group setting provides a
stable sober living environment, which emphasizes development of principles for living
with a strong spiritual content.
Buffalo House is an asset to the community since � individual that returns to the use of
alcohot and drugs either in or out ofBuffalo House, is immediately expelled. We can do
this because the residents aze required to sign a tested and proven sober contract, which
requires adherence to certain rules and absolute abstention from drug or alcohol use and
is enforced through the application of random drug testing. Living in this type of
environment, where attendance at twelve step meetings is encouraged and group
accountability is paramount, individuals develop a new responsible lifestyle free of
alcohol and drug use.
Please find attached letters of support from community members and residents of the
Buffalo House.
Thank you for your consideration in this matter.
Respectfully,
Walter Dinalko
�
�
�
�
] i HAZELDEN
Fellowship Club� St. Paul
October 10, 2000
To Whom It May Concern:
o! -gz.
680 StemartAaenue
St. Paul, MN SSIO2�199
Phane 612-509-3900
http:l/vnvm.hnzeiden.org
Hazelden Fellowship Cfub in St. Paul has been referring to Buffalo Sober
House at 97 N. Oxford in St. Paul since February, 2000.
Residents who go through Fellowship Club generally have compieted an
inpatient treatment experience and continue in Fellowship Club to learn daily
living skilis. They are asked to work or attend school during the day and
then attend groups in the evenings.
Foliowing their stay at Fellowship C1ub we generaily encourage them to find
a sober living environment. Buffalo House has been in existence since
February 2000 and we have found them a solid placement for men in
� recovery. When referring we look at the structure of a house and it appears
that Buffalo House is one with such structure.
We hope to continue referrals to Buffalo House in the future.
�
Sincerely,
�� �� �
Brenda J.
�
) ,�� i �
Iliff, Executive Director
Equai Opportunity Employer
University Bank
��
10/71/2000
Mr. Walter Dinalko
Managing Director
Buffalo Sober Group, LLC
97 North Oxford Street
St. Pau(, MN. 551Q4
Dear Walter,
As per your request I am writing this letter lo outline University Bank's interest in a
Ioan relationship with Buffalo Sober Group. We financed the purchase and remodeling
of a building localed at 97, North Oxford Street in St. Paul. The building had been emply
for several months and had shown considerable signs of negiect, and deterioration. After our
initial discussion I recognized a worthwhile business relationship that would greatly
serve our communily. The business plan had merit, bul lacked capital, and principals
lacked a proven track record. With this, i utilized a program exclusive to University Bank
and sponsored by the City of St. Paui. This program provided guarantee support to the
bank in the loan relationship.
As I am familiar with the project, bolh before and after the remodeling, t can say lhat
I am very pleased with the quality of your work. In addilion, I wouid like to nole lhat
the project was completed within a 45 day time frame. This completely surprised our
appraiser, as he didn't recog�ize the building when I called for a fina! inspection.
As always Waiter, it is a pleasure to be of service to you and the Buffalo Sober Group.
If you need anything else please feel free to call me at 298-6750.
Sinc el
Jo Bennett
r �i. viCc ic i�ci i
v Urnver ity ank
�
r�
200 Uui�crsicy Ave. W., Sc. Paul, MN 55103 pbone: (651) 265-5600 fax: (C51) 29S-G759
• Page 2
September 14, 2000
� Mc Biakey, we are not a group of high-powered, profit�driven developers. We embarked on
tSiis project in good faith and have poured a Iot of our spare change, spare time, a� spa2 enetgy irto
it We are pleased with the 2sults, the success of our residerrts, and our place in the commun'ity as
good neighbors.
We are pleased about the spiritual rightness of this project: NeaAy every dollar the building
generates is put back irrto it. Neady all of the residents perfoRn regular seNice work in the community.
We are doing what we a2 doing to inaease the value of the property and the quality of life in this
neighborhood.
Ptease accept ouc humble invitation to visit 97 No�th 0�6orti Street The door is always open. If
you wish, we wiii gladiy arrange transportation for you, your staff, and the other es[eemed members of
the City Councii to come see what we are really about.
Respectfuly,
WatterL. Dinalko
Managing Director
��..
�
�
o�coner s, z000
To Whom It Mav Concern:
I am wciting to esplain some of the benefits of living at the Buffalo sober house and to gn some
backgroundinformation abouz myself.
I am thirty-five years old I was bom and raised in Kenosb� Wisconsin, the youngest of five children.
I gaduated from the UnicersiN of Wisconsin — Madison in nineteen eighty-nine w�th a bachelors degree in
economics.
I am an alcoholic and liave been s�uggling R�th the disease for ten g ears. Mc father kas a recovering
alcoholic of twenn- years. I believe aicoholism Is a disease, however tliai topic falls outside the scope of
this letter.
I came to Minnesota in nineteen ninety-sit to go to Hazelden Treatment facility. I successfully wmpleted �,
their 30-da} program and then liced at Crossroads aftercare faciliri for one year. I remained sober for sia
months after leaving there.
I relapsed in 1998. I think many factors contributed to my relapse. one o� which was not lic•ing in a
supportice li�ring en«ronment a•hile continuing to rebuild mv life.
I entered Fainzew-Riverside treatment facility in August 1999, successfully completing their thirN-day
progrant.
I have been living at Buffalo sober house since Februai}� 2000.
I think I am fortunate to have this opportunih. I live with people c�ho uace ti�e same probiem and woric on
helping themseh�es. The Buff'alo house offers me a safe licing arrangement w�hile I con[inue to get my life
in order.
If I can be of anv assistance feeI free to contact me.
Sincereh�,
Cazl Alfredson
97 O�'ord SL N.
Saint Paul. MN. 55101
�
�l-9z r
� In additional to looking at this issue from a recovery stand point, I would think it is also important
to the twin cities area from a financial prospective. People come to ihe twin cities from all over
the world for treatment. Revenues from treatment and recovery aze an important part of our
economy. A recent example of this is the Intemationai AA Convention in Minneapolis which was
attended by more than 65,000 people. The city of St. Paul benefitted from this in terms of hotel
usage, restaurants, shopping, etc. One of the reasons that this convention happened here is the
strong recovery community in our area. Halfway Houses and Sober Houses play a part in that .
community.
I believe that our community, and the neighborhood in which it is located, benefit from Buffalo
House. Its residents are hard-working members of society that are working to insure a better
future for themselves and those who care about them. They should be applauded and supported in
their efforts. With the prevalence of chemical dependency in our society, they could also be your
pazent, child or siblings.
Sincerely,
/��7�GC'�' ' /`�-�
t
Kazen Mead
Executive Director
� ,
�
�,
buffalo sober group
September 14, 2000
I� ,�.�.�p:7t�s
,
� �
.�c-� � c11 � �� ���:{ :
f
�`�
Honorabie Jerty Btakey
City Hali Room 3t0-A
15 West Kellogg Boulevard
Saint Paui, MN 55101
Dear Mr. Blakey:
in January 2000 we purchased the property at the address below, located in your district The
seller, Serene La�son, had operated a group home acxommodating as many as 43 merrtally iil aduR
females at a time at this location for a number of years. After losing her license to provide services to
this population, the property was placed on the market as a muttiund group housing facii'dy.
A group of recovering alcoholics, induding myself, saw poterrtial in the property for housing
pe�sons in recovery from chemicai probiems specificaily due to the central location and the floor plan.
During the thorough due diligence provided by our bankers and Fred Gingas, a licensed master real
estate appraiser, it was revealed that, because of extensive interior reconstruction undertaken over 3�
years ago to convert the building irrto a group home, the property is qual'fied as a pre-e�asting, non-
conforming improvement.
Ourgroup spent neady $30(J,D00.00 in acquiring the property, ar�d neady $100,000.00 more to
renovate the interior. The building was a mess when we purchased it. Most of the money sperrt on
renovations went for painting, carpeting, drop-ceiling removal, fire alartn sys[em upgrading, etc...
Our non-confortning use of the property is signficanUy less intrusrve to aii neighbors than the
previous owners', and the property has become an asset to the neighbortrood. We have fewer
residents, strict rules, appropriate pariting demand, quiet, peacefui residents, and a spoUess facility. All
residenis are gainfuiiy empioyed, recovering gemiemen, wi�o G�ocse ta ��r2 i� 8 SuNp:..f:N°. v.hom�al
free ernironment Most are graduates of primary and e�Qended-care Veatrnent programs such as
Hazelden, Fairview-Riverside, IGnnic Fails, etc... They live at 97 No�th 0�6ord Street to receive the
supporf of other men in recovery. AII are productive, law-abiding, voting citizens wifh the unfortunate
handicap of a disease in rem'ission.
It seems that you are uncertain whether this pmjec[ is good for the neighborfiood. We are
quite sure that, shouid you choose to visit 97 North 0�6ord Street, your concems about the projed and
iis rightful place in this neighbortiood, wili vanish.
,�
97 North Oxford Street Saint Paul, Minnesota USA 55104
voice: 651.248.3387 data: 651.227.7782 bsgilc�uswest.net �
/ VLI lb 'IOFJ 141�k7irPi KCF+� c�inic cv�a�iL� "OI�Z
i
R��L Es�a. EQLITIF_.S
REAL ESTATE EOI.�T�ES. �`1C • RE�L ES'NTE EOU�'4E5 BROKERAGE CO
REAL ESTn7E ECV i'�ES DE`/E�OenErvT CC
�
�CIObfI �.�, ����
To W'hom It May Concern:
As a membcr of the communit} who has been professiona[ly cammined tu expanding
affordable housing options in Saint Paul for many yeazs, I�c�ish to voice my support for
the eontinued operation of Buffalo Housz. Specifically, I urge you to eontinue the non-
confoiming Lise privilege granted to the immediate previous ow�ner of the property.
From the information available to me, it appeazs that the owners have made every good
faith efforr to compl}• with ail applicable laws and regulations including the non-
conforming use provision currently under debatz.
� i
In addition to proyiding an important serv�ce to a protected class of persons, the
ownership has demonstrated that it can harmoniously re-integrace the property into the
neighborhood.
Your considzration is appreciated.
� a00 D[G�EL O� HO`+OR Bw�UiNG . 325 CEDhR 5'REET • ST Pn,�;,_ M�vN[50'/� 5510� •:E5�� 227-6925 • Fqx (65U 227-9001
tions
' onymous
October 12, 2000
To Whom it May Concem:
P.O. Box 4245 � Saint Paut, Minnesota • 55104
Statistics show us that one of every ten people is chemically dependent and that one in every five
people is involved with a person who is chemically dependent. Statistics have also shown us that
one of the essential ingredients for recovery is a supportive living environment. Buffalo House and
other sober housing provide such an environment for those in recovery.
I have been involved in the field of chemical dependency for the past twenty yeazs. Five of those
years were as manager of Outpatient Services and Aftercaze at what is now known as Fairview
Recovery Services. One of the most important functions of my aftercaze staffwas the placement
of newly recovery people in halfway houses and sober houses. The e�dstence of such homes is
essential to the field of chemical dependency where lvfinnesota enjoys the reputation of being a
leader in the treatment of chemical dependency. If this is to continue, it is important that
residences such as Buffalo House e�st.
I am a faculty member of Metro State University where I teach a coutse on Chemical Dependency
Intervention and Prevention with a special focus on relapse prevention. Some of the ingredients
that aze essential to relapse preventions are: 1) selfknowledge, 2) accountability, 3) responsible
behavior, 4) a supportive living environment, and 5) regular attendance at support meetings.
Buffalo House creates just such a setting.
My experience with Buffalo House is a personal one. My granddaughter's father has been there
Sl.^.C� 1t OYBP.P�. Tn that tirrZg ha hgc ar„Caimiilatp� ritO2C Lh�n nine EROI1tt1S ,Of COIIYIDUOUS SObI'ICIv.
He is enrolied in school and has completed an emergency medical technician course and has
passed the national registry test. He is now working in that field and continues schooling. He
attends regular AA meetings and works on recovery issues with a therapist. He has a sponsor who
he interacts with on a regular basis. He is an asset to society and his communiry. Buffalo House is
a big part of his recovery.
The residents at Buffato are held accounfable for taking the right step fo insure a good recovery.
If they don't adhere to the rules and regulations, they have to leave. $uffalo House has a zero
tolerance policy. Some of the rules of Buffalo House aze: 1) each resident has weekly household
tasks that must be attended to, 2) each resident must be employed, 3) residents must maintain
sobriety, 4) and agree to a monthly lottery for random urine screens. Residents aze strongly
encouraged to attend weekly meeting and have a sponsor.
�
�
�
Phone: 65ll647-9712 • �'ax: 65ll647-1593
E-mail: eaiscC�mtn.org • Web Page: http!/www.EmotionsAnonymous.org
oi - yz,
Zoning Committee Minutes
� October 12, 2000
File #: 00-122-234
Page 3
She also presented a letter submitted by the SummiUUniversity Planning Council stating they
have found no reason notto support the Buffato Sober Group's application for the Change of
Nonconforming Use Permit.
In response to a question from Commissioner Gordon, Ms. Homans stated she does not have a
copy of the contract between the County and Oakland Home. She received information on the
dates on which the contract was terminated and the residents moved out in a conversation with
the contract manager from Ramsey County.
In response to a question from Commissioner Kramer, Ms. Homans stated the applicant was
provided with a packet of information and an appiication for a permit to reestablish a non-
conforming use.
Mark Gehan, the attorney for Buffalo Sober Group, appeared and presented a packet that
contained several documents pertaining to the case. He noted that his client, Mr. Dinalko, would
respond to the findings related to traffic and parking outlined in the staff report. He commented,
however, that the reference to neighbors noting an increase in traffic is difficult to respond to but
that it should be noted that those same neighbors are part of an organized opposition to the
facility.
� He went on to give a history of the building at 97 North Oxford, acknowledging that the residents
of the previous facility were gone in 1998. He also stated the building was listed as a fully
functional group home by the owner when it was put on the real estate market and that listing is
attached to the permit application. The bui{ding was for sale for over a year. They have
information that one of the property's neighbors Diane Lunderborg wanted to buy the building at
one point. She later, he stated, made negative comments about "drug addicts" in a letter to her
neighbors after the Sober House was established.
Mr. Gehan described some of the financial circumstances surrounding the building. In purchasing
the building, the Buffalo Sober Group invested $82,000, took out a$280,000 loan (a portion of
which was secured by the City) and spent $100,000 to upgrade the sfructure. They are now
making only $1,000 per month. The building was recentiy re-appraised at $528,000, indicating
that they have added value to the structure. He reported that estimates his client has received
from contractors are that it would take $490,000 to �600,000 to convert the structure to a duplex
allowed under the zoning code.
Mr. Gehan went on to propose that the previous nonconforming use was not discontinued or
abandoned. He described a case pending in Hennepin County before the Court of Appeals. The
District Court, in that case, found that a building's not being in use did not constitute
"abandonment." He explained that the argument was made that abandonment of a
nonconforming use must be proved against the property owner. A decision is expected wifhin
30-60 days. Relative to this case, he suggested that because the previous owner was markefing
the building as a non-conforming use, continued to maintain an office and pay utility bills and a
� caretaker, there was no intention to abandon the use.
Commissioner Kramer pointed out that ihe Zoning Code refers to "discontinuing" rather than
"abandoning" a use and that the specific language in the Code is that a nonconforming use is
"discontinued or ceases to exist."
Zoning Committee Minutes
October 12, 2000
File #: 00-122-234
Page 4
In response to a question from Commissioner Gordon about the nature of the business the
building ownerwas maintaining, Mr. Gehan stated thaf fhe ownerwas managing fhe safe of the
property and conducting personal business.
In response to a question from Commissioner Kramer, Mr. Gehan explained that the home was
for people in recovery coming out of facilities such as Hazeidon.
Commission Gordon directed Mr. Gehan's attention to the Coidwell Banker Bumet listing
submitted with the application. After estabiishing that the listing detailed a series of specific
attributes of the building (e.g., nature of the mortgage, numberof ranges), Commissioner Gordon
highlighted the attributes listed under "Current Use": Hotel/Motel, Business Service, Professional
Service. He noted that Group Home, Residentiaf Facifity or Rooming House were nof listed. -
Commissioner Gordon went on to highlight an excerpt from the first paragraph from the letterfrom
University Bank dated October 11, 2000 submitted by the applicant at the meeting: "We financed
the purchase and remodeling of a building located at 97 North Oxford in St. Paui. The building
had been empty for severai months and had shown considerab(e signs of neglecf, and
deterioration."
�
In response to a question from Commissioner Gordon, Mr. Gehan indicated that, unless the
Zoning Committee has discretion, if they find the use was discontinued, they would have to require �
an application to reestablish a nonconforming use. Mr. Gordon then outlined a hypofheficat
scenario of an owner of a non-conforming barbershop who decided to no longer cut_ hair but
confinued to own the building for more than 365 days and went in periodicaily to read the paper
or attend to personal business. He asked Mr. Gehan if he would agree that the use had been
discontinued. Mr. Gehan responded that it would depend on the owner's intent.
Waiter Dinalko (400 Selby Avenue), the applicant and managing direcfor of the Buffalo Sober
House, appeared and showed a video of the property and explained the parking set-up. He stated
they limit the number of automobiles owned by residents to ten and there is enough off street
parking available.
After describing some of his personal history, Mr. Dinalko discussed his conclusion, as a
recovering alcoholic, that a sober environment is an essentiai part of the recovery process. There
is a much higher success rate for people able to find and live in a sober environment. With the
notion of "giving back" to the community, he said found the property in November 1999 (staff note:
I believe he meant September 1999). His original offerwas turned down, but he was recontacfed
by the selling agent at the end of November.
His intention has been to estabiish a sober house--providing a stable network for a group of inen
in recovery. There is a house manager on site. House rules include drug and afcohol testing and
requirements related to being good neighbors.
He outlined the nature of the seven police calis related to the property.
In response to questions from Commissioner Kramer, he said that they began to occupy the �
property on February 15, 2000 and thatthey occupied the properfy without a permit because they
didn't need a permit for occupancy.
OI - 4 Z-
�
� G��
��._O�� �
�.�� ��� �
�� �
��� ���� ���
�� f�
�
� � �
�
buffalo house
� �/���G
�U� .��-�°�ui �-��%' �",��r�.X'
�� `� �S �-/�. � ��f�
-y'�_ y -�d/�i✓�� G' �
�
>�� � � ��� �� �.
�
���� ��c_. � �.� � �
�. �.�� _�ti, ��au�e_ /��
��
��'��,
,• �� T�o
� �f�� �ti�
�� J
� - r �
�/,7/' �� _.����U� � � Q ����r�?2e-- ✓`zC�' .
,, // / / _.�i'U U(J \ (j/� ( � �� '�" " `-
G�'�'!G� � �� • �-� \I �
� G J ,/ ,�/� �����
��'��, C�' d�Gtl���/✓l� � f C� �`c�i/'�� � G�
�� -, �
,
����r��,�,z�a�.�e ��'` -�-�"; — �-�- �o 1���, ����; ��c ���:�;�-�
, � , �� �
� � � ��� l�—t'��L ;'' .��..1j�� ��� �
�� � ,
� � ,� � �� � ' ✓ �, , ,6�r��'� o�
��1 _�%�y,? ��� ./'(/,��l�%v,' //��—C' �-'/ ,.�-� �I'�G'vC%� GC' � — c�Gr/
� , / v � i � � i �`�i�� �C � � �' l � G��'�C. v' L�✓ G'`�! ��/7 .
% /
��`� � "'!�'�,? 7"� 1 �`�-C� �%-�!_/� �/��%/ ��l -
� L� �I
V /�� �
C/ �
� 97 North Ouford Street Saint Paui, Minnesota USA 5104 ` �
voice: 65'1.227.7781 data: 651.227.7782 buffalohouseQuswest.net
_ �- �
1�1:.���� � _ti��
�� �
��-��
�/G
�D��l� ""'r ''"^-c-f
� M
r
��,{,� � �;�L Y ���
��� Z �� �,ry/ ti
.}n �
/ � ��
(� � �
(�//L/tt ��
�,,�,'�rh �
�fiOZ�r s
�( ��
btt�
0�
o�
{,-�t �,
(d�� ��
(�i��l '"
�+1�✓� r
�v�►
�
dUi�
`��
eGd
/t Mh�^
� ��
7R� {L° ! �GL
{✓1 1/��O�f'ti � � �t 1/`�-
1 �� R / owL ,c- l,��y�
�
g v ��'r Gd !�1-rJlC . !/�.,
,{ � � 1 J �� �-� / M, y(c�F R�-
� !� r /
� l!'vt
G ��,K�L /1— C � �-N tt
���
��
�
�� ,�...� �
�
/ Q/� t, ,o,�^ � �.� ��� Mr
��/v � ( �r/ d d��/ L �v� " N C.�! 1/i � � f� �l V ��
✓ (n.f�
/ , , � �'o �/�f� �`+�C- ,
(.b��y/' f}^! ,� �r�fiYy7 �ifT��'[� t✓�n� � �°� �
J, l �' '" �%" , �N 6 v( ��L
��i��� oFf%�� y ` �;�z,�t. �"
{/ - / ' O( �
�� S7 / �L�f G L f�JfL / /
� ° ^ � �d „�i� � � �-C �� �t� � ,a„e �- '� "'��`� (,�
y�
� ���7`� �iJ(L / C P� �� �1�.s�1-�-� �i�t��kf 5���"s�7/
. � �� � �r !� � .,�
s�����'� , � y � � ,�,.Z,�, � �
� .�-�f'f %/L' P�` `����,1� �,^��,^,/c �7� �� N � r�
^ / �
� 97 North O�ord Stree� Samt Paul, Minnesota USA 55104! ��� �
voice:651.227.7781 data:65'1.227.7782 buffalohouse@uswest,net ���
� �� I
�
ot -9�
S
_ __ �
�i r- ;• � •: �:
�� � G �G',� lu• ��a�vi.e� � �"� .
S ,
�°'�-�-( �' `�- ��� � � �
�� l . � � u�� � c�
l �" k 1 �[,L � , / l �� �/ "� �
� 1 "� � . � o' �
��� ��� ���.
`�� e__.� �� � cy 1, �v- G ,�� _ ' ,,
!� ,
`"�`-� � �� �•� �..��- ``��y
� c� �,L �``? ��,1'a/�-c�-v� r''�-e.. _ c � � - �
�k�. �- �, � �.�,
��n�� � -�
� �� � �� ���rn� ��
�'�.�� �.�.� � �
�� � � � � � � �.� .
� ��
� ���v , , �r -, �, 2 s�
�
�,� �
C
� �� � ��-� �,.� . �?�� �`� .
c� �
�� � � �J� �`�'- ��
'�'� � J� � z cs� �c `�'S-C
Y � �-
� 97 North Oxford Street Saint Paui, Minnesota USA 55104
voice: 651.227.7781 data: 651.227.7782 buffalohouse@uswest.net
�-
buffalo house
,
� l..il/fo� /T
�o m�-y cow���� . � ���� ,���w i����
��; -3 `-� ��S /��o w s��-T % >f�s 0°.�.sc c ,l�7cs�-�✓s /6 /h � .
f.S S C G�/�P� � y - SC�Li✓l /y � i "' �SCi��/N[' �-/'�� 1 v1 �L OGn'' _
���c� pc.-., /o F��✓r� �i� u�,q y �,'.� �� .Sa3/�'�ci�, %�✓.o %o
��,P,� f1 Sv�i�I �J•�sc 10 S%r�� sc/��,� _ �y �iv,.vb .r.� Sel�
I�� d,�F�.�Tu,�.� j % ��wq % HC D�Sc,���.�� .� Nc,� t� T
c;�,�wE � � ��% z ,�-��,� ��,� � Sa /.�/,'�cl y . �--,� �, � .
7 ;.s 1� 1 /��20 , � ' ffi9 - se ���.�,d 1� �S'a.��i�Ty �
�� �s,.G F.�C's% i-S %h�c�T�-,�-�i SCco.�d /f�� ��y /�dos�
� �, o % /,'��o � Sc r� � ,-'�a �sE . � /h ��Qc ,� 6P�-T� /�,� ��✓�
��� U� ccn /6 �G �rCC�/°T�,O �/� /�'c , /��.�E .-� C/� �✓ �iv�
C.�o�,�� �w� h3� �,�� �� ��E i� 5��� �'�q�.�,��� , i/�s /��
I.S ,�I? � b �.l J /�c /o�- .S =C� �,/�a 6�/,ir, - � �c�L. % �'i �
��� �fc usc �s � �S'�r �=�✓��a�c n���; rc� /y
/'� �'�
f�l�/J �m C�ft/�Fiu�-- �v �C �EpE' �
,LJ ./���---� � }��
/ D � �a / �
97 North Oxford StreeY�Saint Aaul, Mienesota USA 55904 �
voice:651.227.7781 data: 657.227.7782 buffalohouse@uswest.net
�
OI-�j2
�
1 � -a-cs�
�
':�ii'r.T.• i •� _ �:
� �v� �v I ��v `�e ���scs�� e:
�vseJ c�s ��- �� � s��� � -
��5c-��ec� ��r��r ��� �.V������
� `s � � o .� - �,�e
��,�,� �o � �
� ���\ �-c\a � ���� 1`��S�ld ����,
� �- �� �� ��vi i��cQ' -4-�z `�� s�
�c�5 �o� �V1 .
� ''C��OYeY ��35 ��`��\���
�� � '�`� E?��; � � ,
�,�5 ��\ �`�� J ���v� C� �� ��"�� �
� : � �V�-� C�� V �, Y� �' `�`(��' � S \ O� �QC ��' ��
�
. � ��6� �
� �
��1 � /
I --
� 97 North Oxford Street Saint Paul, Minnesota USA 55104
voice: 651.227.778'i data: 651.227.7782 buffalohouse@uswest.net
�'
buf�alo house
�
���eE n�,,,� '��� ���.�,alo �SF A� t�
rt" l�w� bt�a Ve� y Cs�r�� E,r bi � 6�ere , r� c�cie ;�.
�Eo_.�,\,� e\osE �r�an9., l,:hv � L'an �'Ur'�v 'tc ;^� �•^" c�>
n� 1�,Q O. hete ;s R�41nZ: ,�.�-,Q l<.�s�
1
YS C.\i.Xti� C�eor1 t�eres G�w`c��S ��la Qr�ti1,�o� c5c�,, cv'
)
n ; S 1�} - �p' �.1�� w•�. �:✓�J�QSb�u l.uc� �e�cr t�,.,
��^�o� sE ia 1� �e b.; i- S i,�{��t- � s +1.: a�ac.e ? nee c� fv
b t� Sk�,� Sobe�. ewd cj e+ rn� I• 4e. �ek ;.v crdr.�.
I neJz.- ��.w�l.� i e� "�-nc4 S�ch Ctr� Qx��..-o.-,rnz+�j" a.o
�.� 9� JeJ O-�wC-`15 {1P.Li: Ll c�. �o/'ro.^ S}Cnes C� �b�.1
� mc�rw,s � .� �, .1. :'h t4c�.
�ne�;se5 t�� � ; a � / �`Je¢� l.ere � �
L �`hc�c�e. -�'�.�, C�-+o�'r- .'— D�' �'� ' ea„ -srvs� a.L)
ca, cS v� i� s �• k e o� �n , �� h.cne . ft�id -�
�,os� .
��rrc�'
54ar��.s ��e t�ecv-c� �.-u< ft•z o�e,� hvuc Mak�S
rv� u�cx.c�v. u5�7 - t�c�E c� + f 1, V4e �'� 3 o'�e,
� ol�r5.� l;.�wl laC�
97 North Oxford Street Saint Paui, Minnesota USA 55104 �
voice: 657.227.77$1 data: 651.227.7782 buffalohouse�uswest.net
/
�
- � �—.S�__._
� Z�'3�f��4G ��LE 0l�-lZZ-23y�
October 4, 2000
St. Paul Planning Commission
GJRiilg i.:SiivaaiuG:.
Planning & Economic Development
1400 City Hall Annex
25 West Fourth Street
St Paul MN 55102-1634
To Whom It May Concern:
Re: File #00-122-234 • Public Hearing on 97 North Oxford, Buffalo Sober Group
� to be held October 12, 2000 at 3:30 p.m.
I received notice of this meeting and want to forward some information to you. It has come to my
attention that it is alleged that someone from the Buffalo Group reported to the Zoning Commission
that St. Paul-Reformation Lutheran Church gave the group pernussion to use our pazking lot..0ur
church is located across the street from 97 North Oxford and our parking lot is located a half block
north of that properiy.
We did not give the Buffalo Sober Group any blanket permission to use our parking lot. As good
neighbors in the area we aiways tell inquirers that if they need to use our lot to get their cars off the
sireet in a snow emergency they may do so temporarily. We would not be able to give any blanket,
sustained permission for use of our lot because we need it for our purposes.
On other matters pertanung to this property, we have not had any difficulty with the residents,
though several things of concern have been reported to me by other neighbors. When the building
was first purchased and rehabilitated we met the owner, who at the tnne was Ralph Castagno, and
thought that we would have a good relationship with him since he would be living there. Aowever,
it is my understanding that Mr. Castagno has moved out of town.
My concern at this point is that this appeazs to be a facility that is in some kind of way serving
persons who have been chemically dependent. I am very sensitive to the needs of people who have
� been through treatment, but I am wondering about the wisdom of having a facility like this that, as
I understand it, has no staff. Neither am I clear how the facility is being physically cared for.
Paul A. Tidemann, Pastor Anita C. Hill, Pastoral Minister Lynne F. Lorenzen, Pastor
700 North Oxford Street, St. Paul, MN 5 5 7 046540 (651) 2243371 FAX (651) 224-fi228
E-mail: STPAULREFC�aol.com Website: www.cybenvord.com/spr
St. Faul-Reformation Lutheran Church
Evangelical Lutheran Church in America
l
� �ONING �ILE o�-�ZZ-Z3��
Perhaps there are others who have adequate answers to these matters. Our position as a church is �
neither for nor against the zoning of this property lazgely because we do not have adequate
informaUon about it. I raise the above concerns to indicate that I couldiunagine a situation arising
that may turn out to be difficult in the neighborhood.
Please contact me if you wish.
Sincerely,
�' . � ��a.�,..
Paul A. Tidemann, Pastor
c: �'��r.cii�::�� �er 7e.=� E:al:e�
�
�
_ o�-yZ
ZONII�G
� The subject property is zoned R2B (Residence District), under the zoning ordinance
administered by the City of Minneapolis.
See the Addenda for the zoning ordinance.
DISCUSSION OF ZONIAIG
The subject facility is zoned RZB (Residence District). The subject improvements were
constructed prior to the adoption of the current ordinance and is non-confomiing to the curtent
ordinance but is allowed as a non-conforming use.
"The R2B Residence District is desi�ed primarily for residential use of various types that
are described in the portions of the ordinance that may be found in the Addendum.
Permitted uses in this district inciude all uses ailowed in the other Residential Dish The
existing use is non-conforming but is allo�ved as a non-conformin� use.
The subject property appeazs to be "grand fathered" as a result ofbeing constructed prior to
the adoption of the current zoning ordinance and is, therefore, considered to be a legal use.
Furthermore, the subject appears to be non-conforming with respect to pazking requirements as well
as lot, yazd and density requirements. Although the subject is non-conformin�, its use may continue
� so long as no more than 50 percent of it is not destroyed or damaged. Given that there is sufficient
hazard insurance to cover potentiai'loss, there does not appear to be a negative impact as a result of
the non-conforming use.
14
8$/22/2000 13:39
< ?'
`��
�
:r;;.:�:.s
SPPD RMS QUERY
Address Search
Address Search: 37 OXFORD ST N(Sector. t Grid: 127 ) from 01 /0112 0 0 0 to 0812il2000
RMrieved 7 records
Complaint 3t
i 00153580
� 00150886
�p OOQ92887
- U Q0091793
�&9379
F WQ78900
.j 00011634
- �a.�� � �
` � � �',t
1`�' vvh�-es s ��� 4 S y, v-c_ o_ � 4 '� Q. w
�.�.l�s , �� ,�r��� �s,�r � r�,%e �.�� .��t�-�-��4. �o�
v S�r``j ��_ C^,,�.,•� �' �� os �� c�t� o. `' ��}��
� a., � 1 0. T W�c�t��" ���) �`�t iN T�'�j' e
T"�SC' l .- 1�Y <<_��,t �- �
N � i
��v., ,�t� r
6122226881
6122226881 HTLL PLAZA
Occur Dafa S Time incident Type Disposltion Api#
���z���`-+� DISTURBCALLS� ADV � '
9&Ot/2ppp2325 DEATH � RCV v' 121 �.
05/21i2000 75:35 INVESTIGATE ADV ,__� � �-
05f20/200007�4^_ OTHERASSAUI�- RCV."1 �
' � �l�l, ) Q V-� Y`-Q,'( Z• .
s � �����,
�
r
S c_� "� J 2�tn.
����1 -�-�
N � �� � � �,e_� - �.�
YJ U w��->-r 1- v�-z— ��'�°=
�.x.X.� � z�c � �•. �� �
�
J
���v� � 5 �._�. ��--� '
Info�mation requesied by: (130000)
1
OSH8200022;0'I DISTURB CALLS . UNF- Z +
04l30t200001:03 FIGHTS qpV 2 �}rp.-�q .�J�����
OflZOl20001227 _._—�p�s._.'_—_..._._--ADV ' l
� w :-•-S
� ��
� �'��S"� c� a a �D� ti�� t�
� G�-U � 1 -� �_,�-- ? ,
� �, ��,t 1 -�-z-� -� �,�.
L.�.���- �`��� �
���- �
-J-z-C-�
��
�
Printed af:08/21/2000 7Dr01
PAGE 01
/
MAIN LEVEL
�
�
'� 1 b e�1
�
� �'
�k �
La ��� E
(3
2 beds
�beds
���
���
S tairs
°�'Y 'r 3 z
Ba h h
R oms
Stairs
Entry
Kitchen
Dining
Room
��
i beds
� ���_
I beds
io�
t ��
� � Porch � � ,�,('r
�'C �
O l "�j Z
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�:J
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�\ .-.�`:- � ���� �
OF
A Proposed Group Home
LOCATED AT
97 North Oxford Street
St. Paul, Minnesota 55104
AS OF
December 16,1999
FOR
University National Bank
200 University Avenue West
St. Paul, Minnesota, 55103
Atfention: John Bennett Phone: 298-6750
C.�
LENDERS APPRAISAL SERVICES, INC.
F. W. Gergen, MAI
Appraiser
File #: 11256-L
�
�
�
t <: _.._ _ � �,� , -- _
�
�`
�
/
/6-�-cv
��
buffalo house
01-qz
i l� ' .
�'`'�'�G..�- �� ��� �< < _ < <`� , , �� - � �- .�.-t� :�
?fi :` �"-(-' L� --�_ C"d = x C/t �C Lt, � =,l�._ �.�/' _ _ . ti - -.. -. . .. � - T� .
� �i
.. '�-� !�-'i�iu./ : . /',iYJ ✓�� :<y.nJ . //� //.�1ii/ /i i/�
�� �J" �
� /
� ,��� _ ��-f �� ��l�J� ,�����- .1.i, ' ��
- �,,, ���,,,.�,�-��
,,
iP�� � ,/ 1 � ✓
9 � r,
�i/ii/,��,n'�n,�/ �,��> / //� //�i2��> /
� • .Z/'/!/i,l.i _� /,.�iT �
i
�';:J ,; ;> f��> � =
- ;%���_, i�� 'ii�� .
j/� �: !__ l, ���t' �, ; ��
�
- '�—'�--'� f .i��% 3 , ,
, , c-.t�c.cv� .Z�i!/�.�'-�"�� / �� /)ii �`X
/� i/
!./Si�JJ ,.:.G�,/�� _� ' `�'`�iY'll ` ' �/l.?/_!�'� �}/� J � /`. �
/-.•, � /_ r'? � -`�,�_L�„ �i� � .%!) /, T�/'/>
✓ �� • ��1.�i / /�i/. � ��� � /� ✓ ' l i� (, �
�� /" �J��i/,�/ ��, � Z..- i .
/' c • � . .�
� � / �.�/✓Ll��'ry ���J
G i�. � G'` (:,C_ C � - � _' Z� : . � , . � . ��/ .
" � / ..�'t�. �3 � �i,��/i///�J'��i
� // �
��✓_ �L�rri'.�i4 � �- ./-, . <. L -. . -: C � . . _., ; ` .
/ �.-, . . ._ . . �_� .
' � � / / " Ci� �/'� �
l��C.i�� . �t!.�'ZZ/•' / - 9
, L�'��•��i LX .d � ..i._ //JJ./�1_� ,!J� � .�i� � 1�iii�
�'�� �i�Ji) �i.t�J/� ///is��; T� - �'
�! �%�CC�7.�
�
����i» � O
.
! �: <„ � =/,�. � ,% - --
,_.
97 North Oxford Street Saint Paul, Minnesota USA 55104
voice: 65'1.227.7781 data: 651.227.7782 buffalohouse@uswest.net
�PPER LEVEL
��'� ����
�a.(�ir�
: � � C r �
;�, � ; ��.-�
t ( 1`� ✓��^ u �� 5
�
�
.
� Q' _ Z
�
o�tot�r 6, Z000
I ���1�VG �1LE do-�z2-���
�
�
City of Saint Paul
PED
Nancy Homans
1400 City Aall Annex
25 West 4th St.
St. Paul, MN 55102
RE: Buffalo Sober Group L.L.C.
97 North O�ord St. N.
Deaz Nancy:
I have received a public hearing notice for the appeal for the certificate of occupancy
and for the nonconforming use permit.
I have owned my hoine at 1053/1051 Ashland since November 1998. My property is
immediately adjacent to 97 N. Oxford. The winter of 98-99, I had several conversations
with the cazetaker at 97 N. Oxford. He only came by when it snowed or needed
maintenance. The only part that was kept clear of snow was the front sidewaik and the
back driveway. The pazking azea nea�t to the building was never plowed until the new
owners took over in 7an. 2000. I was interested in knowing, why there was no one living
at this building. He reported that the faciiity for mentally ill women had closed down. I
had not seen any one living in this building from the tune I moved into my home in
November 1998. The residents had vacated the premises prior to November 1998. The
only person that I ever had seen coming and going from this building was the cazetaker. I
never saw any lights on in this building.
I have seen the packet of information that was provided to the city by the 97 N. O�ord,
with the Buffalo Sobriety Group appeal. There were a few records from NSP included in
this appeal packet. I sent you a letter dated April 17, 2000, which stated ttiat the electric
and gas bills had dramatically decreased from 1998 to 1999. Please see the enclosed
letter. The nonconfornvng use permit that was given to the previous owner had eacpired
prior to the Buffalo Sobriety Group purchasing it. The pernut was issue to the Oakland
Home to house mentally ili women, not to run an office by Seren M. Larson. As I have
stated before, the only person I had ever seen at the building up until the Buffalo Sobriety
Group entered in January 2000, was the cazetaker.
The Certificate of Occupancy has been revoked because the buiiding is currently zoned
as a duplex. This building is an exact duplicate of the building at 89 North O�ord,
which is currently operating as a 4-Plex. It houses 8-10 people. There aze additional3
apartment buildings on the corner of Ashland & Oxford, which are also multiple dweliing
units. This is creating an over saturation of the community. The building was built for
the purpose of apartments not a boazding house. This type of facility is not agpropriate in
this community because of the quantity of muitiple dwelling units that aze straining this
neighborhood. This facility will place 3 times the quantity of people that a 4-plex would.
This presents this community with a huge pazking problem because the owners want to
place 26 residents this building. They only have 12 off sireet pazking spaces. Where do
� Z4NiNG F1LE °°.�u-Z3�
the other 14 people park? It also creates traffic congestion for the neighborhood with not �
only the tenants but also the food delivery trucks, gazbage trucks and other utility
vehicles that go in and out of this property that aze not associated with the other
apartment buildings in this neighborhood We also have a church with a food shelve and
a junior high school within one block of 97 N. Oxford. This building has only halfthe
number of parking spot as it does residences which leaves the rest to park on the over
crowed streets.
The currenY owners of 97 North Oacford have been in this building illegally since
3anuary 2000. They report that they have invested approximately $100,000 in
remodeling and repairs. T'his building was renovated without the pre-approval of the city
zoning. They still continue to renovate this ficility without regard to the fact that they
may not be able to run their business out of this building legally. The most recent
renovation has continued to take place over the past several weeks. This money that they
have spent should not be considered by the city, as a reason why this building could not
reasonably or economically be used as a confornvng purpose as a 4-plex.
This type of facility does cause a detriment to the character of this neighborhood with
the quantity and type of facility that they aze rnnning. I have enclosed a police report for
the 97 North Oxford building. The death that is listed on 08/Oi/00 was an overdose as
stated by the Homicide Department of St. PauL There was an additional incident on
08/OS/00 that is not listed on the enclosed report this was also a disturbance cali. This
neighborhood is full of young chiidren that aze living around the building and are coming
and going from the near by school.
This neighborhood is adamantly against allowing this building to be rezoned for
nonconforming use. The re-establishment of a nonconforming use requires the owner to �
obtain signatures from two-thirds of the property owner's within 100 feet of the property.
They have failed to provide the St. Paul Planniug Commission (Zoning Section) with this
required portion of their appIication.
The Planning Commission has no other choice but to deny their application for the re-
establishment of a nonconforming use permit.
We are holding a neighborhood meeting on October 9, 2000 at 1060 Laurel Ave.
between 7-8 PM. If someone from your office could attended, to inform the
neighborhood of the process that will take place and the guideline for this permit it would
be greatly appreciated by the neighborfiood to help understand the City's position.
Si#lcerely,
� � -o �_
;
Shannon A. O`Keefe
105�/ 1053 Ashland Ave.
St. Paul, MN 55104
�
. ,...
Y 1
• - � �_ .�_....
� ausuc a�aoRr
r
Compiaint #
�� �:'.
���• :-
���• •c
..•-.
��� .-.•
I�I .G�
, �_
Occur Date & Tune
� - t� Ol-4Z
I ef froti��
Shacif�ci� G' ��e��.
C � ���o/ o��
Address Search: 97 OXFORD ST N(Sector. 1 Grid: 127 ) from �9/01/1999 to 08/03/2000
Retrieved 8 records
0&0111000 23:15
05/21/200p 15:35
�51202000 01:42
OS/162000 22:01
04/30l2000 01:03
��YLO/2000 �22�
10/06/1999 1223
10/O4/1999 08:18
�'�
SPPD RMS QUERY
Address Search
IncideM Type
DEATH
INVESTIGATE
OTHERASSAULT
DISTURB CALLS
FIGHTS
DOBS ,
ALARMS
ALARMS
Disposition Apt#
RCV 127
ADV
RCV
UNF
V �
2 � �
Aov —�l�YWS_ 1
ADV
ADV
I�st�'b
��.
��� ��
� ,�.�
. ��,
� � ✓�'� � I -�
� ZC}�919VG FILF o���ZZ�z3y�
�
Information requested by: (72100Q)
�t !o%« dePz` G�/-a9�- i�i/.
1
Printed at:08/03/2000 11:18:26
��.�". � �:» � '� � � "'"� � :
°��� � � ,? . �= �� _ _ .:
�--, - _ . � -
�.��� --
���- - � -
- ��
- ��� ��'
� ���i1NG FtLE 6�-=`� = �
� _ , Disposition (Disp� Key w� _ _ ..__. - �
for -
- = - � Address Printouts -
RCV = RECEIYED A Police report was written.
CAN = CANCELED
The call was cancaled. No police report was
writfen.
GOA = Gone On Arrival The police went to the scene of the cail and upon
arrival the disturbance(suspects were not there.
No police report was writGen.
� SNR = Services Not Rendered Police services were not required. No police �
report was written. _ .
° ADV = Advised Poiice ha�dled the situation at the scene and .
advised the peopie involved how to deal with it_ _�- .�fi: '�
No police report was writtsn. �� °-=�_ _�`
TRF = Traffc A Traffic Tag (tickeUcitation) was issued. No .� _-�
police report was written.
PCN = Previous Case Number A case number (C.N.) Was previously assigned to __ _
this incident at another time. Check that casa "-:"
numbePs disposition. -= = =
UNF = Unfouoded There was no reason for the cali. No police report =.
was written. _ -_ -
DUP = Duplicate Cali A case number (C.N.) Was previousiy assigned to ;:_ _
-- this incident at another tirne. Cheek that case �:'_
numbe�'s disposition.
DTX = Detox
RPT
The police brought an individual to the Detox _
Cente�. No police report was written.
No Report see advised ( �} �� �
--- �
�
= ��'
' A fic o�-yz
� �ONIl�lG FILE o�-�u�23y le �prYl �a��' �
. D`1Cee � Ctol��cL�
Buffal er roup, .L.C. purchased this�property in January 2000 for approacimately $300,00
Since that time, the owner has invested approximately $100,000 more in remodeling and repairs.
In St. Paul, the revocation of a Certificate of Occupancy has historicaily been used as a remedy for
health and safety violations. The St. Paul Fue Marshall has affirmatively stated that he has no health
or safety concerns regazding the premises in question.
The issue in this case is one of non-confimung use. The building had been operated as "Oakland
Homes Inc.", a Rule 36 community residential facility for mentally ill women. It was sold to
appellanu in February 2000 and an application for a change in non-conforming use permit was fust
filed in Mazch 2000. The owner ofthe building, Serene Lazson, operated her business from Oakland
Homes, Inc. until January 15, 2000, but during a substantial portion of the time the building was
listed for sale, it was not being used as a residential facility.
Appellant now has a pending application fo: a non-conferming use permit pending, and a copy of
that petition is attached as Exhibit A.
Appellant believes that it is eligible for a non-conforming use permit pursuant to the provisions of
Chapter 62, Section 102, subsection i, ¶ 3 of the zoning code because the proposed use of the
properiy, a rooming use for chemically dependent men in recovery, is equally appropriate or more
appropriate to the neighborhood than the previous non-conforming use, because the traffic generated
would be similar to that �enerated by the previous non-conforming use, because the use would not
be detrimental to the existing character of development in the immediate neighborhood, nor would
it endanger the public health, safety or general welfaze, and because the proposed use is consistent
with the comprehensive plan.
Some of the issues presented by the application for a non-conforming use permit aze:
Whether the use made by the previous owner of the building until January 2000
constituted a continuing non-conforming use of the premises such that there was no
"one yeaz gap" between the time appellant purchased the building and the tune
appellant made its own application for a permit.
F�
Even ifthere was a"one year gap", did the fact that the premises were then listed for
sale operate to toll the ruruiing of the clock.
Whether the denial of a non-coFyforming use permit, under the circumstances of this
case, would operate to create an unconstitutional "taking" of the property.
�
Whether the Federal Fair Housing Act required the City to make a reasonable
accommodation in its zoning policies for the residents of the building owned by
appellant. 42 U.S. Code § 3604(fl(3)(B).
The revocation of the Certificate of Occupancy is based upon the fact that appellant has not yet been
� granted a non-conforming use permit. If the Certificate of Occupancy were to be revoked prior to
. .
- " � s �ONING FtLE bG-l22�Z3
-- �
a deternvnation of the permit appiication, the residenu of appellant's building be required to leave
and find new places to live. These persons are valuable but fragile members of the St. Paul �
community. Each is empioyed and sober, and the facility in which they live provides invaluable
support to them in maintaining that sobriety.
Appeilant respectfuily contends that ali interests of all parties will be protected if the Certificate of
Occupancy is reinstated, and if the ultimate question of non-confornung use is resolved wiihin the
zoning arena where it more appropriately belongs.
�
�
/
�!-�'i2
�
From: <Deqni@aol.com>
To: <nancy.homans@ci.stpaul.mn.us>
Date: 10/11/00 1025PM
Subject: Public Hearing
j��o��N� �t�E b n '! 2 Z - Z 3
_ �
�
Deaz Saint Paul Planning Commission and Zoning Committee,
Reference your public hearing notice, file number 00-122-234 conceming the
applicants (Buffalo Sober Group) request for a change of non-confomung use
permit.
Due to work requirements I will be unable to attend the public hearing on 12
October 2000. I would like to express my thoughts on the subject.
We are supposed to be a society governed by laws applicable to all. Ifthe
investors who own 97 North O�'ord are in violation of city rules and have
failed to obtain the required consent of their neighbors within 100 feet,
then the rules require enforcement.
It is my understanding that the investors started operations without
obtaining permission from the proper authorities. If that is indeed the
case, investors should not be able to do what they want and then get approval
after the fact.
From my perspective, deternuning what the procedures should have been, and if
they were followed, is the only issue. At the meeting last night the
investors talked about the need for their type of facility. That use did not
appear to be an issue. The concerns I heard were population density in the
local area and 24 or more people residing in that one building. Since
similar type apartment buildings aze located ne�t to each other along Oxford,
the concerns are reasonable.
In conclusion, your office will have to review the process and procedures.
If those policies were not followed, then the property should conform to the
zoning code.
Sincerely,
David E. Quimby
�
�
�
� o I-9z
_ ( Zt�NtNG FItE bU"fZZ�23�
PETTTION �
We, the undersigned neighbors (homeowners and residents), affected by the
property located at 97 N. Oxford, wis� to express our united opposition to •
the re-zoning and/or re-establishment of a 26year old "non-conformin� Use
permit issued in 1974. We believe that our fragile and densely populated
neighborhood is best served by maintaining the current zoning ordinances
which designate the building as a two=family residence.
.
. ����-��� - � �-
�G. , �3�
. .l I,'llll ��
� ,
�/
���)1J.w.
w
� , �
,. _� , !Y ;.. �
_ %/�
!1'�1`�
....1�
�_ �
�
�
��
�
��
� i
/
�
ADDRESS
pHO1V� lv�'�lvtval.i
z
�
/a�5��.��
/oas �,
/(� l� o C ,�/�
ii �
��� 3 1� s ���
��
�- �j / iJ t LI A
� �/
Kl�-�— / � 2 � A. �
' or7 G�'rh��
2� � - � l -i
aa s�-a ��7
a�� ��� 7
`)'^;oov'
�%'��' � l
r , ',
Zz�
�-Z- � - �z� l
z z � - �s�� z
((7 J � .
�t � !� �3�.
G sl-Za�-7j
� ����
.
i zor��N� F��E o�.�22.z3
PETITION
We, the undersigned neighbors (homeowners and residents), affected by the
property located at 97 N. Oxford, wish to express our united opposition to
the re-zoning and/or re-establishment of a 26year old "non-conformin� Use
permit issued in 1974. We believe thaf our fragile and densely populated
neighborhood is best served by maintaining the current zoning ordinances
which designate the building as a two-family residence.
NAME
���
, ha��
ADDRESS
l0�-� �I ��
�0�{5 1���--�lan�
PHUNE I(/l't�urv�i
E MAIL
L5t- �l'��1 b
65i- 225 -S.�t,6
�5-1- zz,� -�°3�u�
ZZ� �`�
C�
�
�
f
-.
� O1-9Z
. `� ; ZONING FtL.� ��-«Z�23 �
PETTTION ,
We, the undersigned neighbors (homeowners and residents), affected by the
properiy located at 97 N. O�ord, wish to express our united opposition to
the re-zoning andlor re-establishment of a 26year old "non-conformin� Use"
pernvt issued in 1974. We believe that our fragile and densely populated
neighborhood is best served by maintaining the current zoning ordinances
which designate the building as a two-family residence.
NAME
ADDRESS
1�n9 ��
ia�"/ ��,s���� .9�-r
��, /%lS /.v���-�=s
�
1055 Ash�Q�d
�o�� �shl�r�
� .�
-, � �-
� v � i�sa Ashdu�
r
C
PHONE (OPTIONAL)
E-MAIL
�oSl a`'i� - �5
G�Si -L92 —�o7a-
GS/ , -;>—° U— � / ��
� �
�„�-, _'7 Gt Sr -�l 2� 2
l�i� ��b�� 03g3
(�5 ( -2 Z�-��3�
(�S ( - aa�� - oy�,
�
� Zf3NING FILEo�.�z2�Z3 �
PETITION
We, the undersigned neighbors (homeowners and residents), affected by the
property located at 97 N. Oxford, wish to express our united opposition to
the re-zoning and/or re-establishment of a 26year old "non-conformin� Use"
permit issued in 1974. We believe that our fragile and densely populated
neighborhood is best served by maintaining the current zoning ordinances
which designate the building as a two-family residence.
NAME
- „ .�
. � � •
! ./ ' ' �
�� �
)1�.! , i� t=
! � ..1��
. ..s
'[iL'.� � '
. .
r. i .,, t�� i
� , ��
l_J
PHONL'� (UCLlU1VALl
A . �'
: prr } }1 `;�X XK"i N '...^f�' `f 1 �0V`Y � ih.�� Yd
t.
� 5 1 " 4 .✓.�yFi.
`t-m�:,'1"itawrtr.s"44k .3,,{�Ek2«Y""da�FC�a`�"'43'd.i^5' �y'�n$t"&a'wq^
-a�� >e+ n, s. �,-� biu��wu�.. , . q_� s N: w.. ¢�,} ,�ueq�
J b f .+(' ` ' i .
� y sri i
� �k-.""`n ✓ 4 +� 4 ��s�, G6 f ' l+ ��.r= 'tVS;+
:.�'� � T r5' Y
e : : F � lY� .is4�.
�r . . � _�.b . rt '^z F . . ..
y .tr
�i � � �
..,dnSGxww ta .rFr:� � f.�4r � 'T.
e
�
0
1,➢ . ���`�_
... . ..x . . ..
S
(
�
ti jAV_� 1Y'�"i;p.!, qF 4�..k �8" �+t d 4 Y.. h ttF[w '"n"4'iy�Y �^'l P N
. b+x � �+ . � �
t > � ' ..� � , ,, y.J .
�.:;f r.,�+�. ,?i c v s . u:�.i«�o-4m ,'.+6 'k�;�^+'4 " w�,3a^�! a� aPx '�k �&� ni�t
. c r�v...nr� . �„eM�.u:�:u fF�+,�.�i.. ,�..�xinr^-
, �� . ^ : i rv ( � S.. �N�'.� i,; �
h "
a.Y 'C.0 d i _ 41J. M✓p Yt
t Y . ' .. �.
�
���t��� � .Fx� . � , wv. .. e�
i
j
Y r �;
���M �''w.-a� ?. � »£ f a e�.� �t z1 .�"K4'� .r r�£+a' � rvt '& ✓,
� .
�'i.�* .'S.,�,�+�° �,w�,.; w F .s X � ,4 r nw�rxGn i:
:.,� e r 7 s r' r Js
',i„�.u�..v ! .a 2'7. u ._ 4 .,,a...< s w a' ., ... $ '.
�
I n. „ t 6 "' p l:. 1 i, ; M�'
s
.r�;r' rc+' �.. a.w.«, x� 1 w ) ��F•-1
i w � .
� ne
� r'
� � ti
.r ¢ z�.., e F y
� �,
< ri kp � 4z � r � a
�r :, � e � r.', �' y �'� ,�, q � y � < 5;�
4 �
� •5•• f . '� J � � #'a
�' � � c �;
M� y��21 n Y A'f�v6 1`.� aPM � �' 3 Nn,�.r',!"t
s�c �;n t n: v,c�f r F^a�'3�� tr � ..'�5
� ��i
a } � � j� � )
y k
' � A�} ik < M' C ,.. � " 1
1 ]
L ' n � %� F t ., � Y � e
. ,�1 t nb },� �M.v �,. � A !�
+, ;�$ t 8 ; .f Y . d �s C', "` S
1
i,���, �x4 , , ��if , i n.i�',^; � .a � .e!' �'4m � # �� , , ,
.., � rz. �, .,
n T,: s : b
�1� .z. . ::'�.. _
i
k
i
� f:ti �.rA��.�`NrG.N,�>n �+' ' Y ��e+ u!"� ��x r xu9,iv �r ' t� rak a�. R.ers asdcg �:z, -A ,.n`y xV� `��+ v':y
�
,� ri� r: � o iz.. F y nu x .�"
Y l` � ".: t ,' 1 Y '� �T i !
.l A �+T' P .
:�.r,"i +ae�',� �+.y �� %' ,� u r i �Y°' " , 1 R°.
.p k . 4 a i
l t . 1
Dl-gZ
. ZONING COMNIITTEE STAFF REPORT
FTI,E # 00-122-234
1. APPLICANT: BUFFALO SOBER GROUP, LLC AATE OF HEARING: 10/12/00
2. CLASSIFICATION: Change of Non-conforming Use Pemut
3. LOCATION: 97 North O�ord (west side between Ashland and Laurel)
4. PLANNING DISTRICT: 8
5. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: North 75 feet of Lots 27 and 28, Block 42, Summit Park Addition
to Saint Paul, Ramsey County, Minnesota
�
6. PRESENT ZONING: RT-1 ZONING CODE REFERENCE: 62.102(i)(3)
7. STAFF INVESTIGATION AND REPORT: DATE:10/4100 ,. BY: Nancy Homans
8. DATE RECEIVED: March 21, 2000/
August 28, 2000
DEADLINE FOR ACTION: Applicant requested
extension/October 27, 2000
A. PURPOSE: Change ofNon-confornung Use Permit to allow a property previously used as a
Human Service Licensed Community Residential Facility for 32 residents to be used as a
rooming house for 24 residents.
B. PARCEL SIZE: 75 x 100 = 7500 squaze feet
C. EXIST`ING LAND USE: Rooming house for 24 men in early sobriety (established without
zoning pennits on February 15, 2000).
D. 5URROUNDING LANA USE:
North: One and two-family residential, zoned RT-1
East: Single family residentiaUchurch, zoned RT-1
South: Four-family residential (a twin building to 97 N. Oaford), zoned RT-1
West: One and two-family residential, zoned RT-1
E. ZONING CODE CITATION:
Sec. 62.102 (a) details the intent of the Zoning Code's provisions related to nonconforming
uses:
(a) Intent. There exist within the districts established by this code and subsequent
amendments lots, structures, and uses of land and structures that were lawful before this
�
Zoning File #00-122-234
Page two
code was passed or amended that would be prohibited, regulated or restricted under the
terms of this code or future amendments. It is the intent of this code to permit legal
nonconfornring lots, stnxctures or uses to continue until they are removed.
The code recognizes that in some circumstances allowing nonconfornung uses to be
changed to similar or less intense nonconfornring uses, or allowing nonconforming uses to
be reestablished in vacant buildings, may benefit the city and surrounding nei�hborhood.
Some buildings have a long useful life and allowing their continued occupancy for
nonconfornung uses can be more desirable than requiring them to be vacant if they cannot
be converted to conforming uses. Consequently, the code allows conversion of
nonconfomung uses to similar nonconforming uses and allows the planning commission to
reestablish nonconforming uses in vacant buildings if regulated so as to be compatible with
the surrounding neighborhood.
The code recognizes that enlazgements of nonconfornung uses which improve the
appearance and functioning ofthe use can benefit the sunounding neighborhood. The
code allows the enlargement of nonconforming uses when found to be compatible with
surrounding neighborhoods.
•
Sec. 62.102(fl details the Zoning Code's provisions related to Nonconforming uses of �
structures. (Relevant provisions excerpted.)
( fl Nonconforming uses of structures, or structures and Zand in combination.
Nonconfornung uses of structures, or structures and land in combination, are subject to
the following regulations:
(1) A nonconfomvng use may continue.
(2) A nonconforming use may be changed to a use pemutted in the district in
which it is loca4ed or to a new nonconforming use if the new nonconlornung use is
also listed in the same clause of the code as the nonconfomung use. A
nonconforming use may be changed to a use pemutted in the district in which the
nonconforming use is first allowed, or a principle use pernritted in a district that is
more restrictive than the district in which the nonconforming use is first allowed,
provided the planning commission approves a pemut for the change as set forth in
clause (i)(3).
(3) When a nonconfomung use changes to a use permitted in the district or in a
more restrictive district, the nonconforming use shall not thereafter be resumed.
(7) When a nonconfornung use is discontinued or ceases to exist for a continuous
period of three hundred si�y-five (365) days, the building, or building and land in
combination, shall thereafter be used in conformance with the regulations of the �
Ol�`t L
. Zoning File #00-122-234
Page three
district in wkuch it is located, unless the planning commission approves a permit to
reestablish the nonconfomung use as set forth in clause (i)(5).
Sec. 62.102(i) outlines the planning commission's authority in granting pernuts for the
establishment and change of nonconfornung uses.
(i) Nonconforming use permits The planning commission may approve, modify and
approve, or deny nonconfomung use pernuts. To ensure the public welfaze is served, the
commission may attach conditions to the pernuts including, but not limited to, conditions
concerning appearance, signs, off-street parking or loading, lighting, or perFormance
characteristics, such as noise, vibration, glare, dust, or smoke.
The planning commission in approving nonconfornung use permits may allow a
nonconforming use for a specified period of time and then require its removal by attaching
an expiration date to the permit if the commission makes the following findings: (1)
termination of the nonconforming use or the continued vacancy of the building in which
the nonconforming use was located would cause significant hardship; (2) permitting the
nonconforming use for a period of time will facilitate the transition to a conforming use;
and (3) permitting the nonconforming use for a period of time is consistent with the public
health, safety, comfort, morals, and welfare. The period of time for which the permit is
valid shall be deternuned in each case by the commission and shall be based on the extent
of the hardship.
'�' ..
The planning commission shall heaz and decide nonconforming use permits in accordance
with the procedures and requirements of section 64300. The planning commission may
consider the fotlowing nonconforming use permits:
(1) Establishment of legal nonconforming use status. The planning commission
may grant legal nonconforming status to the use of structures which fail to meet
the standards of section 62.102(b) if the commission makes the following findings:
a. The use occurs entirely witlun an existing structure;
b. The use is similar to other uses pemutted within the district;
c. The use or use of similar intensity permitted in the same clause of the zoning
code or in a more restrictive zoning district has been in existence continuously for
a period of at least ten (10) years prior to the date of the application.
d. The off-street parking is adequate to serve the use;
e. Hardship would result if the use were discontinued;
£ Rezoning the property would result in "spot" zoning or a zoning inappropriate to
surrounding land uses;
u
Zoning File #00-122-234
Page four
g. The use will not be detrimental to the existing character of development in the
unmediate neighborhood or endanger the public health, safety, or general welfare;
h. The use is consistent with the comprehensive plan; and
i. A notarized petition of two-thirds of the property owners within one hundred
(100) feet of the property has been submitted stating their support for the use.
The application for the pernut shall include the petition, evidence of a ten-yeaz
period of existence, evidence that conversion of the use and structure would result
in hardship, a site plan meeting the requirements of section 64.102, floor plans, and
other information as required to substantiate the pemut.
(3) Change of nonconfornung use. The planning commission may allow a
nonconforining use to change to a use pernutted in the district in which the
nonconfoz�ming use is first allowed, or a use pernutted in a district that is more
restrictive than the district in which the nonconfornting use is first allowed if the
commission makes the following findings:
�
a. The proposed use is equally appropriate or more appropriate to the
neighborhood than the existing nonconfomung use;
b. The traffic generated by tke proposed use is similaz to that generated by the �
existing nonconfomung use;
c. The use will not be detrimental to the existing character of development in the
immediate neighborhood or endanger the public heakh, safety, or general welfare;
and
d. The use is consistent with the comprehensive plan.
The planning commission's findings may be a general rule or findings in a specific
- -
- - -
case.
F. HISTORY/DISCUSSION:
Oakland Home, a licensed community residential facility for persons with mental iliness, was
established at 97 N. O�cford in about 1968.
On September 25, 1980, the City Council adopted amendments to the Zoning Code defining
community residential facilities and regulating them as special condition uses consistent with
the provisions of State law included in the Human Services Licensing Act. The amendments
allowed community residential faciliries for 7 or more facility residents in the RT-1 (Two-
family) zoning district as special condition uses.
�
� Zoning File #00-122-234
Page five
On April 11, 1986, a Planning Commission resolution (#86-28) was adopted establishing legal
status for the Oakland Home as an eacisting community residential facility licensed by the
Minnesota Department of Human Services for 36 residents with mental illness in an RT-1
zoning district. In granting the special condition use permit, the Commission modified the
following conditions:
A. Number of residents served. The code limited the number of residents to 16. The
condition was modified to allow 36 residents.
B. Minimum distance between community residential facilities. The code required that
residential facilities be a minimum of 1320 feet apart. Two facilities were within the
required distance (Turning Point at 1089 Portland and Pineview Residence at 69 N
Milton). The condition was modified.
C. Off-street parking. The code required that there be one parking spaces for every two
facility residents—or 18 spaces for the facility. At the time there was parking for 2 vehicles
available on the property. Because no residents owned or operated their own vehicles, the
Commission modified the requirement.
� The Zoning Code was subsequently amended on June 27, 1991 to define Licensed Human
' . Service Community Residential Facilities and to first allow such facilities for 17 or more
persons in the RM-1 Multiple Family zoning district as special condition uses. As a result, the
Oakland Home became a legally nonconfornung use.
Changes in health care financing provisions and State policy, resulted in the general
downsizing of residential facilities for persons with mental illness throughout Minnesota
beginning in the mid-1990s.
Ramsey County initiated a down-sizing plan for Oakland Home and the last resident moved
out on August 21, 1998. The county's contract with Oakland Home expired on September
30, 1998 and was not renewed.
In a discussion with LIEP staff the applicant posited that the use had not been discontinued
because the owner of the building had maintained an office in the building and continued to
pay for telephone, electricity and heat. The Zoning Administrator responded that that case
would best be made to the Planning Commission and that substantial documentation would be
required.
G. DISTRICT COUNCIL COMMENT: No comment had been received at the time this staff
report was prepared.
�
Zoning File #00-122-234
Page six
H. FINDINGS:
1. On 7anuary 15, 200Q four members of Buffalo Sober Group, LLC purchased the property at
97 North O�'ord and, on February 15, 2000, Buffalo Sober House was opened, providing
permanent housing and supportive services to 24 men in the early stages of sobriety.
2. A subsequent inspection by City staff from the Department of License, Inspecrion and
Environmental Protection (LTEP) concluded that the use—a rooming house--was inconsistent
with the zoning code. Rooming houses are first pemutted as special condition uses in the
RM-1 zoning district.
An application for a Change in Nonconfomung Use Pemut was submitted on March 21, 2000.
Evidence submitted in support ofthe applicant's contention that the use had not been
discontinued were:
a. A statement from the building/business owner that she had operated her business out of
the structure until January 15, 2000.
b. Electric bill indicating that electrical and gas service to the building was not interrupted
over the period.
c. A statement from US West indicating that the buiiding owner was responsible for the
phone bill associated with her business in the building over the period.
�
On April 11, 2000, planning staffwrote a letter to the applicant detailing its conclusion that �
the previous use had, indeed, been discontinued and that permission to continue to use the
property as a rooming house would require a pemut to re-establish a nonconfornung use. The
applicants were given the option of withdrawing their application for a Change in
Nonconfornung Use Pernut and applying, instead, for a pernnt to re-establish a non-
conforming use. Their application fee would be applied toward a new application.
In a subsequent phone conversation on April 14, 2000, the attomey representing the applicant
agreed with the planning staff's interpretarion of the code and asked that the zoning
committee's consideration of the case be delayed for 30 days so thaf they could review their
options and begin work on obtauung the consent petition required for an application to re-
establish a non-conforming use. He further indicated that his clients were led to believe by the
building's owner and/or realtor that the building's use as a residential facility had somehow
been "grandfathered in." Later that afternoon, he faYed a formal Request for Continuance,
waiving the statutory requirements for a decision on the application within 60 days of its being
filed.
On May 22, 2000, a request for an additiona160-day continuance—until the August 17, 2000
zomng committee meeting—was faxed to the Zoning Committee by the applicant's attorney,
again waiving the requirement for a decision within 60 days.
�
i
� Zoning File #00-122-234
Page seven
a!-q z
4. On August, 28, 2000, unable to obtain a sufficient number of signatures on a consent petition,
the applicants resubmitted an application for a Change in Nonconfomung Use Pemut. The
substantial additions to the application—beyond those submitted in March—were:
a. A copy of the Coldwell Banker Burnet listing (list date: February 25, 1999) for the
property indicating that the building was a"fully functional group home-32 person brick
structure."
b. A copy of the lodger agreement.
Sec. 62.102(i)(3) of the Zoning Code outlines four conditions for a Change in Nonconfornung
Use. Those conditions and the applicant's ability to meet them are as follows:
a. The proposed use is equally appropriate or mare appropriate to the neighborhood than
the existing nonconforming use;
This condition is met. Both uses are congregate living facilities. The proposed use is
smaller than the previous use, and, therefore, may be judged to be more appropriate.
Boarding houses—like licensed human service community residential facilities for 17 or
more residents--aze first pernutted, with a special condition use permit, in the RM-1
(multiple family) zoning district.
��; b. The traffic generated by the proposed use is similar to that generated by the existing
nonconforming use;
This condition is not met. While there are fewer total residents of the current facility than
lived in the previous facility, none of the previous residents owned cazs or had licenses.
There were transported in a van and had, neighbors report, few visitors. The cars on the
site belonged to program staff
While the current applicant reports that many of the current residents have lost their
driving privileges for some period of time, surrounding residents report a marked increase
in traffic related to both residents and visitors.
Were this facility located in an RM-1 (Multiple family) zoning district and required to
obtain a special condition use pemut as a rooming house, among the conditions would be
that the lot area for 24 residents in 18 guest rooms be 21,000 square feet. The current loi
is 7500 square feet.
It would also be required to haue 12 off-street pazking spaces. While 12 parking spaces
are shown on the site plan, 9 of the spaces are 8 feet wide rather than 9 feet as is normally
required, 1 space is in the required front yazd (not allowed under Sec 64.104(11), 10
spaces are in the required side yard (not allowed under Sec. 64.104(11), and the other 2
spaces are within 4 feet of a side lot line (not allowed under Sec. 64.104(11).
�
Zoning File #00-122-234
Page eight
c. The use will not be detrimentaZ fo the existing characfer of development in the immediate
neighborhood or endanger the pubZic health, safety, or general welfare;
This condition is met. There is no evidence that facilities of this type have any detrimental
impact on properry values, or on public health, safety or welfare.
d. The use is consistent with the comprehensive plan.
This condition is met. The City's Housing Plan calls for the preservation of existing rentai
units and creation of new units providing supportive housing for persons who are or are at
risk of being homeless.
6. On the central point, however, of the appropriateness of the application, staff finds the
following:
a. The Zoning Code (Sec. 60.221) defines Use as the "principal purpose for which Iand or a
building is being occupied."
s
b. A previous use—a Licensed Human Service Community Residential Facility--had been
discontinued for more than 365 days when the applicants assumed ownership of the
building on 7anuary 15, 2000. Ramsey County staff indicates that the last resident moved
out of the building on August 21, 1998. The contract between Ramsey County and the
building owner/service provider formally eacpired on September 30, 1998.
c. The Zoning Code states: When a nonconfornung use is discontinued or ceases to exisY for •
a continuous period of three hundred sixty-five (365) days, the building, or building and
land in combination, shall thereafter be used in conformance with the rea lations of the
district in which it is located, unless the planning commission approves a permit to
reestablish the nonconfomung use as set forth in clause (i)(5). (Sec. 62.102(fl(7))
d. The applicant has not applied for a permit to re-establish a nonconforming use.
e. It is the intent of the zoning code that this building revert to a use permitted in the zoning
district unless this or some other non-confomung use which can meet the conditions
detaiied in Sec. 02. i"v2(i3(5 j—inciuding a sor.ser,t getit;�n �f `L�� ^vF �ii.°. S:1'_; Q`.1.^.`�:^.g
property owners—is established.
L STAFF RECOMMENDATTON:
Based on findings 1-6 above, staff recommends denial of the application.
�
/
NONCONFORMING USE PERIYIIT APPLICATION
: 'F, ` �I Department of Planning and Economic Development
�� Zoning Seclion
II00 City Hall Anner
25 West Fou�th St�eet
Saint Paul, MN 55101
266-6589
o i-qZ
APPLICANT I Name Buffalo Sober Groun LT�
1 Address 400 Selby Avenue, Apt, 22g
City St. Paul St � Zip 55102 Daytime Phone 651/602-0226
Name of owner (if different)
Contact person (if
PRdPERTY Address/Location 97 North O:cford Street St. Paul N1nI
LOCATION
Le al description North 75 ft. of Lots 27 and 28 Block 42
S�nit Park Addition to St. Paul,
Ramsev Countv. ��iinnesota Current 2oning g�-1
(atfach additiona/ sheet ii necessary)
:. ���
TYPE OF PERMIT: Appfication is hereby made for a Nonconforming Use Permit under provisions of
Chapter 62, Section 102, subsection i, Paregraph 3 of the Zoning Code.
The permit is for:
� Change from one nonconfortning use to another (para. 3 in Zoning Code)
❑ f2e-estabfishment of a nonconforming use vacant for more than one year (para. 5)
� Legal establishment of a nonconforming use in existence at least 10 years (para. 1)
❑ Enlargement of a nonconforming use (para. 4)
SUPPORTING INFORMATION: supply the information that is applicabie to your type of permit.
CHANGE IN USE: P�/Past use Oakland Home, a 32-resident DHS Ru1e 36
or ca?gmu�ity residential facility
RE-ESTABLISHMENT: Proposed use _ Rocsninq House for 24 residents
Additional information for all applications (attach additional sheets 'rf necessary}:
See attached SuDnorting Infornation sheet
�
site pian is attached ❑
ApplicanYs signature �
Dates�-t�? City agent
.
Supportinp Information Attachment
The property wili be used as a rooming house, providing permanent living
facilities for men in eariy sobriety. Admission is limited to men demonstrafing 30
days of continuance of abstinence from mood-altering chemicals, current
employment, and a commitment to continuing recovery. Exemplary behavior by
all residents will be assured by the daily presence of an owner and an on-site
manager. Residents will occupy 12 single rooms, four double rooms and two
double suites, and all have access to six fuil bathrooms, two large lounges, a
library, laundry facilities, and a professional quality kitchen. The physical
facilities have been upgraded (but not expanded) from the past use as a Rule 36
community residential facility through the investment of approximately $100,000
by the new owner. The new residents, as former sufferers of chemical
dependency, are subject to protection under the Federai Fair Housing
Amendments Act of 1988 and as such are entitled to reasonabie accommodation
in the administration of zoning ordinances by the City of St. Paui.
The property qualifies for a Non-conforming Use Permit under Section
52.102(I)3 for the following reasons:
�
(a) Use as a rooming house for sober and
recovering men with healthy lifestyles �
and oufside empioyment is equally or
more appropriate to the district than the
previous non-conforming use as a
D.H.S. Rule 36 community residential
facility, which continued through
September, 1998. Shortly thereafter,
the property was put up for sale, as a
group home, with the formal listing with
Coldwell banker first appearing on
February 25, 1999. See attached MLS
"Property fnformation° sheet, reflecting
the property listing as a"fuliy functional
group home -- 32-person brick
structure." Meanwhile, the former
owner, Oakiand Home, Inc. continued
doing business at the facility until
January 14, 2000 (see attached letter of
Serene M. Larson, together with
Dac# 1258810\1
�
� ;�'
*�
�
Telephone and utility
bi!{s/notices}. The proposed use
as a rooming house began in
February, 2000, and an
application for a change in non-
conforming use permit was first
filed in March, 2000.
(b) The proposed use wili not be
detrimentai to the existing character of
development in the immediate
neighborhood, nor will it endanger the
public health, safety or general welfare;
(c) The proposed use will have less impact
upon neighborhood traffic and parking
than the former non-conforming use,
since there will be fewer residents (24
opposed to 32). Also, a higher
percentage of the residents will use
public transportation rather than private
vehicies, due to past problems with
substance abuse. The facility has
available 12 off-street parking spots.
No on-site programming atfracting
visitors will take place; and
(d) The proposed use is consistent with the
comprehensive plan.
Attachments
M�S listing for 97 North Oxford
2. Statement of former owner
3. Buffalo House brochure
4. Lodger Agreement (residency rules)
Dock 1258819\1
2
a!-9z
AUG MON 11:32 AM CB BURNEI HIGHLAND _ FRX N0. 651 698 9356 P, 02
� .
Proper#y Irrformation � �
gurtrrE r,�:� .
�..+�w aoaw.. u w:, ��c>
fr•:o�ma•JM Oeem�id FoOabie 6ul No� (ivarn :!eea
LN:1404882
PF24pE RTY TYpE - 6 INVESTMENT - IV
SP: $290,040 pMD:i1/18l98 DOM: 26B SO:
tP: $299,QOQ LD: 02/25l99 Xp
ADDRESS:9'l OX�ORD ST N ' 7AX: $5,026
MUN: Sf Paul ZJP; 55104 TWA:$5,374
Aft: 746 SU6:1 bIV; 9 C�7U:RAMS ASB:$0
LOT: 7$X100 iJE: 0 N1: N2:
DtR: N ON LEX FR.SUMN1iT TO ASHLAND(E)TO OXFORD (N)
FULLY FUNC710NAL GROUP HOME-32 PERSON BRfCK STRUC7URE,4000
F'SF,fMPECCABGF MECFif\NICS,RESIDENTIAL LOCATlON,IMPRESSIVE
OPERATION,$50Ct000++y�ARLY GROSS,FULLY FURNISHED.
LGL: N 75' OF LOTS z7 AND 28 SLK 42 ZON: 4+'
#U MO$ ANN$ ANIV EXPENSE
1 �a $a $OFU: GAS
Scecia! Funding
Czsh
Z@ S0 SOEL• �Q FSZ: 1600 PID: 022823230130
3 @ �Q SOWSW: $0 FSF: 400� M7G:S0 INT; O.D00
4@ Sd SOIN: OD: 0
5 a� �ytl $OTR: �Sp AGI: $525,000 PlN; 5Q MC2: N MA2: N
5@ $0' 30MN; $0 AGE: $Q FR1: CALL LIS7ER FOR DETAILS
7 �°� g0' SpC7: Sp ANl: s�0 pf22: YEAR BUILT UNCERTAfN
i'dS: / RP: SQ
71: `�0 �O7E: 3Q SpN: G25 St. Paul SDP; 632-3730
AGN: B MC�I.ALElH SMITH 83G-1725 BC:2.7 SA: 0 NA: N
OFC: RE/N7l1X 12LAL ESTA7c GUI6E t.0: 6077 APT: 612$87-�208
Assumablc
Nct Ass�mahin
B�somQnt
Walkout
rWI
Finished (Liveabte}
UaytighVLOOkout Windows
Egress Windpw;
Cxi�Gng Financing
Conyentional
Main Extcrior
Wood
Brick/SLOnc
Fuoi
hlaturaf Gos
lioat
Hot W2ter
Inclusions
c�r� s;;s
List Type
Exciusiv� qr�ency
Misc
Party Roo.m
HPI'dWOOd FIVOfS
Nalural Woodwork
Fire Spr�n�der System
Fencinc
Nfindow Air
220 Volt
Furnishod tJnits
Num6er of Ranges
Two
Num 12etrig
Two
Owncr Ezpenses
Taxes
tosurance
watedSe�n�er
Electric
Fu01
Maintenance/Rep�ir
Janitcriat
Trash
Snovr
Lewn
OfhEr
Parking
Open
Other
Roofing
Fla!
TarlGrave[
Other
Ren1 Per Foot
Other
SBWBY
Ciry Sewe: - Ccr,neoted
SaI¢ Includes
Busincss
Building
Land
Inventory
Fixture/Equipmea!
Other
Sfyle
A.oartrnants/t4tufti Eamity
Basiness Opportunity
7erms
Conventional
8234 SAG: �5346 - ST: SOLD
7t1: 32
/ 98 / N MAp; E4 107
LNA:
ASp; N
N3: YBL:1907 NNIC;N
TenantExpensas
o!har
�ac: a � ss
VAC; N �
Currenf UsB
HoteilMo;e�
8usines5 Service
Professianaf Service
L'( ii�c2S
Fea[ing Common
Electric Common
Hot Watar COmmon
Wafer
ciry Water- Connected
Phofo Code
Tof<e R4ain listing Photo
Pho:o 7aken
.
{c) Copyr�gttt, Earnet COLDWEL4, BANKER - �URt3E7
HomeQ�vst
o�-yz
AUG-21-2000 MON 11�32 AM CB BURNET HIGHLAND ; FAX N0, 651 E98 9356 P, 03
,� - ,
�� �` Property 1`r�fe�r�r�iation �
SCJl2N�'T �
; IIJVE'STMEIY? ��
�^�-�aikn Deemad Ro-taMO 8�: NG Gwrantr.cq
•�- ezg�� SALE PR10E: �290,000 - ST: SOLD
TU: 32 STY: AP7lMUL / BUS OPP
7ERMS: CO�! 1 SPC 1 CSH
DOM: 2fiG OMD: 11/18/99 FIN: 3
ADbRES5:97 OXFORD ST N 7AX� $5,026
M'JN: StPauf Z1P: 55104 T4VA:5�,374
AR: 740 SU8:1 DIV: 7 COU:R.4hAS AS8:50
tOT: 75X100 ME:O N1: ryp;
DIf2: N OM LEX FR.SUMMIT TO ASHLAND(E)TO OXFORD (N)
FL1LI_Y FUNCT10t�1n1_ GROUP HOME-32 PERSON BRIC3C STRUCTUftE,4000
FSF,4FAPECCAf.3LG MECHANiCS,RESIDENTIAL. LOCATION,IMPRESSIVE
OPERA71pN,�500000•i+YEARLY GROSS,FULLY FURNISHED.
LGL: M1! 7� OF LOTS 27 AND 28 BLK 42
#U MO$ ANN$ ANN EXPENSF EXT: WO / BS
� ��' SO' SO HEA: H4V
2 �+� $t7 �40FU; GAS
3 a, $Q $OEL: $0 $SM: W/ F/ L J D/ E
4 @ ga $OWSW: 50 WAT:CONNECT
$ @ SO' � $OIN: SEW:CONNECT
6 CG �(J SOTR�
L1ST NUMBER:'140488?
MAP:E4 i07
ASP: N
PRfC: OP I OT YBL- 1907
N3:
RUM.SX RFAL ESTATE GUiDE
8 MGHALEIH SM17H 836-t725
PHN: 952-884-5404 BC: 2.7 NA:
AP7: 6f2-B87-12Q8 SA: 0 1.!
ZON: 4+�•
PID: 022823230130
7RM: CON / 5PC 1 CSH
MTG: 30 lNT:0.000
SD FSZ: 1600 EXF: CON
��i S�7 SOMN: SO FSF: 4000 PIN: 022823230130
MS: / GT: $0 AGl: 5525,000 5DN:625S;.Pau1
T�� 50 $ORP: SO AGE: $0 TE: $Q ANI: 50
. �l . Z S � `� C
(cj L'apyright, 6urnet COLI7WELL'BANKER - gURNET
Ob; 0 ASM: N
2MC: N 2MA: N
SDp: 632-3736
VRC: N
HomeC]uzs:
��`'-l�0 ` �°
'-t:�-�: -� - �
=�%-
:�::-= _ . �
: _� :;�. "�
i::� =.�0.
__..0 �
C
O
�
�
�
�
d
�
�
3
�
�
s
V
H
W
W
�
X > �j 'o O
� - u �y
-� " �.�i m
� a r � a O
� 0 T L Q L
L A d
� � � � Q
C � C C ,�
U � C L
U � CI
0o p� `^ = O +�
a � � c � O
1] � 6. . v L N
� " `-' �e E n. �
a�+ � �� � � O C
o '"
Q V c �
u N � � m b
� � � � — v
� . � w
- o � K .`°,
� S °" � � o 0
a o �
c�i .i °' '� � „��_. °°
_ _ � > 'O �
m e� i r y
v c ro c � 3
� � � � w o
L Y �
N � d N �^ O_ U C
id u p � � C! � �
� k C L �
O O CJ � O V C v
'r- C C LL N Q L
�� -- `:
� �
�
O
O
N
„'� Y
N �
--N y
H
>-y — P ;
p. eo n
' N, n Q V l
z_y`=1� �O 3
= r �' �
N P N
� N N �
., y N O
� � � p
0. �
i+ _
< G . '
O O O
�n �n O
t� N T
rt t�1 tTl
���
�
N
���
m m m
N (V —
�
Q
F
�
�
C
O
�
O
O
a
�
�
C1
O
� O
C p
� O
�o
L �
3 �
V v�
C1 '
N y
� c
L
F v
Y� �
0
tPr
�
�
Y
w
3
O
L
O
a
i
�
0
� O
C p
� O
��
J �
U N
H
41 C
L �
F- �
N �
d
N
N �
� �
� �
� �
c �
N
E 'o
>. u
tE V
a n
O �
C
Q O
v
� b
G � C
q �O �
O � L
O � ��.
�
O � C
y} � a�
o�=
N � L
� � _>
� � >
= C
v v
Q E - �o
T y � �
O_ -
J L � � y
� F v � �
N . � G! L
� � � � W
O ,- `e s
L 'o � � O
T � N � �
L L N � Q
c -� v " ai
o � o '„ u `
E ai o�o y� L
p C V , �� N
�l pQ
W � � � Q� '�
w �_�
C�J N - �i � L U'
OO V C C �- Y
O � � ro (�
C Qj V '
N � v v � �
i n O "O �
O O V �'= v
O s_ C i C
C � �
O rl a`d a L
. V'? p � � N
� O v d 3
� N
C � in N W O
� c u
h
�
L
�N
C
�
s
Y
�
L
�
�
�.
0
s
�
C1 'p
� � j
C � "O
N v C
� � �
� i N
L C .
v �n O G
,'�] y T CI
m v 'u aa
> F. � d
�
� � � O
L U �
,e � eo Y
N � L G
n o � L
4. �
bp � W
C v
� �Y y l
� t �
� 3 � d
� O
� � L - O
� - � ;
u
� � � N
C v � �
_ a
Q , �`v �
�
/
��
�
�.
�-
3
.�
O
_
�
�
m
0
b0
�
d
d
m
L
C
N
N
L
.
V
L
�
O
�
H
�
0
O
E
�
d
N
.N
�
N
3
�
�
c
.�
O
u =
V
° �v
� u
c
u 'L
i QJ
� Y
--
W
.�
c
�
�
v
C C
G
O
U
N
C
�
u
C
h
v
E
N
w
Q
C
u
d
A
N
N
m
H
O
L
�
V
O
L
bU
�
�
N
3
0
N
3
Q
a
w
�'_.+
N
�
N
w
N
J
d
C
c
.�
.�
O
t
L
m
O
�
0
C
0
.�
d c
L
0
>
O
=
T
C
CJ
3
�
ti
C
O
.�
�
0
u
-�
L
0
�
O
N
c
0
ci
Y
�
�
�
u
O
n.
�
.3
s
3
N
a c
C
O
�
T
�
0��0 �
v
� a
C
L
� C
0. C1
� �
L
C O
O
� �
� O
.�
� i
N
. �
c Y
O ,
L
�V �
CJ t
'a u
� -�
O s
'� N
V C
d �
a �
i° u
� _
Z_ v
� �
�E m
n �
O
L U
� L
v o
L N
� O N
O
c
d
i O_ 3
O �
Y �
S K C
y u �
� � L
�
L
� � �
L �
J . �
O
;3v
Y 3
� d v
� p N
a
� c >.
w` ° E
L
C
V
a
A
m
�
Q
O
�
3
m
O
v
�
C
a
a
a
F
c
a
�
d
�
:c
0
£
N
c
O
O
C
v
(E
>
c
a
d
N
v
.
O
L
a
�
V
.?
�
N �.
F L OO
n �
�
d v v
N j
L � �
C N Z
O �N O
E a �
C �
L � m
C
N N �
C
L O
� O �
G
n p_ s
r
a+ Ql �
m
o. N O
CI 41 y
� "' L
� �. c
N � N
� C V
0
O � O
(E V �
L 7
% v
W
n u
�
Q
�
v
.3
�
C
�
O
V
n
�
v
7
�
d
O
�
A
R
d
u
L
N
d
�
L
�
�
C
O
u
�
;
�
c
�
N
�
'�o
v
ro
C
v
�
�
c
L
�
c
�
ot =9�--
�; -�--�' .'�;-�., ,
��_ _' _
�r_ � .C;6e_-j.
�"y - .
•� '�
� ❑
:�`" �''._:-._ .
i 3� -
'- '
s+
� c
N E
O
O 0
= v
v �
N
� 'Q
T u
c�
U `�
a �
_ y
u �
C '
W �
c
_ 3
� �
�
J �:'
u d
° v
L
C
u m
c �
m
J N
� d
O
m
b
a
L
N
o'
_
�
m
N
2
N
�
Q
N
�
O
s
m
d
o'
O
w
m
N
�
Q
C
0
c
.�
O
N
w
�
O
1)
� p
� N
P �
W �
:° w
L '�
v C
�
= �
c
J �
�a C
d W
V y�j
G t
't3 3
N
�
O L
L �
y c
C �
N �
U
U �
—a — ° r '
L G
O "'
b�0 —'�
v d
a C
O
C
�
L
v
>
�
v
3
N
v
�
a
�
0
0
L
�
v
N
N
v
L
�
?
�
w
N
N
a
�
�
c
d
N
0
0
m
B
0
v
L
�
E
O
O
W
1
3
L
m
'o
_
�
�
m
N
C
m
m
m
�
d
Y
�
:n
0
O
N
b
�
O
O
y L R1
� <u c
a � O
�
� �a .°�'
�
X F a
V1
�
� °' v
L � �
O V `
�C �
N L v
� 3 ;�
C �
N N
M T
C p �
G
v �
� N N
v � '
d. �
O u
� � n
c �
O '
� � i
C � i
� o c
�
�
r
0
m
f'i
c
c�
L
—
.�,
_
c
�
WO
K
�
�
0
�
y ^
�.�/
O
s
0
�
�
.�Q
O
�
W r
C
P
m
v
W
ti
b
3
2
O
W
m
'D G
W N
L Qf
ro D
�
H
.c s
� u
N
d
N
� �
W W
a
N Y
�V
�
� �
� L
h
U ,
:°. v
� �
O C
�
m
H a L i
ro
N �
O C
N
i L
j �
O Y
C
�
N
N
C
O
a
L
n.
�
0
W
w
>
O
d.
u
N
N
�
�
N
�
C
L
O
c
�
O
.�
�
0
�
�
61
v
v �
w v
� �L
W -0
L �
U
N
C
�
b
A
7
G
>
Q
E
�
O
L
�
�
O
O
N
d
O
J
u
i
�
W
�
O
c
O
.�
Y
u
�
U�
v
d
�
u
d
W
�
� Y O
O �
� ro ;
w r
� .'
O
O - �
N
m > a
u W u
� o w
'_ d
G O
v ° a
� L
N
b d C
o v �e
� L F
L N u
u �
V � �
� v �
i
y � V
"O _C =
c �
� � h
� y
� �C
H 3
� ry
T
v
i
d
O
C
L
N
O
L
u
Y
u
�
d
V
T
V
�
N
�
F-
�
0
N
�
t
�3
L
N
w
C
7
0
�
L
O
�
� L
bo �
C
� O
3 L
C V
u
H �
3 �
N �
L �
b C
i N
N
� �
Y i
N
L �
m a
d p
� d
N
� v
C L
�
� N
O �
O
LL
ai
.n u
� G
V :".
O
C
3
v
O
3
iU
O
d
�
�.
�
�
m
i
m
�
O
N
m
�
L
�
a
d
c
c
O
3
N
O
�
3
v
O
0
C
�
N
C
�
N
�
v
C
N
0
d
C
L
N �
2 �
N �
b '
2
H �
L
O �
� °°
v �
F L
ro
ci a
3
C W
> �
Q N
N
U
C
N
�L
W
a
�
0
�
N
O
n
O
�
N
W
=
�
�
u
� �
L L
a !"
ro
y� O
u x
c a
'° a
C
� �
O �
� �
L
O `
h m
3 �
C
� �
� �
_ u
N u
N
u L
�
H �
� c
O �
�
O �
� c
N
m �
� � O C
L y
; � �
C
� � U �
u O
� �
� = N
_ C � �
—� �� � o
i � O r+
O U V
d u V a'
� L � �
i �
C A �
r O u >
N C �L
v L � c
v
a
O ,� U �
n O � L
�
� � � n
U
= O � N �
= v L m
N a �,
O � L �
v
� 'X W >
� �y L O
m E o n.
�
N
>
O
U
W
0
_
�
L
0
bO
c
J
U
0
3
u
w
�
E
0
U
c
N
c
O
O
0
N
�
N
V
�
L
O
N
-
d
L
�
d O � 'D
~ N � A
O
E w ro �
.+ �,
a o- V ° - '
N
C V L Y
� � � Y
(d � L
� � 0.
'" .-' = -o
N v �
- p - O �y N
N
� ,� � �
L L �
A �
V
N � O �
� o �
� L
T N �
� �
�! b
-� N L
E o o c
�J L � �
i � � �
r L U �
� � 3 �
O s
� C u f-
C
�
�
L
C
?
�
4
0
�
O
� ^l
W
L
13
�
�
�
^
�
S
i
O
�_
= y
ro v
C �
o U
� C
L 3
L N
� u
O ,_
E °'
O '-�
w �
_
c �
r
v �
v
� " C
v
„ m
- �
N °'
>„ C
`O O
2' �
O �
N -
� �
C1 ._
G
O
L
O
�
L
O
V
m
W
Q
�
C
�
v
N
t^.
s
b
�
N
.�
0
N
3
N
�
u
m
u
V
�
f0
�
O
2
O
�
�
C
r
G
V
�
.�
L
W
N
V
C
�
L
N
�
N
G)
h
m
U
L
�
m
L
O
Y
�E
�X
Q
a
C
E
�
0
V
T
N
�
L
a
0
C
c
0
�
N
C
C
O
v
�
�1
>
0
T
U
O
V
0
0
CI
u
r
L
O
�
March 16, 2000
I ope-rated my business out of Oakland Home, Inc. at
97 North Oxford St. until January 15, 2000. The phone
number was 651-227-7781.
Sin re1y,
-��-yCN�2 Z �— - Li ��.��.
Serene M. Larson, President
Oakland Home, Inc.
�
�
�
O 1'-�Z
M1�r-16-2000 04:51pm From-U.S.NEST COA6IlINICATIONS 7012226096 T-i52 P.002/002 F-267
unextyod
bSasch 16, 2p00
To Who¢ Zt Mav Concarn:
Oaklan3 Home Inc, Serene Lazson, waa raponsable £or 551-227-7781 �
until Jauuary 15, 2000_
U9WE3T
Paga 1
0
s
Service7ype Gas ' SecviceStatus: Aclive
MeterjCantract U0��5745Q7 Nn�rMeterType:
CunrnlRate: 178 Large Commeruai firm [MN Gasj
❑ Display Canccled Bilis
Ul(28jU0 14
11JZ3(99 23 '
lOR5j9H 40
09/15(99 79
Ofij2Hf99 32
OS)27j49 29
Oa(LB(99 30
03(L9(S9 28
Servia Options
Spatt Heat •
Small C 81
a
99U 30.9 .UO� .UU00
590 427 .ODU .0000
U .000 .O�OU
iii iii�
sa� zt.e .ann .auon
5A� t8.6 .OQ¢ .RUaD
n .von .oao¢
U .�aU .�UUU
0 .00D .OU00
37 1.7 � ,R00 .�OW
?28 70.9 .000 .D000
744 26.6 .000 .00OU
Printftepnrt L(sL Sum...
03/17/Z000 14:51:15
OAKLAND HOME INC
97 OXFORD ST N
ST PAUL, MN 55104-6539
Detail...
fi�5.688 M P
348.828 M P
.DUB S P
�
487.68 B M
35U.75@ E
38.526 M
76.UHB L
2B9�B M
44.398 M
1H3.398 M
409.778 E
Ciose
C�
�
� � � / Z
ServittTypc Electric ' ServirlStatus: Active
Meter(Cnntrocl: OU82551807 NomMctcrType:
Cwrent Ra1e: At 4 General Service (MN ElecJ
[] Display Canceled Bills
Oij28(UO 74
7,680
�U
L'G:iiY
1,400
5,560
2UUa
3,52�
4.2UU
5,4B�
6,460
5.04U
781.2
120A
n.zno
1 D.BOU
.aa¢
.i�
15.600
6.800
6.800
7.6�0
70.4U0
12.HOU
72.000
73200
oansrys �s
U6(Lej99 67
U4(28j99 22
04jO6j99 36
03�01(99 32
OtJ2H)99 29
12j30f98 36
17RN9H 28
Print Report
u :�
03/17/2000 14:50:57
OAKLAND HOME INC
97 OXFORD ST N
17.7
9L1
90.9
97.8
1372
7 89.0
7 BU.O
160.0
ST PAIIL, MN 55104-6539
Sum...
Servfce Options
Small C & 1 •
Overhend
Singie Phase y
n. .oaou
11. .0000
.aoon
: IIII
7. .�U00
il. .ODUO
il. .OU00
72. .0000
12. .OU00
13. .0000
iz. .aaoo
73. .0000
Detail...
332.35W M P
118.57W M P
.90W S P
� 1 1
333.29 S P
4BS.SBM L
763.SOW M
284.77W M
28l.98 W M
335.77W M
363.02W M
32T.ZSW M
Close
i
s
Se�vi¢Type: Gas � ServiceStaNs: Aclive
Aleter(CantracC 0 05T45U1 Nart-MeterType:
Current Rate: 718 �arge Cammercial Frm (MN GasJ
❑ pispiay Canccicd Bllls
UZ/29(UO 32
OifId10V I 15
72(30�44 37
71R3199 29
70(25�99 40
osnsl9s 7a
�b(2Hry9 32
a5R7rye 2e
DA�ZHr99 30
03t29f99 2B
Se�vice Op4aas
Space Heat �
Small C 8 1
i
99U 30.9 .000 .0000
590 42.1 .000 .UOOU
i ii� iiii
558 37.9 .UOU .OUDO
BU7 27.8 .000 .0000
540 18.6 .000 .0000
0 .0�� .UUUO
n .non .nnoa
6 .606 .U6UQ
31 1.1 .000 .�OOU
328 70.9 .000 .�000
744 26.6 .OUO .�ODU
605.688 M
348.828 M
i�:
335.95B S P
487.668 M P
360.758 E P
3B.52B M P
76.�BB L P
28.9U8 M P
45.39 B M P
7H3.396 M P
409.17 6 E P
I Print pcport List Sum... Detait... Close f
r 1
�swc� �wMi�' �w�--� J �� `�—� � �_�_��_�_���
03/17/2000 14:42:44
BUFFALO HOUSE LLC
97 OXFORD ST N
ST PAUL, MN 5510?-6539
�
�
L
d
''s
�
�
� �
L
�
d�-9�
e
ServiceType: Electrie ServiceStatus: Active
Meter(Contrace U082557B07 NamMeterType:
Current 0.atc: A74 ' Geneml Service (MN EIe�
❑ Display Lanceied etils �
U2j29(l7U 32
U7(2Bn10 14
� .ii i
O1(I4(�0 121
U4t25j99 79
O6j28(99 61
Oy28j99 22
04�06(99 36
U3j01199 32
U1j28(99 29
iZj3U�48 36
„ n�roa za
Prini Repott
7,68�
�'
6,44U
t,4U�
5,SS0
2,OOU
3.520
4.2�0
5,480
6.48U
5,040
list
03/17/2000 14:a2:12
BUFFALO HOUSE LLC
Service Options
Small C 8 1 �
Overhead
Singie Phase �
187.2 11.20� 17. .U000
532
17.7
91.1
90.9
97.8
1372
189.0
IeU.0
78�.0
15.6U0
6.800
6.H00
7.600
70.400
72.600
i2.uaa
13.ZOU
B. .00OU
7. .auan
77. .DOUO
11. .0��0
72. .0000
12. .U000
13. .0000
i2. .aaaa
13. .0000
Sum...
oaaa...
332.35W M
118.SiW M
ii
63U.�7 W 5 P
333295 P P
495.58M t--P
163.SO W M P
284.77YJ M P
284.9614 M P
335.17W M P
363.62V{ M P
32725W M P
377.USW M P
Closc
�
X
�
Z
�4._
_ �
�` ,
�� rT
s �
o �
2
97 OXFORD ST N
ST PAUL, MII 55104-6539
- d
� To:
From:
Dafe:
Subject:
Walter,
Walter, Buffala House LLC
Laura, NSP Customer Service
M�rch 96, 2000
97 Oxford 5t N St. Paul MN 55104
This letter is written to verify that there was no interruption in the electrical
ar gas service from the time it was Oakland Home Inc., to Buffalo House
LL.C, Service was established in the nama of Buffalo House L.LC on
d1/14/2000:
if 3 can be of further assistance, please contact me back at 651/639-4944.
Thank you.
�_�.��'}"'���D
Laura Herbert
N5P Customer Service
�
�
•
IO 'd 'ON Sdd dSN Wd 55�Z0 I�Id Q�OZ-L[-�di�
Rug 28 �O 09:04a Buffalo SG, LLC 651-227-?782 �'_� Z
_ p.3
LODGER AGREEMENT
THE UNDERSIGNED ACKNOWLEDGES, UNDERSTANDS, AIVD ACCEPTS THAT BIIFFALO
HOUSEIS AN A�COHOL AND DRUG FREE SHARED HOUSING PROPERTY MANAGEO BY A
PROPERTY MANAGER. THE UNDERSIGNED ALSO ACKNOWLEDGES, UtJDERSTAfVDS,
AND ACCEPTS THAT RESIDENCY AT BUFFALO FiOUSE iS It�! THE CAPACITY OF A
LODGER SHARING A HOUSWG UNIT AND NOT AS A TENANT 1lUITH RfGHTS OR
POSSESSION OF SPACE EXCLUSIVELY.
7HE UNDERSlGNED FURTHER UNDERSTANDS THAT FAILURE TO COMPLY WITtt THE
RULES AND EXPECTATIONS OF BUFFALO HOUSE IS GROUNDS FOR IMMEDIATE
TERMtNATION OF OCCUPANCY. A MqNAGEMEAtT TERMlNATION W/LL RESULT 1N THE
FORFEITURE OF TFfE UNDERSIGNED'S DEPOSIT AND A(VY NOUSlNG FEES.
9) USE OF ALCOHOL, ILLEGAL DRUGS, OR POSSESSION OF PARAPHERNE�IA. USE OF ANY
A�COHOL OR OTHER MOOp-AL7ERWG SUBSTANCES (ILLEGAL DRUGS OR
_, PRESCRIPTiON MEDECATIONS IN ANY MANNER OTHER THAN PRESCREBEU), WHETHER IN
POSSESSIOPd OF OR ON THE PERSON OF THE RESIDENT, OR WITHIN THE LIVING SPACE
OCCUPIED BY 7HE RESIDENT, WILL RESULT IN IMMEDIA7E TERMINATION,
2) TRAFFICKtNG. ANY SUSPECTED ACTIVITY OF DRUG DEALING OR RUNNING WI�L RESU�.T
IN tUMEDtATE TERMINATION AND WIL� BE REFERRED 70 LAW ENFORCEMENT;
3) SIGNIFICANT OR WII,LFUL DAMAC-E TO THE HOUSING PROPERiY,
4) THREATS OR POSS�SSIOf! Or ANY WEqpONS. THREATS QF PHYSICAL VIOLENCE,
SUICIDE ATTEMPTS AND/OR OTHER ABUSE, OR POSSESSlON OF ANY WEApONS 6Y ANY
RESIDENT OR HIS GUEST{S) W1LL RESULT IN IMMEDIATE TERMINATION AN6 BE
REFERRED TO L4W ENFOftC�M�NT;
5) A6'JSE AfJY PHYSICAL O,q VERBAL ABUSE OF MA^JAGEMENT OR ANy OTHEF RESlDENT
OR H!5 GU=ST(St V�Ji�L RESULT IN IMMEDIATE TER�IINATION AM1D tv1AY Bc REFERRED TO
LA�N ENFORCEMENT;
6V SMOKING A�VWJHERE ON THE PREMISES EXCEPT FOR DESIGNFT�D QREA(S). SMOKING
IN SLEEPING qRGqS WILL RESULT IN IMMEDIATE TERMINATION;
7) SEXUA! RELATf:JNSHiPS SEXUAL RELATIONS ARE NOT PERMITTED WITHIN THE
BUILD!NG. ANY SEXUAL SO�ICITATION, PROSTITUTION OR pROh10TIOPJ THEREOF 4V1� L
RESUL7 IN IMMEDIATE TERi�t?hA710N. OVERNIGHT GUES75 ARE fdOT PERP�IITTED;
NONCOMPUANCE MAY RESUiT IN TERVIINATION;
S) ANY ACTIOtJ TNAT DISRUPTS A SAFE AND PEACCpUL RECOVERY-0RIENTED
ENVIRONMENT. NO PERSON PAAY INTERFERE W17H ANY RESIDENT'S QUIET ENJOYMENT �
OF TH� PREMISES COURTESY AR�D CONSIDERATION WILL BE SHOWN LNHEN US!NG
TELcVi5tON, RADIO, AND PERSONAL STEREO DEVICES. THE HOURS OF �0:00 PM TO
07:00 AM WILL BE CGNSI6ERED T€MES OF SP�CIAL Ai i ENTION AfdD CONSiDERATION TO
FHOSE TRYIt�G TC REST. NONCOMPLtANCE 41qY RESUL7 IN TERMENATION,
9� MAIL TAM?ERING_ ANY Psqi_ TA4IYERING VJtLL RcSULT W}MMEDIA7E TERMINATION AND
BE REFERRED TO LAW EN^ORCEMENT;
10) THEFT ANY THFFT OR SUS?EGTED THEFT B1' ANY RESID�Nr bVY_L RESULT Ih
iiw':N;�DI:,� E��ERlvih�::,710h! AND BE R�FERRE'J l�0 LAW ENFORGEME�l;
Rug 28 00 09:�4a Buffalo SG, LLC , 651-227-7782 P•
11} FAiLURE TO ADHERE TO PftOGRAM EXPECTA710NS.�ALL RESIDcNTS ARE EXPECTED TO
8E ACCOUNTABLE TO EACH OTHER AND MANAGEMENT AS TO THE[R SOBRtETY STATUS.
EXPECTATIONS fNCLUDE, BUT ARE NOT LIMITED TO: HOUSE JOBS AND DUTIES ANQ THE
WEEKLY HOUSE MEETING; KEEPING PERSbNAL ITEMS OUT 0= PUBLIC AREAS; KEEPING
BEDS MADE AND ROOMS CLEAN; KEEAING PUSLIC AREAS CLEAN; MAINTAINING
ACCEPTABLE PERSONAL HYGIENE. NONCOtviPLIANCE MAY RESVLT IN TERMINATION;
72) OTHER GIRGUMSTANCES. MANAGEMENT RESERVES THE RIGHT TO CONSIDER
TERMiNATION, CONTINUEO RES[DENCE, OR ACCEPTANCE O\ AN INDIV€DUAL BASIS.
MANAGEMENT INTERPRETATtON OF THE LODGER AGREEMENT WI�L NOT BE SUSJECT
TO DEBATE. MANAGEMENT RESERVES THE RfGHT TO TERMIt+lATE Ai�lY LODGER
AGREEMENT AT ANY TIME;
13) FAILURE TO GIVE WRfTTEN NOTICE OF VOLUNTARY TERMINATION. AT LEAST FOURTEEN
DAYS' ADVANGE NOTICE UF VOLUNTARY TERMINATION IS REQUIRED;
14) FAfLURE TO PROVIDE URINE OR BREATH SAMPLE. ALL RESI�ENTS AGREE TO PROVtDE
A URINE OR SREATH SAMPLE TO BE TESTED FOR TOXICI7Y AT THEIR [XPENSE.
REFUSAL TO DO SO VViLL RESULT IN IMMEDfATE TERMINAFION.
1 HAVE READ AND UNDERSTAND THE LODGER AGREEMENT AND AGREE TO FOL�OW
THE EXPECTATIOIdS AS STATED HEREfN AND INTERPRETED BY HOUSE MANAGEMENT.
I Ut�1DERSTAND THAT IT ES MY RESPONSIBILiTY TO BE FAMILIAR WITH ALL RULES AND
EXPECTATfONS. I 11NDERSTAND ThiAT IF I DO NOT TERMINATE VOLUNTAf21LY I WILL
FOR�E(T MY SECURITY DEPOSIT AND ANY FEES PAID OR OWED.
APPLICANT SIGNATURE / QATE :
MANAGEMENT SIGiJATURE ! DATE :
C J
.
•
�
�
� � 01'92.
�
--- �x�°Ctf� - ��7-�E
�L[��L..O Ho<%ts�
T� c-� ���P�lc- ��N
� � ox �o�T7 S
�`�f � i�,��t L. , M 6�.1
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT
SPECIFICATION OR REPOI
PREPARED BY ME OR UI
SUPERVISION AND THAT
REGISTERED ARCHITECT
LAWS OF THE STATE OF
� �D��-I
c�� ; ��_
�
dY OIRECT
A DULY
7HE
� � Z�NitVG FiLE oo-�2z-
Y�
Shannon A. O'lCeefe
Doctor of Chiropractic
O'Kee�e Chiropractic Clinic
t 053 Ashiand Ave.
St. Paul, MIY 55104
Phone: (651) 292-8072 Fax: (651) 292-8722
April 17, 2000
St. Paul Planning and Economic Development
Ms. Nancy Holman
PED Zoning Department
1100 City Hall Annex
25 W. 4th St
St. Paul, MN 55102
Dear Nancy:
•
� Z4NING FlL���-��
��
This letter is to inform you of the information that the residents have established that
smround the building of 97 N. Oxford (Buffalo Sober House). Since the pwchase of the
building in 7an. 2000 by Walter Dinalko and Ralph Castagno for the use of a boazding
house for a group living facility for men in eazly sobriety, there has been a cloud of
misunderstanding and confusion by the residents that sunound this building.
I have placed many phone calls to the city of St. Paul, Mayor Norrn Coleman's office, the
Summit-University Planning Council, Jerry Blakey's office, St. Paul Zoning. The
outwme has been the same from aIl parties. NO ONE KNOWS ANYTHING! !!
This letter is to inform you that the above mentioned owners aze trying to establish that
the former owner was operating with a Non-confoxxning use permit at the time of
pwchase in 7an 2000. The previous owner was operating the non-profit facility from
1974 untzi approximately Sept. 1998 when the residents vacated the premises.
The sunounding residents ofthis building have contacted the electric company and have
found concrete evidence that the buildittg was vacant some time in 1998. The Electric
bill in 1998 was calculated for a 12-month period for $550 per month. 1999 it was $160
per month. The Gas bills were also significantly reduced from 1998 to 1999. The
average gas bill for 1998 was $536 and for 1999 they were $297 per month. It would be
appropriate if the city would find ouY when the specific c3ecline in utilities were, to
establish the exact date when the premise of 97 North Ox£ord was vacated by the
previous tenants that established the non-confornung permit. The current homeowners
•
•
/
Ol��j2
• s�urounding this building are willing to testify that this building has been vacant since
Sept. 1998. We are not trying to cornest the occupancy of an office by the previous
owners but the actual occupancy of the tenants that the non- confornung permit was
esitbilised for. The surrounding neighbors have also been exposed to a fire alar�n that
rang far appro�nately one week before the fire department came out to disengage the
alarm after the pervious owner had vacated the premises in the summer on 1998. We
vrge you to fiuther investigate the above information to establish the fact there were NO
RESIDE23TS in this building after Sept. 1998. The non-conforming permit requires that
there is no more than a 12-month lapse in residence for the old permit to be grandfathered
in for the new owners.
The residents of the neighborhood would like the new owner to have to re-establish the
non-conforming permit so that the residents wovld have an opportunity to say if this
business should be allowed in our neiborhood.
This neighborhood has been BUFFALOED by ali of the owners and appropriate officials
about the process that the new owner must follow. This matter should not come down to
who has the most expensive attomey because the neighborhood will lose since there is
NO attorney representiag us. We are counting on the CITY to make the new owner
follow a11 the appropriate zoning laws that apply to this building.
Please provide this case with due justice by making the new owner follow the law by
;�, establishing a new non-confornvng permit, which would require the support from two-
thirds ofthe property awner's located within 100 feet ofthe property.
Sincerely,
`��' ��--�-- ���'�g�--
Dr. Shannon A. O'Keefe
1053 Ashland Ave.
St. Paui, MN 55104
CC:
LEP
Jeiry Blakey
Mayor Norm CoTeman
Summit-University Planning Council
Neighbors of 97 North O�'ord
•
/
CITIZEN PARTICIPATIO DIS RI TS
•
•
1 . SUIV�(HT -t5H j�'I Ltl,Kttl�-tf'1GtItYUUC1
2.GREATER EAST SIDE
3.WEST SIOE
4.DAYTON'S BLUFF
5.PAYNE-PHALEN
6.NORTH EN�
7HOMAS-DALE
8. UMMIT-UNIVERSITY
.WEST SEVENTH
lO.COMO
11.HAMLINE-MID4IAY
12.ST. ANTHONY
13.MERRIAM PK.-LEXINGTON HAMI.INE
14.GROVELAND-MACALESTER
15.HIGNLAND
16.SUMMIT HILL
17. D041NTOWPI
�00-12Z2
C�
CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PLANNIN6 DISTRICTS
�
�
_ __ �
o�-qz
. . . . �-
•
��� � ��Cr,� ��'�, �t�� ,��,��rc6�- �',.r.+✓�Bfx��k
� ���a� ��
C1/��v�• ��T2 ,��� ���;Y:B�u �nL� 9��re���
�2z����� o� Gz¢�'e`�` ���
i��G;���'f.G1GP� ��! -������.�.�ee%LU� �.-c2CZ
'� °k�'GG2i r �� iyh%�G%�l�/�1�.�'�"""'" `Etiy�
� � i9��L�'GlY�'� ;Z2a�2� /
�
�
� Go��:������"�` ��
�� � =� ��r:��:�� � �
�G��►'� d _ ��G�,t�iji
. � /�'�'�z��� � ��
�� / � ( O� � � � �� �� ���
/ � I� ������
A��t'�_ � (/ f �� ' � e � . -
U
- -- � ��� '�°'� `���"���� �� 9 �
'�� ��I���� �
�e���
����
� G��
�
97 North Onfard Street Saint Paul, Minnesata USA 55104
voice: 651.227.778'I data: 651.227.7782 buffalohouse@uswest.net
�
bufFalo house
. � �,v�,� b��� �e% �r ��P�'/ ,1 b�� b�`f
���3 �C��"' s i; (ce °l �d fl�X (�� , 1 �� � t�s�t
� � r � � � � � n � V �.��,r p�t; � r� �...ow( v� �� e � ���/.�
j � �a� f��l o� c� ���,(eS5 .� ��k�
� l;� e o h t-�-t- s��� � f�, li�,>, s D T�, P���X
��r�f���,( � �� ��e�'e� Y'��L�t r��_
) a � �,
�
s
97 North Oxford Street Saint Paul, Minnesota USA 55104 �
voice: 657.227J78! data: 651.227.7782 buffalohouse(�uswest.net
� �_ g �
�
��
. . . . �-
�
� ' .fil��. .c,�; . , .�t'*� .�iu.� �/i-t��
� � �' �. - l�
/�k� � cG�—c���! -�st� �1 C ��� � i� fC��
�,r,�'��'v��.� : �.c� �� ._
���������
/1��u�,Cu.=� ����� � .�, z .� �
�� �,� �.
,
:����f,lf� �i� `� � ` ��2.��� %+�'� / �"'E�'!�' �-'C�
� �/'..�.��.--.� �
� 97 North O�dord Street Saint Paul, Minnesota USA 55104
voice; 651.227.778'1 data: 651.227.7782 bufFa{ohouse@uswest.net
�
: ii'r•1.7� � �.-
��� -- �
T hav� becn t;ving ak +ke bw�..lo kouse ��
7 wta n-�� s n o.� � � e.C}o./ �o.�irtc� � �\�ce \'��e � kk 2
��ato `l.a�Se ; ��-- v.�.s �e��+u\ �ro h..�c a �er'
e�v �� or�wt o�.� }� \��ve- o��- , w�el� Z ��d� v � � �
-}1,e. �� l( e�t'� P L\,�b . L;v�ng w�� �- b,,.nc.� o�'
sobu Yeog��- h���s ►m.2 w;�'� ,ny s an�
a�.��,� .�,�� ,�, � +� a,� ��o����, . -c�.�
�pe.v�X��S �t�v� 'i'�t �,A2e 4cG O��eq�
�.�, s �.,6,�� �,k� a-� �aa , ��,�
�S- �-� . `-� d�on`� �..ylo.r/. �� � Cor..�d �
i�l"� A�i 1"f^f p�.9 y �ve �pv+�l2. �
�.;,�� �.�
.ve wtc.�e
�
�
97 North Oxford StreeY Saint Paul, Minnesota USA 55'f 04 �,
voice: 651.227.7781 daYa: 65'l.227.7782 butfaiohouse�uswest.net
r o1
�
�
SU�WHIT-UNIVERSITY
�
a
DISTRICT 8 �N x° "°° r'°° '°°° "°`° "°°
. � scu= �x FEEf
.�����a�� ��� �
QO�� (Z.Z2�`�
�
, � j � � �'_,��—.� �
�_._�- `-�' �
U y �
: �a ����� ,;� �: �
�
�
4✓ Y Y. "V �A� �ld's f _ . �
__._ .�
�Q ��� �r� � �
�Q
����
� '� � cr .. ; —,.' .,
�,.�
�, i
� � � �� '^. r�
�. �� �
�
��.....�.a
� / � (h.; r�
� .� Y G
.F \.W
� .C3C} � V.V i-' L3,t�
__. 3 _ �
fl�� � �; �;��
���t��
�A . �
�i �1: �
a.� a.' �.II.�,� "�`'� ���
�
�
��
�-
� �;������J �p �
������
�
�
�
•
1flL r
': ��:�'�°��� �,��� �' � s c� � � �
� `�
� �
,,. �' �s..,._..
L '""°"' Y ^r .. - -----.-.—..-..._.�._,_... _
r
� � . 'i ' �p ' � �
- � �+ i �� ,E_.,� ..�.,._.
f
� ����;:���N��� �; �� �- �'� � � ��� � c�� c� _:
_ I �.
�
� � f.y�'
� (�. � V
��
�
� -�
� �
.`�.l �.7 k
� .J'�.. A � -.,..i
F
Y
�������
�' �� ; � . � , � t � , � .� � ,y
'�✓��cJ� '` .,r� `'} �' `. Yf' 1 t�= i s d:� �w,>
, ��
- ' rr..�v-..�..s.......-..z�.�._�r...�-w�....a..�-s....am.....
�" � .'i ('� � y �t�".�, ��.
�'�� �'�.����
;�'' �,; ,'. �E'���'
� � N : � `..S
W. � ,;
C
� �*�:�
0��,���"���3�
� � �'�^G � � � =; � �'.�
I � � n
�r r � �
2
CN __ i .. _
� y , _✓ r
_ n e�
APPLICANT ��� � �" ���� �C—� LEGEND
PURPOSE � � '—� zoning district boundary
a � � � � . � �: sub � � o �t
FlLE �"e%.,�.,.::� �2.� DATE`"' `" `° � �' G� Pe Y
PLNG. DIST�— MAP # o one tamily
_w ¢ two tamiiy
�
_--„ �-�Q multiple (amily
� (� " ,-.. ..-� I' s - , � "" , ;� `„' tJ C� !� � �
� �L' �v S � , „ �
n L �
• � ^ commerc
� o.,.. indusirial
V vacant
s:
��-�-�aoa
�
oi-gz.
� �C3i��NG F�tE b�-�ZZ.����
To Nancy HomanS PED,
My name i5 Arthur HiII ,1 live at 94 N. Oxford St directly
acro55 from 97 N. Oxford 5t. [ have lived thier 5ence May
1976 ancf are mo5t directly impacted by what goe5 on at - �hat
addre55 becau5e it i5 right acro55 from my front door.
On or about augu5t or 5eptember of 1998 a]( of the
tennent5 that Iived thier packed up and left for good, a great
day for me, The building 5tayed vacant un�Gil early 2000 except
for a per5on or two ,three or four day5 a week for two or three
hour5 a day, no more. No tennet5.
The buffalo people moved in (at time5 25 5trong) and the
traffic etarted loud car5, truck5 and mu5ic goe5 on until after
11f M daily. GroupS of inen out5ide in front and in the alley
� 5moking and throwing cigarett5 butt5 in the etreet and talking
LOUD on cell phone5 out5ide (5ometime5 in the 5treet} , i5 a
daily happening. DogS droping5 on the blvd (without picking it
up) . The only quiet time i5 during the day hour5 > but about 71'M
until after 11!'M noi5e and traff ic. The weekend5 are wor5e.
About twelve people that live thier have auto and or truck5.
The people that own the building have no ve5ted intere5t in
my neborhood, except too make money and be a blite too the
nieghborhood . The people that live thier ju5t don't have too care
at all.1 live here , pay taxe5 and take care of my property and
get no break from people who ju5t don't care. plea5e read too
the Zoning Gommittee.
Thank you , Arthur Hill 651-224-8971
94 N. Oxford St.
� 5t Paul, MN 55104
_—�a �_ _� / d
� ■ � I, ■ � ■
! � � � �.■ i� '�� 11 �
i
-
,
Ot�4�
� �
� �
,'�''� ��
; ,
�; � '�
_ ;.,��
m ;' i
� !!�
z ''
� �
0
z �
•
�
;#
LAIJREL
`
�r
� � .
� ,�
: ?
� '�
�---
�
�
�
�
���
o i-q2
��. �,��sjd�
PETITION
VVe the undersigned homeowners and residents are not opposed to
the egistance of the Buffalo Sober Aouse located at 97 N. Ogford.
NAME ADDRESS
e, r�I 5' i,n. o,�/ l� � 4 �� e�e, t--
�n� u��'�-�- �,� y �� i��
��n����r��*������
��_� �� �. .i��
`'� � � TaS/�fj�l�''►.vta'� e. A. ,
/'�_ � °:� /;
�- . � v � . . 1• !�ri_'J
. J.��..-_�1�1.. �� ,: ,
�!'�:/,� � �i� s �
, �i�� � j � � , ' '
� �� ,i'1.1�;!% ,/, , . �/
�060 ��,.�C �-
l �'Zo >�a,t,9.•�v.�l.
I � 7� ��r�Q,�-�
� � �l�ct..-�
/ � � � r�
#
"�` �ks�..��.,d -�
PHONE
�a��'�$S
� 3 -�I 6 �
� f� — gs-s
� -��_J�-, �
�91�
� �-�--,�,
�
3ai o3y�
z L Y—I33/
GS /-��ll
Gsr 3.a ��'�r23
��
�5 � �a� �-a y /
(�s � �Z z .
(,51 LZz -� b3
D�-Q'L
PETITION
We the undersigned homeowners and residents are not opposed to
the existance of the Buffalo Sober House located at 97 N. Oxford.
� �.,.r�ow��.o. u�� io� ��
� q7 r� . ox�a�� 0�-92
<<��
. ��
PETITION �
We, the undersigned neighbors (hom�:owners and residents), affected by the
property located at 97 N. Oxford, wis� to express our united opposition to
the re-zoning and/or re-establishment of a 26year old "non-conformin��Use"
permit issued in 1974. We believe that our fragile and densely populated
neighborhood is best served by maintaininS the current zoning ordinances
which designate the building as a two-family residence.
�
NAME
,�.
ADDRESS
/b-�s�
/oas
(�t�°r
��
�j'�t 3 � r l�
�
,
0
�v�
►� ,
�7�'��,`� ,
�
0
oJL�
l0/7
��
�;:,
�'r h � �
PHONE (OPTTONAL)
E MAIL
da �- ��Y
, 22 � "
J
22 2 - ?-�'i
, aa -a7�7
a�� ��� 7
� �, _ �;,e���
L��I�Gi l�
, , �,
Z zY - /33I
^��_
Z Z 7- 7s'� Z
�i J I .
��t/"'73i�
6Sl-2zs�
�;' �� �$�vD
PET� N
o�-yZ
We, the undersigned neigl�twrs (homeowners and residents), affected by the
property located at 97 N. Oxford, wish to express our united opposition to
the re-zoning and/or re-establishment of a 26year old "non-conformin� Use"
permit issued in 1974. We believe that our fragile and densely populated
neighborhood is best served by maintaining the current zoning ordinances
which designate the building as a two-family residence.
NAME
�/�n�ic- �
.�
ADDRESS
�AAJ
�
f!�! I! �
f ' r :
/ ,/.ii
i�[.. �,�
�-y��
�:
0
t
�
PHU�VL' ((1Cllv
E-MAIL
,
_�
� , ,
�
o �-yZ
PETITION
_`
We, the undersigned neighbors (homeowners and residents), affected by the
property located at 97 N. O�cford, wish to express our united opposition to,
the re-zoning and/or re-establishment of a 26year old "non-conforming Use"
permit issued in 1974. We believe that our fragile and densely populated
neighborhood is best served by maintaining the current zoning ordinances •
which desig�ate the building as a two-family residence.
NAME
ADDRESS
PHONE /OP"l'lU1vAL1
����
� /DcS/ ��s.fGfh✓A ,
a, /.//l S /..a��i
�
Gv - L92 -807�
6S/ , ?,� y � / ��
� �
f055 Ash�A�d
►05� hshlur�
r��- Za� -q :
(�5� � aa� �8a�
1a4����bfi 03�
Lo51-22�—��35
�i•r<I,�.r �ts � L�Sa Ashda�
(�SI-aay
o,-yz
PETIT_IOl!T
We, the undersigned neighbors (homeowners and residents), affected by the
property located at 97 N. O�cford, wish to express our united opposition to
the re-zoning and/or re-establishment of a 26year old "non conformin� Use"
permit issued in 1974. We believe that our fragile and densely populated
neighborhood is best served by maintaining the current zoning ordinances
which designate the building as a twafamily residence. �
�
�� ►' A�
��
�'�.ui�
%,7,�q
.:., �.
��
. � �
ADDRESS
IOZ� �I�Iwv�d
�o�{s }�
IU 3 civi.�[�
� �
�9 ����'� Sr u/-
PH01v� �ur����vA��
L 51-1Z'� y'7 b
651_ 2� - S.�'l.b
�s�1- ZZ� -�C���
ZZ� ��l
6 s�( � � YG ��6 3/ _
' I
oi-92
�
._ The Fair Amendments Act of 1988 and Group Homes for the
By John H. Foote
Hazel & Thomas, P.C., Manassas, V'uginia
Reprimed from the 7oumal of the Section on Locai Govemment Law of the Yuginia State Bar, Vol.
III, No, I, September 1997
Introduction. Reguiation of group homes for persons with one or more handicapping conditions, is a
volatile issue throughout the United States. Since the Generai Assembly's first foray into the Seld in
1977, directing certain local zoning controts over group homes for the mentally ill, mentally retarded,
and developmentally disabled (see Va. Code Ann. § 15.1-486.2, now repealed, and its current version,
§ 15.1-486.3), there have been major changes in federal law with direct impact on local authority to
deal with the locarion and control of group homes. Indeed, that law now creates sigiuficant and
importam restrictions on the extent of permissible local regulation. This article outlines the currern
state of affairs affecting group homes for thc handicapped. It offers clear warning to local
governments that ordinances and policies which are discriminatory in pwpose or effect, or which fail
to make reasonabie accommodation for the needs of the handicapped, can have costly consequences.
Congregate living arrangements among unrelated people are nothing new, of cowse, nor is their
treatment by the courts. There has been legisiation and litigation over whai constitutes a"family" for
years. Localiries are not powerless to deSne the term: more than twenty years ago, the United States
Supreme Court heid that local ordinances defining "family" to mean one or more persons related by
blood, adoption or marriage, or not more than two unrelated persons, living and cooking together as a
singte housekeeping unit, are constitutional. V"illage of Belle Tene v. Boraas, 416 U.S. i(1974). But
facially neutral ciassifications caa have unimended results or affirmatively discriminatory purposes or
effects, and not long after Belle Terre the Court held that a definition of "family" which criminalized a
grandmother's desire to live with her two grandsons — who were not brothers but cousins -- was an
unconstiturional deprivation of her due process rights. Moore v. City of East Cleveland. 431 U. S. 494
(1977).
The Fair Housing Amendments Act Restrictions on the definition of family, however, are only one
aspect of America's approach to housing and housing discrimination. For many years Congress has
made it national policy to eliminate such discrimination in all its forms, through the Fair Housing Act
of 1968. The originai Act (Title VIII ofthe Civil Rights Act of 1968, 42 U.S.C. §§ 3601-3619)
banned, among other things, housing discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, and national
origin, and provided for a variety of enforcement mechanisms. The Act was amended in 19T4 and
again in 1988, however, and it was these latter changes, known as the Fair Housing Amendments Act
http:/iwww.oxfordhouse.orgJfairhouse.html 10/25/00
ol
of 1988 (the "FfiAA"), which made truly substantive revisions in the law, and which form the source
of the principal resriictions on local comrol of group homes. See PL 100-430, 102 Stat. 1619 (1988),
42 U.S.C. 3601, et s�.
Even before the FHA.t�, the United States Supreme Court had held in City of Cleburne v. Cleburne
LivinQ Cemer. Inc.. 473 U.S. 432 (1985), that the Equal Protection Clause prolubits a city from
requiting a special use pernut for group homes for memally retarded persons, when such pemuts are
not required for other similar residemial uses. But it was the FHAA which truly attered the landscape.
Drawing heavily on existing law with respect to handicap discrimination in federally-supported
�� programs (See § 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 29 U.S.C. 701), the Act made it unlawfui for
azry one of a number of covered entities, including local govemmerns
to discriminate in the sale or rental, or to otherwise make unavaiiable or deny, a dwelling to any buyer
or renter because of a handicap of —
(A) that buyer or renter,
(B) a person residing in or intending to reside in that dwelling after it is so sold, rented or made
available; or
(C) any person associated with that buyer or renter.
42 U.S.C. 3604(�(1).
The Act defines discriminarion to include not oniy tradirional discriminatory pracrices, but aiso "refusai
to make reasonabie accommodations in rules, policies, practices, or services, when such
accommodations may be necessary to afford such person equal opportunity to use and enjoy a
dwelling." 42 U.S.C. 3604(�(3)(B). While localities need not do everything humanly possible to
accommodate a disabled persoq the "reasonable accommodation" requirement imposes a$rmative
duties to modify local requirements when they discriminate against the handicapped. Liddy v
Cisneros 823 F. Supp. 164, 776 (S.D.1VI' 1993).
The Act defines handicaD eactremely broadly as
(1) a physical or mentat impairment which substantially limits one or more of [a] person's major life
activities,
(2) a record of having such an impairment, or
(3) being regarded as having such an impairment.
Although there are exceptions to this definition, including those "whose tenancy would constitute a
direct threat to the health or safety of other individuals or whose tenancy would result in substantial
physical damage to the property of others" (42 U.S.C. 3604(�(9)), and people af�licted with the
"current, iilegal use of or addiction to a controlled substance" (42 U.S.C. § 3602(h)), handicap does
include people who take drugs tegatly, or people who were once, but no longer aze, iilegal drug users.
United States v. Southern Management Coro 955 F2d 914, 919-23 (4th Cv. 1492}.
Congress understood that one of the central problems for the establishment of group homes is baseless
http://www.o�'ordhouse.org/fairhouse.html 10/25/00
oi-yz
hostility on the part of neighbors and even local govemments themselves. It manifestly intended,
therefore, to preempt state and local laws which e$'ectuated or perpetuated housing discrimination.
The fIouse Judiciary Committee said that
{t]he FFiAA, like Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, is a clear pronouncemern
of a nationai commitmem to ead the unnecessary exclusion of persons with handicaps from the
American mainstream. It repudiates the use of stereotypes and ignorance, and mandates that persons
with handicaps be considered as individuals. Generatized perceptions about disabilities and unfounded
speailations about tlueats to safety are specifically rejected as grounds to justify exclusioa ..,
While state and local governmems have authority to protect safety and health, and to regulate use of
Iand, that authority has sometimes been used to restrict the ability of individuaLs with handicaps to live
in communities. This has been accomplished by such means as the enactmem of or imposition of
health, sa£ety or land-use requiremems on congregate living arrangements among non-related persons
with disabilities. Since these requirements are not imposed on families and groups of similaz size of
other uinelated people, these requiremems have the effect of diserimination against persons with
disabilities. The Committee i�ends that the prohibition against diaM+*±+±nation against those with
handicaps apply to zoning decision and practices. The Act is intended to pro}u'bit the application of
speciai requirements through land-use regulation, restricrive covenams, and conditional or special use
permits that have the effect of limiting the ability of such individual to Gve in the residence of their
choice in the community .... Another method of maldng housing unavailable to people with
disabilities has been the application or enforcement of otherwise neutral rules and regulations on
health, safety and land-use in a manner which discriminates against people with disabilities. Such
discrimination often results from false or overprotective assumptions about the needs of handicapped
peopie, as well as unfounded fears of difficulties about the problems that their tenancies may pose.
These and similar practices would be prohibited.
House Committee on the Judiciary, Fair Housing Amendments Act of 1988, I-I.R. Rep. No. 711,
100th Cong. 2d Sess., at 18, 24. Thus, with specific regard to the exercise of local powers, the Act
says clearly that "(a]ny law of a State, a political subdivisinn, or other such jurisdiction that purports
to require or permit any action that would be a discriminatory housing practice under this subchapter
shall to that extent be invalid." 42 U.S.C. 3615 (emphasis supplied).
Judicial treatment of "handicap." The decisions interpreting the FHAA have been far reaching in
detemvning what constitutes a handicap. In fact, it is difficuit to conceive a disability that does not
constitute a handicap. Thus the PHAA has been held to cover not oniy rather obviously handicapped
folks, such as the wheelchair-bound, or visually impaired, but atso those who are disadvantaged by
aicohofism and drug addiction (e,g,O�ord House v. TownshiQof Ii'ilL 799 F. Supp. 450 (D. N.7.
(1991)), those beset by emorional problems and mental illness or retardation (e.�.,Association for
Advancement of the Mentally Handicapped. Inc v City ofBlizabeth, 876 F. Supp. 614 (D. N.J.
1994)), and oid age. United States v. Commonwealth of Puerto Rico_ 764 F. Supp. 220, 224 (D.P.R
1991). It extends to communicable diseases, including AIDS and HIV. Support 1�Tinistry v. vlla�e of
Waterford, 808 F. Supp. 120, 133-35 (N.D. N.Y. 1992). The homeless can be deemed handicapped, if
oniy because their homelessness is related to other, specific handicaps. Stuart B. McKinnev
Foundation v. Town of Fairfield 790 F. Supp. 1197 (D. Conn. 1492).
It has been estimated that one out every six persons in America is handioapped under this definition.
Housing Discriminarion� Law and Liti ag ri°a by Robert G. Schwemm (Clark, Boazdman, Callaghan
1990), § 11.5(2), p. 11-56.
http://www.oxfordhouse.org/fairhouse.html 10/25/00
oi-qZ.
4. Judicial Treatment of Discriminatory Housing Practices. FHAA group home cases turn on one
— or more frequently all — of three differem theories: discriminatory imeat, di�+**!�na*ory effect, or
failure to make "reasonable accommodation" to the needs of the handicapped. While the decisions
often involve all three, there aze severai identifiable subclassifications af FHAA cases worthy of note.
Family composition rules. Many cases involve local ordinance definirions of "family" that preclude
group homes. Rarely do these defimtions survive sctutiny in the group home context. Although lower
courts had been roughly bandling "family composition rules" for some time, in C'rty of Edmonds v.
Oxford House. Inc. 514 U.S. 725 (1995) the Supreme Court held that such rutes are plainly subject to
the FHAA and while limitations on unrelated residents is not �er se invalid, they must be scrutinized
carefully for their discrimu�atory imern or effect.
An example of these cases is Oxford House v. Township of Cherry I-�iiL 799 F. Supp. 450 (D. N.J.
1991), the federal coutt rejected a state court tuling that residents of a group home for recovering
alcoholics were not a single family under the Township's ordinance, and that they were not
handicapped. The court noted that those handicapped by alcoholism or drug abuse aze persons more
likely than others to nced a living arrangemern in which sufficiemly large groups of unrelated people
live together in residential neighborhoods for mutual support during the recovery process. The
Township produced no evidence of a nondiscriminatory reason for its position. See also O�ord
House-Everareen v. Citv of Plainfield 769 F. Supp. 1329 (D. N.J. 1991)(nine residents necessary to
make a group home for recovering alcoholics viable.)
Special use permits and the imposition of restrictive conditions. Several cases have invoived
requiremems for special use permits, or the imposition of particular conditions on those permits. While
the Eastern District of vrginia has held that the mere requirement for a special use permit dces not
violate the Act (O�ord House v. Cii� of V'uginia Beach 825 F. Supp. 1251 (E.D. Va. 1993)), in fact
caurts rarely uphold denials of such permits, or the imposirion of bwdensome conditions. In Bangerter
v. Orem C�_ Utah. 46 F.3d 1491 (lOth Cir. 1995), for example, the court of appeals found that
requirements that a group home for memally retarded aduks give assurances its residents would be
properiy supervised on a 24-hour-a-day basis, and that the home establish a community advisory
committee to deal with neighbor's complaint, were not imposed on other communal living
azrangements under the City's zoning ordinance, and were intentionally discriminatory.
In Tumintr Point. Inc. v. City of CaldweLl Idaho 74 F.3d 941 (9th Cir. 1996), the City asserted that a
homeless shelter for 16 residents in a single-family district was a"boarding house" that required a
special use permit to exceed twelve persons. A pernrit was ganted, but for a limited number of
residents, and subject to requiremerns for residem staff, parl�ag spaces, a new sidewaik and
landscaping and an annual review of the permit. The cour# rejected these restrictions as having no
relationship to iegitimate zoning purposes, and set occupancy at 25 based on testimony from the Fire
Chief. It reduced the parking requirement, eliminated the sidewalk and landscaping, and suuck the
annusi review requiremetrt. See aiso Marbrunak. Inc. v. City of Stow. Ohio. 974 F2d 43, 46-48 (6Yh
Cir. 1992) (invalidating requirement that a home for four mentally retarded adult women install an
alazm system interconnected to ceiling sprinkler system, doors with push bars swinging outwazds with
lighted exit signs, and fire walls and flame reYardant wall coverings, as based on false and
overprotective assumptions); North Shore-Chicago Rehabilitation_ Inc v V'illage of 5kokie, 827 F.
Supp. 497, 499-502 (N.D. Ill. 1993) (enforcement of requirements on home for traumarically brain-
damaged adults that home consist of five or fewer residents on a permanent basis, with paid
professional sta� license from state, local occupancy pemrit and compliance with local, was
http:/1www.oafordhouse.org/fairhouse.html 10/25/00
o! �9z
discriminatory and constituted a failure to make reasonabie accommodarion).
Dispersat reqnirements. A number of localities have imposed requiremerns that group homes be
geograplrically dispersed in an effort to deinstitutionalize target populations. Dispersal rules do not
generally sutvive. In Larldn v. State of Ivfichisan_ 883 F. Supp. 172, 17� (E.D. Ivfich. 1994) a state
statutory scheme precluded issuance of a license if it would "substan6ally comn�rute to an excessive
concemration" of such faciiities, and required notificationbe given to the City Councii to review the
number of existing and proposed ficilities witUin 1500 feet of a proposed facility and to its neighbors.
The City argued that its dispersal requiremern prevemed formation of "ghettos" and normalized the
endsronme�. 'fhe Court found no rational legal basis for these provision, and held tbat they were
facially dis�`++*��n�ory, since "the absence of a malevolent motive does not com�ert a facially
disciiminatory policy into a neutral policy with a discriminatory effect."
In United States v. V'illage of Marshall. 787 F. Supp. 872, 878 (W.D. ws. 1991), a Wisconsin starirte
required that group homes be separated by 2,500 feet. A group home for six mentally ill persons was
proposed 1619 feet &om another existing home. The trial court found no evidence to support this
requirement and held that the reasonable accommodation requirement mandated the grarn of
pemussion.
In Association for Advancement of the Mentally Handicapped_ Inc. v. City of Elizabeth. 876 F. Supp.
614, 622-23 (D. N.J. 1994) a state statute permitted six residems but required a special use permit for
more than six, but wMch couid be denied if located within 1500 feet of an existing residence or
community sheiter for victims of domestic violence, or the number of persons other than resident staff
residing at the existing residence excced the greater of 50 persons or .5% of the municipal population.
The court invalidated the statute on the ground that there was no evidence that developmernally
disabled persons presern a danger to the community: "The record is devoid of any evidence upon a
fact finder could reasonably conclude that community residences housing more than six
developmentally disabled persons would detract from a neighborhood's residential character." See also
Horizon House v. TownshiQ of Upper South HamptOn, 804 F. Supp. 683, 695-97 (E.D. Pa. 1992)
(affd without opinion, 995 F.2d 217 (3rd Cir. 1993) (100Q foot dispersai rule was on based
unfounded fears about people with handicaps and facially invalid).
Not all courts have agreed with this approach. In Familystyle of St. Paul v. Cit�of St. Paul. Mmn..
923 F.2d 91 (8th Cir. 1991) the court was faced with a request for a speciai use pemut to �pand an
existing campus of homes from 119 to 130 mentally ill persons. The City issued temporary permits on
condition that Familystyle work to disperse its facilities consistently with Mumesota's
deinstitutionalizarion policy which required that community residential facilities for the mentally
impaired be located at least one-quarter mile apart. The court rejected the azgument that the dispersal
requirements impermissibly limited housing choices, holding that nondiscrimination and
deinstitutionalization are compah'bie goals. Contrary to the legislative history and treatment by other
courts, the Eight Circuit suggested that the FHAA did not intend simply to eliminate state and local
zoning authority.
Neighbor notification requirements. Yet another ciass of cases has involved requirements that
neighbors be specifically notified of the advent of group homes. None of these schemes has survived.
In Potomac Group Home v Montgomery Coutrtv 823 F. Supp. 1285, 1296-99 (D. Md. 1993), the
court shuck a requirement that neighbors of each group home adjacent and opposite and
neighborhood civic associations be notified prior to the location of a group home for disabled elderly,
as unsupported by legitimate justification. "The requirement is as offensive as would be a rule that a
http://www.oa-fordhouse.org/fairhouse.html 10/25/00
ol - 9z
minority family give notification and invite commem before moving into a predominantly white
neighborhood." See also Horizon House, suDra. (notification requirement based on discriminatory
imem and effect and violation of reasonable accommodation rule).
Reasonable accommodation reqnirements. Finally, a special subset of cases have involved a
locality's failure to make "reasonable accommodation" for the needs of the handicapped. The Act
requires localities to make such accommodation by amendmem to or variance of local ordinances and
policies when they stand in the way of the location and operation of gr� homes. An accommodation
is reasonable unless it requires a"fundamernal alteration ia the nature of a program or imposes undue
financial and administrative burdens." Southeastem Community Colle�e v. Davis_ 442 U.S. 397, 410.
412 (1979) (irnerpreting § 504 of the Rehabilitation Act). Mere adherence to existing zomng
requirements and land use policies is generally insufficiem to protect the locality, if those requiremems
and policies comravene the Act. A good example of the e�rtent to wluch the courts will go is Hovsons
Inc. v. Township of Brick 89 F3d 1096, 1104 (3rd Cir. 1996), where the court of appeals said there
that although "what the 'reasonable accommodation' standard requires is not a modei of clarity", a
failure to amend ordinances to pemrit nursing homes for handicapped persons in residential zones is a
failure to make reasonable accommodation.
In Judy B. v. Borough of Tioga, 889 F. Supp. 792, 799-800 (M.D. Pa. 1995), United Christian
Muristries wamed to convert a motel into SROs for the disabled. They were denied a use variance, and
the denial was upheld by the state courts, but the federal court held that the denial was a failure to
make reasonable accommodatioq and that changes must be affirmatively made so that peopie with
handicaps may use and enjoy a dwelling. Granting a use variance would require an "extremely modesY'
accommodarion in the zoning rules, and the proposed use was fundamentally consistent with the
neighborhood. See also United States v. City of Philadelphia, 838 F. Supp. 223 (E.D. Pa. 1993), affd
30 F.3d 1488 (3rd Cir. 1994) (requiremem for a rezoning constituted a failure to make reasonable
accommodation).
While localiries must make reasonable accommodations, it does appear that they must first be given an
opportunity to do so. In United States v. V'illage of Palatine. Illinois 37 F. 3d 1230 (7th Cir. 1994) the
Oxford House program, which has a policy of refusing to seek local permits, declined to seek a
required special use permit, The court heid that it had never invoked the procedures that wouid have
pemutted reasonable accommodation to be made. See also Oaford House-C v. City of St. Louis, 77
F.3d 249 (8th Cir. 1996) (restriction to eight residents by-right not discriminatory, and Oxford
House's refusal to apply for pecmits to house more than eight residems rendered reasonable
accommodation claim unripe).
Neighbor600d opposition as a d�ning characteristic. As has been suggested, there is frequently
hostile citize:� opposition to the location of group homes._It is perhaps fatal for the locality to accede
to such pressure, which the courts invariably find to be 6ased on groundless fears.
In Stuart B. McKinney Foundation v. Town of Fairfield 790 F. Supp. 1197, 1221-22 (D. Conn. 1992)
the court invalidated a requirement for a special exception for the use of a two-family residence as a
home for seven HIV-positive persons. Despite efforts to act quietiy, the location of the home was
leaked to the press, and there was a lazge gathering at a local firehouse and much political uproaz. The
trial court noted that meetings were marked by many bigoted remarks. Subsequemly, the Pianning
Birector sent the home a letter asking thirteen questions, inciuding inquiry into standards of admission,
number of people who would live at the property, average anticipated length of residence, type of
medicai care, how the determinarion of departure date was made, leases, payment of rent and other
http://www.oxfordhouse.org/fairhouse.html 10/25/00
o�-9Z
�Pe�, �S, services and facilities to be provided and transportation. The City admitted that
there were no legitimate dangers to public health and safety from HIV-positive residenu, and the court
found that the City's practices evidenced a clear discriminatory intern. See also S�port 11�inistry v
V�illape of Waterford 808 F. Supp. 120, 133-35 (N.D. N.Y. 1992) (citizen opposition and govemmeirt
hostilit}r manifested when Town passed ordinance to assure the defeat of a group home for AIDS
vichms and named opponents to the Zoning Boazd of Adjustmern. Uncontradicted evidence showed
that it was "[c]rystai clear" that locai ordinance was enacted to prevern Support IV�inistries from
establislvng its home.)
In O�£ord House-Evergreen v City of Plaiafieid 769 F. Supp. 1329 (D. N.J. 1991), the Mayor and
other city officials led hostile responses to a group home, and the Zoning Ad,t,;n;Mraror had first
armounced that Oxford House was a pennitted use but after a City Council mcefsng at which much
opposirion was expressed by the neighborhood, changed her position. The court found the City's
conduct irnentionally discriminatory.
A cautionary taie. Localities must not underestunate the time and difficuhy that FHAA cases can
cost. The lengthy saga of Smith & Lee Associates is instructive. The case involved efforts by a private
goup home operator to locate a foster care home for twelve elderly handicapped residents in a single
family residential district,ll�fichigan law authorized adult foster care homes for six or fewer residems in
all residenrial neighborhoods, but in order to house more than six the home required local approval,
which was denied.
The district court first held that the City had been guilty of discriminatory intent, dispazate impact, and
failure to make reasonable accommodation, and imposed a$50,000 civii penalty on the City. Smith &
L_ee Associates Inc v Taylor M'ic �eaci 798 F. Supp. 442 (E.D. M'ich. 1992). The court ofappeals
reversed. Smith & Lee Associate� Inc v Taylor M�chiga� 13 F.3d 920, 929-32 (6th Cir. 1993). It
upheld the constitutionality c�f Taylof s definition of "family", and reversed the lower court's finding as
to discriminatory intent. As to reasonable accommodation it concluded that the district court could not
simply order the locality to advise Smith & Lee that it could proceed.
On remand, however, the district court again held that City had been motivated by discriminatory
animus, and directed the City to amend its ordinance and to pay Smith & Lce profits from the
impermissible limitation on the number of residents. United States v. City of Taylor M'ichi� 872 F.
Supp. 423, 429-443 (E.D.14fich. 1945).
On a second appeal, Smith & Lee Associates Inc v Taylor M'ichig� 102 F3d 781 (6th Cir. 1996),
the court of appeals held that the trial judge had eaed in finding discriminatory inten but that he had
been conect to Snd that the City had failed to make rea5onable accommodarion by adapting its
processes to accommodate the group home. The court said that aithough Taylor had no duty to
approve Smith & I,ee's zoning application, it could not lawfull�deny that applicarion because of the
demonsuated hostitity of the City government to the handicapped. The FHAA is concemed with
achieving equal resuits and not just formal equality, and imposes an affinnative duty to reasonably
accommodate handicapped people.
Conciusion. This articie has oniy touched on major issues that aze presented by local regulation of
group homes. But the message is ciear: local regulation cannot discriminate against the handicapped,
and, moreover, localities must take affirmarive steps to accommodate them. Finally, localities must
steel themseives to the opposition that the location of group homes almost invariably attracts. To
aecede to political pressures growing out of ignorance and bias can lead to judicial intervention at the
httpJ/www.oxfordhouse.org/fairhouse.htmi 10/25/00